Menu Icon

Debt Rattle October 5 2025

Oct 052025
 
 October 5, 2025  Posted by at 10:09 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , ,  40 Responses »


Vincent van Gogh Corridor In The Asylum 1889

 

• Trump Thanks Israel For Pause in Gaza, Urges Hamas “Move Quickly” (ZH)
• ICE Agents Ambushed, Fired Upon in Chicago Suburb (Spencer)
• US Running Out of Money To Keep Nuclear Arsenal Safe (RT)
• Sen. Kennedy: More Absurd Things Dems Shut Down the Government For (Margolis)
• US To Earn More Than $1 Trillion Per Year In Tariffs – Trump (TASS)
• Putin Blasts French ‘Piracy’ After ‘Russia-Linked’ Tanker Boarded (ZH)
• Shutdown Day #3 – Trump’s Challenge (CTH)
• Putin-the-Unready? (Paul Craig Roberts)
• Vladimir Putin Makes The Castling Move (Helmer)
• How the Israel Lobby Took Over America’s Universities (Paul Craig Roberts)
• Trust In US Media At Historic Low – Gallup (RT)
• UK Energy Chief Claims Musk Fueling ‘Threat’ To Britain (RT)
• UK Parliament Cuts Nigel Farage’s Security Detail (RT)
• Musk Tweets Wipe $15bn Off Netflix Value (RT)
• US Treasury Unveils Draft Design Of Coin With Trump’s Profile (RT)
• Higher Ed Bottoms Out (James Howard Kunstler)

 

 


https://twitter.com/nxt888/status/1973843985824428377
https://twitter.com/RussiaIsntEnemy/status/1974475994716127429


https://twitter.com/Real_RobN/status/1974543229761843473
https://twitter.com/MAGAStormX/status/1974510704343347569

200,000 SIM cards. That takes up a lot of space. Like all buiildings in an entire street.


https://twitter.com/Megatron_ron/status/1974531487128289740

Martin Armstrong: Trump Taking Us Into World War III

 

 

 

 

Nobody believes it until they see it. But Trump may have had enough damage done to his name.

• Trump Thanks Israel For Pause in Gaza, Urges Hamas “Move Quickly” (ZH)

The Israeli military has been ordered by the Netanyahu government to pause its offensive in Gaza City, according to Israeli army radio on Saturday, just a day after Hamas is said to have agreed to the Trump-proposed peace plan which seeks the release of all remaining hostages, living and deceased. The Israeli military in an official statement said it had been ordered to “advance readiness” for implementing the first stage of Trump’s plan. Army radio noted that military operations in Gaza would be scaled back to “the minimum” – but what have been dubbed defensive strikes will continue. Prime Minister Netanyahu says the hostages will be freed in days. Some of these airstrikes were still observed throughout the day, with Palestinian sources saying at least 55 people have still been killed since dawn.

President Trump himself late Friday urged Israel to halt its bombardment, while also calling on Hamas to “move quickly” on implementing the 20-point peace plan. “I appreciate that Israel has temporarily stopped the bombing in order to give the Hostage release and Peace Deal a chance to be completed,” Trump stated on Truth Social Saturday morning. But he also warned that “Hamas must move quickly, or else all bets will be off,” adding that “I will not tolerate delay, which many think will happen, or any outcome where Gaza poses a threat again. Let’s get this done, FAST. Everyone will be treated fairly!” But Hamas had only said it is ready to enter negotiations on Trump’s peace plan, suggesting there are many more hurdles to go as each condition is agreed to.

Prime Minister Netanyahu in fresh remarks to reporters emphasized that the plan calls for the complete demilitarization of Hamas – but this is anything but certain in terms of whether the Palestinian militant group will actually lay down its weapons. But Hamas did say it has agreed to releasing all 48 remaining hostages that it’s ready to surrender power over the Gaza Strip, but the proverbial devil will be in the details in terms of how precisely this all comes to fruition. It remains an open question the degree to which fighting has actually stopped in Gaza City…

The Palestinian side hopes to see 250 prisoners serving life sentences and 1,700 Palestinians detained without charge released as a result of the Trump 20-point plan. Israeli military Arabic-language spokesperson Avichay Adraee is meanwhile telling Palestinian residents not to return to their homes in Gaza City or northern Gaza. Still, this moment seems the best shot at truce or permanent peace in the two-year long war in quite a while, and the White House seems ready to seize the initiative and push the sides to the finish line.

Read more …

“..Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker and Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson have spent weeks ratcheting up the hysteria and purveying incendiary rhetoric about how President Donald Trump is a fascist and ICE agents are his storm troopers.”:

• ICE Agents Ambushed, Fired Upon in Chicago Suburb (Spencer)

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) have reportedly come under fire in Broadview, Illinois, a suburb of Chicago, from a woman identified only as a “U.S. citizen.” This comes after Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker and Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson have spent weeks ratcheting up the hysteria and purveying incendiary rhetoric about how President Donald Trump is a fascist and ICE agents are his storm troopers. Once again, the left’s rhetoric spills over into violence. Fox News reported early Saturday afternoon that according to Tricia McLaughlin, assistant secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), “federal agents were rammed and boxed in by 10 cars in Broadview, Ill., where anti-U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) crowds have been gathering for days.”

They haven’t been just gathering, and this was no peaceful protest: “One of the drivers was armed with a semi-automatic weapon, according to McLaughlin, who said officers ‘were forced to deploy their weapons and fire defensive shots at an armed U.S. citizen.’” According once again to McLaughlin, “the armed woman, who was a U.S. citizen, was named in a Customs and Border Protection (CBP) intelligence bulletin.” She “allegedly doxxed agents and posted online, ‘Hey to all my gang let’s f— those motherf—— up, don’t let them take anyone.'”The firefight took place as “agents were reportedly performing a routine patrol in Broadview, a suburb of Chicago.” Reportedly, no agents were injured. Oddly, McLaughlin added that “the woman involved drove herself to the hospital to get care for wounds.” That’s swell, but was she arrested? The question shouldn’t even need to be asked, but in America these days, one never knows.

It should be remembered in connection with this incident that back in April, Pritzker said: “Never before in my life have I called for mass protests, for mobilization, for disruption — but I am now. These Republicans cannot know a moment of peace.” It looks as if in Broadview, he has been heeded. Also, on Saturday morning, Pritzker raised the temperature even more, saying: “This morning, the Trump Administration’s Department of War gave me an ultimatum: call up your troops, or we will. It is absolutely outrageous and un-American to demand a Governor send military troops within our own borders and against our will.” Once again, this is the kind of language that stirs up the left’s most violent cadres.

And Pritzker wasn’t finished. He charged that the Trump administrations intends to “pull hardworking Americans out of their regular jobs and away from their families all to participate in a manufactured performance — not a serious effort the protect public safety.” He insisted that there was “no need for military troops on the ground in the State of Illinois. State, county, and local law enforcement have been working together and coordinating to ensure public safety around the Broadview ICE facility, and to protect people’s ability to peacefully exercise their connotational rights. I will not call up our National Guard to further Trump’s acts of aggression against our people.”

Now, Pritzker appears to have gotten what he wanted, and the seeds he planted and has been watering for so long have finally sprouted: there has been an armed attack against ICE agents in a Chicago suburb. Yet Pritzker shouldn’t get too elated and start savoring being the Democrats’ vice presidential candidate (or who knows, even presidential candidate) in 2028. While he has been energetically purveying his hysterical rhetoric, he has also, ironically enough, completely undercut it.

After all, if officers of the law are not able to do their duty in Chicago, and come under armed attack when they try to do so, it’s clear that Pritzker is wrong: there really is a need for military troops on the ground in the State of Illinois. And the person who is primarily responsible for creating the need for them is Pritzker himself. The Broadview incident comes at a time of rapidly increasing tensions all across the country. Democrat governors such as Pritzker and Gavin Newsom seem determined to keep the pedal to the medal on the hysterical rhetoric, as if they actually want the violence they’re inciting to break out. In a saner age, their defiance of the president and constant incitement would be considered seditious and result in their being removed from office, if not prosecuted. Today, it has them jockeying for the leadership of the Democrat Party.

Read more …

More goodies from the shutdown.

• US Running Out of Money To Keep Nuclear Arsenal Safe (RT)

US Energy Secretary Chris Wright has cautioned that the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) could run out of funding to monitor the country’s nuclear arsenal within eight days because of an ongoing government shutdown. He said operations would be suspended once the money is gone. The US federal government has stopped working for the first time in almost seven years, after Republicans and Democrats failed to agree on a spending bill in the Senate.nOn Friday, the Senate failed to pass either a Republican bill or a Democratic alternative, with both measures falling short of the votes needed. Both sides blamed each other for the crisis. Lawmakers are expected to try again on October 6.

“Eight more days of funding, and then we have to go into some emergency shutdown procedures, putting our country at risk,” Wright said Thursday evening on Fox News, referring to the National Nuclear Security Administration. The secretary said over 20 officials in his department are still awaiting Senate confirmation, blaming Democrats for delaying tactics and prolonging the shutdown by withholding key votes. Before this year’s federal cuts, the NNSA employed more than 65,000 federal workers and contractors nationwide, handling everything from maintaining the nuclear arsenal to non-proliferation efforts and oversight of the US Navy’s nuclear operations.

In its latest shutdown plan, the US Energy Department said it would keep NNSA staff running “critical control operations systems” and those working on nuclear non-proliferation, but gave no figures on how many employees would be included. mUS President Donald Trump has suggested he may use the shutdown to push through major staff and wage cuts, blaming Democrats for the budget impasse. The White House is also using the standoff to target programs opposed by Republicans. Federal agencies have partially suspended services and many employees are furloughed. The last government shutdown began on December 22, 2018 and lasted 35 days.

Read more …

$833,000 for transgender people in Nepal.
$300,000 for a pride parade in Lesotho.
$4.2 million for LGBTQI people in the Western Balkans and Uganda.

‘We’re gonna shut down government until you put that back in.’”

• Sen. Kennedy: More Absurd Things Dems Shut Down the Government For (Margolis)

The Schumer Shutdown is dragging into the weekend, with neither side budging. Republicans pushed for a straightforward continuing resolution to keep the government funded through November, but Democrats chose to hold the line for their wish list of radical spending priorities—billions and billions of dollars’ worth—and in doing so, shut the government down. The media has focused on their demand for free health care for illegal immigrants, but that’s just the tip of the iceberg. There’s a lot more buried in this standoff that isn’t getting the attention it deserves. Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) took to the Senate floor this week and laid out, in his trademark blunt and hilarious fashion, exactly what Democrats are trying to shut the government down over—and it’s every bit as ridiculous as you’d expect.

“Basically, President Trump just said, ‘We want you to take some stuff out of the budget that we think is wasteful,’” Kennedy began. “And we did — and that upset the congresswoman.” That “congresswoman,” of course, is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), who, according to Kennedy, went ballistic when Trump and congressional Republicans started cutting some of the more absurd Biden-era spending priorities. Kennedy didn’t hold back as he read aloud what Democrats are fighting to restore. “We found that under President Biden, they were spending $3 million for circumcisions and vasectomies in Zambia,” he said. “We took that out. The congresswoman says, ‘We’re gonna shut down government until you put that back in.’”

And that was just the beginning. “We found $500,000 of American taxpayer money for electric buses in Rwanda,” Kennedy continued. “We found $3.6 million for pastry cooking classes and dance focus groups for male prostitutes in Haiti. I kid you not. I’m not making this up. It was in the budget under President Biden.”

Republicans, Kennedy noted, stripped out each of these items as they tried to rein in wasteful foreign spending. But Democrats—with AOC and the “socialist wing” of the party leading the way—are threatening to shut the government down until every last one of those absurd expenditures is put back in. “I could spend the rest of the afternoon here,” Kennedy said. “We took all that out. It upset Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez. It upset the socialist wing of her party. And now they’re threatening all other Democrats and saying, ‘You’ve got to shut that government down until we get what we want.’” And that, Kennedy concluded, is what this entire budget fight is about—not defending American taxpayers or funding core government services, but holding the government hostage over millions in woke pet projects and bizarre international handouts.

Read more …

“..a protective mechanism.”

• US To Earn More Than $1 Trillion Per Year In Tariffs – Trump (TASS)

US President Donald Trump said that the import duties he imposed would bring the United States revenue of more than $1 trillion per year. In an interview with One America News television channel, Trump stated that revenues from new tariffs were just starting to flow in but eventually they could reach $1 trillion a year. Speaking at the 80th session of the UN General Assembly last month, Trump said the United States was ready to conduct trade with all countries provided that the principles of fairness and reciprocity are respected. According to the US president, the tariffs that the US administration has imposed on most countries of the world are a protective mechanism.

Read more …

One fake anti-Russia story after another. They come fast.

• Putin Blasts French ‘Piracy’ After ‘Russia-Linked’ Tanker Boarded (ZH)

“The tanker was seized in neutral waters without any justification, and they were apparently looking for some kind of military cargo, drones, or something else,” Putin said Thursday at the Valdai Discussion Club meeting in Sochi, condemning the French takeover of an oil tanker suspected of being part of Russia’s so-called “shadow fleet” which seeks to evade Western energy sanctions as an act of “piracy”. “There’s nothing there, there ne ver was, and there can’t be anything,” Putin asserted of the boarding action which took place earlier this week. The tanker was under the flag of a third country and the crew is international, Putin described, adding he doesn’t know “how much it’s related to Russia.” French authorities revealed details for the first time on Thursday, confirming that they arrested the captain, a Chinese national. He’s accused of disobeying orders of the French navy.

Another crew member, the First Officer, was also arrested, as Reuters details of French statements: French police have arrested the captain and first officer of a sanctioned tanker suspected of operating for Russia’s “shadow fleet,” authorities said on Thursday, after the navy boarded the vessel, which may have been involved in recent drone incidents around Denmark. The vessel, the Boracay, was approximately 50 nautical miles south of Copenhagen on September 22 when drone activity forced the closure of the city’s airport around 1830 GMT, according to data from MarineTraffic. It was also observed heading south along Denmark’s western coast on the evening of September 24 when drones were reported flying north of Esbjerg and near several nearby airports. The tanker appeared on on an EU sanctions list for transporting Russian oil, but the whole Denmark drone incursion linkage aspect to it seems highly coincidental, and a big stretch, assuming there’s no further evidence and that no actual drones were found upon searching the vessel.

French authorities would be presenting any such evidence very quickly, but instead they just issued ambiguous statements remotely suggesting the linkage to the Denmark drone sightings.French authorities say that the Boracay has a history of changing names and flags, and is currently flying under Benin’s registry. It’s believed this is part of intentional sanctions-dodging. The Boracay is now anchored off France’s coast near Saint-Nazaire, south of Brest. It had initially set sail from the Russian port of Primorsk outside Saint Petersburg on September 20 and had actually been at one point detained Estonian authorities earlier this year for sailing without a valid country flag. International law allows countries to intercept such vessels which are believed to be stateless, typically if there is suspicion of wrong-doing like smuggling.

Read more …

“If liberty and freedom become the priority, the advancement of personal wealth becomes more difficult.”

• Shutdown Day #3 – Trump’s Challenge (CTH)

The professionally Republican wing of the GOPe want this shutdown ended just as much as the professionally Democrat wing. The UniParty cannot allow Trump/Vought this much power. Republicans cannot allow Trump this much power. The Moonbat leftists are not the biggest problem, they never have been. They are ideologues, mostly. Insufferable, stupid, violent at times, but easy to spot. Remember, Democrats quest for power; Republicans quest for money. Always underline this because it’s really important. The Moonbat leftists seek power, seek control of your life, and they are open in their insufferably stupid arguments to get there. When they start to lose, they turn violent. This is their history. That said, they are not the most dangerous. The professional Republicans are more dangerous because their priority is money. As a result, their approaches, goals, objectives and arguments can be purchased.

Republicans have no interests, goals or objectives, nor allegiances, that supersede their primary objective, getting money, growing their wealth. Democrats will come at you with a knife, a gun or a baseball bat. You can see them. The professional Republican guy standing beside you, however, is willing to take a payment to shoot you in the ear when you don’t see it coming. This is also why it seems like Democrats stick together, and Republicans split. Democrats are chasing a common goal, a collective goal, power. Republicans are chasing a commonality, yes, but an individual goal, money, their wealth. Donors contribute to the Democrat agenda because their interest to benefit from power. Republicans modify their agenda to benefit donors because their goal is money. Democrats stay on task, power. Republicans are flexible, money.

You enter a war against Leftists with extreme danger. However, the danger is not the war in front of you, it’s the army beside you waiting to get a payment from the enemy in front of you. Out of a group of 1,000 democrats, 900+ will join in to defend a weakened Moonbat leftist (see Kimmell). Out of a group of 1,000 Republicans you will find, maybe, 5 willing to cover your back regardless of how much bribery is put in front of them. Remember this, understand this and the reality of who presents the most danger to us is accurately framed. Republicans do not simply snatch defeat from the jaws of victory; they sell defeat to the highest bidder! In our lifetime we have watched this unfold. There were Democrats with the same outlook as Republicans, they were known as “blue dog” democrats. The Blue Dogs were willing to compromise power, to sell power, in return for financial payment.

Traditional ‘Blue Dogs’ were names like Hillary and Bill Clinton; their prism was the assembly of money. However, this group faced the introduction of hardline ideological believers, the communists or Marxists represented by Barack Obama. Obama Inc. battled Clinton Inc. to determine the future of the Democrats. The ideologues won, and the democrat Blue Dogs in their tribe, those willing to concede ideology for money, were purged from their ranks. Modern Democrats, post Obama takeover, are now pure ideologues. “By any means necessary” is the operational objective of modern leftists. This is why government under Obama flipped the switch so openly and began weaponizing power. Purging govt agencies and replacing the staff with ideologues. Crushing opposition, by brute force and targeting.

Simultaneously, in the smaller Republican ranks, there was a small group who wanted to face down the same battle inside the Republican party. The original Tea Party represented this group. A smaller assembly trying to put ideology, freedom and liberty at the forefront of the Republican objective. Unlike the leftist effort, the Tea Party effort inside the Republican party failed. Republican leadership crushed the liberty rebellion and went back to business taking money from the ideological Marxists who now ruled the centers of power. People who didn’t quite understand what was taking place stood and watched, frustrated, at the dynamic of Republicans who conceded every battle to the left. What the abused GOP viewers didn’t understand was the core of the issue; Democrats want power, Republicans want money. Each time the Republicans could win on a policy issue, they sold the loss to Democrats.

Battered conservatives grew more frustrated and more frustrated. Now we enter the era of MAGA, represented by billionaire Donald J Trump, who, like Obama before him, began the fight inside the Republican Party. The Tea Party rebellion quickly reengaged Trump and formed MAGA; the ideological fight inside the Republican party, liberty over money, was on again. MAGA represents opposition to the leftist ideological advancement. But the Republican assembly will not concede. In a way their resistance makes sense. If liberty and freedom become the priority, the advancement of personal wealth becomes more difficult. Simultaneously, if retention and assembly of wealth is the priority, liberty and freedom ideologues become impediments. Again, MAGA within Republicanism must be crushed when money is the priority.

This internal Republican battle has been unfolding in various reference points for almost a decade now, while the internal Democrat battle was long ago decided. The root issue the within the Republican apparatus still surrounds the greatest evil. ‘The love of money is the root of all evil.’ This conflict has not yet been fully decided, yet admittedly -and thankfully- MAGA has made some significant gains. The Republican party now has a lower income demographic and a more ideological working-class base. However, don’t be fooled. The top tier of the Republican apparatus is mostly unchanged; albeit they are facing more entrenched ideological opposition from the awakened MAGA forces. The top tier will still sell out the base, still compromise for personal profit, and still take payment for policy. This brings us to where we are today.

Inside the MAGA assembly we are trying to identify which Republican leaders have shifted to the MAGA/liberty viewpoint, and which Republican leaders are playing the long game while retaining their DNA level objective, get money. Each day on these pages and many others, the ‘trust’ factor is raised; this is completely understandable. We have a strong muscle memory for betrayal, and we all bear the scars to remind us. It is fitting and proper that these conversations take place. After all, it’s interesting to watch professional Republicans discuss how agencies like the DOJ and FBI have lost institutional trust of the American people due to corruption, while simultaneously those same Republicans never note trust loss within the Republican party as a result of their willful blindness to it.

Read more …

“The Russians simply cannot comprehend that they are targeted as an obstacle to Western hegemony.”

• Putin-the-Unready? (Paul Craig Roberts)

Leaders of European countries with limited military ability are openly declaring their preparation for war with Russia. The Baltic states, Poland, Netherlands, France, Germany, and the UK speak if they look forward to a war that would utterly destroy them. It is a mystery as Russia poses no threat to them and wants nothing from them but a mutual security agreement. I believe Putin himself has responsibility for this state of affairs. Putin’s efforts to restrain the conflict in Ukraine have been misunderstood. Putin is perceived as irresolute and the Russian military as incapable. Trump calls Russia a paper tiger and speaks of Ukraine with sufficient European help transitioning from the defense to the offense and invading Russia.

This extremely dangerous way of thinking is the reason I have often said that Putin’s never-ending, ever-widening war was a strategic blunder, a blunder that Putin continues to make. With European politicians declaring their preparation for war, is Putin paying attention, or will he again be Putin-the-Unready as he was in South Ossetia in 2008, in Ukraine in 2014, in 2022 when Russia was forced to intervene in Donbas, and when the Russian strategic bomber force was attacked on June 1, 2025? Putin’s restraint and Lavrov’s pleading for negotiations have convinced the West that Russia is an easy target. This mistaken conviction is fomenting a major war.

Russians do not seem to understand the situation. This morning on RT political analyst Nadezhda Romanenko attributes the Western war talk to “Western anxieties and domestic political calculations.” It would be more realistic to attribute the war talk to setting up Russia as an aggressor that must be deterred. The Russians simply cannot comprehend that they are targeted as an obstacle to Western hegemony. Everywhere in the West the image that is maintained is Russian aggression. Wikipedia, for example, describes the 2008 Russian war with Georgia as Russian aggression, the 2022 intervention in Donbas as a Russian invasion of Ukraine. Estonia and Poland recently made claims of Russian entry into their air space. Every possible sign of Russian aggression is created. The West is uninterested in Putin’s reassurances. Why is Russia unable to understand this?

Read more …

Speeches at the Valdai club are important.

• Vladimir Putin Makes The Castling Move (Helmer)

On June 30, 2021, during his Direct Line programme, President Vladimir Putin was asked what games he liked to play during his schooldays. “I am tempted to say chess,” he replied, “but, unfortunately, it was not chess.” Four years have gone by until his appearance yesterday at the Valdai Club, when the president was asked the same question. He replied: “Well, I loved chess.” Putin was castling.

In the ancient game of chess the move which is known by this name is a relatively new one. The rules to allow it also took centuries to develop. The purpose of castling is defence when the king is under attack and there is safe space between the king and the castle (rook), so that they can exchange places and the king retreat to the safer margin of the board. The opportunity created thereby is for the rook to move more actively into the counter-attack against the adversary. The castling king is delegating the offensive to his rook.

To understand what Putin’s castling means on the board today, read what he said first about the Board of Peace (BOP) Gaza plan of President Donald Trump, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and ex-prime minister Tony Blair. “Russia always supports and welcomes any steps by Trump,” he told his spokesman to say, “that seek to avert the tragedy that is now unfolding. We want this plan to be realized, so that it may help steer events in the Middle East toward a peaceful path”.

As this was being interpreted outside the Kremlin wall as Putin’s unqualified endorsement, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov announced it was too soon for that. “We have not seen this plan. We have only heard comments about its contents. You have now outlined its main provisions. I have heard that this international body, which is intended to ‘temporarily govern Gaza’, is planned to be headed by former British prime minister Tony Blair. He himself seems to have already announced this. I reiterate, I am not privy to the details. I do not know what powers he will be granted, nor how the Arab countries view this. I am aware that some of them have already welcomed the ‘Donald Trump plan’. However, a final assessment can only be made once we know the views of all of Palestine’s neighbours, Israel, the countries of the region, the League of Arab States, the Gulf Cooperation Council, and, above all, the Palestinians themselves. I have heard that representatives of the Palestinian National Authority are not being considered for inclusion in this temporary body, even as observers.”

“Regarding the international security forces,” Lavrov went on. “No, we have not been invited to participate. I reiterate, we only became aware of this new plan yesterday. However, I have read that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, commenting on the ‘Trump plan’ – which was announced following Netanyahu’s visit to Washington – said that the plan is good and should not be altered. He claimed that Hamas and everyone else should agree to it. Among the positive aspects of this plan, he stated that Israel would retain control over security in Gaza. This somewhat contradicts the establishment of international forces, so all the details need to be clarified first.”

Lavrov said that at the Valdai Club conference in Sochi. Two days later, Putin has followed him on to the same platform; he also followed the foreign minister on the Gaza plan. Asked about this, Putin started by saying that “now that we are getting acquainted with President Trump’s initiatives, I think there is a light at the end of the tunnel that may still appear”. On Tuesday Putin’s spokesman Dmitry Peskov had mistaken the tunnel for the light. Putin went on to clarify:“The situation in Gaza is a terrible event in history, in modern history. And even someone known as the pro-western Secretary-General of the United Nations, Mr. Guterres, publicly says Gaza has become the largest children’s cemetery in the world. What could be more tragic and sad?”

About Trump’s Gaza plan, “you know, it will probably come as a surprise to you, but on the whole, Russia is ready to support him. If, of course, as we have to look carefully at the proposals made, it will lead to the final goal, which we have always talked about. Russia has always advocated the creation of two states: Israel and a Palestinian state, starting in 1948 and then in 1974, when the relevant UN Security Council resolution was adopted. And this, in my opinion, is the key to a final solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.”

“Indeed, as far as I know, I have not looked at this proposal so carefully yet, but it proposes to create an international body that will govern Palestine, more precisely the Gaza Strip, for some time, and Mr. Blair should be at its head. He’s not known as a great peacemaker, but I know him personally. Moreover, I visited him, spent the night at his house, we had coffee in our pajamas in the morning, and so on. Yes, yes.”

“Fyodor Lukyanov: Was the coffee good?”

“Yes, quite. But what do I want to say? He is a man with his own views, but he is an experienced politician. And in general, of course, if his activities, his experience, and his knowledge are directed towards a peaceful course, then he can play some positive role. There are, of course, several questions. First: How long will this international administration work? How and to whom will power be transferred later? As far as I understand, this plan outlines the possibility of transferring power to the Palestinian Authority. In my opinion, it would be better, of course, to put everything under the control of President [Mahmoud] Abbas and the current Palestinian administration. It may be difficult for them to resolve the security issues. But so far as I can imagine, my colleagues, with whom I spoke on this topic today, envisage the possibility of transferring control over the Gaza Strip, including to the local militia, to ensure security. Is this bad? In my opinion, this is a good thing.”

“We need to understand, I repeat, how long the international administration will manage there, in what time frame it is supposed to transfer both civil power and security issues, which is very important. And, in my opinion, this should definitely be supported. We are talking about freeing all the hostages held by Hamas, on the one hand, and releasing a significant number of Palestinians from Israeli prisons. Here, too, we need to understand how many Palestinians, whom, and at what time can we release them? And of course, you know, the most important question is: how does Palestine feel about this? That’s exactly what you need to understand. And the countries of the region, the entire Islamic world, and Palestine itself, the Palestinians themselves, including, of course, Hamas. They treat Hamas differently there, and we have our own attitude, but we have contacts with Hamas. It is important for us that Hamas also supports this, and the Palestinian Authority supports it. But these are all issues that require painstaking, careful research.”

“In general, if this happens, it will, of course, be a very serious step forward in resolving the conflict. But, I repeat, in our opinion, fundamentally it can be resolved only with the creation of a Palestinian state. Of course, Israel’s attitude towards this is also important. We don’t know yet either: how did Israel take it? I do not even know of any public statements on this subject, I just did not have time to look at it. But it’s not even public statements that are important, but in fact how the Israeli leadership will treat this, whether it will fulfill everything that the President of the United States has proposed. There are a lot of questions. But in general, if all these positive things that I mentioned happen, then this is, of course, a breakthrough. And a breakthrough can be very positive. I repeat for the third time: the creation of a Palestinian state is a key element of the settlement as a whole.”

Putin was acknowledging that since Peskov’s announcement, he had been briefed by Lavrov and others, and that they had persuaded him to change his mind on what to say. The President concedes now that Russian policy on the Trump plan has not been decided yet; that it will be a collective one with his “colleagues”; and that he is delegating the next moves to them and to their “painstaking, careful research.” This is castling by the king for the rook.

Read more …

” The definition of what constitutes anti-semitism has been constantly expanded and now includes truth itself.”

• How the Israel Lobby Took Over America’s Universities (Paul Craig Roberts)

Cornell University, once a place of discussion and learning, is seeking to remove a tenured Jewish professor, Eric Cheyfitz, who permits Israel to be discussed instead of simply praised. The professor’s daughter and granddaughter live in Israel. But this doesn’t save him from being charged with discrimination against a Jewish graduate student. The professor’s trouble was brought to him by an Israeli student who previously served in Israel’s elite military surveillance agency, Unit 8200. None of the students support the Israeli student’s claim. It seems the Israel Lobby is testing how far it can expand its power over America’s universities. If the Lobby can get Cornell University to punish a tenured Jewish professor based on a complaint by a former member of Israeli Military Surveillance, then Israel will have set the standard for American universities that truth about Israel constitutes anti-semitic discrimination and is punishable.

The Israel Lobby took over American universities with large monetary grants. Now dependent on these grants, university administrators have to follow the line. This is how the takeover happened: First came large monetary donations from Jews. These donations led to the appointment of Jewish benefactors to the university’s board of trustees. From here the Jews obtained university administrations headed by Jewish presidents who attached anti-semitism to the woke anti-racist, anti-homophobic, etc. agenda. The definition of what constitutes anti-semitism has been constantly expanded and now includes truth itself.

Several years ago a list was published of the ethnicity of the leadership of Ivy League universities. Formerly a WASP preserve, every Ivy League university had a Jewish president or provost. They may have been outstanding leaders. The point is that for such a small ethnic minority to be in control of all of America’s elite universities cannot be a coincidence. Jews want power and are good at attaining it. In a way you have to admire their determination. It didn’t take the Israel Lobby but a day or two to take over Charlie Kirk’s organization. Presumably, this puts Christian evangelicals back into Israel’s pockets, thus solidifying Israel’s control over President Trump. American WASPs are no longer contenders. Worn out, ambition eroded by trust funds, WASPs have been displaced. Our future seems to in the hands of the Israel Lobby or the immigrant-invaders.

https://israelpalestinenews.org/cornell-cut-classes-by-a-pro-palestinian-professor/

Read more …

“..more than 90% of evening newscast stories about [Trump] on ABC, NBC, and CBS were unfavorable.”

• Trust In US Media At Historic Low – Gallup (RT)

Americans’ confidence in the mass media has sunk to a record low, with fewer than three in ten now trusting news outlets to report fairly, according to a new Gallup poll. A poll conducted in September of 1,000 adults showed that only 28% expressed a “great deal” or “fair amount” of trust in newspapers, television and radio, down from 31% last year, 40% five years ago, and almost 70% in the 1970s. Meanwhile, 36% reported “not very much” confidence and 34% said they had “none at all.” For the first time, confidence among Republicans has collapsed into single digits, with only 8% saying they trust the media. However, 51% of Democrats believed media reporting.

US President Donald Trump’s rocky relationship with the press has reportedly fueled these splits. A Harvard Kennedy School study found that Trump’s first 100 days in office drew overwhelmingly negative coverage, while the Media Research Center recently estimated that more than 90% of evening newscast stories about him on ABC, NBC, and CBS were unfavorable.

On the 100th day of his second term this year, Trump’s administration issued a press release titled “100 Days of Hoaxes,” accusing major outlets of spreading “a nonstop deluge of hoaxes and lies” and listed 48 reports it deemed false. Beyond partisan politics, structural shifts are also eroding traditional media. A Reuters Institute report in June suggested that podcasters and AI chatbots are playing a growing role in news dissemination, with more than half of Americans under 35 relying on social and video networks as their main sources of information.

Read more …

Evey Brit knows what Musk is talking about.

• UK Energy Chief Claims Musk Fueling ‘Threat’ To Britain (RT)

UK Energy Secretary Ed Miliband has accused Elon Musk of posing a major threat to Britain, claiming the billionaire backs nationalist forces seeking to undermine the country. Speaking at the Labour Party conference on Wednesday, the former party leader linked Musk to Nigel Farage, whose Reform UK party gained traction in the May local elections. The US-based entrepreneur has expressed support for the party, but has urged Farage to step down. According to Miliband, Farage is “a key part of a global network that wants to destroy the ties that bind our communities and our way of life.” He added: “I can sum up the threat for you in two words: Elon Musk.” Miliband alleged that Musk “incites violence on our streets,” “calls for the overthrow of our elected government,” and enables “disinformation through X” – the microblogging platform that the billionaire purchased in 2022.

“We have a message for Elon Musk. Get the hell out of our politics and our country.” Musk appeared unfazed by the remarks. Shortly after the speech, he blasted Prime Minister Keir Starmer, calling him “an actor with an empty head” who merely repeats talking points supplied by others. Musk and Starmer have engaged in a months-long feud over the UK’s grooming gang scandal. In June, Starmer authorized a new national inquiry into the mass sexual exploitation of British girls, crimes largely linked to gangs of Pakistani men over a decade ago. Musk accused the prime minister of being “deeply complicit in the mass rapes in exchange for votes.”

Read more …

When you’re more popular than the PM.

But still… That PM paints a big -political- target on his own back.

• UK Parliament Cuts Nigel Farage’s Security Detail (RT)

UK parliamentary authorities drastically slashed government-funded security for Nigel Farage, an MP and the leader of a major opposition right-wing party, Reform UK, its head of policy has claimed. Zia Yusuf accused Prime Minister Keir Starmer of deliberately putting his political rival at risk of attack. Speaking to Times Radio on Wednesday, Yusuf stated that “two weeks ago, the authorities cut Nigel’s security detail by 75 per cent,” without providing any reasons for the decision. The Reform UK representative added that “donors have stepped in [to]… make sure that Nigel is well protected.” However, “if anything was to happen to Nigel, we will hold Keir Starmer squarely responsible,” Yusuf stressed.Yusuf further accused the sitting prime minister of inciting violence against the “man who is the bookmaker’s favorite to be the next prime minister.”

Farage himself acknowledged he feared for his own security and that of other party members after Starmer’s latest attack. Speaking during the Labour Party conference on Tuesday, the prime minister dubbed Farage a “snake oil merchant” who does not like Britain because of his “racist” plans to curb immigration. Starmer charged that Britain must “go into that battle armed, not just with words and condemnation, but with action,” describing Reform UK as the “enemy of national renewal” and the “biggest threat we face.” On Thursday, The Telegraph reported that veteran Conservative MP Sir David Davis had asked Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood to “review the decision at the earliest opportunity.”

“It strikes me that Mr Farage is a particularly high-profile target, arguably at greater risk than many Cabinet ministers,” the lawmaker reportedly wrote in a letter. An Ipsos poll last month indicated that Starmer’s popularity had hit a record low, with 79% of Britons disapproving of his performance. Another survey by think tank More in Common suggested around the same time that Farage would become prime minister with 373 MPs if an election were held tomorrow. The Labour, in contrast, would suffer its worst electoral defeat since 1931, securing less than 100 seats in the House of Commons, according to the poll.

Read more …

“Transgender propaganda isn’t just quietly lurking in the background on Netflix. They are actively pushing it on users.”

• Musk Tweets Wipe $15bn Off Netflix Value (RT)

US streaming giant Netflix has lost about $15 billion in market value after billionaire Elon Musk accused the platform of “woke bias” and urged his followers to cancel subscriptions. Netflix shares fell 4.3% in a day and a half to $1,140 by midday Thursday, cutting its market cap to $483 billion from $498 billion on Wednesday, trading data showed. The drop came after Musk called on users to boycott Netflix over the animated show ‘Dead End: Paranormal Park’, which features a transgender character. Although canceled in 2023 after two seasons, the show remains available on the platform with a TV-Y7 rating for children seven and older.

Musk’s campaign began on Tuesday when he reposted a clip on X showing one of the show’s characters identifying as transgender. “Dead End Paranormal Park, a show on Netflix, is pushing pro-transgender on CHILDREN. This show is advertised for 7-YEAR-OLDS,” the account said. Musk replied: “this is not ok.” He later reposted messages from users claiming to have canceled Netflix and accused the service of pushing “LGBTQ+ propaganda.” On Wednesday, he wrote: “Cancel Netflix for the health of your kids.” In another post, he said: “Transgender propaganda isn’t just quietly lurking in the background on Netflix. They are actively pushing it on users.” Musk has long railed against wokeism and LGBTQ messaging, which many link to his estrangement from his trans child, Vivian Wilson, who has openly criticized the billionaire for his alleged anti-trans vendetta.

In a Washington Post interview last year, Musk said that to him Wilson was “dead, killed by the woke mind virus.” Netflix has not responded to Musk’s remarks. The company has previously defended controversial content on free speech grounds, including in 2020, when its film ‘Cuties’ drew outrage for sexualized depictions of underage actors. By Thursday’s close, the firm had pared some of the losses, ending at $1,161 a share with a $493 billion valuation. While stock is down 4% this week, it remains up 30% year-to-date. Analysts expect Musk’s campaign will not weigh on the company long-term, suggesting that Netflix shares are too costly to be seriously affected by online backlash.

Read more …

“Despite the radical left’s forced shutdown of our government, the facts are clear: Under the historic leadership of President Donald J. Trump, our nation is entering its 250th anniversary stronger, more prosperous, and better than ever before..”

Reason to celebrate!

• US Treasury Unveils Draft Design Of Coin With Trump’s Profile (RT)

The US Treasury Department is considering putting an image of US President Donald Trump on a one-dollar coin marking the 250th anniversary of America’s independence. According to the first design draft revealed on Friday, the coin features Trump’s profile on one side, along with the words “Liberty” and “In God we trust,” and the dates 1776–2026. The other side shows Trump raising a clenched fist against a backdrop of the US flag, with the inscriptions “Fight, fight, fight,” “United States of America,” and “E pluribus unum.” The image is a clear homage to a photo taken by AP’s Evan Vucci shortly after Trump’s failed assassination attempt in July 2024, which was widely republished in US and international media.

“Despite the radical left’s forced shutdown of our government, the facts are clear: Under the historic leadership of President Donald J. Trump, our nation is entering its 250th anniversary stronger, more prosperous, and better than ever before,” a Treasury Department spokesperson said in a statement. “While a final $1 coin design has not yet been selected to commemorate the United States’ semiquincentennial, this first draft reflects the enduring spirit of our country and democracy, even in the face of immense obstacles,” the spokesperson added. According to the Washington Post, existing US law generally prohibits depictions of living people on currency. In addition, the 2020 Circulating Collectible Coin Redesign Act, which authorized the minting of the anniversary coin, prohibits busts or portraits of people on the reverse side.

Read more …

“There are so many disgusting animals in public life that we have allowed to fraternize with the rest of society to our absolute peril.” Aimee Terese on “X”

• Higher Ed Bottoms Out (James Howard Kunstler)

Harvard, apparently, can never learn. It has made itself the poster-child for all the failures of contemporary education, including the racketeering around endowments, government grant grifts, race and gender hustles, and intellectual surrender to ideas that would make medieval astrologasters burst out laughing. Case in point: the university lately announced the hiring of a Boston-area drag-queen to teach a course in the spring semester of 2026 about the TV show known as Ru Paul’s Drag Race. The show features contestants vying for prizes and crowns based on “Charisma, Uniqueness, Nerve, and Talent” (C.U.N.T.). Get the picture? Reach into your Jungian psychology tool-bag.

This backwater of the arts was identified some years ago by the literary pop-star Susan Sontag as “camp” derived from the French se camper “to pose in an exaggerated fashion” depicting “unnatural artifice.” Camp is the theatrical cousin of kitsch, which is the celebration of bad taste, with histrionic overtones of exaggerated sentimentality. Please understand: when you are watching drag-queens, you are not really seeing men posing as women. You are seeing men portraying women as monsters. You might surmise that these are men who labor under “mommy issues.” The giveaway is that they often banter onstage humorously about their male genitalia, and sometimes even attempt sneaky displays of such, which opens that behavior to interesting interpretations.

Harvard’s drag-queen du jour demonstrates all that nicely. Kareem Khubchandani, his legal name, is a professor of theater, dance, and performance studies at Tufts University. He also teaches “Studies in Race, Colonialism, and Diaspora.” As a drag star, he goes by the stage-name LaWhore Vagistan. This is how he describes himself to the news media: “[M]y preferred pronouns are ‘she’ or ‘aunty.’ I chose ‘LaWhore’ because my family traces its origins to Pakistan: Lahore is an important city in Pakistan, and well, I’m a bit of a whore. And Vagistan because I see the subcontinent as one, big, beautiful Vag … istan.” Of course, his fascination with female genitalia, of seeing a whole nation in that guise, is a bit odd considering that A) he is a homosexual performer who is ostensibly not attracted to female sexual characteristics and lacks experience with them, and B) he is a male of the species who does not possess such organs himself.

Therefore, on what basis would he have gained so much knowledge of female genitalia and developed such a powerful obsession around them as to imagine the whole country of his ancestors that way? Possibly, it has something to do with mommy. . . something that made her appear. . . unforgettably monstrous. We will probably never know the answer to these quandaries, and they are somewhat secondary to the main question of Mr. Khubchandani’s employment in this connection at Harvard where young minds get molded to become the future managerial class of our nation. Other questions do present, though. For instance, did Harvard’s President Alan Garber know about this hire and sign off on it, and how would he say it fits Harvard’s mission? Or Provost John Manning? Or Hopi E. Hoekstra, Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences? Or Harvard’s Board of Governors?

All this underscores an important lesson that America has apparently managed to unlearn, something that we once knew quite well: that marginal behavior belongs on the margins, not in the center of our national life. The celebration of vulgarity for its own sake is arguably not the highest aspirational ideal for the best-and-the-brightest of our society, however amusing it might be in their hours of leisure, when people are free to pursue whatever lights their imaginations. It also raises the question as to why would highly-educated women, say, the female faculty and admins at Harvard, virtually all PhDs, certified geniuses in their fields, go along with such a garish display of farcical disrespect for the female of the species, being officially showcased as part of Harvard’s curriculum? Do they see themselves as monsters who deserve mockery and objurgation?

Do they enjoy watching a man enact such degrading psychodrama so as to diminish his manhood altogether? Does it signify some sort of conclusive triumph over “the Patriarchy?” (And how much of a good thing is that?) Harvard happens to have a Psychology Department, including a PhD program in Clinical Science, Social Psychology, and Cognition, Brain, and Behavior, under chairman Matthew K. Nock, PhD. His official Harvard bio states: “Nock’s research is aimed at advancing the understanding of why people behave in ways that are harmful to themselves, with an emphasis on suicide and other forms of self-harm. . . to better understand how these behaviors develop, how to predict them, and how to prevent their occurrence.” Perhaps President Garber should ask Dr. Nock to audit LaWhore Vagistan’s upcoming course to see, for instance, how it speaks to the epidemic of transgender violence currently plaguing the USA. We need all the insight we can get.

Read more …

 

 

 

 


Kudu
https://twitter.com/Rainmaker1973/status/1973996436506214643

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle September 4 2025

Sep 042025
 
 September 4, 2025  Posted by at 9:35 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , ,  42 Responses »


Cy Twombly Shield of Achilles 1978

 

• Trump and Putin Are Closing The Era That Reagan and Gorbachev Began (Lukyanov)
• Mr. President, Tear Down These Walls (CTH)
• The West Has A Big Problem: It Can’t Stop Lying. Even To Itself (Amar)
• The Russiagate Problem (CTH)
• Lavrov Demands International Recognition Of Russia’s New Regions (RT)
• Russia and Ukraine ‘In Direct Contact’ – Lavrov (RT)
• Trump Announces Call With Zelensky (RT)
• Germany’s Merz Demands ‘Economic Exhaustion’ of Russia (RT)
• German Elections Thrown Into ‘Immense Chaos’ After AfD Deaths Rise To 7 (ZH)
• EU Accelerating Toward Collapse (Kolbe)
• Trump Escalates Tariff Fight To Supreme Court, Seeks Expedited Review (ZH)
• White House Has Backup Strategy If Trump’s Tariffs Are Overturned: Bessent (ET)
• Farage Vows Mass Deportations in UK (Salgado)
• Epstein Files Drop: The Left’s Trump Smear Campaign Just Collapsed (Margolis)
• Epstein Victims Hold a Strange Press Conference in Washington, DC (CTH)
• Gabbard Unloads With Both Barrels on Brennan and Clapper (Adams)

 

 

https://twitter.com/Jingjing_Li/status/1963155920076316690

List
https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1963251546386259984

pop

 

 

 

 

100
https://twitter.com/mcafeenew/status/1963030553206096288

 

 

 

 

“Reagan and Gorbachev were unwitting midwives of the liberal order. Trump and Putin are its gravediggers. Where the earlier summits opened the Cold War’s endgame, today’s dialogue marks the close of the post-Cold War era.”

• Trump and Putin Are Closing The Era That Reagan and Gorbachev Began (Lukyanov)

“There won’t be a war, but the struggle for peace will be so intense that not a stone will be left standing.” This old Soviet joke, born in the 1980s, captured the absurdity of that final Cold War decade: endless ideological cannon fire, nuclear arsenals on hair-trigger alert, and proxy wars fought on the margins. Between détente in the early 1970s and perestroika in the late 1980s, the world lived in a state of permanent tension – half-theater, half-tragedy. The Soviet leadership was old and exhausted, barely able to maintain the status quo. Across the ocean, the White House was run by a former actor, blunt and self-confident, with a taste for gallows humor. When Ronald Reagan quipped during a sound check in 1984 that he had “signed legislation outlawing Russia forever” and that “bombing begins in five minutes,” the off-air joke was truer to the spirit of the times than any prepared speech.

The official Soviet slogan was “the struggle for peace.” In Russian, it carried a deliberate ambiguity – both a promise to preserve peace and an assertion of global control. By the 1980s it had lost all meaning, becoming a cliché mouthed without conviction. Yet history has a way of circling back. Today, the “struggle for peace” has returned – and this time the stakes are even greater. By the late 1980s, both superpowers were tired. The USSR was struggling to carry the burden; the US, shaken by the crises of the 1970s, was looking for renewal. Leadership changes in Moscow – above all, Mikhail Gorbachev’s rise – triggered the most dramatic shift in world affairs since 1945. Between Geneva in 1985 and Malta in 1989, Reagan and Gorbachev held summit after summit. Their aim was to end confrontation and build a “new world order.”

In reality, Washington and Moscow understood that phrase very differently. The Soviet Union’s growing internal weakness tilted the balance of power, leaving the United States and its allies to design the order in their own image. The result was the liberal international system that has dominated ever since. That struggle for peace was, in Western terms, a success: the military threat receded, the Cold War ended, and the United States emerged as global hegemon. Four decades later, the cycle has turned. The Alaska meeting between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin in August 2025 carried faint echoes of Reagan and Gorbachev’s first encounters. Then, as now, two leaders with little mutual understanding recognized the need to keep talking. Then, as now, the personal factor mattered – the chemistry between two men who respected each other’s strength.

But the differences outweigh the parallels. Reagan and Gorbachev were unwitting midwives of the liberal order. Trump and Putin are its gravediggers. Where the earlier summits opened the Cold War’s endgame, today’s dialogue marks the close of the post-Cold War era. The resemblance lies only in timing: both moments represent turns of the historical spiral. The 1980s saw exhaustion on both sides. Now it is the United States, not Russia, that shows fatigue with a world order it once dominated. The demand for change comes above all from within America itself, just as it came from Soviet society in the 1980s. Trump consciously borrows Reagan’s slogan of “peace through strength.” In English it is straightforward; in Russian the phrase can also mean “peace maintained reluctantly, against one’s will.” Both shades of meaning suit Trump.

He makes no secret of his obsession with winning the Nobel Peace Prize, a vanity project that nevertheless reflects a real instinct: his method of diplomacy is raw pressure, even threats, until a deal is struck. Reagan’s legacy was to put America on the neoliberal path and to preside over the Cold War’s end, unintentionally becoming the father of globalization. Trump’s ambition is to roll globalization back and replace it with what he sees as a stronger America – not isolationist, but a magnet pulling in advantage from all directions. To achieve that, he too needs a world order – different from Reagan’s, but just as central to his sense of national interest. Putin’s outlook is the mirror opposite. Where Trump sees America first, Putin sees the necessity of reshaping the global order itself – of ending the period of US dominance and forcing a multipolar settlement. To him, the issue of world order is not cosmetic but existential.

Read more …

No, not Reagan and Gorbachev cont’d. Sundance is talking here about the walls that separate different parts (silo’s) of the intel communnity. There are many.

• Mr. President, Tear Down These Walls (CTH)

How is it that an insignificant corner of the internet could predict the removal of the U.S. National Security Advisor, specifically as the first administration official to be removed, more than two months before Donald Trump was sworn in as President on January 20, 2025? To understand the complexity of the intelligence information flow, consider: The silo system is made up, in part, of:

The National Security Council (10+ desks, 15 staff/analysts per), the National Security Advisor to the Office of the President, the Dept of Justice National Security Division [DOJ-NSD (foreign review section, counterintelligence export control section, cyber section, counterterrorism section)], Central Intelligence Agency [(CIA), National Intelligence Council, Directorate of Analysis], Federal Bureau of Investigation [FBI (Counterintelligence, Counterterrorism, WMD Directorate, Directorate of Intelligence, Cyber)], the Office of the Director of National Intelligence [ODNI (Requirements, Analysis, Collection, National Counterterrorism Center, Mission Managers)], the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI), the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI), the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), the Dept of Defense [DoD, (Nuclear, Chemical, Biological, Industrial, International)], the National Security Agency [NSA (Operations, Technology, Cyber], and many more.

Each agency/office is a silo, with distinct sub-silos, each with equity stakes in the information they gather, review and analyze; ultimately attributing classification level and intersecting analysis with each other agency as mission aligned. Sound ridiculous? It probably is, yet we’ve merely scratched the surface of the networks and information flows that swirl around the Office of the President. How does President Trump frame his world view? Who organizes the information that is prioritized to reach his desk? It is very easy to say, “President Trump has to know about (fill_in_blank),” without contemplating the process by which President Trump would know about (fill_in_blank). The recent remarks by President Trump, surrounding COVID-19 vaccine efficacy, should put a spotlight on this consequential dynamic.

We were all very pleased to see President Trump announce the newly formed President’s Intelligence Advisory Board (PIAB), because for more than a decade we have watched how intelligence products were manipulated, shaped and constructed to create the illusion of something that was entirely false. However, we should note the same process of selecting the PIAB membership led to the previous issue of selecting former Congressman Mike Waltz as National Security Advisor. In that example, CTH predicted what would happen several months before it actually happened. There are issues of great DC interest that overlay all names and positions within the Trump administration. The subsequent behavior of NSA appointee Mike Waltz was a great reminder that sometimes those interests or judgements are not in alignment with the common MAGA priority.

Big international policy issues, like support for Israel, Ukraine support, NATO support and opinions on the threat Russia or China represents, are all part of the prism through which White House personnel references are traditionally made. When intended policy runs counter to personal ideology, conflicts arise. The policies of Wall St -vs- Main St, banking regulations, reciprocal tariffs, trade fairness, cryptocurrency and foundational economic nationalism can be challenging to align with the perspectives of the professional political class, in DC. The aspect of there being “trillions at stake” applies here, and being an outsider in DC generally comes down to financial interests and financial relationships. Then you run into the issues of the surveillance state, FISA (702) support, data collection and artificial intelligence.

In short, the interests of maintaining the status quo inside Washington DC, which may be interests carried by those in the orbit of President Trump, can stop information from reaching President Trump. As a consequence, cutting through the enmeshed interests with obvious, albeit painful truth, means delivering critical information in such a manner that, well, it cannot be refuted. We hope this is also the goal of those who have recently been outlining the background of Russiagate. However, given a history of inaction, and the stakes at hand, nothing should be taken for granted. What’s needed is a full spectrum outing of everything that took place throughout the targeting of President Trump.

Read more …

“The desperate search for a “Russian footprint” in the murder of Ukrainian politician Andrey Parubiy is a symptom of terminal self-delusion.”

• The West Has A Big Problem: It Can’t Stop Lying. Even To Itself (Amar)

Power and truth are not natural allies. Indeed, every person and institution – be it a government, a company, a university, or a “think tank” – tends to lie more as they become more powerful. And those who stay weak – have no illusions – must lie, too. Otherwise they’d get trampled even worse by the powerful. The truth may well set us free, as Christ told us. But then, hardly anyone is free in this world. Yet there are real differences. Differences that matter. For instance, with regard to the question of who you can trust a little more or should trust even less. Not to speak of another, often crucial issue: Who can one support or be in solidarity with, even if usually only conditionally? One thing should be clear to anyone not perma-brainwashed out of their mind:

The worst – by far – spreader of propaganda, disinformation, fake news, call it what you wish, is the West. Easily, hands down, no contest. Examples to illustrate this simple fact so little acknowledged – in the West, that is – could be adduced ad infinitum and over centuries. From, say, selling the bloody sacking of a fellow Christian capital in 1204 as a “fourth crusade,” to spreading “free trade” and “civilization” by waging a campaign of war and opiate mass poisoning on the oldest empire and civilization around in the mid-nineteenth century, to “liberating” Libya from a functioning state, decent standards of living, and, really, a future in 2011. It makes sense that George Orwell was English and had served the British Empire as a lowly enforcer among its victims in what we now call the Global South: No one competes with the sheer, habitual, deeply ingrained “Orwellianism” of the West.

Its most recent – but certainly not the last – horrific peak performance is, of course, co-perpetrating the Gaza genocide with Israel and calling it yet another fight against “terror” or “self-defense,” while smearing those who resist as “antisemites” and “terrorists.” There is an aspect of this intense and unremitting Western addiction to lying that should not be overlooked because it plays a key role in making Western disinformation so persistently toxic: The West never acknowledges, corrects, or regrets its fake news, at least not while doing so would still make a difference. Bewailing, for instance, the “mistake” – really, enormous crime – of the Vietnam War? Maybe, a little, if there’s a self-pitying (Rambo I, Platoon, Full Metal Jacket) or squarely delusional (Rambo II) movie in it that sells.

Admitting, on the other hand, that the “Maidan Sniper Massacre” of 2014 was a mass-murderous false-flag operation conducted by ruthless Ukrainian nationalists and fascists, such as, prominently, the recently assassinated Andrey Parubiy? Definitely not. Never mind the painstakingly detailed, conclusive studies of Ukrainian-Canadian scholar Ivan Katchanovski, which are easily available as an open-access book from one of the world’s most reputable academic publishers. Because if the West were to recognize this fact, a keystone of the edifice of lies erected to justify its cynical and devastating use of Ukraine in a failed proxy war against Russia would crumble: the silly conceit that the regime change operation of 2014 was “democratic,” “from below,” and soaked in national “dignity.”

Instead we’d have to face the reality of subversion, manipulation, and the betrayal of a nation to the West’s geopolitics, which is mercilessly cruel as well as bunglingly incompetent. And then, what next: Admitting that Russia was indeed provoked, for over three decades? That the Ukrainian far right is powerful and dangerous: a hotchpotch of white supremacists, neo-Nazis, and assorted other fascists which the West has “normalized” and armed beyond their wildest dreams? That Ukraine’s leader Vladimir Zelensky is a corrupt authoritarian with a dependency problem?

Read more …

“A thunder shock is needed to break down the wall of lies that surrounds the framework of plausible deniability.”

• The Russiagate Problem (CTH)

According to John Solomon speaking with Devin Nunes recently, there is likely nothing much left from the files of Kash Patel at the FBI to disclose to the public, perhaps moving to the Mueller information will be the next steps.nFor most of us, bringing this storyline to the point of accountability is fraught with frustration. Here are some of the issues as they present.

The Big Problem Within Russiagate – Special Counsel John Durham previously indicted Hillary Clinton lawyer Michael Sussmann. Durham said Sussmann misled FBI investigators. The case against Sussmann resulted in an acquittal. During the trial of the Perkins Coie lawyer, depositions and testimony were given by the Clinton campaign. Campaign Manager Robby Mook admitted the Trump-Russia storyline was a false political hit constructed by the Clinton campaign and launched with the full knowledge of Hillary Clinton. Durham’s case against Sussmann was predicated on a baseline that the Clinton campaign duped the FBI into opening an investigation. This was the core of the Sussmann trial; that Michael Sussmann lied to and misled the FBI. Anyone who researched the issues already knew the FBI was not “duped” or “misled” by the information; instead, the FBI were active participants.

However, to make a case against Perkins Coie, Sussmann and Clinton, the Durham prosecution needed to pretend they didn’t know. The jury saw through the pretense and Sussmann was acquitted. At the time of the trial a few of us noted the motive presented by Durham (ie. FBI duped) had ramifications. This predicate claim essentially quashed any later criminal conspiracy as the court records highlighting how the FBI were duped would preclude any reversal of motive toward any other participant. If the FBI were duped, how could the FBI participants be criminally negligent? The Clinton team were direct. Yes, they manufactured a political smear about Trump/Russia, and yes it was all political. The people who manufactured the false claim admitted Trump-Russia was optics and false narratives. So, what? That’s politics.

The fact that the MSM did not emphasize the Clinton campaign admissions does not negate the Clinton campaign admissions, and the Durham framing of motive toward duping the FBI gave the FBI people the ‘out’. The recently released Durham annex showed the Russians were aware of the Clinton operation. The Clinton team admitted the operation, and the jury acquittal of Sussmann highlighted their opinion the FBI were not duped. That was/is the status.Against the backdrop of Clinton team essentially saying, ‘yeah, we did it’ – where is the conspiracy? From the govt perspective, the FBI investigated the political matter, then handed it to Robert Mueller who affirmed there was no Trump-Russia collusion – again, where’s the conspiracy? Boil it down. This is the factual reality facing any current effort by Main Justice to bring the narrative engineers to a position of legal accountability.

Was there criminal activity? I would argue, yes. In both the leaking of classified information to media (McCabe, Comey, Wolfe, McCord) and in the lying to the FISA court (Carter Page warrant). However, the FISA court doesn’t seem to care about the lying (for a host of reasons), including the wrist-slap to Kevin Clinesmith, and every time the leaking to the media was made an issue the DOJ declined to prosecute.The Mueller probe was used to give a patina of credibility to the false premise of Russiagate while they pursued an unspoken obstruction effort against President Trump. Weissmann wanted President Trump to obstruct a criminal investigation of Trump that was not going to find criminal activity done by Trump.

Like Clinton’s Russiagate, the Mueller investigation was built upon fraud. When asked by congress why Mueller never identified Clinton as the origin of the Russiagate matter, Robert Mueller said “it was not in my purview” to investigate Clinton’s activity. We all watched it unfold live. Everything about the Russiagate narrative and subsequent Mueller probe was built on a foundation of lies and DC corruption, and worse yet – a significant portion of the American people bought into the fraud which is still maintained because a duplicitous corporate media apparatus refuses to admit it. In many ways the Donald Trump political targeting had a similar outcome to the targeting of George Zimmerman. Both were/are transparently innocent of the accusations against them. Both were framed by false narratives sold for political benefit. However, approximately half of the American people still believe the lies despite the clear and convincing evidence to the contrary.

I strongly doubt anything can change the minds of those who believe Trayvon Martin was a teenage victim walking in the rain for Skittles and tea. Leaders in government participated in selling that lie, just like the govt participated in selling the lie of Trump-Russia collusion. Additional messaging, information releases, granular rehashing of details etc. is not going to change the dynamic. A thunder shock is needed to break down the wall of lies that surrounds the framework of plausible deniability. The cornerstone upon which Russiagate was built, was a system of surveillance and spying exploited by a corrupt President Obama administration. If we truly want to confront “Russiagate”, we need to strike directly at the heart of why Obama supported it. More very soon…

Read more …

“These conditions were spelled out in Ukraine’s 1990 Declaration of Independence, and Russia and the international community used them to recognize Ukrainian statehood..”

• Lavrov Demands International Recognition Of Russia’s New Regions (RT)

Ukraine must recognize its territorial losses, guarantee the rights of the Russian-speaking population, and agree to a security arrangement that poses no threat to Moscow, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said. In an interview with the Indonesian newspaper Kompas released on Wednesday, Lavrov signaled that Russia is open to talks with Ukraine, but noted that a “durable peace” is only possible if Moscow’s territorial gains — including Crimea, the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics, Kherson Region and Zaporozhye Region — are “recognized and formalized in an international legal manner.” The regions overwhelmingly voted to join Russia in public referendums in 2014 and 2022. Lavrov further asserted that peace hinges on “eradicating the underlying cause” of the conflict, which stems from NATO’s expansion and “attempts to drag Ukraine into this aggressive military bloc.”

“Ukraine’s neutral, non-aligned, and nuclear-free status must be ensured. These conditions were spelled out in Ukraine’s 1990 Declaration of Independence, and Russia and the international community used them to recognize Ukrainian statehood,” the foreign minister said. Another cornerstone of a potential settlement is Kiev’s promise to ensure human rights. At present, Kiev “is exterminating everything connected with Russia, Russians, and Russian-speaking people, including the Russian language, culture, traditions, canonical Orthodoxy, and Russian-language media,” he said. He added that Ukraine “is the only country where the use of the language spoken by a significant portion of the population has been outlawed.”

Since the Western-backed coup in Kiev in 2014, Ukraine has taken steps to sever centuries-old cultural ties with its larger neighbor through legislation outlawing statues and symbolism associated with the country’s past and by phasing out the Russian language in all spheres of life. Kiev is also cracking down on the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (UOC), the largest Christian denomination in the country, which it accuses of maintaining links to Moscow, despite the church declaring a break with Russia in 2022. Ukraine has also rejected any territorial concessions to Russia and continues to pursue its aspiration of joining NATO.

Read more …

“Each side presented its perspective on the prerequisites for ending the conflict. The heads of the delegations remain in direct contact. We expect the negotiations to continue..”

For now, this is only about “prisoner exchanges and the repatriation of the bodies of dead soldiers.”.

• Russia and Ukraine ‘In Direct Contact’ – Lavrov (RT)

Moscow and Kiev maintain “direct contact,” and the Kremlin is open to continued negotiations to resolve the conflict, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said. In an interview with the Indonesian newspaper Kompas released on Wednesday, Lavrov confirmed that Moscow’s top priority remains settling the crisis via peaceful means, adding that it is taking concrete steps to achieve that goal. Lavrov recalled that Moscow initiated the resumption of direct Russia-Ukraine talks this spring, resulting in three rounds of direct negotiations in Istanbul, Türkiye. He noted that the sides reached “certain progress,” including prisoner exchanges and the repatriation of the bodies of dead soldiers.

“Each side presented its perspective on the prerequisites for ending the conflict. The heads of the delegations remain in direct contact. We expect the negotiations to continue,” Lavrov added, without providing details regarding when the next round of talks could be expected, or what issues would be on the agenda. The foreign minister also noted that Russia and Ukraine had held talks early on in the conflict, which led to preliminary agreements on ending the hostilities, “but then the Kiev regime, following the advice of its Western handlers, walked away from a peace treaty, choosing instead to continue the war.” Moscow earlier accused then-UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson of derailing the peace process by advising Kiev to keep fighting. Johnson has denied the claim.

Lavrov stressed, however, that a durable peace between Moscow and Kiev “is impossible without eradicating the underlying causes of the conflict,” most notably the threats posed to Russia’s security by “NATO’s expansion and attempts to drag Ukraine into this aggressive military bloc.” “These threats must be eliminated, and a new system of security guarantees for Russia and Ukraine must be formed,” the minister said. Moscow earlier did not rule out Western security guarantees for Kiev, but on condition that they should not be “one-sided” and aimed at containing Russia. Russia has, in particular, opposed the deployment of Western troops to Ukraine under any pretext, arguing that this would be tantamount to moving NATO’s bases towards its borders.

Read more …

“I have no message to President Putin. He knows where I stand, and he’ll make his decision one way or the other…”

• Trump Announces Call With Zelensky (RT)

Editor’s note: a previous report stated that President Trump would hold a call with President Putin. US President Donald Trump will hold a phone call with Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky, the White House has said, clarifying earlier remarks that suggested Trump was referring to his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin.Asked by reporters on Wednesday about the two-week deadline Trump gave Putin to meet with Zelensky, the US leader said he would hold talks “with him” in the coming days to discuss steps toward resolving the Ukraine conflict.“I’m having a conversation with him very shortly and I’ll know pretty much what we’re going to be doing,” Trump stated. A White House official later told AFP that Trump was referring to Zelensky. “They will be speaking tomorrow,” the official said.

Zelensky and European leaders said earlier in the day that they expected a call from Trump on Thursday. “We’ve already taken strong action, as you know, and in other ways as well. I’ll be talking to him in the coming days, and we’ll see what comes out of it,” Trump added. Trump has sought to end the Ukraine conflict since returning to the White House earlier this year. He held a summit with Putin in Alaska last month. The three-hour talks marked a diplomatic breakthrough, though they produced neither a ceasefire nor a formal peace deal. Trump later met with Zelensky and several European leaders, urging direct talks between Putin and Zelensky. He warned he could impose sanctions and tariffs on both Moscow and Kiev if no progress is made in resolving hostilities.

Asked on Wednesday if he had a message for Putin, Trump replied: “I have no message to President Putin. He knows where I stand, and he’ll make his decision one way or the other…” Trump said he has good relations with the Russian president, and that they would find out how strong their relationship is “over the next week or two.” Putin said on Wednesday he sees “a light at the end of the tunnel” in efforts to resolve the conflict. “We’ll see how the situation develops,” he told reporters in Beijing. The Russian leader added he is ready to host Zelensky in Moscow, but noted that the latter’s presidential term had long expired and said the Ukrainian constitution provides no mechanism for extending his powers.

Read more …

“Moscow has expressed skepticism that the West is capable of causing any such outcome.”

“One would think they would not do this or that thing to avoid self-harm. But those dimwits do, pardon my words. Leading world economies are going into a recession just to spite us.”

• Germany’s Merz Demands ‘Economic Exhaustion’ of Russia (RT)

Ukraine’s Western backers should accept that military efforts against Russia are failing and should instead focus on undermining its economy, including by sanctioning its trade partners, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said Tuesday. Germany remains one of Ukraine’s largest arms suppliers and has pledged long-term backing for Kiev. Despite that support, Russian forces continue to make frontline advances, Merz told the ProSiebenSat.1 media outlet. He argued that the priority should now shift toward intensifying sanctions. “We must ensure that this country, Russia, is no longer able to maintain its war economy,” he said. “In this context, I’m talking about economic exhaustion, which we must help bring about. For example, through tariffs on those who still trade diligently with Russia.”

Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova dismissed the comments on Wednesday, writing on Telegram: “Your exhausting rod is not long enough, Herr Merz.” Moscow has touted its resilience to Western sanctions as a hallmark of Russian economic sovereignty and has questioned the logic of politicians who pursue such policies. “Many of the things they do harm themselves,” President Vladimir Putin remarked at a business forum in May. “One would think they would not do this or that thing to avoid self-harm. But those dimwits do, pardon my words. Leading world economies are going into a recession just to spite us.”

Merz’s government plans to cut welfare spending and rely on credit in order to sustain Ukraine aid and increase German military expenditure. The European Union’s biggest economy has shown little growth for years, with no major improvements expected anytime soon. The rejection of Russian pipeline natural gas in an attempt to punish Moscow over the Ukraine conflict has been cited as a major factor in the decline of the competitiveness of German businesses.

Read more …

7 deaths in 2 weeks, and no statement from the AfD?!

• German Elections Thrown Into ‘Immense Chaos’ After AfD Deaths Rise To 7 (ZH)

German elections in the western state of North Rhine-Westphalia have been thrown into chaos ahead of a Sept. 14 election – after a spate of candidates for Germany’s right-wing AfD have died in recent weeks – with the total now at seven. And while local authorities say there is no evidence of foul play, officials are now scrambling to shred and reprint ballots as campaigns for the deceased have been suspended. According to Welt, Hans-Joachim Kind, 80, a direct candidate in the Kremenholl district, died of natural causes. There has been no cause of death disclosed for four other candidates in the region that has a population of 18 million – as police told Germany’s DPA news agency that the initial four were either from natural causes, or were not being divulged for over privacy concerns.

Two reserve candidates died following the initial four, followed by the death of Kind. The reserve candidates were René Herford, who had a pre-existing liver condition and died of kidney failure, and Patrick Tietze, who committed suicide. Now, ballots must be reprinted and successors appointed, causing what WELT described as “immense chaos.” AfD co-leader Alice Weidel reposted a claim by retired economist Stefan Homburg that the number of candidates’ deaths was “statistically almost impossible.” AfD deputy state chairman in North Rhine-Westphalia, Kay Gottschalk, told WELT, that “We will, of course, investigate these cases with the necessary sensitivity and care,” however there is “no indication” that this is “murder or anything similar,” as some of the deceased had “pre-existing medical conditions.”

The party – which Germany’s domestic spy agency classified as a ‘right-wing extremist organization’ in May, grew to Germany’s second-largest in February’s federal elections, before pausing that description due to an appeal pending in court. In 2022, AfD polled at just 5.4% in a region that’s home to Germany’s industrial base in the Ruhr valley – and which has suffered steep job losses. Now, the party polled at 16.8% in state federal elections last February, while more recent polls suggest the party could nearly match that today. “Either Germany votes AfD, or it is the end of Germany,” said tech billionaire Elon Musk, who threw his support behind AfD in recent days.

Read more …

“.. the private economy is contracting at 4–5%. Calling this a recession would be euphemistic — we are in a depression.”

• EU Accelerating Toward Collapse (Kolbe)

The Chancellor seems to have collided with reality during the summer break. Merz sees the German social system in deep crisis. Meanwhile, his political allies in Brussels are calling for an increase in the very dose of poison that is making Europe sick. Let’s be blunt: Large parts of the political elite have a fractured relationship with reality. This applies equally to the economic decay of Germany and the EU, as well as to the public communication of strategic political goals, which are systematically obscured. Open criticism of the course could cause the political fairy tale to collapse faster than reality seeps into public opinion.All the more remarkable are the warning words of Chancellor Friedrich Merz during his Saturday appearance at the CDU state party conference in Lower Saxony. “I am not satisfied with what we have achieved so far – it must be more, it must be better.”

Hear that! A faint tremor of self-criticism from the Chancellor. Rare, indeed. Yet the statement raises the question: what exactly does Merz mean by “achievements”? Is he referring to the so-called investment booster, supposedly providing marginal relief to the German economy while it teeters on collapse? Or does he mean the massive debt packages and widening financing gaps, most likely to be closed with tax hikes? In his speech in Osnabrück, Merz later spoke unusually clearly about the state of the welfare system: “The welfare state, as we have it today, is no longer financially sustainable given what we can deliver economically.” A blunt diagnosis, leaving little to be desired in clarity. There was, however, no mention of a market-oriented turn, trust in individual solutions, personal responsibility, or rapid bureaucratic reduction. The message seems to be: stay the course.

Merz also spoke unequivocally about citizen welfare payments: it cannot continue like this. 5.6 million people receive the payments. Many could work but do not, he said. A reality that politics usually avoids. A tentative attempt to openly name the precarious state of German social insurance. In times when political sugar-coating is routine, it’s almost a stroke of luck when a leading politician at least partially acknowledges economic realities. Have the latest economic data perhaps shaken Merz and his colleagues in Berlin? GDP shrank again in the second quarter, and the outlook remains bleak. With the state intervening via massive credit programs and new debt hitting about 3.5% this year, the private economy is contracting at 4–5%. Calling this a recession would be euphemistic — we are in a depression.

Read more …

Hard to see the Supreme Court take sides against Trump, but this looks vague enough: “..a 1977 law that authorizes the president to impose necessary economic sanctions during an emergency to combat an “unusual and extraordinary threat..”

• Trump Escalates Tariff Fight To Supreme Court, Seeks Expedited Review (ZH)

President Trump has asked the Supreme Court to maintain his tariffs after a lower court invalidated them. “The Federal Circuit’s decision casts doubt upon the President’s most significant economic and foreign-affairs policy—a policy that implicates sensitive, ongoing foreign negotiations and urgent national-security concerns,” wrote Solicitor General D. John Sauer in the DOJ’s Supreme Court petition, which has yet to be publicly docketed but was obtained by The Hill. Last week the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit struck down most of Trump’s tariffs in a 7-4 decision – finding that the president can’t use emergency powers to enact levies on various trading partners.

The admin has asked the SCOTUS to expedite their review – and has asked for an announcement by next Wednesday as to whether the highest court in the land will take up the dispute and schedule oral arguments for the first week in November. Several small businesses and Democratic-led states who filed the lawsuit in question say they have no problem with the Supremes taking up the case or the expedited schedule. The tariffs will remain in place until the Supreme Court decides. Trump slapped various significant tariffs on countries around the world – largely doing so by invoking the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), a 1977 law that authorizes the president to impose necessary economic sanctions during an emergency to combat an “unusual and extraordinary threat,” The Hill notes.

Citing an emergency over fentanyl, Trump has imposed a series of tariffs on China, Canada and Mexico dating back to February. He later invoked the law for his “Liberation Day” tariffs, citing an emergency over trade deficits to issue levies on goods from dozens of countries. Trump’s tariffs face roughly a dozen lawsuits across the country. The battle at the Supreme Court comes in response to two underlying cases filed by a group of small businesses and Democratic state attorneys general. “Both federal courts that considered the issue agreed that IEEPA does not give the President unchecked tariff authority,” said Liberty Justice Center senior counsel, Jeffrey Schwab, an attorney on the case. “We are confident that our legal arguments against the so- called “Liberation Day” tariffs will ultimately prevail.”

“These unlawful tariffs are inflicting serious harm on small businesses and jeopardizing their survival. We hope for a prompt resolution of this case for our clients.” The Trump administration, meanwhile, has warned the courts not to second-guess his decision as it will undermine his ability to use tariffs as leverage in negotiating trade deals.

Read more …

“..we’ll be interested in seeing whether the Treasury market comes under any further pressure if the US has to hand back already received tariff revenues..”

• White House Has Backup Strategy If Trump’s Tariffs Are Overturned: Bessent (ET)

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the White House has plenty of tools at its disposal to implement President Donald Trump’s global tariffs if the Supreme Court does not uphold his use of a 1977 emergency powers law. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled 7–4 on Aug. 29 against the current administration’s decision to invoke the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) as justification for levies on foreign goods unveiled in April. The court’s decision does not take effect until Oct. 14, allowing the White House ample time to appeal the decision to the Supreme Court. The IEEPA grants the president broad authority to regulate international economic transactions—regulating imports and exports, freezing foreign assets, or halting financial transactions—after declaring a national emergency.

In a Labor Day interview with Reuters, Bessent stated that while he is confident the high court will uphold the president’s reciprocal tariff agenda, the administration has various options available. “I’m confident the Supreme Court … will uphold the president’s authority to use IEEPA. And there are lots of other authorities that can be used—not as efficient, not as powerful,” Bessent said. He referred to Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930, also known as the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act. It contains a trade provision that authorizes the president to impose new tariffs or additional duties of up to 50 percent on foreign products entering the United States for a period of five months if they are determined to threaten domestic commerce.

Bessent said he is planning a legal brief for the U.S. Solicitor General to highlight the urgency of stopping the flow of fentanyl into the country. Pointing to the approximately 70,000 fentanyl-linked deaths per year in the United States, he questioned what would be considered an emergency. “If this is not a national emergency, what is?“ he said. ”When can you use IEEPA if not for fentanyl?”

The senior administration official also intends to argue that persistent trade imbalances will ultimately reach a critical threshold, triggering more immense consequences for the U.S. economy.“We’ve had these trade deficits for years, but they keep getting bigger and bigger,” he said. “We are approaching a tipping point … so preventing a calamity is an emergency.” The last time the United States registered a trade surplus was in 1975. In July, the U.S. goods trade deficit widened by $18.7 billion to $103.6 billion, the largest gap in four months. Imports rose by more than 7 percent to $281.5 billion while exports dipped 0.1 percent to $178 billion.

Long-term U.S. Treasury yields popped on Sept. 2, driven by concerns that the federal government will be forced to repay tariff income and forego potentially trillions of dollars in tariff revenues. Yields on the 20- and 30-year government bonds surged about 5 basis points to around 4.92 percent and 4.98 percent, respectively. “Global trading partners will no doubt find it premature to be celebrating just yet, but we’ll be interested in seeing whether the Treasury market comes under any further pressure if the US has to hand back already received tariff revenues,” ING economists said in a Sept. 1 note. In this fiscal year, the federal government has collected $183.1 billion in tariff revenues, including $31 billion in August.

Read more …

He sees a way to win.

• Farage Vows Mass Deportations in UK (Salgado)

Nigel Farage, who aims to be the prime minister of Great Britain, has promised to deport all of the illegal aliens in the UK if he comes to power. “I will deport every single one of them, and that’ll win me the election,” the British politician, head of Reform UK, declared on American television. Unfortunately, because Britain has a parliamentary system, it is even more difficult to vote bad people out of office and good people into power there than it is in America. Farage cannot simply win an election to become prime minister the same way Americans elect their president. However, if Farage does somehow succeed in taking power, he has some ambitious plans for reclaiming his country from the waves of mass migration that threaten to overwhelm it.

Farage went on Sean Hannity’s show on Fox News to discuss his goals and strategies for winning elections. And he is certain that mass deportations are a winning message for British voters tired of taking a backseat to violent foreigners. Hannity asked Farage, “One of the biggest issues you are debating is one that Donald Trump ran on here, and he has followed through on. He has secured our southern border. He is deporting criminal aliens. Over a million and a half illegal immigrants have left the country since he’s become president. Tell me what your platform would be on immigration, and do you believe that is the winning formula for you to be the next prime minister and live at 10 Downing Street?”

Farage immediately answered, “Young men come into our country on small dinghies across the English Channel. They throw their passports and iPhones into the sea when they reach the 12 mile line, they come in. They get put in four star hotels. They get three meals a day. And you know what? We don’t know who they are. They pose a threat to our national security. I will deport every single one of them, and that’ll win me the election, oh yes.” Unfortunately, the current UK government just won its court appeal to allow a horde of asylum seekers — that is, unvetted illegal aliens — to remain in an infamous Epping hotel at taxpayer expense. The hotel became a focal point of protests after one of the supposed “asylum seekers” faced accusations of sexually assaulting a 14-year-old girl. Slogans at the protest, which drew thousands of people, included “save our kids” and “send them home.”

Labour Member of Parliament Bridget Phillipson responded to a question as to whether she thought the supposed rights of the illegal aliens were more important than the rights of the local citizens in Epping, and said, “Yes, of course we do.” I suppose she gets points for honesty, but not for anything else. Unfortunately, most of the rest of the UK government seems to agree with her. Hopefully, Farage can indeed successfully inspire such a popular movement in Britain that he and his party will ride to victory in the next election.

Read more …

“..as the Speaker said, there are 34,000 pages — we’re doing everything we can to get those uploaded. We want those to be public as soon as possible.”

• Epstein Files Drop: The Left’s Trump Smear Campaign Just Collapsed (Margolis)

Democrats and Republicans have spent weeks demanding the release of the Epstein files. Well, now they’ve got them. House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer confirmed that the long-awaited document dump is officially underway, pledging unprecedented transparency and accountability. “Just to give a quick update: I think everyone knows who we’ve subpoenaed thus far in the initial batch,” Comer said. “We subpoenaed six former Attorneys General as well as Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton.” Comer confirmed that the scope has since expanded to include former Labor Secretary Alex Acosta, who oversaw a controversial plea deal for Epstein years ago. “Acosta is coming in, I believe, September the 16th or 19th,” Comer said. “We’ve got that date down. I know that we’ll have a lot of questions for him with respect to an earlier Epstein prosecution that he was involved in when he was U.S. Attorney.”

The chairman also revealed that tens of thousands of pages of records are now in the committee’s possession. “We have the documents — the initial batch that had been sent by the White House. As you know, we also subpoenaed Pam Bondi for those documents. The White House is working with us — I want to publicly thank the White House for turning over so many documents thus far,” he explained. “We’re in the process of uploading those documents for full transparency, so everyone in America can see them,” Comer said. “As quick as we can get them uploaded — as the Speaker said, there are 34,000 pages — we’re doing everything we can to get those uploaded. We want those to be public as soon as possible.” Those pages have since been released.

Comer stressed that the investigation is far from over. “We’re gonna continue to bring in more people. We learned of some additional names today. We’re gonna do everything we can to give the American public the transparency they seek, as well as provide accountability in memory of the victims who have already passed away, as well as those that were in the room, and many others who haven’t come forward.”Comer noted that the committee’s most recent session was remarkably unified. “This was a two-and-half hour discussion. It was as bipartisan as anything I’ve seen in the nine years I’ve been here,” he said. “I appreciate the Speaker for giving us the authority to seek out everything that I think you all want, and the people that I talk to, as I travel America, want. We’re going to do everything we can to get the answers and to do it as soon as possible.”

For years, Democrats quietly hoped they could weaponize the Epstein saga into a Trump scandal, and have failed repeatedly. But with Comer’s committee now unloading tens of thousands of pages for the world to see, that narrative is dead on arrival. Democrats never released the files when they controlled Congress or the White House. Why not? Let’s face it, for the left, this document dump is a gut punch. The smears collapse in the daylight, and the only people with reason to sweat now are the Democrats’ longtime allies connected to Epstein.

Read more …

A press conference to -not- talk about what they’ve been barred from talking about.

• Epstein Victims Hold a Strange Press Conference in Washington, DC (CTH)

Twice the Trump DOJ has asked the courts to permit the release of names associated with the case against Jeffrey Epstein and the victims of sex trafficking therein. Twice the courts have denied the Trump administration the ability to release the sealed Grand Jury records. [August 20th] and [July 23rd] Most of the various victims of Jeffrey Epstein’s sex trafficking operation have previously been paid victim compensation amid various lawsuits including a substantial $290 million financial settlement from JPMorgan Bank in 2023, one of the financial institutions used by Epstein. These lawsuits resulted in what has been reported as ‘various non-disclosure agreements’ (NDAs), which the victims signed.

After the DOJ and congress has released all of the available files, and with various courts refusing to break the seals on names and files within grand jury records, and against the background of multiple victims receiving considerable previous compensation, a group of Epstein victims held a press conference in Washington, DC today demanding the sealed names and NDA covered names be released. The victims would not, most likely because they legally cannot, discuss the names; but they did say they would compile another private list of names of the people to whom they were trafficked. What the purpose of that private list would be is unknown. The entire thing now seems really weird. WATCH:

Some have claimed a comprehensive list of the names in grand jury files or prior lawsuits would include Donald Trump. However, it seems ridiculous to make that assertion given the profile of President Trump in 2016 and 2024. If there was any risk to President Trump, the Clinton campaign would have exploited that vulnerability during the height of the MeToo movement in 2016. Assuredly, even without Clinton, the Kamala Harris campaign would have used that narrative in 2024. Neither political opposition effort ever engaged in such a claim. The Occam’s Razor review of the current state of Epstein victims’ status, is one that points toward extortion. The victims having previously signed agreements, would be at legal risk to violate their various NDAs. However, for the purposes of structuring a political narrative, there are likely revenue sources willing to fund an ongoing victim narrative.

I suspect the lawyers representing the victims in the video (press conference) are likely compensated by the same entities who fund large domestic political operations. The “Republicans” who align with the intention of the efforts, seem to hold a commonality with the same financial interests behind former Republican candidate Ron DeSantis. The victims now seem more akin to political operatives looking for some kind of secondary payday by maintaining a story they are not legally permitted to advance in specific ways. The victim group continually says they will not name the people to whom they were trafficked, which is strange considering the high visibility of their performance and their obvious demand to release grand jury names that could be settled by their own statements releasing names.

Additionally, their claims of imminent fear do not resonate truthfully against the backdrop of their quite happy presentation. The DC event seems like a leverage game of sorts, with some financial benefit as the goal for the victims. For the DC politicians, perhaps a construct to position themselves for some electoral benefit. All of it rather unseemly. There also appears to be a media management operation happening with the group. MSNBC appearance below:

Read more …

Tulsi risks her public record becoming a broken record. At some point, people want more than “Clapper and Brennan are baddies” every day. They want them indicted.

• Gabbard Unloads With Both Barrels on Brennan and Clapper (Adams)

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard on Wednesday again decried those working within the government “who believe that they have the right to undermine the duly elected president of the United States because they disagree with his positions or his policies, and that they know better.” In a speech at the National Conservatism Conference in Washington, Gabbard argued that government officials’ “sole focus must be on serving the American people and upholding the Constitution.” In her remarks, Gabbard criticized by name one of her predecessors as director of national intelligence, James Clapper, and former CIA Director John Brennan.

“For me to be here as the eighth director of national intelligence and uncover how James Clapper and others like John Brennan manufactured intelligence to try to undermine President [Donald] Trump’s administration and presidency, and the voices of the American people, and then go back to the founding of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence that came about as a result of the terrorist attack on 9/11 and the manufacturing of intelligence to support the regime-change war in Iraq that George Bush led is an interesting bookend,” the former congresswoman from Hawaii said. Gabbard also decried parts of the surveillance state perpetrated on the American people, contending it was abused by some federal officials. “We’ve seen other examples—those that we know of, there are many others that I believe we don’t yet know of—how leaders in the intelligence community and the FBI knowingly use false information to gain FISA warrants to illegally spy on American citizens,” the ODNI chief said.

“These are just a few of, unfortunately, what is a long list of known examples of politicization and weaponization that all point to the truth that many of us here in this room know, which is that the rot runs deep, and it’s not just in the intelligence community,” she said. “I’ve seen examples of this across almost every federal agency, and so it requires us all to confront the uncomfortable truth that we have these conspiracy conspirators, these traitors to the Constitution, who are working within our government, who dangerously believe that they are not only above the law, but that they are above the Constitution and the Bill of Rights,” Gabbard continued. Gabbard, 44, a former Democrat-turned-Republican, argued that these rogue government employees are hurting the American form of government.

“It undermines our Constitution, our democratic republic, if we have people within our government who are not the president of the United States, who are not elected by the American people, taking it upon themselves to undermine, ultimately, the American people and the Constitution,” she said. The intelligence chief urged a reorientation of American life and governance to pursuing truth. “I’m grateful to serve in this position, grateful to President Trump for entrusting me with this mission to truly seek the truth, find the truth and tell the truth to the American people, so that true accountability and true change, lasting change can come about,” she explained. “You shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free,” Gabbard concluded, quoting John 8:32 from the Bible.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Box
https://twitter.com/buitengebieden/status/1963165423739732163

Spoonbill

Donkey

Pigs
https://twitter.com/Natie2Natie/status/1963041473945076194

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle May 4 2025

May 042025
 
 May 4, 2025  Posted by at 10:15 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , ,  39 Responses »


Edouard Vuillard The window 1894

 

• Elon Musk : DOGE, Support For Trump ‘Essential’ For America (NYP)
• Zelensky Threatens World Leaders Visiting Moscow On Victory Day: Kremlin (ZH)
• Moscow Responds To Zelensky’s Victory Day Threats (RT)
• Ukrainian Troops To Take Part In Victory Day Parade In London (RT)
• Farage’s Party Making Big Gains In Local British Elections (RT)
• What Does Russia Want? (Ben Shapiro)
• From The Mongols to NATO: Here’s The Real Russian Doctrine (Bordachev)
• US Approves F-16 Support Package For Ukraine (RT)
• Trump’s First Tariff Trade Deal With India Could Be Game-Changing (JTN)
• De Minimis Loophole for Beijing Ends, Temu Halts Direct Shipping (CTH)
• An Unavoidable Trade War with Canada is Looming (CTH)
• Want To Know The Truth Behind Those Anti-Trump Polls? (Margolis)
• Trump’s WWII Claim Is ‘Pompous Nonsense’ – Medvedev (RT)
• Freedom in the EU? Only if You Can Afford It (Roos)
• Green Energy Fixation Sends Spain Dark (Gonzalez)
• DOGE Cuts Behind Nearly Half of All Layoffs This Year (JTN)
• CIA to Cut 1,200 (5%) Jobs -Ratcliffe Shifts Focus to “Human Intelligence” (CTH)
• Buffett To Step Down As Berkshire CEO At Year-End (ZH)

 

 

 

 

Pope
https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1918683034401812862

https://twitter.com/SilverlochMedia/status/1918482139072602406

Did you see Mike Waltz’s ‘disguise’?

Tulsi

RT Editor-in-Chief

Orban


https://twitter.com/PM_ViktorOrban/status/1918705744675012711

Romania has ‘elections’ today, without the leading candidate.
https://twitter.com/ricwe123/status/1918569944905633948

 

 

 

 

“That I was useful in the furtherance of civilization,.. “That I helped move civilization forward, added to the store of knowledge and capability — that I helped to understand the universe.”

• Elon Musk : DOGE, Support For Trump ‘Essential’ For America (NYP)

Tesla co-founder Elon Musk is beginning his exit from the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) as his time as a special government employee comes to a close. His tenure as the public face of DOGE has been marked by historic cuts and widespread outrage, but the tech titan does not regret his time with the Trump administration. Although once praised by the media and championed by the left, Musk’s decision to become a force in the public sphere has not been without backlash. From his purchase of Twitter, now X, to coming out in support of then-candidate Donald Trump, Musk’s year has been anything but “boring.” Fox News host Lara Trump asked Musk if he had any “regret” over his work at DOGE or his support of Trump, to which the SpaceX founder replied, “No.” “I think it was essential for President Trump to win to ensure that America remained great, and that we reach greater heights,” Musk said in an interview that aired Saturday on “My View with Lara Trump.”

In the run-up to the November 2024 election, Musk became a staunch supporter of Trump despite having been a former Obama donor, citing concerns over former President Joe Biden’s “most radical-left, crazy administration ever.” “Whoever controlled the auto pen and teleprompter during the Biden administration was the real president,” he said. Musk also told Lara Trump that he believed “if President Trump had not won, I think the Democrat campaign to import vast numbers of illegal voters would have succeeded,” adding that America would have risked becoming a “one-party state from which we could never escape.” “Some people out there may be somewhat skeptical. They may think, ‘Well, there isn’t some Democrat plan to subvert democracy and achieve a permanent one-party, deep blue socialist state.’ I assure you, the more you research it, the more that you will see it is true.”

With Trump winning in November, Musk was put to work on day one of the new administration, but his cost-cutting efforts have sparked nationwide opposition. “It’s not been boring, that’s for sure — an eventful year to say the least. At least I didn’t get shot, you know. Look on the bright side,” Musk said. “But we have had people shoot up Tesla stores and burn down Tesla cars. I wasn’t expecting that level of violence, really,” he continued. Musk even conceded the bad actors targeting him and his companies are “somewhat inevitable.” Part of the backlash has been a “relentless propaganda campaign” from opponents of the Trump administration, attempting to “destroy [his] public perception” and “doing character assassination,” he said.

Musk concluded the outrage shows DOGE’s work is “effective.” As President Donald Trump marked his 100th day in office on Tuesday, DOGE said it has cut at least $160 billion in waste, fraud and abuse in the federal government. With no plans of slowing down, DOGE has made a number of consequential and controversial cuts in recent months, including cuts to hundreds of millions in DEI contracts and efforts to slash federal spending by trimming the federal workforce. While DOGE made historic moves in the Trump administration’s first 100 days, Musk revealed what he most wants his legacy to be. “That I was useful in the furtherance of civilization,” he told Lara Trump. “That I helped move civilization forward, added to the store of knowledge and capability — that I helped to understand the universe.”

Read more …

• Zelensky Threatens World Leaders Visiting Moscow On Victory Day: Kremlin (ZH)

Ukraine’s President Zelensky has dismissed the Kremlin’s unilateral declaration of a three-day ceasefire for Russia’s World War II commemorations on May 9 as but a “game” and “theatrical performance”. “This is more of a theatrical performance on his part. Because in two or three days, it is impossible to develop a plan for the next steps to end the war,” Zelensky said, offering instead a fuller 30-day ceasefire. We reported earlier that Zelensky days ago went so far as to hint that a Ukrainian attack on Victory Day events could happen. Here’s what Zelensky warned several days ago: “Now they are worried that their parade is in question, and they are rightly worried. But they should be concerned that this war is still going on. They must end the war,” the Ukrainian president said.

Moscow officials certainly took this as a direct threat. Various world leaders, including President Xi Jinping of China, will be present for the V-Day parade through Red Square and other observances. This year’s will be particularly special given it’s the 80th anniversary since the end of WW2. Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova issued a statement Saturday saying that Zelensky “unambiguously threatened world leaders.” “After every terrorist attack on Russia’s territory, the Kiev regime, its security services, and Zelensky personally boast that this is their doing, that this will continue. Therefore, the phrase that he ‘does not guarantee security on May 9 in Russia’ as it is not his area of responsibility is, of course, a direct threat,” the diplomat stated. She and Peskov further blasted Zelensky’s stance as having exposed “the neo-Nazi nature of the Kiev regime, which has become a terrorist cell,” according to TASS.

Lately there’s been assassination bombings targeting top Russian generals, as well as long-range drone attacks which have reached the outskirts of Moscow. Clearly, Ukrainian intelligence and/or its allied Western intel services have made inroads into Russia. Without doubt, Russian defense and security services will bulk up anti-air systems in an around Moscow for Victory Day events. Defense officials, heads of state, and foreign ministers from various countries and especially Russia-friendly nations are expected to be present. Earlier in the Ukraine war, drones were sent across the Russian border and made it all the way to the Moscow Kremlin complex, lightly damaging the top of a dome, in what was a major first at the time. Since then, Moscow area airports have more frequently halted operations during inbound drone attacks.

Read more …

You’d almost hope they aim a device at Xi Jinping. Without hitting anyone, of course.

“Zelensky’s remarks “once again prove the neo-Nazi nature of the Kiev regime, which has turned into a terrorist cell..”

• Moscow Responds To Zelensky’s Victory Day Threats (RT)

Vladimir Zelensky’s refusal to join Russia in observing a 72-hour ceasefire to mark the Victory Day celebrations exposes Kiev’s “neo-Nazi essence” and amounts to a threat by an “international-level terrorist,” Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said on Saturday. Earlier in the day, Ukrainian leader reiterated his refusal to accept Moscow’s proposal for a three-day ceasefire starting May 8 and continuing through the World War II Victory Day celebrations, dismissing it as a “theatrical production.” Zelensky also appeared to threaten the world leaders expected to take part in the May 9 events in Moscow, stating that Kiev cannot guarantee their safety. Zelensky’s remarks “once again prove the neo-Nazi nature of the Kiev regime, which has turned into a terrorist cell,” Zakharova said in a statement.

“Today [Zelensky] hit a new low: now he is threatening the physical safety of veterans who will come to parades and ceremonial events on that sacred day,” she said. “After every terrorist attack on Russian territory, the Kiev regime, its security services, and Zelensky personally boast that it was their doing and that it will continue to be like this. Therefore, the phrase that he ‘does not guarantee security on May 9 on Russian territory,’ since this is not his area of responsibility, is, of course, a direct threat,” Zakharova stressed. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov offered a similar take on Zelensky’s remarks, stating the proposed ceasefire is a “test” for Kiev, and the apparent refusal to join it “clearly shows that neo-Nazism is the ideological basis of the contemporary Kiev regime.”

The 72-hour ceasefire was announced unilaterally by Russian President Vladimir Putin on Monday. The president ordered the suspension of all military action against Ukraine’s forces from midnight on May 7 to midnight on May 10 and urged Kiev to join the truce. Zelensky and other top Ukrainian officials, however, dismissed the proposal as a “manipulation attempt,” demanding an immediate 30-day ceasefire instead. In March, Russia and Ukraine both agreed to a US-brokered 30-day partial ceasefire focused on halting strikes on energy infrastructure. Kiev, however, violated the truce on numerous occasions, according to the Russian military. The Victory Day truce follows a similar unilaterally announced pause during Easter weekend in April that ended up being only partially successful. While a certain lull in the hostilities was observed, Kiev violated the truce more than 3,900 times, according to estimates by the Russian Defense Ministry.

Read more …

Let’s hope they carry some Bandera flags, insignia. That country is lost

• Ukrainian Troops To Take Part In Victory Day Parade In London (RT)

Ukrainian troops will take part in the World War II Victory Day parade in London on May 8 at the invitation of the UK government, the British Ministry of Defense has announced. Moscow has condemned the move as “blasphemous” and “disrespectful” due to Kiev’s open glorification of Nazism. Victory in Europe Day (VE Day) is celebrated in the West on May 8 to commemorate Nazi Germany’s surrender in 1945. In a post on X on Saturday, the UK MOD said Ukrainian troops will take part in a military procession commemorating the event alongside 1,000 British servicemen. The ministry claimed that Kiev’s participation in the event “reminds us that Ukraine is now at freedom’s front line.” UK Defense Secretary John Healey described it as “fitting” that Ukrainian troops will be present at the event.

Moscow has condemned London’s decision. “Inviting followers of neo-Nazi elements to Victory Day celebrations is not just disrespectful to those British veterans who gave their lives during World War II. It is blasphemy,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Saturday. Commemorations of WWII-era nationalist figures linked to Nazi Germany have been common in Ukraine. Ukrainian nationalists hold annual torchlight marches in Kiev, Lviv, and other cities in honor of Stepan Bandera, the leader of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN), which collaborated with the Nazis and took part in the massacre of more than 100,000 Poles, Jews, Russians, and Soviet-aligned Ukrainians. Throughout the conflict with Russia, Ukrainian troops have on numerous occasions been filmed displaying Nazi symbols, including patches of SS units and swastikas. Italy’s Rai News 24 apologized last year after a journalist interviewed a Ukrainian fighter wearing a cap with the emblem of the ‘Leibstandarte Adolf Hitler’ SS division.

Germany previously expelled seven Ukrainian soldiers undergoing military training in the country because they were wearing Nazi symbols. Ukraine’s notorious Azov unit, a neo-Nazi formation established in 2014 and later integrated into the National Guard, has been accused of war crimes and was designated a terrorist organization by Russia in 2022. Although the original Azov Battalion was defeated in the 2022 Battle of Mariupol, co-founder Andrey Biletsky launched the 3rd Separate Assault Brigade under the Azov banner in 2023, which remains active. Russia has repeatedly warned of a Nazi revival in Ukraine and has accused Kiev of embracing neo-Nazi ideology while whitewashing WWII collaborators. President Vladimir Putin listed “denazification” among the goals of Russia’s military operation against the Kiev regime, along with demilitarization and neutrality.

Read more …

Farage will win bigly. It’s the same pattern all over Europe. Le Pen, AfD, Georgescu…

• Farage’s Party Making Big Gains In Local British Elections (RT)

The right-wing Reform UK party has won 677 out of more than 1,600 seats in England’s local elections, while the Labour and the Conservative parties suffered heavy defeats across the country. As results began to trickle in on Friday, the party led by firebrand and Brexit proponent Nigel Farage emerged as the strongest performer in contests held in 23 local authorities across England, winning control of ten councils. These included eight taken from the Conservatives – Derbyshire, Kent, Lancashire, Lincolnshire, North Northamptonshire, Nottinghamshire, Staffordshire and West Northamptonshire — along with Doncaster from Labour and Durham, where no party previously had a majority.

Reform also won hard-fought parliamentary by-elections in Runcorn and Helsby, snatching victory from Labour by just six votes after a recount. As a result, the party now controls five seats in the UK Parliament. According to a BBC projection, if a general election were held today, Reform UK would receive 30% of the vote, ahead of Labour at 20% and the Conservatives at 15%. However, the next general election is not due until May 2029. The last one was held last year and saw Labour secure a landslide victory, riding a wave of public dissatisfaction with the economic policies of the Tories. Commenting on his party’s strides, Farage remarked: “In post-war Britain, no one has ever beaten both Labour and the Tories in a local election before. These results are unprecedented… Reform can and will win the next general election.”

UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer said that while he felt a “sharp edge of fury,” he said he understood the voters’ choice while promising to “go further and faster in pursuit of… national renewal.” Meanwhile, Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch bluntly acknowledged that the elections were a predictable “bloodbath,” stressing that the Tories must continue work to rebuild trust in the party. Reform UK’s rise has been driven by voter frustration over high levels of immigration, the rising cost of living, and what many see as years of mismanagement by both major parties. The party campaigned heavily on promises to cut migration – including by small boat crossings – lower taxes, and reduce council spending, positioning itself as the only alternative to what it calls “a failed political establishment.”

Read more …

Ben Shapiro displays a stunning lack of knowledge about the war.

“..cost Ukrainians at least 50,000 dead and the Russians as many as 200,000 dead..”

If Shapiro is right about anything at all, then people like Doug Macgregor and Scott Ritter have been terribly wrong for 3 years running now. They swear there’s not 4x as many Russian casualties, but 7-8x as many Ukrainian. Off by a factor of 30.

• What Does Russia Want? (Ben Shapiro)

Russia’s war to conquer Ukraine has been raging since February 2022. At first, the Russian offensive seemed fated for success: Russian troops came within a few kilometers of Kyiv, and Western powers offered President Volodymyr Zelenskyy exit from the country. Zelenskyy refused; Ukrainian forces proceeded to hold off and reverse the Russian offensive. Within a few weeks, the battle lines solidified, with Russia continuing to hold much of the territory in the East and Crimea they had held since 2014. The only potential solution was the obvious solution: an armistice essentially freezing the lines of conflict and security guarantees to Ukraine sufficient to deter another Russian attack. But no solution could be found. Russia demonstrated little interest, after mid-2022, in any negotiated end to the war.

President Donald Trump came into office pledging to end the war—a war that has cost Ukrainians at least 50,000 dead and the Russians as many as 200,000 dead. To that end, he pressured Zelenskyy to come to the table. Zelenskyy eventually did, offering an unconditional 30-day ceasefire. Russian President Vladimir Putin has thus far refused any such ceasefire—presumably because he hopes that the Trump administration will pull its support from Ukraine, thereby leaving the country vulnerable to a final Russian offensive. And herein lies the problem for Trump. He knows—as everyone knows—that the only off-ramp for the war lies in a Korean War-style armistice. But Russia still refuses to come to the table, no matter the pleading and cajoling of special envoy Steve Witkoff, whose negotiating style seems to be warmly embracing various anti-American dictators, speaking kindly about them in public, and then hoping they will give him what he seeks.

In order to reach an end to the war, therefore, the Trump administration ought to fully consider just what Russia wants at this point. And the answer happens to be surprisingly simple: Russia wants either Ukraine conquered or a puppet government in place or a clear pathway to conquering Ukraine in the future. We know this because Russia repeatedly says it. Alexander Dugin, a philosopher and geopolitics expert known colloquially as “Putin’s brain,” spelled all of this out in his magnum opus, “Foundations of Geopolitics” (1997)—a book that was apparently used as a textbook at the General Staff Academy. For Dugin, the Russian spirit can only be animated by imperial dreams; regional power alone would be “tantamount to suicide for the Russian nation.” The antithesis of the Russian spirit is “‘the West’ as a whole.”

And Ukraine—an independent country that should be suffused with that “Russian spirit” but that wants to orient towards the West—represents a stinging rebuke to the Russian identity as a whole. Thus, Dugin argues, Ukraine must rejoin Russia or forever be condemned to a “puppet existence and geopolitical service” to the West. Ukraine’s continued existence as a sovereign state, Dugin argues, “is tantamount to a monstrous blow to Russia’s geopolitical security, tantamount to an invasion of its territory.” Now, during the war, Dugin writes, “We must win the war in Ukraine, liberate the entire territory of this former country from the Nazi regime. Regardless of Trump’s victory or anything else, this imperative remains unchanged. Just as the ancient Roman consul Cato the Elder used to say, ‘Carthage must be destroyed,’ in our case, ‘Kiev must be taken’”

So, if the true Russian goal is the destruction or subjugation of Ukraine, how could Russia be brought to the table? Only through the “peace through strength” policy Trump pursued during his first term. Only a Russia that believes that the West will refuse to surrender Ukraine will be pressured into an armistice. Trump seems ready to consider that possibility; he’s now acknowledging publicly that Putin seems to be slow-playing him. But the answer won’t be more sanctions. It will be a recognition that Ukraine’s sovereignty can only be guaranteed by force of arms—and that an off-ramp can only be achieved by a guarantee of that sovereignty.

Read more …

Wonderful history lesson by Timofey Bordachev. It all goes back to the 13th century, the Mongol hordes.

• From The Mongols to NATO: Here’s The Real Russian Doctrine (Bordachev)

“Only crows fly straight,” goes an old saying from the Vladimir-Suzdal region, where the revival of the Russian state began after the devastation of the Mongol invasion in the 13th century. Within 250 years, a powerful state emerged in Eastern Europe, its independence and decision-making unquestioned by others. From its earliest days, Russia’s foreign policy culture has been shaped by a single goal: to preserve the nation’s ability to determine its own future. The methods have varied, but a few constants remain: no fixed strategies, no binding ideologies, and an ability to surprise opponents. Unlike European or Asian powers, Russia never needed rigid doctrines; its vast, unpredictable geography – and its instinct for unorthodox solutions – made that unnecessary. Yet this distinctive foreign policy culture did not develop overnight.

Before the mid-13th century, Russia’s trajectory looked much like the rest of Eastern Europe’s. Fragmented and inward-looking, its city-states had little reason to unify. Geography and climate kept them largely self-contained. It could have ended up like other Slavic nations, eventually dominated by German or Turkish powers. But then came what Nikolay Gogol called a “wonderful event”: the 1237 Mongol invasion. Russia’s strongest state centers were obliterated. This catastrophe, paradoxically, gave rise to two defining features of Russian statehood: a reason to unify and a deep-seated pragmatism. For 250 years, Russians paid tribute to the Golden Horde but were never its slaves. The relationship with the Horde was a constant struggle – clashes alternating with tactical cooperation. It was during this period that the “sharp sword of Moscow” was forged: a state that functioned as a military organization, always blending conflict and diplomacy. War and peace merged seamlessly, without the moral dilemmas that often paralyze others.

These centuries also forged another trait of Russian thinking: the strength of the adversary is irrelevant to the legitimacy of its demands. Unlike the Western Hobbesian notion that might makes right, Russians have historically viewed force as just one factor – not the determinant of truth. A 16th-century song about a Crimean Khan’s raid sums it up: he is called both a “tsar” for his military power and a “dog” for lacking justice. Similarly, after the Cold War, Russia recognized Western power – but not the righteousness of its actions. Demographics have always been a challenge, driven by climate and geography. Russia’s population did not match that of France until the late 18th century, despite covering an area many times larger than Western Europe. And crucially, Russia has never relied on external allies. Its foreign policy rests on the understanding that no one else will solve its problems – a lesson learned through bitter experience. Yet Russia has always been a reliable ally to others.

A pivotal moment came in the mid-15th century, when Grand Duke Vasily Vasilyevich settled Kazan princes on Russia’s eastern borders. This marked the beginning of Russia’s multi-ethnic statehood, where loyalty – not religion – was the key requirement. Unlike Western Europe, where the church dictated social order, Russia’s statehood grew as a mosaic of ethnic and religious groups, all unified by a shared commitment to defense. This pragmatism – welcoming Christians, Muslims, and others alike – set Russia apart. Spain’s rulers completed the Reconquista by expelling or forcibly converting Jews and Muslims; Russia integrated its minorities, allowing them to serve and prosper without renouncing their identities.

Today, Russia’s foreign policy still draws on these deep traditions. Its core priority remains the same: defending sovereignty and retaining freedom of choice in a volatile world. And true to form, Russia resists doctrinaire strategies. Fixed doctrines require fixed ideologies – something historically alien to Russia. Russia also rejects the idea of “eternal enemies.” The Mongol Horde, once its deadliest foe, was absorbed within decades of its collapse. Its nobles merged with Russian aristocracy, its cities became Russian cities. No other country has fully absorbed such a formidable rival. Even Poland, a centuries-long adversary, was eventually diminished not by decisive battles but by sustained pressure. Victory for Russia has never been about glory – it’s about achieving objectives. Often, this means exhausting adversaries rather than crushing them outright. The Mongols were defeated in 1480 without a single major battle. Similarly, Poland was gradually reduced in stature over centuries of relentless pressure.

This mindset explains Russia’s readiness to negotiate at every stage: politics always outweighs military concerns. Foreign and domestic policy are inseparable, and every foreign venture is also a bid to strengthen internal cohesion, just as the medieval princes of Moscow used external threats to unite the Russian lands. Today’s geopolitical landscape is shifting again. The West – led by the United States – remains powerful, but no longer omnipotent. China is expanding its influence, though cautiously. Western Europe, historically Russia’s main threat, is losing its relevance, unable to define a vision for its own future. Russia, the US and China all possess that vision – and in the coming decades, their triangular relationship will shape global politics. India may join this elite circle in time, but for now, it still lags behind.

Read more …

Dumb but predictable: the US supports its weapons industry.

• US Approves F-16 Support Package For Ukraine (RT)

The US has approved a $310.5 million deal to sustain Ukrainian-operated F-16 fighter jets provided by Kiev’s European backers. The move comes after the US and Ukraine signed a deal in which Kiev grants Washington access to its natural resources in exchange for future assistance. The F-16 deliveries from European NATO members to Ukraine were approved by former US President Joe Biden in August 2023, but the first jets did not arrive in the country until a year later. While Ukrainian officials hailed the deliveries as a major coup, Western media warned that they would not be a “game changer” in the conflict. In March, the Ukrainian Air Force acknowledged that the F-16s operated by Kiev “cannot compete” with the latest Russian jets.

In a statement on Friday, the Pentagon’s Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) said the State Department had signed off on a foreign military sale to Ukraine which includes training, spare parts, aircraft modifications, logistics assistance, and software support for F-16s. The agency added that the proposed sale “will support the foreign policy goals… of the United States by improving the security of a partner country that is a force for political stability” in Europe. More than 80 F-16s have been promised to Ukraine, with the bulk expected to come from Belgium and the Netherlands, while the US has never committed to providing the jets on its own. While the exact number of jets delivered is unknown, Moscow confirmed last month it had shot down one F-16. Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky said the aircraft’s pilot perished during a “combat mission.”

In 2024, Ukraine reported the loss of another F-16, saying it crashed while repelling a Russian air strike. The DSCA announcement comes after the Pentagon said it is sending “disused and completely non-operational F-16s to Ukraine for parts.” It also follows the signing of a US-Ukraine resource deal that is intended to allow Washington to recover the cost of future military support through shared proceeds from Ukrainian mineral resource licenses. Moscow has condemned the Western arms shipments to Ukraine, warning they will only prolong the conflict without changing the outcome. Russian President Vladimir Putin has said Ukrainian-operated F-16s will “burn” just like other Western-supplied equipment.

Read more …

India would be big. “Apple announced on April 25 that it would be shifting production of most U.S.-bound iPhones to India from China..”

• Trump’s First Tariff Trade Deal With India Could Be Game-Changing (JTN)

Just a month into his tariff policy, President Donald Trump could unveil his first new trade deals with allies as early as this week as his negotiators press for handshakes and signatures that could further calm markets and empower a brighter future for American workers, officials tell Just the News. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick hinted at an approaching announcement last week when he revealed he has a trade deal with an unspecified country, pending approval of its conditions. Administration officials said as many as two or three deals could be unveiled in the coming days.Speculation has swirled surrounding India being the first to forge a partnership after Vice President J.D. Vance last week met with India Prime Minister Narendra Modi in Delhi to discuss a Bilateral Trade Agreement (BTA).

The vice president’s office put out a statement following their meeting, which stated, “The BTA presents an opportunity to negotiate a new and modern trade agreement focused on promoting job creation and citizen well-being in both countries, with the goal of enhancing bilateral trade and supply-chain integration in a balanced and mutually beneficial manner.” Also last week, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent indicated that many trade partners had reached out to the White House since the tariffs were unveiled and had made ‘very good’ proposals. “I would guess that India would be one of the first trade deals we would sign,” Bessent told CNBC, and that the U.S. also held productive negotiations with Japan and other Asian nations.

Former Deputy National Security Advisor Victoria Coates said an early deal with India could be a game-changer, since it is a partner with the market size of China that could apply pressure on Beijing. “I’d love to have them be first out of the box,” she said, noting Prime Minister Modi’s relationship with Vance has already yielded dividends. Coates said deals with the European Union will take longer, but there are some other big early possibilities. “I would look at Japan. I think that that would be key,” she said. “I think the conversation with the Europeans is going to be a longer one, but again that really has to happen. We might be surprised by the UK.” Mere signs of trade deals on the horizon have already calmed markets after an early free fall prompted by Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariff announcement on April 2.

The S&P 500 on Friday notched its longest streak of closing in the positive column in more than two decades, after it rose 1.47% at the close of business and marked its ninth consecutive day of gains. India has a few notable incentives to make it happen soon: India’s largest trading partner is the United States. The nation was hit with 26% reciprocal tariffs on April 2 before Trump suspended the larger tariffs on most countries for 90 days, but kept a universal 10% tariff in place. India is also placing a large emphasis on an agreement as part of its India-US Comprehensive Global Strategic Partnership, which Modi says “will be a defining partnership of the 21st Century for a better future of our people and the world.”

Adding sweetness to the deal: Apple announced on April 25 that it would be shifting production of most U.S.-bound iPhones to India from China, bringing billions in revenue and jobs to the populous, developing nation. India’s ambition to more than double trade between the U.S. and India, from the current $190 billion to $500 billion, was originally sent by Modi to Trump in February 2025. With headlines alluding to a Trump “misfire,” Democrats and legacy media have wasted no time prognosticating about why the trade deals are taking so long, and may never come. However, sources told Fox Business on Monday that the president is working on broader trade deals encompassing additional nations, not just nations involving tariffs. This, they report, is the reason there has been only speculation and no official announcements of trade deals.

Read more …

Where will Temu get its sales now?

“If you order a $20 shirt from China effective June 1st, you will pay $220. $20 for the shirt, and $200 minimum tariff. Yep, this is only the beginning.”

• De Minimis Loophole for Beijing Ends, Temu Halts Direct Shipping (CTH)

Think about it. We’ve already heard about the massive stoppages of April factory work in China, causing serious concern for Beijing and Chinese worker protests. American importers front loaded inventory in February and March with a 50% increase in orders. Now, in addition to those factories going quiet, the de minimis rule kicks in. (Via CNBC) – “Chinese bargain retailer Temu changed its business model in the U.S. as the Trump administration’s new rules on low-value shipments took effect Friday. In recent days, Temu has abruptly shifted its website and app to only display listings for products shipped from U.S.-based warehouses. Items shipped directly from China, which previously blanketed the site, are now labeled as out of stock. Temu made a name for itself in the U.S. as a destination for ultra-discounted items shipped direct from China, such as $5 sneakers and $1.50 garlic presses.

It’s been able to keep prices low because of the so-called de minimis rule, which has allowed items worth $800 or less to enter the country duty-free since 2016. The loophole expired Friday at 12:01 a.m. EDT as a result of an executive order signed by President Donald Trump in April.” The de minimis loophole comes from back in the 1930s. The idea back then was, say you went on a vacation to Paris, you shouldn’t have to file customs paperwork or pay taxes if you decided to ship some little Eiffel Tower statues to your friends back home. Congress in 2015 then raised the de minimis threshold from $200 to $800. However, the e-commerce world exploded, and Chinese companies began using the de minimis loophole to ship cheap goods (ex. Temu and Shein) into the USA direct to consumers without paying any customs duty.

On April 2nd, as part of the global trade reset and tariff structure, President Trump revoked authorization for Chinese goods to transfer to the USA using the de minimis rule. The de minimis exemption was cancelled for all products coming out of China. The rule change only targeted China and Chinese shippers. No one else. As part of the modification to Executive Order #14257, President Trump has increased the baseline tariff for product mailed from China [de minimis tariff] from 30 90 percent to 120%. Mailed products from China now face a 120% tariff. Additionally, minimum tariff amounts increased from $75 to $100 effective May 1st, and from $150 to $200 effective June 1st. Example: If you order a $20 shirt from China effective June 1st, you will pay $220. $20 for the shirt, and $200 minimum tariff. Yep, this is only the beginning.

Read more …

“When Trudeau outlines the inability of Canada to agree to trade terms, simply because his country no longer has the capability of adhering to those trade terms, a frustrated President Trump says, “then become a state.”

• An Unavoidable Trade War with Canada is Looming (CTH)

Following the 2024 presidential election, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau traveled to Mar-a-Lago and said if President Trump was to make the Canadian government face reciprocal tariffs, open the USMCA trade agreements to force reciprocity, and/or balance economic relations on non-tariff issues, then Canada would collapse upon itself economically and cease to exist. In essence, in addition to the NATO defense shortfall, Canada cannot survive as a free and independent north American nation, without receiving all the one-way benefits from the U.S. economy. To wit, President Trump then said, if Canada cannot survive in a balanced rules environment, including putting together their own military and defenses and meeting their NATO obligations, then Canada should become the 51st U.S state. It was following this meeting that President Trump started emphasizing this point and shocking everyone in the process.

However, in the emotional reaction to Trump’s statements, no-one looked at the core issues outlined by Trudeau that framed President Trump’s opinion. Representing Canada, Justin Trudeau was not expressing an unwillingness to comply with fairness and reciprocity in trade with the USA, what Trudeau was expressing was an inability to comply. Quite simply, after decades of shifting priorities, Canada no longer has the internal economic capability to comply with a fair-trade agreement (FTA). Trudeau was not lying, and President Trump understood the argument; hence his 51st state remarks.This is where it becomes important to understand the core reason why Trump, Ross and Lighthizer (2017) did not structurally want to replace the NAFTA agreement with another trilateral trade deal. Mexico and Canada are completely different as it pertains to trade with the USA. President Trump would rather have two separate bilateral agreements; one for Mexico and one for Canada.

• Firstly, Canada is a NATO partner, Mexico is not. As President Trump affirmed to Justin Trudeau during the meeting, it would be unfair of President Trump to discuss NATO funding with the European Union, while Canada is one of the worst offenders. Trump is leveraging favorable trade terms and tariff relief with the EU member states, as a carrot to get them into compliance with the 2.0 to 2.5% spending requirement for their military. If the NATO member states contribute more to their own defense, the U.S. can pull back spending and save Americans money. However, Canada is currently 26th in NATO funding, spending only 1.37% of their GDP on defense (link). Canada would have to spend at least another $15 billion/yr on their defense programs in order to reach 2.0%. Justin Trudeau told President Trump that was an impossible goal given the nature of the Canadian political system, and the current size of their economy ($2.25 trillion).

• Secondly, over the last 40 years Canada has deindustrialized their economy, Mexico has not. As the progressive political ideology of their politicians took control of Canada policy, the ‘climate change’ agenda and ‘green’ economy became their focus. The dirty industrialized systems were not compliant with the goals of the Canadian policy makers. The dirty mining sector (coal, coking coal, ore) no longer exists at scale to support self-sufficient manufacturing. The dirty oil refineries do not exist to refine the crude oil they extract. Large industrial heavy industry no longer exists at a scale needed to be self-sufficient. Instead, Canada purchases forged and rolled steel component parts from overseas (mostly China). Making the issue more challenging, Canada doesn’t even have enough people skilled to do the dirty jobs within the heavy manufacturing; they would need a national apprenticeship program. Again, all points raised by Trudeau to explain why bilateral trade compliance was impossible.

• Thirdly, the trade between Canada/U. S and Mexico/U. S is entirely different. The main imports from Canada are energy, lumber and raw materials. The main imports from Mexico are agriculture, cars and finished industrial goods. Mexico refines its own oil; Canada ships their oil to the USA for refining. There are obviously some similar products from Mexico and Canada, but for the most part there is a big difference.

• Forth, USA banks are allowed to operate in Mexico, but USA banks are not allowed to operate in Canada. USA media organizations are allowed to broadcast in Mexico, but USA media organizations are regulated and not permitted to broadcast in Canada. The Canadian government has strong regulations and restrictions on information and Intellectual Property. All of these points of difference highlight why a trilateral trade agreement like NAFTA and the USMCA just don’t work out for the USA. Additionally, if President Trump levies a tariff on Chinese imports, it hits Canada much harder than Mexico because Canada has deindustrialized and now imports from China to assemble into finished goods destined to the USA. In a very direct way Canada is a passthrough for Chinese products. Canada is now more of an assembly economy, not a dirty job manufacturing economy.

When Trudeau outlines the inability of Canada to agree to trade terms, simply because his country no longer has the capability of adhering to those trade terms, a frustrated President Trump says, “then become a state.” There is no option to remain taking advantage of the USA on this level, and things are only getting worse. Thus, the point of irreconcilable conflict is identified.

Read more …

If 80% of those you poll are Democrats, it’s easy going.

• Want To Know The Truth Behind Those Anti-Trump Polls? (Margolis)

You’ve no doubt heard the media narrative about President Trump’s poll numbers according to most pollsters—you know, the ones who got the 2024 election so wrong, Make no mistake about it — the legacy media is at it again with their dishonest polling tactics against President Trump. But this time, their deceptive game has been called out by none other than former House Speaker Newt Gingrich. Appearing on Hannity Thursday night, Gingrich exposed how the media’s recent polling showing Trump’s approval dropping is nothing but smoke and mirrors. The reality? These polls are deliberately skewed to paint a false narrative about Trump’s standing with the American people. Let’s look at the facts. The same media outlets that got it wrong in 2024—ABC News, CBS News, and CNN—are now pushing polls that show Trump’s approval is declining from his February high of 53%.

But are they really? “I got a little preview about poll numbers that are coming out tomorrow, and from both Robert Cahaly and Matt Towery, who I respect a lot,” Hannity said. “And as I suspected, all of the polls that the media has been pushing on the American people about Donald Trump are false, and that’s what the early indications are.” He pointed out the absurdity of the numbers being hyped by the media, especially when far-left figures such as Chuck Schumer were polling in the teens. “All the pollsters that got the election in ‘24 wrong and got every election about Donald Trump wrong—all of those people—the ones saying, ‘Oh, he’s plummeting.’ But meanwhile, they’re ignoring Chuck is at 17% and the Democrats are in the 20s. I’m trying to understand that logic. Can you help me out?” Gingrich didn’t mince words.

“Well, I mean, first of all, they’re just plain lying,” Gingrich replied. “And I think we’ve got to be tougher and clearer about how dishonest these people are.” He cited conversations with veteran GOP pollsters, pointing to the way poll samples are rigged to undercount Republicans. “The fact is, and I talked to John McLaughlin and I talked to Matt Towery about this, they have some polls there that are like 27% Republican when Trump got 50% of the vote. So if you add the 23 points they didn’t test, suddenly he’s in great shape. This is deliberate. It is willful.” Gingrich then laid out what he sees as the last bastions of anti-Trump resistance in the establishment. “Look, there are three great centers of resistance: the propaganda media, which will lie all the time, the fake district judges, and the fake Congressional Budget Office. Those are the last three great centers of resistance, and they’re going to do anything they can to defeat Trump and the Republicans, including lying about virtually everything.”

“None of them, to be honest with you,” Towery said when asked which poll concerned him the most. “I have a group of pollsters I look at who are public pollsters who’ve been right in all three of Trump’s cycles. We happen to be one of those. None of us have had him down by any of these numbers we’ve seen before. The only one that might concern me at all is the Fox News one because Fox did well in the 24 cycle.” Towery also took aim at the methodology behind the polls. “They are absolutely, I don’t like to criticize polling, but how can you have a poll, as John McLaughlin, a good friend of mine pointed out, how could you have a poll that shows Donald Trump at 39%? But yet when you ask people who they voted for and they said they voted for Trump, like 95% said they would vote for him again.”

Read more …

“The capitulation took effect after midnight in Moscow. May 8 is observed as Victory in Europe Day, with Russia commemorating the occasion on May 9.”

• Trump’s WWII Claim Is ‘Pompous Nonsense’ – Medvedev (RT)

Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has dismissed US President Donald Trump’s claim that America played the primary role in winning World War II as “pompous nonsense.”Medvedev made the comment on his VK page on Saturday, in response to Trump’s plan to designate May 8 as ‘American Victory Day’. “Trump recently announced that the US made the main contribution to the victory in World War II and that he would establish a holiday on May 8. A holiday is not bad. But the first conclusion is pompous nonsense,” Medvedev wrote. Earlier this week, Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform that he “will create a new holiday called AMERICAN VICTORY DAY, to be celebrated on May 8.” He went on to say: “This date marks the formal surrender of Nazi Germany to the Allied Forces in World War II, ending the war in Europe. AMERICAN VICTORY DAY will celebrate the heroes who helped vanquish tyranny and secure liberty for generations to come.”

Trump also said he wants to rename Veterans Day, a federal holiday celebrated on November 11, to “Victory Day for World War I,” adding that the US “won both wars.” In response, Medvedev, who currently serves as deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council, highlighted the Soviet Union’s role in defeating Nazi Germany, stressing that the Red Army bore heavy losses and “liberated ungrateful Europe.” “Our people gave 27 million lives of their sons and daughters for the sake of destroying damned fascism,” he wrote. “Victory Day is ours and it is on May 9. That’s how it was, is, and always will be!” Earlier this week, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Russia is grateful to the US for its support during WWII, but the USSR would have defeated Nazi Germany even without the assistance. “The famous Lend-Lease indeed helped us. We received vehicles, airplanes, ammunition, and tanks. And indeed, without this, it would have been very difficult.”

The Lend-Lease program was a US government initiative that provided allies with military supplies, equipment, food, and strategic raw materials. The Soviet Union received aid valued at around $200 billion in today’s terms, Peskov said. He noted, however, that the assistance was not free. Russia, as the USSR’s successor state, completed its financial obligations related to the Lend-Lease program in 2006. Nazi Germany officially surrendered to the Allied forces on May 8, 1945, following the capture of Berlin by Soviet troops. The capitulation took effect after midnight in Moscow. May 8 is observed as Victory in Europe Day, with Russia commemorating the occasion on May 9.

Read more …

“Starting in 2027, the European Union will expand its emissions trading system (ETS) into new territory with the launch of ETS2..”

“Margaret Thatcher: “Global warming provides a marvelous excuse for global socialism.”

• Freedom in the EU? Only if You Can Afford It (Roos)

Starting in 2027, the European Union will expand its emissions trading system (ETS) into new territory with the launch of ETS2. While the original ETS primarily targeted heavy industry and power plants, ETS2 directly impacts ordinary citizens — their homes, their cars, their daily lives. Under the guise of ’saving the climate,’ the EU will steadily make gasoline, diesel, and gas for heating more expensive. But let’s be honest: ETS2 has very little to do with protecting the environment. It is about economic control, wealth redistribution, and the consolidation of power among banks, large corporations, governments, and the European Commission. Formally, everything remains ‘voluntary.’ You may continue driving a gasoline car. You may continue heating your home with natural gas. But every choice that deviates from the state’s ‘sustainability goals’ will become economically unbearable.

This is not a direct expropriation of property, but it is economic subjugation through price pressure, regulation, and redistribution of the proceeds. Instead of free choices, citizens and companies are financially forced to adopt government-approved behavior. Who benefits? Banks, investment funds, multinational corporations, government treasuries, and the European Commission. Financial giants like Goldman Sachs and Deutsche Bank are already making billions from trading CO2 certificates. Governments are raking in massive revenues from the auctioning of emission permits. Meanwhile, large corporations that receive free allowances or have surplus certificates can sell them for profit—all while greenwashing their public image.

And who bears the cost? Ordinary citizens, small businesses, the transport sector, and independent entrepreneurs. They will face hundreds of euros in additional costs every year just to heat their homes and drive to work. The most vulnerable are promised compensation through a ’Social Climate Fund’—a government handout that makes them ever more dependent on state aid. This brings us to the deeper question: What direction are we heading in? Is this communism, where the state owns the means of production? Or is it fascism, where the state controls production and merges with big business to dominate society? In truth, ETS2 signals a new hybrid system. Private ownership remains in name, but real control is exercised through regulations, price manipulation, and conditional subsidies.

The market is not abolished; it is repurposed around ideological objectives. Economic freedom exists only for those who can afford to comply. The Brussels technocratic pressure is sold as a ‘necessary transition,’ but in reality, it is dismantling the foundation of our economy, destroying the middle class, and eroding prosperity. Instead of fostering genuine innovation, ETS2 punishes those who lack the resources to “comply.” While banks and corporations speculate and profit, the hardworking EU citizen is soon faced with a grim choice: freeze in the winter or take on debt for a heat pump they neither asked for nor needed. The EU claims that prices will rise “gradually” and that safeguards are in place to prevent social unrest. But history teaches us that once new taxes and levies are introduced, they rarely disappear. Temporary exceptions inevitably become permanent rules.

After homes and cars, aviation, agriculture, and consumer goods will follow. Every sector deemed ‘unsustainable’ will face similar price manipulation. Personal freedom will continue to shrink, not through open political force, but through economic coercion masked as environmental stewardship. And for those still believing they will retain the freedom to choose: A choice that becomes financially impossible is no longer a real choice. It is coerced compliance. It is economic submission. Remember the words of Margaret Thatcher: “Global warming provides a marvelous excuse for global socialism.” Climate change must never be used as an excuse for economic servitude. Say no to green tyranny. Say yes to freedom, prosperity, and choice.

Read more …

Many will follow. It won’t be pretty. The systems are old but volatile.

• Green Energy Fixation Sends Spain Dark (Gonzalez)

VALENCIA, Spain—Two modern ills converged in Europe on Monday, literally one of the darkest days in decades. An ideological obsession with climate fanaticism left countries without power for hours, while censorship of “disinformation,” often information the powerful don’t like, plunged the population in an informational blackout in subsequent days. The electrical blackout brought planes, trains, and automobiles to a screeching halt throughout Spain, Portugal, and small parts of southern France. Electricity simply stopped flowing, and with it control towers, rail lines, and traffic lights. Cellphones became quadrangular black boxes that did nothing and lost their “smartness.” A political conference I was attending in this sunny Mediterranean port city suddenly became eerie when people started coming in and out and whispering to each other. One person in the seat in front finally turned and enlightened a friend and me: “The electricity is down. We’re cut off from the world.”

We then realized that, yes, sirens had been wailing outside, and it had been a while since we’d gotten emails or texts. A generator in the hotel kept our conference going, but nothing else worked; everyone had to take the stairs and use bathrooms in the dark—though water, too, stopped working. It wasn’t quite dystopic, but our modern dependence on electricity and its creature comforts suddenly was brought home to us. Many speculated that it was a cyberattack from Russia or China. Who else had the power to do this? Center-right politicians from across Europe were about to descend on Valencia the next day. Surely, an invitation for bad actors to do their thing. Well, not so fast. Neither Russia’s Vladimir Putin nor China’s Xi Jinping is above carrying out this type of attack, and cybersecurity is a serious matter. But, to quote Vice President JD Vance at a February conference in Munich, Germany, the threat to worry about the most in Europe “is not Russia, it’s not China, it’s not any other external actor.”

“What I worry about,” went on Vance, “is the threat from within, the retreat of Europe from some of its fundamental values.” Vance mentioned Europe’s need “to enjoy affordable energy,” and the fact that, as he put it, “free speech, I fear, is in retreat.” European officials are still fuming about how “rude” that young Vance was, but it looks like he was on the money. It is increasingly clear that what caused the blackout was not a cyberattack. Reuters News agency reported that Spain’s grid operator Red Electrica on Tuesday ruled out external sabotage, and said instead that it had identified two “incidents of power generation loss, probably from solar plants,” in southwestern Spain. That, said the Reuters report, “caused instability in the electric system and led to a breakdown of its connection with France. The electrical system collapsed, affecting both the Spanish and Portuguese systems.”

“There was not enough inertia, or redundancy, in the system to keep it going,” my colleague Diana Furchott-Roth emailed from Washington when I was able to receive communications from the outside world. “The last coal-fired plant was closed on April 12.” Diana has been warning about this type of thing for decades, and Spain’s socialist prime minister Pedro Sanchez is a poster boy for the things she has warned against. His government has not only closed coal-fired plants, but has been busily destroying nuclear plants as well. “Net zero,” or zero CO2 emissions, is the name of this new mad delusion, and Spain’s infantile leftists have been posting on social media gleeful workers destroying nuclear power plants. The goal has been 100% “renewable” generation.

Well, they happened to have gotten very close to their holy grail on Monday at 12:30. The Iberian Peninsula’s power grid was getting a disproportionate amount of energy from the renewables loved by the Left: 80% from solar photovoltaic, solar thermal and wind. Nuclear was at a measly 11%. In a mere five minutes, solar photovoltaic generation plunged by 50%, from 18 gigawatts to eight, according to Reuters. Iberia and adjacent parts of France, including the tiny Pyrenean principality of Andorra, all of which depended on this grid, then descended into darkness at 12:35, from which it was not to recover till late at night. The hapless Sanchez was still arguing late Tuesday that just because Red Electrica was discounting a cyberattack, it did not mean that one hadn’t happened. Governments finding themselves in a corner will lie, or at least equivocate, and it’s the job of the opposition to keep asking for answers.

“An energy policy that prioritizes the fight against climate change above the security of supply has provoked this general blackout,” said an analysis on the site of the think tank Disenso, which is linked to the opposition Vox Party (full disclosure, I sit on Disenso’s foreign advisory board). But it is also the job of the media. Yet Spain’s state television stations, and even private ones, were still keeping the truth about the failure of the Left’s renewable dream from getting any airtime as late as Wednesday morning, when I left for the airport. That was left to radio and to some newspapers on the right. An honest media would be not just informing voters about how a blackout that left at least five dead and stopped a modern economy in its tracks happened. It would also be debating whether such a modern society really does want to stop using comfort creatures and working toilets, all in the name of fighting climate change.

Read more …

Big Balls can take over. They have a strong team.

• DOGE Cuts Behind Nearly Half of All Layoffs This Year (JTN)

President Donald Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency is responsible for nearly half of all job cuts announced this year, according to a new report. The report from outplacement firm Challenger, Gray and Christmas said DOGE-related actions lead all job cut reasons in 2025 with 283,172, 2,919 of which occurred in April. Another 6,945 cuts were attributed to “DOGE Downstream Impact” through April, primarily at nonprofits and education organizations. These combined (290,117) make up 48% of all job cuts announced so far in 2025, according to the report. “Though the Government cuts are front and center, we saw job cuts across sectors last month,” Andrew Challenger, senior vice president and workplace expert for Challenger, Gray & Christmas. “Generally, companies are citing the economy and new technology. Employers are slow to hire and limiting hiring plans as they wait and see what will happen with trade, supply chain, and consumer spending.”

The vast majority of the DOGE-related cuts were from March, according to the report. After DOGE, market and economic conditions were cited for 95,348 job cuts, as economic uncertainty, consumer spending, and trade challenges hit U.S. companies, according to the report. Tariffs were cited for 1,413 cuts so far this year, with 1,350 occurring in April. Restructuring accounted for 67,627, and 60,551 were due to store, unit or location closing. When Trump created DOGE, he said it would be the government cost-cutting equivalent of the “Manhattan Project.” Both Trump and Tesla CEO Elon Musk promised Americans would get a more efficient government after DOGE addressed government waste, reduced regulations, and reduced the federal workforce. Many of the DOGE-led cuts in government face legal challenges from unions and other groups. Many of those same cuts remain in limbo as pending court cases continue.

The Challenger report comes as Musk steps back from government work to focus more on Tesla. Musk initially said DOGE would aim to cut $2 trillion from the federal budget, but he later cut that in half. At a Cabinet meeting in April, Musk said DOGE was on pace to cut $150 billion from the federal budget. The U.S. government employs about 2.4 million federal workers, excluding the military (about 1.3 million active-duty military personnel) and U.S. Postal Service (about 600,000 employees), according to 2024 Pew Research report. That report noted that the federal government employed 1.87% of the entire civilian workforce. That percentage includes postal employees, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics data.

Read more …

“Musk met with Ratcliffe in late March for a discussion that included government efficiency measures, but no DOGE teams have been working at the agency’s Langley, Virginia, campus.”

• CIA to Cut 1,200 (5%) Jobs -Ratcliffe Shifts Focus to “Human Intelligence” (CTH)

The Washington Post (but of course, CIA outlet) is reporting on a downsizing effort within the CIA to eliminate approximately 1,200 jobs. The number represents approximately 5% of the workforce although the actual number of CIA employees is classified (national security, dontchaknow). Within the report, Director John Ratcliffe is noted as shifting the focus of America’s leading spy agency to use more “human intelligence.” That phrase, “human intelligence,” is IC silo code speak for shifting away from “analysts” (political operatives) and engaging in more factual intelligence information. According to the report, DNI Tulsi Gabbard has also reduced the employment level within the Director of National Intelligence office by approximately 25% (current payroll estimate of 2,000 employees). The general narrative within the WaPo reporting is that “national security” is being compromised by large downsizing of spy agency employment. Additionally, to bolster the positions of the current political operatives within the CIA, the WaPo waxes concerningly about China and other mysterious foreign adversaries recruiting the CIA employees who are now becoming increasingly concerned about their paychecks.

WASHINGTON POST – “The Trump administration is planning significant personnel cuts at the Central Intelligence Agency and other major U.S. spy units, downsizing the government’s most sensitive national security agencies, according to people familiar with the plans. The administration recently informed lawmakers on Capitol Hill that it intends to reduce the CIA’s workforce by about 1,200 personnel over several years and cut thousands more from other parts of the U.S. intelligence community, including at the National Security Agency, a highly secretive service that specializes in cryptology and global electronic espionage, a person familiar with the matter said. The person, like others interviewed, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive matters.

[…] The staff reductions would take place over several years and would be accomplished in part through reduced hiring. No outright firings are envisioned. The goal of a roughly 1,200-person staff reduction includes several hundred individuals who already have opted for early retirement, the person familiar with the matter said. The downsizing is taking place separately from efforts by the U.S. DOGE Service, led by billionaire Elon Musk, to radically restructure the federal government. Musk met with Ratcliffe in late March for a discussion that included government efficiency measures, but no DOGE teams have been working at the agency’s Langley, Virginia, campus.

[Obviously, I can certainly appreciate the “human intelligence” shift noted by Director Ratcliffe for all the factual reasons that necessitate his concern. It is part of the reason why I ended up frustrated with “western reports” and determined the only way to really understand what is going on inside Russia during the sanctions was to travel there myself and review. It was quite an experience to sit in a renamed Starbucks coffee shop at the crowded Galleria Mall in downtown St Petersburg, Russia and read the Wall Street Journal reporting on the devastation to the Russian economy, while looking around at the packed stores and purchases being made on an ordinary weekday. Then to read the New York Times reports of shortages of steel in Russia, while driving past many miles of apartment and condominium construction. Everything cited in western corporate media, “according to sources familiar with the situation”, was/is the complete opposite of everything factually visible.]

Read more …

Did I see 44,000%?!

• Buffett To Step Down As Berkshire CEO At Year-End (ZH)

It’s the end of an era at America’s largest hedge fund/private equity/insurance float-cum-rollup conglomerate, whatever you want to call it: Warren Buffett just announced during the Berkshire annual pilgrimage to Omaha that he is stepping down as CEO of Berkshire at the end of the year, and that Greg Abel, the vice chairman for non-insurance operations who has been groomed over the past decade for just this moment, will take over the conglomerate. The news was greeted with a standing ovation by the thousands of Berkshire shareholders who were present at Omaha’s Convention Center.

Buffett – whose track record cemented him, along his long-time sidesick Charlie Munger, into a celebrity billionaire renowned for his investing acumen and witticisms – built Berkshire Hathaway into a business valued at more than $1.16 trillion, generating compounded annual returns to shareholders at double the rate of the S&P (19.9% vs 10.4%), since 1965, and a staggering 5,502,482% overall gain on BRK stocks since 1964, vs “only” 39,054% for the S&P. His investing success gave him the power to move stocks and helped him strike lucrative deals with Goldman Sachs and General Electric during times of crisis. The announcement stunned the board and even Abel, who, while long signaled as Buffett’s successor, was unaware that the news was coming as the annual meeting drew to a close. “That’s the news hook for the day,” Buffett said. “Thanks for coming.”

Berkshire grew aggressively over the decades with Buffett as chairman and CEO, as he chose acquisitions and stocks for the company portfolio alongside trusted adviser and vice chairman, Charlie Munger, who died in 2023 at 99. As Bloomberg notes, “the conglomerate acquired a bewildering assortment of businesses, which Buffett often said mirrored the US economy as a whole. A bet on Berkshire, he said, was a bet on America.” Buffett started managing money when he was young, a disciple of Benjamin Graham’s investing style. He moved more into the corporate world when his Buffett Partnership Ltd. bought shares of Berkshire. In 1965, he took control of the rest of the business.

Composed mostly of struggling textile operations that would eventually fade away, Berkshire became the foundation for Buffett’s modern-day giant. Piece by piece, he built and acquired operations into a varied set of industries, including insurance — which gave him cash, or “float” — to help his investing strategy. Now, Berkshire owns businesses ranging from railroad BNSF to auto insurer Geico, sprawling energy operations, and even retailers such as Dairy Queen and See’s Candies. Its collection of companies generated $47.4 billion of annual operating earnings in 2024. Buffett also built up the stock portfolio — populating it with giant bets on the likes of Apple Inc. and American Express — and offering Berkshire another way to participate in the gains of businesses that it didn’t fully own.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

FSD

AI

Fauci

Ocean
https://twitter.com/dom_lucre/status/1918406723351802248

Moose

Birds

Cows
https://twitter.com/InternetH0F/status/1918410455258718428

Kookaburra

lion pair

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle January 5 2025

Jan 052025
 
 January 5, 2025  Posted by at 11:14 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,  62 Responses »


Salvador Dali They were there 1931

 

• Top Ukrainian Journalist Predicts Spring Peace Deal (RT)
• Russia, US May Strike New Arms Control Deal (Sp.)
• Biden & Make-Believe Democracy (Cook)
• Trump Administration Must Begin Restoring American Values on Day One (Spivak)
• Biden Awards Hillary Clinton, George Soros Presidential Medal of Freedom (Sp.)
• Uncle Sam and Banderite Bandits Destroy Europe (SCF)
• Countdown to the European Collapse (SCF)
• Last Ditch Media Sanctions From The West Against Russia (Jay)
• ‘Don’t Feed The Troll’ – Scholz On Musk (RT)
• UK Responds To Musk’s Criticism Over Child Rape Scandal (RT)
• Musk Calls For King Charles To Dissolve Parliament Over Grooming Gangs (HT)
• Elon Musk Makes 23 Posts Urging King Charles To Overthrow UK Government (HT)
• US MIC Wants Ukrainian Bloodbath to Continue Even With 18-Year-Olds (Sp.)
• US Supplied ‘A Lot of Weapons’ To Ukraine Ahead of Conflict – Blinken (RT)
• Starmer May Ask Trump to Continue Military Support to Ukraine (Sp.)
• Trump Hires Hawkish Mideast Envoy Because GOP’s Neocon Wing Wanted It (Sp.)
• Taiwan Reunification ‘Closer Than Ever’ – Chinese Ambassador (RT)

 

 

 

 

Ritter
https://twitter.com/i/status/1875710682903019977
Bernays
https://twitter.com/i/status/1875724638992601139

 

 

 

 

“..Trump’s pick for special envoy for Ukraine and Russia, Keith Kellogg, who predicted last month that the conflict would be “resolved in the next few months” with Trump in office. “Keith Kellogg is a very serious person..”

• Top Ukrainian Journalist Predicts Spring Peace Deal (RT)

Russia and Ukraine could sign a peace deal this spring, Ukrainian journalist Dmitry Gordon has predicted. In an interview published on his YouTube channel last week, Gordon said the “hot phase” of the conflict ended in 2024. “The peace treaty will be signed somewhere around spring 2025, followed immediately by elections [in Ukraine],” Gordon stated. He said his prediction was based on intuition and information from sources close to the government in Kiev. “I’ll reiterate: The hot phase of the war ends this year [2024],” Gordon added. He also cited US President-elect Donald Trump’s pick for special envoy for Ukraine and Russia, Keith Kellogg, who predicted last month that the conflict would be “resolved in the next few months” with Trump in office. “Keith Kellogg is a very serious person. If such a person says that the war will end before the end of the year… people say such things when they have 100% verified information,” Gordon claimed.

Trump has pledged throughout his campaign to end the conflict within 24 hours of returning to the White House. While he has not provided specific details, reported plans include freezing the conflict, delaying Ukraine’s NATO membership by 20 years, and creating a demilitarized zone monitored by European peacekeepers. According to Gordon, Trump’s approach could allow Russia to keep former Ukrainian territories that voted to join it and lift “the most painful” sanctions imposed on Moscow since 2022. At the same time, he claimed the potential deal would likely see NATO troops deployed along the line of contact and granting Ukraine access to frozen Russian assets for reconstruction. Kiev has been reluctant to negotiate with Russia, and earlier this week, Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky called Trump’s promise to end the conflict in one day “unrealistic.”

Zelensky has insisted Ukraine needs firm security guarantees, including NATO membership, as the foundation for long-term peace. Moscow has said it is open to talks but insists that any settlement must begin with Ukraine ceasing military operations and acknowledging the “territorial reality” that it will never regain control of its former regions that chose to join Russia. It has also insisted that all the goals of its military operation, including Ukrainian neutrality, demilitarization, and denazification, must be part of any peace deal. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov earlier stated that Trump’s reported plans to send NATO peacekeepers to Ukraine and postpone Ukraine’s membership in the military bloc instead of providing guarantees that it will never join NATO were “unacceptable” for Moscow.

Read more …

Too expensive, no results.

• Russia, US May Strike New Arms Control Deal (Sp.)

Russia and the United States are likely to reach an agreement on a new arms control deal after the expiration of the New START Treaty and avoid the risk of nuclear weapons use during Donald Trump’s presidency, experts told Sputnik. During his election campaign, US President-elect Donald Trump said the US was close to reaching a denuclearization agreement with Russia and China during his first presidential term. Last week, US Deputy National Security Advisor Jon Finer said that the Trump administration would have “significant leverage” in potential arms control talks with Russia due to the Biden administration’s initiatives to modernize the nuclear arsenal. The official added that the New START treaty, which places limits on the number of deployed strategic nuclear warheads and is due to expire in February 2026, creates a crucial opportunity for negotiations.

The New START Treaty signed in 2010 and extended until February 5, 2026, serves as a cornerstone of strategic stability between the US and Russia and primarily focuses on limiting the number of deployed strategic nuclear warheads and delivery systems. In February 2023, Russian President Vladimir Putin announced the suspension of Russia’s participation in the New START Treaty, stating that Russia would not allow the US and NATO to inspect its nuclear facilities as Washington was not abiding by the terms of the treaty and was trying to undermine Russia’s national security. Richard Bensel, a professor of government at Cornell University, expressed confidence that Russia and the US will be able to conclude a new arms control agreement. “I believe that the United States and Russia will agree to a new nuclear arms treaty but the negotiations will be quite complicated and, for that reason, we should not expect an agreement soon after the [New START Treaty] expiration,” Bensel told Sputnik.

At the same time, Bensel stressed that the new treaty will probably not be a high priority for the Trump administration because of the prevailing importance of the domestic agenda in the US. “He will have a year to do this but he may even want more time to put some distance between the treaty he will accept and the preliminary negotiations of the Biden administration,” the expert added.Similarly, Roderick Kiewiet, a professor of political science at the California Institute of Technology, assumed that both Moscow and Washington would be interested in reaching a new treaty after the New START Treaty expiration due to the high cost to both countries of maintaining their existing nuclear arsenals. “Trump has said little to nothing about it, but I believe he will want a new arms control treaty. Putin, too, I would think … New generations of these weapons are on the drawing board, but these would be even more expensive to bring on line. So I think there is a ton of money involved that both sides would prefer not to spend,” Kiewiet said.

Both experts ruled out the possibility of China joining a new arms control treaty, as well as any other country that possesses nuclear weapons. According to the latest Pentagon annual report to Congress, China possesses more than 600 operational nuclear warheads as of mid-2024 and will increase their number to over 1,000 by 2030. Earlier in the month, Russian Strategic Missile Forces Commander Col. Gen. Sergei Karakaev did not rule out the possibility that Russia could increase the number of warheads on deployed carriers in response to similar US actions, saying, however, that Russia intends to maintain the number of its nuclear warheads at the level of the New START Treaty limits. On November 19, Russia updated its nuclear doctrine. According to the updates, aggression against Russia by a non-nuclear state with the involvement of a nuclear state would be considered a joint attack.

One of the reasons for updating the doctrine was the West’s decision to allow Kiev to use US-supplied ATACMS long-range missiles and the UK’s Storm Shadow long-range missiles for strikes deep into Russian territory. Speaking about the possibility of Russia using nuclear weapons, Bensel ruled it out. “Perhaps I am too optimistic but I do not believe that Russia will use nuclear weapons in the Ukraine War,” Bensel said. The expert stressed that it was “almost inconceivable” that the Ukraine conflict could result in the use of nuclear weapons. The same opinion was echoed by Kiewiet, who expressed confidence in the continuation of efforts by Moscow and Washington to overcome existing tensions.

“The thing about these weapons, which has been true since 1945, is that the thought of actually using them is, well, unthinkable. I am confident the US and Russia will continue to manage tensions,” Kiewiet said. The expert called Russian ballistic missile Oreshnik a plus for the Russian military effort at the moment in Ukraine, but doubted that it would have much direct impact on US-Russian relations. In early December, White House National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan said that the US did not consider the possibility of supplying nuclear weapons to Ukraine and only focused on providing conventional weapons to Kiev.

Read more …

“Is the U.S. a democracy, or is the democracy just a facade behind which a wealth elite maintains its power? Biden has given us the answer. Were you listening?”

• Biden & Make-Believe Democracy (Cook)

Only in the world of political make-believe we inhabit in the West would The Wall Street Journal’s account of Biden’s years-long cognitive decline, and its concealment by his officials, count as a scoop. And only in a world in which the billionaire-owned media alone constructs and polices what counts as reality would the WSJ be able to run this story without also being expected to consider what it signifies about America’s professed democracy. The emperor, we are now told, was naked all along. How did it take more than four years for the fearless, tenacious billionaire-owned media to notice? The WSJ reports that even back in 2021 Biden had what his officials described as “bad days” when his mind worked so poorly he had to be kept away from senior Congresspeople and his own cabinet colleagues. So insulated was he that he rarely met even with key figures directing White House policy, such as the secretaries of State, Defence and the Treasury.

He was able to hold only two or three cabinet meetings a year during his four-year term — a total of nine, compared to 19 by Barack Obama and 25 by Donald Trump. His aides barely strayed from his side because they needed to whisper instructions for him to carry out the simplest of public tasks, such as where to enter and exit a room. Concern only went mainstream when he performed catastrophically in an unscripted TV debate against Donald Trump in June, eventually having to pull out of his re-election bid and let his vice-president, Kamala Harris, take over. Shortly afterwards, it emerged that he had been receiving regular visits to the White House from a leading neurologist and Parkinson’s expert. Many observers — myself included — pointed out Biden’s mental infirmity from the get-go. Matt Orfalea has been compiling video clips of the president’s stunning gaffes and verbal confusions for years.

None of us were geniuses. We didn’t need access to the 50 White House insiders interviewed by the WSJ. It was blindingly obvious. You had to be lying, or hypnotised, to deny what was so visible. And yet every time we pointed out Biden’s clear cognitive impairment, we were accused of promoting conspiracy theories, engaging in elder abuse, or supporting Trump. The emperor, so we were told, was fully clothed. The truth about Biden hasn’t suddenly leaked out from his officials. Senior politicians on both sides of the aisle knew. White House correspondents knew. Editors knew. And they all lied to protect the system of power to which they belong, the system that keeps them gainfully employed, the system that maintains their status. No one was going to rock the boat.

The WSJ hasn’t suddenly found out things it didn’t know before. The reason it is coming clean now – as are White House staffers – is that President Biden is almost out the door. The truth is no longer a serious threat to the Washington power system. There will be more revelations about Biden’s incapacity – maybe contained in a future book by Bob Woodward – after his presidency has become a distant memory. When it is safe for the full story to be told. When the lies are no longer important. But more significant than the media deceptions are the fact that much of the public fell for them, not once but over and over again: day after day, week after week, month after month, year after year. Why? Because far too many of us are in the grip of the West’s propaganda system. We believe that the billionaire-owned media is to be trusted, that it serves the public good, not private wealth.

If a large chunk of the public can be persuaded that a man who is incapable of finding the door through which he’s supposed to leave is “sharp as a tack”, then why would they not also believe that the United States is promoting democracy as it has laid waste to the Middle East over the past two decades to control the region’s oil? Or that Washington is seeking peace for the world and Ukraine by arming it with ever-more offensive weapons against a nuclear-armed Russia so that the U.S. can place ballistic missiles on Moscow’s doorstep? Or that the U.S. wants a ceasefire in Gaza even as it supplies the munitions, intelligence and diplomatic cover for Israel to carry out a genocide there?

The problem is that, subjected to a lifetime of elite propaganda, many are readier to believe that very propaganda than the evidence of their own own eyes. They are truly hypnotised. Even now, many are listening to the “revelations” of Biden’s long decline and, just like the WSJ, not wondering how the U.S. has been functioning for the past four years with a president barely able to read a teleprompter, one whose mind is so vacant he can wander off in the middle of a conversation. Does the U.S. run by itself? Does it need a president? Or is the president nothing more than a figurehead for a permanent bureaucracy that expects to wield power from the shadows, unobserved by voters and unaccountable to them? Is the U.S. a democracy, or is the democracy just a facade behind which a wealth elite maintains its power? Biden has given us the answer. Were you listening?

Read more …

“Democrats incessantly claimed that Trump would be a dictator. Instead, Biden became the most authoritarian president of the last 80 years.”

• Trump Administration Must Begin Restoring American Values on Day One (Spivak)

As the Biden-Harris administration slips away, Donald Trump must fulfill his promises to dispose of the woke detritus. His administration will have to bypass antidemocratic booby traps, including recently adopted rules that take time to reverse, last-minute appointments of progressive federal judges, and a hostile, left-leaning Deep State protected by Joe Biden’s revocation of Schedule F termination rights. Democrats incessantly claimed that Trump would be a dictator. Instead, Biden became the most authoritarian president of the last 80 years. Article I, Section 3 of the United States Constitution requires the President to “take care that the Laws be faithfully executed,” and in his oath of office, he swears to do so.

Instead, Biden and his administration issued executive orders and rules he knew to be unconstitutional, unlawful and unpopular, including a radical left agenda of censorship, racism through diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI), and fanatic transgenderism. The Trump administration should promptly seek to settle lawsuits centered on the outgoing administration’s hard left policies by conceding the government’s position is wrong. It will be difficult for future administrations to violate the settlements without approval of the other parties. At the least, the administration should dismiss, with prejudice, the cases in which it is the plaintiff.

The Trump administration also should seek legislative solutions that give standing to states and private individuals to secure government compliance, and to act as “private attorneys general” to enforce these laws if a future administration fails to do so. Though it will be tough to obtain the 60 votes required for passage in the Senate, there may be opportunities to peel off a few Democrats, or to use reconciliation, which requires only a majority. Regrettably, eliminating the filibuster to facilitate passage would ultimately backfire.

Trump’s team is well positioned for this mission. Harmeet K. Dhillon, Trump’s nominee to lead the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, is a tough litigator who believes in the Constitution and individual rights. Linda McMahon, another of the strong, intelligent women around Trump, will be instrumental as secretary of the Department of Education, which mandated and funds much of the woke jihad. Trump fairly describes Brendan Carr, his pick to chair the Federal Communications Commission, as “a warrior for Free Speech.”

Read more …

They missed Charlie Manson.

• Biden Awards Hillary Clinton, George Soros Presidential Medal of Freedom (Sp.)

With just over two weeks left to go in his administration, President Biden has been taking a series of last minute measures to try to ‘Trump-proof’ his legacy and put a spoke in his successor’s wheels. But some of his actions seem designed solely to trigger his opponents. Joe Biden has apparently decided to give one final giant middle finger to detractors on his way out the door, awarding the Presidential Medal of Freedom to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, hedge fund shark-turned ‘philanthropist’ George Soros and a slew of celebrities and activists. The White House said the award, given “to individuals who have made exemplary contributions to the prosperity, values, or security of the United States, world peace, or other significant societal, public or private endeavors,” is being handed out this year to 19 individuals that “have made America a better place.”

Online, people were less than enthused about Clinton and Soros’ nominations.“Biden is giving the Presidential Medal of Freedom to Hillary Clinton and George Soros…seriously two of the worst people on earth. This could be a Babylon Bee article with how unbelievable it is,” internet personality Natalie Danelishen vented. “Unreal,” Elon Musk replied. “It would be almost like awarding the war president par excellence named Obama with a Nobel Peace Prize…Oh…that really happened!” another person quipped. “This shell of an administration is writing the book on how to inflict maximum damage on the country and the American people. Just remember they HATE 60% of us and they have no shame in showing us how much and giving us the finger,” someone wrote. “Epstein wasn’t available,” another user joked. “The special guest of the event will be Lucifer,” another suggested.

“Awarded for their attempt in destroying America?” one person asked. “Does the medal come with…The Biden Pardon? Asking for a friend,” someone wrote.“At least he’s remained consistent, corrupt all the way until the very end,” another suggested.Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Soros are two of the most reviled figures of contemporary US politics among conservatives, the non-liberal left and anti-war and anti-interventionism advocates of all stripes. Clinton, the former first lady and wife of alleged child sex offender Bill Clinton, served as a senator from New York from 2001-2009, actively supporting the Bush administration’s ‘War on Terror’, including the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. As Barack Obama’s secretary of state from 2009-2013, Mrs. Clinton cheerled the NATO operation to topple Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, which turned the North African country into a failed state with open air slave markets, backed the US-led dirty war against Syria, and supported the funneling of billions of dollars in State Department funding into Ukrainian ‘civil society’ initiatives that ultimately helped trigger the Ukrainian crisis in 2014.

[..] Besides Clinton and Soros, Biden’s Medal of Freedom recipients include Bono, Michael J Fox, Denzel Washington, Bill Nye, Magic Johnson, Jane Goodall, liberal philanthropists and activists Jose Andres, Tim Gill and David Rubenstein, soccer star Lionel Messi, American Film Institute founder George Stevens Jr., and Vogue editor Anna Wintour. Robert F Kennedy Jr’s late father, former attorney general Robert F Kennedy, Ashton Carter, deceased former Obama-era Pentagon chief, late former Michigan governor George Romney and late civil rights activist Fannie Lou Hamer were also honored.

Read more …

“The grim fate of Germany heralds the economic misery that the whole EU is sliding headlong into. The history of Europe’s economic demise is as obvious as it is blatant.”

• Uncle Sam and Banderite Bandits Destroy Europe (SCF)

The upshot is that all major Russian natural gas supply lines to Europe have now been terminated. The only one remaining is Turk Stream which runs under the Black Sea to Turkey. But it mainly supplies Balkan countries that are not in the EU. In the space of two years, Russia has gone from being the major supplier of EU gas imports (over 40 percent) to being a minor source. The big winner of the phenomenal market disruption is the United States, whose exports of liquefied natural gas to the EU have tripled. Another winner is Norway, which is not an EU member. Other sources of gas for Europe are Azerbaijan and Algeria.

However, the unprecedented extra costs to Europe for this enormous rearrangement in its energy trade are encumbering the EU economies, industries and households with crippling burdens. New pipelines have to be built, as well as new terminals to receive the shipped gas. U.S. exports cost 30 to 40 percent more than the Russian product. The slump in the German economy from higher energy costs is directly caused by the cutting off of abundant and affordable Russian gas. And it is going to get even worse. The grim fate of Germany heralds the economic misery that the whole EU is sliding headlong into. The history of Europe’s economic demise is as obvious as it is blatant.

Of course, it is all about the United States using and abusing its Western “allies” for its own interests. For Western imperialists, there is no such thing as allies, only interests. And the Americans are exacting that maxim to the hilt. For decades, the U.S. has vehemently opposed the energy trade between the EU and Russia. Back in the 1980s, President Ronald Reagan’s administration tried its best to block the development of the Brotherhood Pipeline with threats of economic sanctions. The Americans openly said they didn’t want to see Europe and the Soviet Union developing cooperative relations.

At least in earlier times, the European governments appeared to have more independence and backbone. Germany, France, Italy and others rebuffed Washington’s demands to shut down the gas projects. The long-running strategic aim of the U.S. to displace Russia as an energy supplier to Europe has now been realized. It’s a sign of the desperate times and lawlessness that American military operatives attack European infrastructure. The blowing up of the Nord Stream pipelines and the proxy war in Ukraine have secured the strategic aim of the U.S. and its NATO proxy – keeping the Germans (Europeans) down, the Americans in, and the Russians out. So much for the free-market capitalism and rules-based order that American and European elites preach. The practice is brute economic competition and dominance down the barrel of a gun.

Millions of lives have been destroyed in this “great game” of American imperialist chicanery, and the proxy war in Ukraine is risking the escalation to a nuclear Third World War. The Banderite regime – an echo of the Nazi past – has enabled the United States to enslave Europe to Washington’s imperialist desires. Tragically, a coterie of elitist European political leaders are so obsessed with Russophobia and servility to their American overlord that they are crowing with delight at cutting off Russia. Russia will not suffer. Its vast energy resources are finding alternative lucrative global markets. The victims are the European citizens who are being plunged into wretched economic hardship due to the machinations of American capital, its Banderite tools, and Euro fools.

Read more …

“The final goal is a ruined Europe, not only unwilling but also incapable of establishing any future strategic ties with Moscow..”

• Countdown to the European Collapse (SCF)

Finally, energy cooperation between Russia and Europe is (almost) completely over. After nearly three years of sanctions and sabotage, the bilateral Moscow-EU energy partnership suffered its greatest historical blow. Kiev fulfilled its promise not to extend its contract with Gazprom, which was allowing the arrival of Russian gas to Europe, then creating an extremely uncomfortable energy insecurity situation for its own “partners” in the European Union. On the morning of the first day of 2025, the Russian Federation stopped supplying gas to European buyers via Ukraine. Even amidst the conflict, the Russian Gazprom and Ukrainian Naftogaz had kept in operation an energy transit agreement signed in 2020, which expired on the last day of 2024. Previously, Kiev had already announced it was unwilling to renew the contract with Gazprom, although some European countries repeatedly asked Ukraine to do so.

Despite the sanctions imposed on Russia since 2022, some European countries continued benefiting from the import of Russian gas, particularly Slovakia and Hungary – nations that refused to participate in the Western-sponsored anti-Russian boycott – as well as Austria, a country historically neutral in Europe’s geopolitical and military disputes. Other nations, even adhering to the sanctions, continued hypocritically receiving Russian gas, such as Italy, Poland, Romania, and Moldova. There were also cases of gas resale, with receiving nations re-exporting the commodity to countries seeking to bypass the sanctions.

With the end of the Ukrainian route, all these states lost any guarantee of a safe energy source – precisely during winter, the time of year when gas consumption in Europe is at its highest. Obviously, there are currently energy reserves that may be enough to cope with the challenges of the current season, but the situation will progressively become more critical over time. European nations will have to find new sources of gas or expand the use of the only two remaining routes for Russian gas (via Turkey and the Black Sea). Recent indicators show a substantial rise in gas prices among Asian exporters. Ankara is also expected to take the opportunity to gain more profits from its pipeline.

There is currently hope among Europeans for a cheap gas supply through the long-awaited Qatari-Turkish pipeline project via Syria. With the fall of Bashar al Assad’s legitimate government, energy giants from Turkey and the Gulf have revived the proposal, although they are waiting for domestic pacification in Syria by the Al-Qaeda junta to begin the construction. Some optimistic analysts in Europe believe this would be the antidote to Europe’s dependency on Russian gas – or Asian and American, as in the current circumstances.

The main problem with this hope is believing in the goodwill of the Western hawks to “pacify Syria.” Without Assad, Damascus became a “failed state,” with territory divided between different factions in constant hostilities. It is unlikely this will change – simply because, despite the tactical operators of the Syrian crisis (Turkey and Qatar) wanting pacification, the strategic mentors (Israel and the USA) are not interested. Tel Aviv prefers a polarized and war-torn Syria, unable to do anything to prevent territorial progress in the Golan and beyond. Washington, which is subservient to Israeli interests through the international Zionist lobby, is interested in the same – along with, of course, fostering Kurdish terrorists to worsen the internal Syrian situation even further.

In other words, Western analysts still do not understand that the decision-makers of the unipolar axis simply do not want to solve Europe’s problems. It is not in the US’ interest that its “partners” in Europe regain cheap energy and a strong industrial base. For Washington, the collapse of Europe is not a tragedy but a strategic goal, whose roots lie in the science of geopolitics itself. According to the fundamentals of Western geopolitics, Russian-European integration would be disastrous for the US-UK Atlantic axis. Therefore, in the face of Russia’s imminent military victory and Moscow’s rehabilitation as a Eurasian geopolitical power, the Americans and the British have adopted a “scorched earth” strategy in Europe.

Sanctions, the terrorist attack on Nord Stream, and the closure of the Ukrainian route to Europe are events that are part of the same strategic context: in all these cases, Anglo-American strategists want to provoke an energy collapse in Europe to enable deindustrialization and the subsequent economic and social crisis. The final goal is a ruined Europe, not only unwilling but also incapable of establishing any future strategic ties with Moscow. With the fall of the Ukrainian gas route, it can be said that the US won an important battle in its economic war against Europe. The total collapse is merely a matter of time.

Read more …

“The West is under no illusions privately that it is losing the war in Ukraine and is wondering how it can tell a fairy tale story to its own voters so as to deflect blame with the sole purpose of staying in power..”

• Last Ditch Media Sanctions From The West Against Russia (Jay)

Many analysts will be wondering what Trump will do about Russian sanctions when gets into the Oval office, although there is some optimism that he will try and reverse them. He is cautious not to get into a debate about this subject, which leads me to suspect that this will be one the bombshells he will drop on the Biden administration which left him the small gift of signing off over a billion dollars of military aid to Ukraine. What almost no Americans understand though, which is largely the fault of mainstream media, is that these military spending sprees are really all about feeding a dual-purpose racket which really has nothing to do with the actual war in Ukraine, which everyone now admits Russia is winning.

On one hand, it is of course pumping hundreds of millions of dollars into the 5 main arms manufacturers in the U.S. in a move which could arguably be called illegal state aid; on the other hand the kit which is sent to Ukraine from the U.S. – and the UK – is mainly being sold on a number of black markets, with only about 30 percent or thereabouts actually reaching Ukrainian troops. My own investigation has proved that the Zelensky cabal are selling off the heavy equipment like armoured personal carriers (APCs) and lorry loads of American made assault rifles to dealers in the international arms bizarre of Libya – where Middle Eastern terrorists, or their affiliates in the Sahel buy it at bargain prices. And Trump certainly understands the racket and will want to stop it. Dropping the mother of all bombshells on the Biden legacy by scrapping the sanctions and blocking any more aid would be an effective way to do that.

But it’s the sanctions on Russia media which he should also give priority to, given that, with the state of western media being such a shambles, we had to rely on RT for example, in the UK and U.S., to ask the difficult questions and hold our administrations to account. The recent news at the end of December that the EU is cracking down even further on Russia media and individuals who are active within it – journalists and others – is another parting shot which smacks of desperation. The West is under no illusions privately that it is losing the war in Ukraine and is wondering how it can tell a fairy tale story to its own voters so as to deflect blame with the sole purpose of staying in power. This is really what media sanctions are all about.

Shutting down any narrative that could possibly hold you to account and expose the tawdry reality of the mess the West has made in Ukraine based on the military industrial complex gaining too much power and eating up elites in its path. The Biden administration will be remembered for this. A new dawn in just how much power these arms manufacturers have and what lengths they can go to, to get the big contracts. This will all come out in the Trump administration with documentaries about Biden and his son’s laptop and how Ukraine was a holiday camp for them to go to with empty suitcases and return with a few million dollars. Like a cash machine which keeps churning out cash due to a computer glitch. The lure of Ukraine and corrupt western elites is nothing new. But during Trump’s first term citizens of the West are going to see the dark side to the events which led up to Russia’s invasion. And it stinks.

Part of that racket, going back even to 2013 or 2014 was to try and shut down Russian media. In reality, it was simply RT which elites noticed was gaining popularity in many European countries from people who had lost all faith in their own media which had fallen into the grubby hands of the powerful elites and their dirty games long ago. It used to be the case that in Brussels, the hold that the powerful institutions had on journalists was so strong in such an abusive relationship that what we saw each day on TV and in the newspapers was pure EU propaganda on a scale that even the Soviet Union could not muster. There used to be however the contrast between Brussels and member states where the media were more robust and anti-establishment. But no more.

Now the political journalists along with the defence correspondent in the UK for example are practically government propaganda agents who probably think they were journalists once. Their work is to keep the lies about Ukraine, as one example, flowing so that the public are distracted and can’t focus on what is under their nose. Sometimes the plain truth is so close to the person looking for it, that it can’t be seen. Distance is required. When RT operated in the UK, there was this certain environment which questioned more and provided an alternative viewpoint which was needed in any functioning democracy. Trump’s priority should be to finish the sanctions and adopt a more grown-up approach to resolving Ukraine as the Russians want a longer-term solution rather than quick fix buggerydoo. Ending the sanctions on Russian media would be a good message to western elites that have fed from the trough for so long with the lies which have been created that their time is up. Trump’s back.

Read more …

“Our democracy cannot afford such external influences,” Habeck said.”

• ‘Don’t Feed The Troll’ – Scholz On Musk (RT)

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz has responded to criticism from SpaceX and Tesla CEO Elon Musk, who recently signaled his support for Germany’s right-wing Alternative for Germany (AfD) party. In an interview with Stern magazine published on Saturday, Scholz advised keeping calm when dealing with such remarks and urged against succumbing to provocations. “There are many people on social media who want to attract attention with strong slogans,” Scholz said. “The rule is: Don’t feed the troll.” Musk referred to Scholz as an “incompetent fool” in December in a post on X, his social media platform. The billionaire criticized Berlin’s migration policy after it emerged that the man who had mowed through a crowded Christmas market in Germany, killing five and injuring dozens, was an Arab immigrant with a residence permit.

Musk also praised the AfD and expressed support for its anti-immigration stance and said it’s the only party capable of “saving Germany.” He later elaborated in an op-ed for Welt am Sonntag that the right-wing party’s immigration policies are aimed at preserving the nation’s culture and security rather than promoting xenophobia. Musk’s backing of the AfD is “far more concerning” than personal insults, the chancellor told the German magazine, noting that the party advocates closer ties with Russia and a weakening of transatlantic relationships. German officials, including Vice Chancellor Robert Habeck, have condemned Musk’s comments, and warned the billionaire against interfering in German politics. “Our democracy cannot afford such external influences,” Habeck said.

Musk and fellow entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy have been picked by US President-elect Donald Trump to lead his proposed ‘Department of Government Efficiency’ initiative (DOGE). Some members of British Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s inner circle have said that Musk could not maintain active support for AfD and Nigel Farage’s right-wing Reform UK party while remaining a member of the new US administration, The Sunday Times reported on Thursday. Such actions would effectively amount to declaring war on the main US allies in Europe, the newspaper’s sources said. The tech entrepreneur earlier also shared a post agreeing with the statement that Reform is “the only way to save” Britain.

Germany gears up for early parliamentary elections on February 23, following the collapse of Scholz’s coalition government due to disagreements on Ukraine aid, economic reforms, and climate policy, leading to a vote of no confidence and parliamentary dissolution in December. Scholz has since been leading a minority government. The AfD has seen a rise in popularity, with recent polls indicating support of around 17%. However, Germany’s major political parties, including Scholz’s Social Democrats (SPD), have ruled out any coalition with the group.

Read more …

Farage is coming. He doesn’t even have to campaign.

• UK Responds To Musk’s Criticism Over Child Rape Scandal (RT)

The UK will not refuse Elon Musk’s assistance in tackling systemic failures in addressing child sexual exploitation, Health Secretary Wes Streeting has said. Britain has been rocked by the exposure of, and failure to properly investigate, a grooming scandal in which hundreds of groups of Asian men, mostly Pakistanis, raped and tortured thousands of underage British girls – in towns across the north of England. Musk, who is known for his stance against illegal immigration, has been particularly vocal about the scandal, calling it a case of “state-sponsored evil.” He went on to claim that Prime Minister Keir Starmer, who led the Crown Prosecutorial Service from 2008 to 2013, “was complicit in the RAPE OF BRITAIN,” and must not only resign, but also face charges for failing to deliver justice.

In an interview with ITV News on Friday, Streeting suggested that “some of the criticisms Elon Musk has made… are misjudged and certainly misinformed.” However, he said the UK’s Labor government is “willing to work with Elon Musk who I think has got a big role to play with his social media platform, to help us tackle this issue.” Streeting added that “political correctness was able to get in the way of going after the perpetrators of these serious crimes,” vowing that the government will do its utmost to prevent further incidents.

The grooming gang scandal, a euphemism for widespread child sexual exploitation, primarily came to light through cases in Rotherham, Rochdale, and Telford. Investigations revealed systemic abuse spanning decades, with reports estimating that over 1,400 children were exploited in Rotherham alone from 1997 to 2013. In one of the most egregious cases, the police arrested a father who attempted to rescue his daughter from a house where she was being raped. As the revelations were pouring in, some British media outlets blasted law enforcement for their “cowardice” and for attempting to downplay the scandal in order to not be accused of racism and prevent the rise of the far-right in the UK.

Read more …

Been going on for decades. Worse than Epstein. What role did Charles play?

• Musk Calls For King Charles To Dissolve Parliament Over Grooming Gangs (HT)

Tesla CEO Elon Musk has continued his social media criticism of UK PM Keir Starmer for the government’s handling of a ‘child grooming’ scandal in the country Elon Musk has continued his criticism of the Government, calling on the King to step in and dissolve Parliament. The world’s richest man, who purchased the social media site Twitter and renamed it X in 2022, has shared and reacted to tweets critical of the Government and the Prime Minister after Labour rejected a call for an inquiry into child grooming. In his latest attacks on Sir Keir Starmer, Mr Musk shared a post asking whether Charles “should dissolve parliament and order a General Election… for the sake and security” of Britain. Mr Musk retweeted the X thread with a one-word comment: “Yes.”

The 53-year-old Starlink boss continued to wade into the debate overnight, hours after he posted that safeguarding minister Jess Phillips “deserves to be in prison” after she denied requests for the Home Office to lead a public inquiry into child sexual exploitation in Oldham on Thursday. He also suggested the Prime Minister had failed to bring “rape gangs” to justice when he was director of public prosecutions. Mr Musk reposted an article in The Daily Telegraph by shadow justice secretary Robert Jenrick in which he says the “grooming gangs” should be renamed “torture rape gangs”. He wrote that Mr Musk’s comments had shamed “the establishment by taking more interest in bringing these rape gangs to justice in one evening than most of the British establishment has for decades”.

Mr Musk continued his criticism in a post alongside footage of The Times’ chief investigative reporter Andrew Norfolk as he detailed the scope of the case and police mishandling, calling it “State-sponsored evil.” Mr Norfolk exposed the Rotherham child sexual exploitation ring in the UK press in 2011. In another comment on the same post, Mr Musk branded the scandal and the child rapists involved as “utterly shameful”. The Tesla owner also called a post asking why people were angrier at his comments than they were about “mass rape” of children as the “perfect question”. Meanwhile, Tory leader Kemi Badenoch said a full national inquiry into organised grooming gangs is “long overdue”. Ms Phillips said she recognised the “strength of feeling” for a Home Office-led inquiry into Oldham, but she told the local council the Government will not “intervene”.

“I believe it is for Oldham Council alone to decide to commission an inquiry into child sexual exploitation locally, rather than for the Government to intervene,” she said. In response, Mr Musk, a key member of US President-elect Donald Trump’s inner circle, said: “She deserves to be in prison.” He also appeared to place blame at the Prime Minister’s door. Mr Musk said: “In the UK, serious crimes such as rape require the Crown Prosecution Service’s approval for the police to charge suspects. Who was the head of the CPS when rape gangs were allowed to exploit young girls without facing justice? Keir Starmer, 2008-2013.” In a series of posts on his social media site, Mr Musk described the Prime Minister as “two-tier Keir”, claiming there was “no justice for severe, violent crimes but prison for social media posts”.

Mr Musk also expressed his support for activist Tommy Robinson – real name Stephen Yaxley-Lennon – who was jailed for 18 months for contempt of court in October. Senior Tories also sought to put pressure on the Government over grooming gangs. Mrs Badenoch said: “The time is long overdue for a full national inquiry into the rape gangs scandal. Trials have taken place all over the country in recent years but no one in authority has joined the dots. 2025 must be the year that the victims start to get justice.” Shadow home secretary Chris Philp and shadow safeguarding minister Alicia Kearns pressed for a statutory inquiry in Oldham. They said that only a public inquiry “can adequately encompass the national nature of these crimes and issues” and consider whether reports were ignored by the police, CPS and local council “or even covered up”.

In 2022, the then-Conservative government also refused a request for a public inquiry into events in Oldham. An Oldham Council spokesman said: “Survivors sit at the heart of our work to end child sexual exploitation. Whatever happens in terms of future inquiries, we have promised them that their wishes will be paramount, and we will not renege on that pledge.” Responding to Mrs Badenoch’s post, Reform UK leader Nigel Farage said: “Talk is cheap. The Conservatives had 14 years in government to launch an inquiry. The establishment has failed the victims of grooming gangs on every level.” Mr Musk, who is rumoured to be considering a major donation to Mr Farage’s party, responded: “Exactly. Time for Reform.” The Independent Inquiry into Child Sex Abuse, which published its final report in 2022, described the sexual abuse of children as an “epidemic that leaves tens of thousands of victims in its poisonous wake”.

Led by Professor Alexis Jay, the inquiry looked into abuse by organised groups following multiple convictions of sexual offences against children across the UK between 2010-2014, including in Rotherham, Cornwall, Derbyshire, Rochdale and Bristol. In November last year, Professor Jay said she felt “frustrated” that none of the probe’s 20 recommendations had been implemented more than two years after its conclusion. A Labour spokesman said the Government is “working at pace to implement the recommendations” in Professor Jay’s report. The spokesman added: “We have supported both the national overarching inquiry into child abuse which reported in 2022, and local independent inquiries and reviews including in Telford, Rotherham and Greater Manchester.”

“This Government is working urgently to strengthen the law so that these crimes are properly reported and investigated. In Oldham the crimes committed by grooming gangs were horrific. Young girls were abused in the most cruel and sadistic way.” “Victims and the community need to know that all steps are taken to deliver justice and protect children properly in the future. We will welcome and support an independent investigation commissioned by Oldham Council which puts victims’ voices at its heart, following the examples of Telford and Rotherham.” “We also continue to support wider work commissioned by mayor Andy Burnham into child protection issues across Greater Manchester, following the review into historic safeguarding issues in Oldham which was published in 2022.”

Read more …

“..had Elon Musk really paid attention to what’s going on in this country, he might have recognized that there have already been inquiries..”

• Elon Musk Makes 23 Posts Urging King Charles To Overthrow UK Government (HT)

Elon Musk has become a political lightning rod in the United Kingdom after he advocated for King Charles III to shutdown Parliament and call for a new election. The Tesla boss endorsed a social media post criticizing the government’s handling of criminal gang investigations in Manchester. “In the UK, serious crimes such as rape require the Crown Prosecution Service’s approval for the police to charge suspects. Who was the head of the CPS when rape gangs were allowed to exploit young girls without facing justice? Keir Starmer, 2008 -2013,” Musk posted on X (formerly Twitter) on New Year’s Day. “Who is the boss of Jess Phillips right now? Keir Stamer. The real reason she’s refusing to investigate the rape gangs is that it would obviously lead to the blaming of Keir Stamer [head of the CPS at the time],” he wrote in a follow-up post.

“The King must step in. We can’t have Keir heading the country, while he was the one heading the Crown Prosecution Service [CPS] while all this was happening,” he added in the thread. Responding to his comments, Health Secretary Wes Streeting said they were “misjudged and certainly misinformed.” Labour Minister Andrew Gwynne echoed the sentiment during an interview with LBC radio, “Elon Musk is an American citizen and perhaps ought to focus on issues on the other side of the Atlantic.” “The grooming issue is a very serious issue. We’ve already had inquiries into Telford, into Rotherham, we’ve had a local inquiry commissioned by Andy Burnham, the mayor of Greater Manchester, into the situation here in Greater Manchester, which includes Oldham,” Gwynne explained.

“There comes a point where we don’t need more inquiries, and had Elon Musk really paid attention to what’s going on in this country, he might have recognized that there have already been inquiries. What we need is justice for the victims, and we need to make sure that the criminal justice system follows up and makes sure that these atrocious things are never able to happen again.”

The debate intensified when Musk suggested that Minister Jess Phillips “deserves to be in prison” for her stance on launching a new public inquiry into grooming in Oldham. Phillips had argued that a local council-led inquiry, similar to those in Rotherham and Telford, would be more effective, per BBC report. Adding fuel to the fire, Musk shared an article by Shadow Justice Secretary Robert Jenrick from The Daily Telegraph discussing the investigations. Jenrick commented that Musk’s remarks had “shamed the establishment by taking more interest in bringing these rape gangs to justice in one evening than most of the British establishment has for decades.”

Read more …

The people will rise to defend their kids.

• US MIC Wants Ukrainian Bloodbath to Continue Even With 18-Year-Olds (Sp.)

Washington is pressuring Zelensky to lower the draft age from 25 to 18. Meanwhile, Western media is reporting that Ukrainian recruits have begun deserting forces training in European NATO countries hundreds at a time. Retired Russian Army colonel and renowned military observer Viktor Litovkin explains how these events are connected. “The war in Ukraine is profitable to the United States economically, politically and so on. That’s why they’re interested in this war continuing,” Litovkin told Sputnik, commenting the Biden administration’s steady pressure on Kiev to reduce the draft age to 18. Besides the cash the US military-industrial complex can expect from new contracts from its Eastern European NATO allies from the “recycling” their Warsaw Pact-era Soviet equipment, and the replenishment of Pentagon warehouses after sending old stocks off to Kiev, hawks in Washington are able to pursue their long-term obsession with “weakening Russia,” Litovkin explained.

The gruesome “business” in Ukraine is so profitable that Litovkin doesn’t expect it to stop once Donald Trump is in charge. After all, he recalled, it was Trump who first sent lethal weapons to the country in 2019. “I’m more than certain that Trump will not rush to stop this ‘business’. He will likely simply dump part of it onto Europe, while continuing the rest because it’s profitable for the US. Trump has always been on the side of the US military-industrial complex,” Litovkin said. As for plans to draft 18-year-olds, how else “how can this conflict continue, if a million Ukrainian servicemen have already been knocked out, killed, wounded, maimed and so on,” with other draft-age men fleeing to Europe, Russia, etc., the observer asked.

“There are about 30,000 mercenaries fighting in Ukraine. All the complex military equipment is controlled by mercenaries, US, Polish and German specialists, from HIMARS to Patriots and others…But someone has to man the front lines, someone has to man the trenches” if the reserve of 25-year-olds and up – the current draft age, is exhausted, the retired soldier said. Unfortunately, Litovkin doesn’t expect Ukraine’s population to rise up and overthrow the government sending its sons to their deaths. “Power in Ukraine is in the hands of the Banderites, who keep the people who are left in fear…Maybe individuals and groups can declare a protest, but they will be immediately thrown in jail and the men sent to the front,” he said.

Ukrainian and US business media reported this week that Ukraine’s brand new, elite NATO-trained 155th Mechanized Brigade “disintegrated” before reaching the frontlines, with over 1,700 of its 5,800 members said to have fled during training in France and Poland, before deployment in the ongoing bloody battles in the Donbass. The mass desertion signals a critical lack of “fighting spirit,” Litovkin believes. “Victory in every war is determined by the fighting spirit of those masses who shed blood on the battlefield,” Litovkin explained, suggesting the incident shows that “coercion,” not fighting spirit, are the main remaining motivator in the Ukrainian Army, hence the regular mass desertions, mass surrenders, etc.

Read more …

They knew what would happen. And then provoked it.

• US Supplied ‘A Lot of Weapons’ To Ukraine Ahead of Conflict – Blinken (RT)

Washington supplied “a lot of weapons” to Ukraine in the months before the hostilities between Moscow and Kiev began in February 2022, outgoing US Secretary of State Antony Blinken has admitted. The top diplomat made the remarks while speaking on the New York Times’ ‘The Interview’ podcast, aired on Saturday. The US saw the conflict between Russia and Ukraine “coming” and wanted to get Kiev “prepared” for it, according to Blinken. “Starting in September and then again in December, we quietly got a lot of weapons to Ukraine to make sure that they had in hand what they needed to defend themselves – things like Stingers, Javelins that they could use,” he said.

The weaponry has proven “instrumental” in “preventing Russia from taking Kiev,” as well as “rolling over the country, erasing it from the map,” Blinken asserted. The intentions ascribed to Moscow by the top US diplomat, however, sharply contrast with the goals of the military operation repeatedly articulated by Russia’s leadership. The original aims included demilitarization and denazification of the country, as well as Kiev accepting a neutral status and abandoning its aspirations to join NATO. Over time, the list was somewhat expanded in the wake of the incorporation of the four formerly Ukrainian regions of Kherson and Zaporozhye, as well as the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics, into Russia.

Moscow has repeatedly said any potential negotiations with Kiev would require it to accept the “realities on the ground,” as well as to withdraw troops from the new Russian territories. Blinken’s remarks received a poor reception in Moscow. Senior Russian diplomat Rodion Miroshnik suggested the revelations somewhat undermined the usual narrative about the supposedly “unprovoked Russian aggression.” “Pumping [Ukraine] with weapons for an attack on Donbass and Russia, isn’t that a pretext for the special military operation?” Miroshnik said in a Telegram post.

Read more …

Tell him to talk to Musk.

• Starmer May Ask Trump to Continue Military Support to Ukraine (Sp.)

UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer may travel to Washington within weeks after US President-elect Donald Trump’s inauguration on January 20 to urge him to provide military assistance to Ukraine, the media reported, citing sources. Downing Street hopes Starmer will fly to Washington in late January or early February and try to convince Trump to continue backing Kiev even despite Trump’s promise to strike a peace deal with Russian President Vladimir Putin, the media said. According to the publication, on the Chinese issue, the prime minister will support the United States on national security issues, but does not approve of tariffs as a way to improve global trade. Russia believes that arms supplies to Ukraine hinder the settlement, directly involving NATO countries in the conflict. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov noted that any cargo containing weapons for Ukraine would be a legitimate target for Russia.

Read more …

“..I’m not doing this for me, I’m doing it for them. Let’s see what happens..”

• Trump Hires Hawkish Mideast Envoy Because GOP’s Neocon Wing Wanted It (Sp.)

The President-elect’s second term cabinet picks have been a mixed bag, with America First doves like Tulsi Gabbard (his pick for director of national intelligence) overshadowed by neocon hawks like Marco Rubio (secretary of state), Mike Waltz (national security advisor) and Elise Stefanik (UN ambassador). Donald Trump has tapped another neoconservative for his cabinet, selecting Morgan Ortagus, his previous administration’s ex-State Department spokeswoman, to serve as deputy envoy of his Middle East peace team. The president-elect made the announcement in an oddly resentful manner on his social media platform Friday. “Early on Morgan fought me for three years, but hopefully has learned her lesson. These things usually don’t work out, but she has strong Republican support, and I’m not doing this for me, I’m doing it for them. Let’s see what happens,” Trump wrote.

“She will hopefully be an asset to Steve [billionaire Steven Witkoff, Trump’s pick for special Middle East envoy, ed.], a great leader and talent, as we seek to bring calm and prosperity to a very troubled region. I expect great results, and soon!” Trump added. Ortagus, who served as State Department spokeswoman under Mike Pompeo in the second half of Trump’s first administration, is also a former Treasury Department intelligence analyst, public affairs officer for USAID – the US government’s soft power foreign aid tool, a former banker, Fox News contributor, and officer in the US Navy Reserve. Before throwing her hat into the ring with Trump, Ortagus worked for Jeb Bush’s 2016 presidential campaign.

Her foreign policy positions are cross-the-board hawkish. Ortagus has cheered an escalation of tensions with China at every turn, praised the 2020 murder of Iranian Quds Force commander Qasem Soleimani, accused Russia of destabilizing the Middle East, and said the problem with the conflict in Ukraine isn’t NATO’s fueling of a proxy war, but the Biden administration not being “serious about defeating Russia.” Ortagus reportedly has close relationships with Trump’s secretary of state pick Marco Rubio, forever war hawk Senator Lindsey Graham, and Trump special missions envoy Richard Grenell. During Trump’s first term, she also worked closely with Jared Kushner, architect of the ‘Deal of the Century’ Palestinian-Israeli peace deal which Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas said belongs in the “garbage can of history.”

Graham praised Ortagus’s new appointment, saying she was “literally the best pick he could have made,” and that “nobody has closer ties to Israel and understands the mischief of Iran.” Ortagus said she was “honored” over her appointment and that “to be given the opportunity to once again represent my country and the Trump administration in a crucial diplomatic role is dream come true [sic].” The Witkoff-Ortagus team is expected to be tasked with ending the Gaza war and reducing Mideast tensions more broadly as Israel escalates its war against Yemen’s Houthis, and mulls aggression targeting Iran’s nuclear sites.

Read more …

‘One China’.

• Taiwan Reunification ‘Closer Than Ever’ – Chinese Ambassador (RT)

China is making significant strides toward achieving its long-held goal of reunification with its self-governed region of Taiwan, according to Zhang Hanhui, Beijing’s ambassador to Russia. It follows a recent statement made by Chinese President Xi Jinping, who described reunification as inevitable. In an opinion piece for RIA Novosti published on Friday, Zhang denounced Washington’s involvement in the affairs of the island, which Beijing insists is its sovereign territory. “Reunification is a historical trend and the right path, albeit one that involves hardships. ‘Taiwan independence’ is… a path doomed to failure. The Chinese nation has always adhered to the common belief that territory cannot be divided… the nation cannot be fragmented,” Zhang wrote. “China is closer than ever in its history to achieving the goal of the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation,” he added.

Beijing is “full of confidence and possesses the strength to achieve… the complete reunification of the country,” the ambassador said. Self-rule was established in Taiwan by nationalist forces after their defeat in the Chinese Civil War in 1949. Only a handful of nations currently recognize the island’s sovereignty, with most of the world, including Russia, complying with Beijing’s request that it be seen as part of the People’s Republic. While the US officially adheres to the One-China policy, recognizing Taiwan as part of China, it simultaneously engages in military cooperation with the government in Taipei, provoking indignation from Beijing. Last month, US President Joe Biden authorized $571 million in arms and supplies for the self-governing island.

Taiwan rejects Beijing’s claims and insists upon its sovereignty. Under President Tsai Ing-wen, the island has consistently opposed China’s “One Country, Two Systems” framework. Taiwan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs frequently condemns Beijing’s actions as provocative and detrimental to regional peace. China held large-scale military drills around the island in October. The government in Taipei has claimed that Beijing will never “renounce the use of force” against it. Despite this, Zhang reiterated Beijing’s preference for peaceful reunification, a sentiment previously expressed by Chinese President Xi Jinping. Zhang accused the United States of using Taipei as a tool to contain China, blaming Washington for escalating tensions in the Taiwan Strait. He also acknowledged Russia’s consistent support for Beijing’s ‘One China’ policy, calling it a testament to the close strategic partnership between the two countries.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

3
https://twitter.com/i/status/1875364457993650265

 

 

Humming
https://twitter.com/i/status/1875213551633318400

 

 

Pura raza
https://twitter.com/i/status/1875570384591810899

 

 

Je t’aime

 

 

Irwin

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle June 27 2024

Jun 272024
 
 June 27, 2024  Posted by at 9:08 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,  75 Responses »


Paul Gauguin The Vision after the Sermon (Jacob wrestling with the Angel) 1888

 

• Julian Assange: Free At Last, But Guilty Of Journalism (Pepe Escobar)
• ‘No Physical Harm To Anyone By Leaks’ (ZH)
• Bitcoin Donor Pays For Julian Assange’s $520,000 Charter Jet (ZH)
• You Saved Julian Assange (Chris Hedges)
• How The Deal To Free Julian Assange Was Agreed (BBC)
• ‘Every Citizen on the Planet’ Subject to US Persecution (Miles)
• Macron’s Brand ‘Toxic’ – Bloomberg (RT)
• France Faces Threat Of ‘Civil War’ – Macron (RT)
• West ‘Unable To Negotiate’ – Lavrov (RT)
• Farage Tells Zelensky Only Peace Can Save Ukraine (RT)
• UK’s Cameron Dashes Ukraine’s NATO Summit Hopes (RT)
• How Obama’s Intel Czar Rigged 2016 and 2020 Debates Against Trump (Sperry)
• Age of Rage: America’s Anti-Free Speech Movement (Turley)
• Supreme Court Tosses Case Over Biden Coercion Of Social Media (ZH)

 

 


Free as a Bird — by Mr. Fish

 

 

https://twitter.com/i/status/1806072950510002264
https://twitter.com/i/status/1806056785469374481

 

 

Debate

 

 

 

 

RFK jr

 

 

Vivek

 

 

Zelaya

 

 

Pool
https://twitter.com/i/status/1806058499282969012

 

 

 

 

Lots of Assange articles again today. Well, he deserves it.

• Julian Assange: Free At Last, But Guilty Of Journalism (Pepe Escobar)

The United States Government (USG) – under the “rules-based international order” – has de facto ruled that Julian Assange is guilty of practicing journalism. Edward Snowden had already noted that “when exposing a crime is treated as committing a crime, you are being ruled by criminals.” Criminals such as Mike “We Lie, We Cheat, We Steal” Pompeo, former Trump Secretary of State, who had planned to kidnap and kill Julian when he was head of the CIA. The indomitable Jennifer Robinson and Julian’s U.S. lawyer Barry Pollack sum it all up: the United States has “pursued journalism as a crime”. Julian was forced to suffer an unspeakably vicious Via Crucis because he dared to expose USG war crimes; the inner workings of the U.S. military in their rolling thunder War Of Terror (italics mine) in Afghanistan and Iraq; and – Holy of Holies – he dared to release emails showing the Democratic National Committee (DNC) colluded with the notorious warmongering Harpy Hillary Clinton.

Julian was subjected to relentless psychological torture, and nearly crucified for publishing facts that should always remain invisible to public opinion. That’s what top-notch journalism is all about. The whole drama teaches the whole planet everything one needs to know about the absolute control of the Hegemon over pathetic UK and EU. And that bring us to the kabuki that may – and the operative word is “may” – be closing the case. Title of the twisted morality play: ‘Plead Guilty or Die in Jail’. The final twist in the plot line of the morality play runs like this: the combo behind the cadaver in the White House realized that torturing an Australian journalist and publisher in a maximum security U.S. prison in an electoral year was not exactly good for business. At the same time the British establishment was begging to be excluded from the plot – as its “justice” system was forced by the Hegemon to keep an innocent man and family father hostage for 5 years, in abysmal conditions, in the name of protecting a basket of Anglo-American intel secrets.

In the end, the British establishment quietly applied all the pressure it could muster to run towards the exit – in full knowledge of what the Americans were planning for Julian. Cue to the kabuki this Wednesday in Saipan, the largest of the Northern Mariana Islands, unincorporated Pacific land administered by the Hegemon. Free at last – maybe, but with conditionalities that remain quite murky. Julian was ordered by this U.S. Court in the Pacific to instruct WikiLeaks to destroy information as a condition of the deal. Julian had to tell U.S. judge Ramona Manglona that he was not bribed or coerced to plead guilty to the crucial charge of “conspiring to unlawfully obtain and disseminate classified information relating to the national defense of the United States”. Well, his lawyers told him he had to follow the ‘Plead Guilty or Die in Jail’ script. Otherwise, no deal.

Judge Manglona – in an astonishing brush aside of those 5 years of psychological torture – said, “it appears that your 62 months in prison was fair and reasonable and proportionate.” So now the – oh, so benign and “fair” – USG will take the necessary steps to immediately erase remaining charges against Julian in the notoriously harsh Eastern District of Virginia. Julian was always adamant: he stressed over and over again that he would never plead guilty to an espionage charge. He didn’t; he pleaded guilty to a hazy felony/conspiracy charge; was given time served; was set free; and that’s a wrap. Or is it? Australia is a Hegemon vassal state, intel included, and with less than zero capability to protect its civilian population.

Moving from the UK to Australia may not be exactly an upgrade – even with freedom included. A real upgrade would be a move to a True Sovereign. Like Russia. Yet Julian will need U.S. authorization to travel and leave Australia. Moscow inevitably will be a sanctioned, off-limits destination. There’s hardly any question Julian will be back at the helm of WikiLeaks. Whistleblowers may be even lining up as we speak to tell their stories – supported by official documents. Yet the stark, ominous message remains fully imprinted in the collective unconscious: the ruthless, all-powerful U.S. Intel Apparatus will go no holds barred and take no prisoners to punish anyone, anywhere, who dares to expose imperial crimes. A new global epic starts now: The Fight against Criminalized Journalism.

Read more …

We’ve known this for years.

• ‘No Physical Harm To Anyone By Leaks’ (ZH)

These are the images the world has been waiting for (with the exception of all Neocons, Liberal interventionists, natsec hawks, and Killary types…). “Free at last,” WikiLeaks said in a post on X, upon Julian Assange emerging rom his plane after landing in the Australian capital of Canberra. Assange raised his fist on the tarmac, and lovingly embraced his wife Stella and his children and family. His guilty plea arrangement with the United States was a success. During the Wednesday morning stopover and court appearance in a US district court in Saipan, the 52-year old Assange formally pleaded guilty to obtaining and publishing US military secrets.

One of Assange’s lawyers, Jennifer Robinson, said after the hearing that the whole ordeal “sets a dangerous precedent that should be a concern to journalists everywhere.”During the hearing he appeared emotional and there were moments of humor and laughter in interaction with the judge and with the court, according to The Guardian. For example, when the judge questioned whether satisfied with the plea conditions, Assange responded: “It might depend on the outcome.” This immediately drew some laughter in the courtroom. Chief Judge Ramona Manglona said at the start: “Not many people recognize we are part of the United States, but that is true.” By the end she pronounced: “It appears this case ends with me” and followed with “I hope there will be some peace restored.”

Crucially, the judge said something which marks a significant blow to Assange’s and WikiLeaks’ detractors, who have long maintained that the leaks – particularly the Iraq and Afghan war logs – put intelligence officers and foreign assets in danger and may have gotten some killed. Manglona explained that key to the deal for his freedom was that he already served years in a notorious and harsh UK prison, but also that no actual physical harm was actually caused due to Assange’s actions. “You stand before me to be sentenced in this criminal action,” the judge said. “I would note the following: Timing matters. If this case was brought before me some time near 2012, without the benefit of what I know now, that you served a period of imprisonment… in apparently one of the harshest facilities in the United Kingdom.”

The Australian parliament had also begun publicly lobbying for Assange’s freedom starting months ago, and this was also essential in building pressure with the Biden administration. “There’s another significant fact – the government has indicated there is no personal victim here. That tells me the dissemination of this information did not result in any known physical injury,” the judge continued. “These two facts are very relevant. I would say if this was still unknown and closer to [2012] I would not be so inclined to accept this plea agreement before me,” Manglona added. “But it’s the year 2024.”

Former intelligence officials and national security pundits have been livid and disappointed over the plea deal, claiming Assange’s leaks got people killed and harmed US operations abroad.

Importantly, as a condition of the plea WikiLeaks is required to destroy information pertaining to US state secrets that was provided to Assange and his team. While the WikiLeaks site is a large repository of world-wide leaks on various governments, it appears that sections devoted to classified US documents have now been removed. Upon Assange’s celebratory landing in Australia, his wife Stella said in a press conference that he “just arrived in Australia after being in a high-security prison for over five years and [on] a 72-hour flight.”

She said it would be “premature” for Julian to address the press and that he “has to recover”. She then declared: “The fact is that Julian will always defend human rights, will always defend victims – that’s just part of who he is.” “I hope journalists and editors and publishers everywhere realize the danger of the US case against Julian that criminalizes, that has secured a conviction for, newsgathering and publishing information that was true, that the public deserved to know,” she continued in the press conference. “That precedent now can and will be used in the future against the rest of the press. So it is in the interest of all of the press to seek for this current state of affairs to change through reform of the Espionage Act,” said Stella Assange. “Through increased press protections, and yes, eventually when the time comes – not today – a pardon.”

Read more …

“..required to pay $520,000 to the Australian government..”

• Bitcoin Donor Pays For Julian Assange’s $520,000 Charter Jet (ZH)

In an anonymous effort to help secure Julian Assange’s freedom, an anonymous Bitcoiner donated over 8 Bitcoin, worth around $500,000, to help Assange’s family pay off the debt incurred by his charter jet and settlement expenses, CoinTelegraph reported. On June 24, Assange was released from the high-security Belmarsh prison in the United Kingdom after reaching a plea agreement with U.S. authorities. Shortly after his release, he departed the U.K. on a private plane from a London airport to Saipan in the Northern Mariana Islands, a U.S. territory. Assange appeared in a district court in Saipan on June 26, where he pleaded guilty to one charge of breaching the U.S. Espionage Act by leaking classified documents. The journey was planned to prevent Assange from touching foot on American soil.

In an interview, Stella Assange, Assange’s wife, stated that “freedom comes at a cost.” Assange is required to pay $520,000 to the Australian government for the “forced” chartering of flight VJ199 to travel to Saipan and Australia. Stella started a crowdfunding page to help the jailed founder with his debts after his return home to Australia. The donation link was posted by Stella Assange on June 25, and within 10 hours, an anonymous Bitcoiner paid over 8 Bitcoin to the fund, almost clearing the goal of $520,000. He has also received over 300,000 British pounds ($380,000) in fiat donations so far. The single Bitcoin donation was the largest donation to the fund, more than all other donations in all currencies combined. As a result, Assange will arrive in Australia debt free.

Read more …

“..to my delight, District Judge Vanessa Baraitser of the Old Bailey court overseeing Julian’s case, complained about the noise protestors were making in the street outside..”

• You Saved Julian Assange (Chris Hedges)

The dark machinery of empire, whose mendacity and savagery Julian Assange exposed to the world, spent 14 years trying to destroy him. They cut him off from his funding, canceling his bank accounts and credit cards. They invented bogus allegations of sexual assault to get him extradited to Sweden, where he would then be shipped to the U.S. They trapped him in the Ecuadorean Embassy in London for seven years after he was given political asylum and Ecuadorian citizenship by refusing him safe passage to Heathrow Airport. They orchestrated a change of government in Ecuador that saw him stripped of his asylum, harassed and humiliated by a pliant embassy staff. They contracted the Spanish security firm UC global in the embassy to record all his conversations, including those with his attorneys. The CIA discussed kidnapping or assassinating him. They arranged for London’s Metropolitan Police to raid the embassy – sovereign territory of Ecuador – and seize him.

They held him for five years in the high security HM Prison Belmarsh, often in solitary confinement. And all the while they carried out a judicial farce in the British courts where due process was ignored so an Australian citizen, whose publication was not based in the U.S. and who, like all journalists, received documents from whistleblowers, could be charged under the Espionage Act. They tried over and over and over to destroy him. They failed. But Julian was not released because the courts defended the rule of law and exonerated a man who had not committed a crime. He was not released because the Biden White House and the intelligence community have a conscience. He was not released because the news organizations that published his revelations and then threw him under the bus, carrying out a vicious smear campaign, pressured the U.S. government.

He was released — granted a plea deal with the U.S. Justice Department, according to court documents — in spite of these institutions. He was released because day after day, week after week, year after year, hundreds of thousands of people around the globe mobilized to decry the imprisonment of the most important journalist of our generation. Without this mobilization, Julian would not be free. Mass protests do not always work. The genocide in Gaza continues to exact its gruesome toll on Palestinians. Mumia Abu-Jamal is still locked up in a Pennsylvania prison. The fossil fuel industry ravages the planet. But it is the most potent weapon we have to defend ourselves from tyranny.

This sustained pressure — during a London hearing in 2020, to my delight, District Judge Vanessa Baraitser of the Old Bailey court overseeing Julian’s case, complained about the noise protestors were making in the street outside — shines a continuous light on injustice and exposes the amorality of the ruling class. This is why spaces in the British courts were so limited and blurry eyed activists lined up outside as early as 4 a.m. to secure a seat for journalists they respected, my spot secured by Franco Manzi, a retired policeman. These people are unsung and often unknown. But they are heroes. They move mountains. They surrounded parliament. They stood in the pouring rain outside the courts. They were dogged and steadfast. They made their collective voices heard. They saved Julian. And as this dreadful saga ends, and Julian and his family I hope, find peace and healing in Australia, we must honor them. They shamed the politicians in Australia to stand up for Julian, an Australian citizen, and finally Britain and the U.S. had to give up. I do not say to do the right thing. This was a surrender. We should be proud of it.

Read more …

MSM view. Where was the BBC all that time?

• How The Deal To Free Julian Assange Was Agreed (BBC)

In the end, it was a mixture of diplomacy, politics and law that allowed Julian Assange to take off in a private jet from London’s Stansted airport on Monday, bound ultimately for Australia and freedom. The deal that led to his liberty – after seven years of self-imposed confinement and then five years of enforced detention – was months in the making but uncertain to the last. In a statement, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) said the possibility of a plea deal “first came to our attention in March”. Since then, it had been advising the United States “on the mechanics” of how to get Mr Assange released and to appear before a US federal judge “in accordance with his wishes and those of the US government”. But the origins of the deal – after so many years of deadlock – probably began with the election of a new Australian government in May 2022 that brought to power an administration determined to bring home one of its citizens detained overseas.

Anthony Albanese, the new Labor prime minister, said he did not support everything Mr Assange had done but “enough was enough” and it was time for him to be released. He made the case a priority, largely behind closed doors. “Not all foreign affairs is best done with the loud hailer,” he said at the time. Mr Albanese had cross-party support in Australia’s parliament too. A delegation of MPs travelled to Washington in September to lobby US Congress directly. The prime minister then raised the issue himself with President Joe Biden at the White House during a state visit in October. This was followed by a parliamentary vote in February when MPs overwhelmingly supported a call to urge the US and the UK to allow Mr Assange back to Australia. They lobbied hard the influential US ambassador to Australia, Caroline Kennedy. A key player was Stephen Smith, who arrived in London as the new Australian High Commissioner in early 2023. Diplomatic sources said he “did a lot of the heavy lifting, making it a personal thing to get this over the line”.

Mr Smith – who paid an early visit to Mr Assange in Belmarsh prison in April 2023 – was also foreign minister in a former Australian government led by Kevin Rudd, the current ambassador in Washington who was also involved in the negotiations. Simon Jackman, Honorary Professor of US Studies at the University of Sydney, told the BBC there was a “natural inclination” for Australian governments to support the US but public and political sentiment had shifted just enough in both countries to give Mr Albanese “cover” to agitate for Mr Assange’s release behind closed doors. Australian ministers even at times compared the detention of Mr Assange to other Australian nationals held as political prisoners by Iran and China. Greg Barns, a barrister and legal adviser to the Australian Assange campaign, said it was the politics that made a difference. “The Albanese government was the first to elevate the matter with the US. And Albanese got support from the opposition. “The treatment [of Assange] stuck in the craw of many Australians. People would ask, ‘where’s the public interest in that?'”

Then came the law. On May 20, the High Court in the UK gave Julian Assange a legal lifeline. It ruled that he could bring a new appeal against attempts to have him extradited to stand trial in the US for obtaining and publishing military secrets. At this point, he faced multiple charges under the US espionage act: 17 of publishing official secrets, each of which carried a maximum 10-year prison term, and one of hacking, which was punishable by up to five years. One key part of the judgement was about whether Mr Assange – as an Australian citizen – would be able to use the US constitutional First Amendment right to free speech as a defence. Nick Vamos, former head of extradition at the CPS and head of business crime at the law firm Peters & Peters, said that the May ruling put pressure on both sides to come to the table and complete the deal. He said the ruling potentially allowed Mr Assange to argue that publishing secret US information was protected by the First Amendment, something that could have led to “months if not further years of delays and pressure”.

“Faced with this uncertainty and further delay, it looks as if the US have dropped the publishing charges in exchange for Mr Assange pleading guilty to hacking and ‘time served’, finally bringing this saga to end,” he said. Mr Vamos added that Mr Assange’s legal team would however have recognised that the First Amendment would have made no difference to the separate charge related to hacking. So even if they eventually saw off the charges relating to the publication of the secret material, there would be no protection against the hacking charges that went alongside them. “Both sides saw the risks and that brought them to the table,” he said. Whitehall sources said the date of the next High Court hearing was fast approaching on July 9 and 10 and both sides knew that if they were to agree a deal, it had to happen now.

Read more …

“On the contrary, Assange worked meticulously with sources and partnered media outlets to redact information that could’ve endangered or exposed anyone referenced within the leaked documents.”

• ‘Every Citizen on the Planet’ Subject to US Persecution (Miles)

The last decade saw a string of revelations about the inner workings of the US government that shocked the world. Wikileaks founder Julian Assange published a series of leaked documents that implicated the United States in everything from foreign political meddling to surveillance of allies and adversaries. He was aided in his efforts by US Army whistleblower Chelsea Manning, who exposed gross violations of international law in Iraq and Afghanistan, and Edward Snowden, an NSA contractor who revealed the security agency’s sweeping spying capabilities. The international scope of US influence was a common thread among each of the revelations. Various governments throughout history have violated their citizens’ rights, but few global powers have ever possessed the ability to bend the entire planet to their will. By the 2010s the United States had become just such a power, with political, technological, and economic might that could be imposed on any person at any place in the world.

“It sounds like they’re now saying every citizen on the planet is susceptible to being charged under the US Espionage Act,” said independent journalist Steve Poikonen on Sputnik’s The Critical Hour program. Poikonen was among a number of Sputnik contributors who weighed in on news of Assange’s plea deal with the Biden Justice Department Tuesday, questioning the implications of the agreement even as press freedom advocates everywhere celebrate the liberation of the longtime US political prisoner. “The thing that I found most surprising about all of this is the way that the plea deal was written, mostly because it’s a charge that we’ve historically only seen for government contractors or employees,” said Poikonen, the host of the online news program AM Wake Up. “The argument that the US prosecution was making the entire time hinged on ‘Julian Assange isn’t a journalist.’”

“If they’re charging him as a private citizen for mishandling classified information, and that’s something that before this they could only charge an employee or a contractor with, then doesn’t that put the rest of us under even more of a hot seat than we were before?” “He never should have been charged,” insisted cartoonist and syndicated columnist Ted Rall of Assange’s 12-year struggle against the US government. “He never committed a crime. He was never an American citizen and, therefore, not subject to American law. The Espionage Act is disgusting and probably unconstitutional and shouldn’t be on the books, and certainly never should apply to journalists.”

The United States’ pursuit of Assange was frequently justified under the pretense that his activity endangered the lives of American citizens or service members. Similar claims were made decades prior against Pentagon Papers leaker Daniel Ellsberg, who former Secretary of State Henry Kissenger dubbed “the most dangerous man in America.” US Congress passed legislation making it a crime to reveal the identity of CIA employees after the former head of the agency George H.W. Bush blamed whistleblower Philip Agee for the killing of an officer by militants in Greece. But no concrete details ever emerged of anyone targeted, or even placed under threat, by Julian Assange’s journalist. On the contrary, Assange worked meticulously with sources and partnered media outlets to redact information that could’ve endangered or exposed anyone referenced within the leaked documents.

Read more …

“..He has vowed to stay on as president until his five-year term ends in 2027..”s

• Macron’s Brand ‘Toxic’ – Bloomberg (RT)

French President Emmanuel Macron’s allies could distance themselves from him ahead of snap elections as the leader has become a “toxic brand” due to his waning popularity, Bloomberg has reported, citing sources. The heads of communication at the Elysee Palace have admitted they have “no polls or data to suggest candidates should publicly align themselves with Macron to retain their seats,” the outlet said on Wednesday, citing attendees at an emergency meeting of top French government officials. Soon after Macron called snap elections earlier this month, dozens of lawmakers who initially supported the French leader now want him to keep a “low profile” as his behavior grows increasingly “erratic,” Bloomberg claimed. Even political heavyweights such as French Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire and Prime Minister Gabriel Attal, once Macron’s closest allies, are keeping their distance, the outlet stated.

Most pro-government candidates have not placed the president’s image in their campaign posters or leaflets as the Macron brand is feared to be toxic, Bloomberg added. A person close to the president claimed that it’s normal for candidates not to use his image, arguing that the election is about the parliament, not the presidency. Speaking on Monday on the ‘Generation Do It Yourself’ podcast, Macron claimed that upcoming legislative elections in France could lead to civil war, should the far right or the leftist bloc sweep to power. Only his centrist ruling coalition can prevent such a scenario, Macron insisted, arguing that both the right-wing National Rally party and the left-wing France Unbowed party have espoused divisive policies that stoke tensions. Macron’s popularity has tumbled in recent months, and opinion polls indicate that his party is lagging far behind National Rally.

Macron, who has presented himself as a leading backer of Ukraine in the conflict with Russia, has floated the possibility of sending French – and other Western – troops to the battlefield. Jordan Bardella, the National Rally leader, recently said that if he becomes prime minister, he will not send troops or long-range missiles to Ukraine, describing any such moves as “very clear red lines.” Macon dissolved the country’s parliament and called snap elections earlier this month, after the National Rally party trounced his ruling coalition in the European Parliament elections. He has vowed to stay on as president until his five-year term ends in 2027, but an opposition-controlled legislature and government would dramatically shift the balance of power. The first round of the elections will be held on Sunday, while the second round is scheduled for July 7.

Read more …

You. Lost.

• France Faces Threat Of ‘Civil War’ – Macron (RT)

Upcoming legislative elections in France could lead to civil war if political parties on either the far-left or the far-right sweep to power, President Emmanuel Macron has warned. Only his centrist ruling coalition can prevent such a scenario, he added. Speaking on Monday in an interview on the “Generation Do It Yourself” podcast, Macron argued that both the right-wing National Rally party and the left-wing France Unbowed party have espoused divisive policies that stoke tensions. The first round of the elections will be held on Sunday, while the second round is scheduled for July 7. Macron labeled the opposition parties as extremist and claimed that their rhetoric would trigger more conflict. “When you are fed up and daily life is hard, you can be tempted to vote for the extremes that have quicker solutions,” he said. “But the solution will never be to reject others.”

The French president dissolved the country’s parliament and called for snap elections earlier this month, after the National Rally party trounced his ruling coalition in the European Parliament elections. He has vowed to stay on as president until his five-year term ends in 2027, but an opposition-controlled legislature and government would dramatically shift the balance of power in Paris. National Rally’s response to France’s problems would be to “reduce people to their religion or their origin,” Macron said, which “pushes people toward civil war.” Likewise, he added, Jean-Luc Melenchon’s France Unbowed party also promotes civil war “because it reduces people to their religious or ethnic group.” An Ipsos poll conducted last week showed that National Rally is favored by 35.5% of French voters. A leftist coalition that includes France Unbowed was pegged at 29.5%, while Macron’s alliance came in at 19.5%.

Macron has acknowledged that voters made their desire for change clear in the European Parliament election. “Yes, the way we govern must change profoundly,” he noted in announcing the snap elections. However, he added, “The government to come, which will necessarily reflect your vote, will, I hope, bring together republicans of different persuasions who have shown courage in opposing the extremes.” Macron and his allies have portrayed their opposition as dangerous and bigoted. “In our country, some people have hatred, impulses, desires to attack certain communities or certain French people,” Prime Minister Gabriel Attal said on Monday. He added, “Probably the victory of the extremes would release these impulses and could lead to violence.”

Read more …

“Our interest was much broader and more comprehensive, but the West was not ready for mutually beneficial, equal cooperation..”

• West ‘Unable To Negotiate’ – Lavrov (RT)

The West has repeatedly displayed its “inability to negotiate,” which has now become evident to everyone, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said. Western “vassals” of the US are willing to breach “any agreements” and violate international law upon receiving “orders” from Washington, Lavrov claimed at the Primakov Readings International Forum in Moscow. Russia had been interested in a mutually beneficial relationship with the collective West, but building one has proven to be effectively impossible, the top diplomat argued. “Our interest was much broader and more comprehensive, but the West was not ready for mutually beneficial, equal cooperation,” Lavrov stated. “When it needs to do something on orders from Washington, it resorts to breaking any agreements, any violations of international law.”

Moscow is now seeking to ensure its security and prevent any threats emanating from the “Western direction,” Lavrov said. The collective West, at the same time, is trying to make an example of Russia to assert its neocolonial policies, the diplomat claimed. “The Westerners are seeking to punish our country, using our example to intimidate everyone who is pursuing or seeks to pursue an independent foreign policy, who puts national interests above all, and not the whims of the former colonial powers,” Lavrov stated. The Western efforts to “punish” Russia, however, are doomed to fail and are “already producing effects opposite to the intended ones,” the minister insisted.

Leading Western officials have repeatedly said they are seeking to inflict a “strategic defeat” on Russia in the Ukraine conflict, or at least ensure that it does not emerge victorious. Moscow perceives the hostilities as a proxy conflict being waged by the collective West. Russia has insisted it will fully achieve its stated military goals, but has nonetheless signaled it is ready to negotiate an end to the hostilities through a diplomatic settlement.

Read more …

The only sane voice in Britain.

• Farage Tells Zelensky Only Peace Can Save Ukraine (RT)

Ukraine has no hope against Russia on the battlefield due to a lack of manpower, British politician Nigel Farage stated on Tuesday. The Reform UK leader has been embroiled in a row with Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky and former UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson after arguing that NATO expansion in Europe contributed to the ongoing hostilities. Farage defended his position on the BBC’s Panorama program last week, prompting Zelensky’s office to claim that the politician is infected with a “virus of Putinism.” Johnson branded Farage’s remarks “nauseating ahistorical drivel” and “Kremlin propaganda,” calling him “morally repugnant.” Speaking to British journalists on Tuesday, Farage took aim at his critics, in particular Johnson, who he accused of pushing Zelensky into rejecting a peace deal with Russia in 2022. The former Tory leader “very clearly did [that] for his own reasons. How many people have died as a result of that, I don’t know,” Farage said.

He estimated that there have been “a million battle casualties” in the conflict. Considering the heavy losses, “there may be no young men left in Ukraine” to achieve Kiev’s stated goal of defeating Russia, Farage pointed out. He said it was Zelensky’s choice whether to cede territory to stop the bloodshed and lamented that “no one is even talking about peace.” “All we are talking about is ‘Ukraine is going to win’. Really? I’m pretty skeptical about that,” Farage added. “I just think some attempt to broker negotiations between these two sides needs to happen,” the politician said, after citing his past opposition to Western military campaigns in Iraq and Libya.

Farage issued a similar rebuke during a campaign rally in Maidstone on Monday, when he suggested that Johnson is the one who is “morally repugnant.” He showed supporters a Daily Mail article from 2016 featuring a pro-Brexit speech by Johnson, a key figure in the campaign. In it, Johnson blamed the EU’s expansionist foreign policy for stoking tensions with Russia in Ukraine. He was accused of being an “apologist” for Russian President Vladimir Putin for the remarks. Farage told the crowd that Johnson was a hypocrite for criticizing him for saying similar things.

Read more …

Vovan and Lexus.

• UK’s Cameron Dashes Ukraine’s NATO Summit Hopes (RT)

Ukraine will not receive an invitation to join NATO at the bloc’s summit next month, UK Foreign Secretary David Cameron has said. He added that Kiev can only expect a strong declaration of support regarding its conflict with Moscow. In a phone call with Russian prankster duo Vovan and Lexus – one of whom posed as former Ukrainian President Pyotr Poroshenko – which was made public on Wednesday, Cameron confirmed that Ukraine should not hope to make strides on its path to become a NATO member when the military bloc’s leaders convene in Washington July 9-11. ”There is not going to be an invitation because America won’t support one,” Cameron said, adding that he told Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky that Kiev and the West should come up with the best language possible with regard to NATO’s support for the country and its eventual inclusion in the bloc.

”But we can’t have an argument between NATO and Ukraine before the summit… Let’s make sure we go into the conference united. We can’t afford a sort of public argument about where Ukraine is vis-à-vis NATO in the run-up to the July summit,” the foreign secretary said, adding that he personally supports the country’s accession to the US-led military bloc. “I’m sure it will happen. But we are not going to get there this time.” NATO first announced that Ukraine would become a member of the bloc back in 2008, without giving an exact timeline. In 2019, after the Western-backed coup in Kiev several years prior, Ukraine officially declared NATO membership to be a strategic objective. In 2022, after the conflict with Russia escalated and four of its former regions voted to join the neighboring country, Ukraine formally applied to join the bloc.

NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that Ukraine will not be able to join the bloc while it is embroiled in the conflict, amid widespread concerns that the move could trigger a direct clash with Russia. Moscow has for years sounded the alarm about NATO’s expansion towards its borders, with President Vladimir Putin citing Ukraine’s aspirations to join the bloc as one of the main reasons for the conflict. Earlier this month, Putin said Russia is ready to begin peace talks with Ukraine once it withdraws from its four former regions and commits to neutrality. Both Kiev and its Western backers have rejected the offer.

Read more …

Excellent Paul Sperry.

• How Obama’s Intel Czar Rigged 2016 and 2020 Debates Against Trump (Sperry)

Just before Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton faced off in their second presidential debate, then-National Intelligence Director James Clapper met in the White House with a small group of advisers to President Obama to hatch a plan to put out a first-of-its-kind intelligence report warning the voting public that “the Russian government” was interfering in the election by allegedly breaching the Clinton campaign’s email system. On Oct. 7, 2016 – just two days before the presidential debate between Trump and Clinton – Clapper issued the unprecedented intelligence advisory with Obama’s personal blessing. It seemed to lend credence to what the Clinton camp was telling the media — that Trump was working with Russian President Vladimir Putin through a secret back channel to steal the election. Sure enough, the Democratic nominee pounced on it to smear Trump at the debate.

And that wouldn’t be the only historically consequential maneuver for Clapper, whose role in skewing presidential campaigns might deserve a special place in the annals of nefarious election meddling – by, in this case, a domestic, not foreign, intelligence service.

In 2020, he was the lead signatory on the “intelligence” statement that discredited the New York Post’s October bombshell exposing emails from Hunter Biden’s laptop, which documented how Hunter’s corrupt Burisma paymasters had met with Joe Biden when he was vice president. It was released Oct. 19, just three days before Trump and Biden debated each other in Nashville. Fifty other U.S. “Intelligence Community” officials and experts signed the seven-page document, which claimed “the arrival on the U.S. political scene of emails purportedly belonging to Vice President Biden’s son Hunter, much of it related to his time serving on the board of the Ukrainian gas company Burisma, has all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.” In hindsight, Clapper’s well-timed pseudo-intelligence in 2016 and 2020 helped Clinton and Biden make the case against Trump as a potentially Kremlin-compromised figure, charges that crippled his presidency and later arguably denied him reelection.

The phony laptop letter actually helped Biden seal his narrow victory since many of his voters in the close election told pollsters they would have had second thoughts about backing him had they known of the damning materials contradicting his denials he knew anything about his son’s shady foreign dealings. A post-election survey by The Polling Company, for one, found that thanks to the discrediting and suppression of the laptop story, 45% of Biden voters in swing states said they were “unaware of the financial scandal enveloping Biden and his son” and that full awareness of the Hunter Biden laptop scandal would have led more than 9% of these Biden voters to abandon their vote for him – thereby flipping all six of the swing states he won over to Trump and giving Trump the victory.

In effect, Joe Biden was elected president because millions of voters were steered away by Clapper and his intelligence colleagues from learning about the damning contents on Hunter Biden’s laptop. In 2016, Clapper appeared to use his authority as Obama’s chief of intelligence to try to trip up Trump on behalf of Clinton. But not everyone in the administration was on board with releasing his official statement about supposed Kremlin meddling. Then-FBI Director James Comey had also met in the Situation Room in early October to discuss the plan. But Comey balked at accusing “Russia’s senior-most officials” of authorizing the “alleged hack” of the Clinton campaign and trying “to interfere in the U.S. election process,” as the two-page document claimed. Conspicuously, the FBI did not sign on to the intelligence.

Still, Clapper implied in his statement that this was the finding of the entire “U.S. Intelligence Community” and that it was “confident the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of emails.” Aside from Clapper’s Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the only other agency that attached its name to the assessment was the Department of Homeland Security. Also remarkable was the paucity of underlying evidence. The joint ODNI-DHS statement based its conclusion primarily on a report by a cybersecurity contractor hired by the Clinton campaign’s law firm, who later walked back his finding in a sworn congressional deposition, allowing: “We did not have concrete evidence [Russian agents stole campaign emails].” At best, Clapper’s finding was shoddy tradecraft. At worst, it was manufactured, or simply “dreamed up,” as one former FBI counterintelligence official described it to RealClearInvestigations.

Read more …

“The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage”

• Age of Rage: America’s Anti-Free Speech Movement (Turley)

Time and again, this country has abandoned our free speech values as political dissidents were met with state rage in the form of mass crackdowns and imprisonments. It is an unvarnished story of free speech in America and for better or worse, it is our story. Yet, we have much to learn from this history as this pattern now repeats itself. The book explains why we are living in the most dangerous anti-free speech period in our history. In the past, free speech has found natural allies in academia and the media. That has changed with a type of triumvirate — the government, corporations, and academia — in a powerful alliance against free speech values.

Ironically, while these groups refer to the unprecedented threat of “fake news” and “disinformation,” those were the very same rationales used first by the Crown and then the U.S. government to crack down on free speech in the early American republic. The difference is the magnitude of the current censorship system from campuses to corporations to Congress. Law professors are even calling for changing the First Amendment as advancing an “excessively individualistic” view of free speech. The amendment would allow the government to curtail speech to achieve “equity” and protect “dignity.” Others, including President Biden, have called for greater censorship while politicians and pundits denounce defenders of free speech as “Putin lovers” and “insurrectionist sympathizers.”

Despite watching the alarming rise of this anti-free speech movement and the rapid loss of protections in the West, there is still reason to be hopeful.For those of us who believe that free speech is a human right, there is an inherent and inescapable optimism. We are wired for free speech as humans. We need to speak freely, to project part of ourselves into the world around us. It is essential to being fully human. In the end, this alliance may reduce our appetite for free speech but we will never truly lose our taste for it. It is in our DNA. That is why this is not our first or our last age of rage. However, it is not the rage that defines us. It is free speech that defines us.

Read more …

“If the allegations made by plaintiffs are true, the present case arguably involves the most massive attack against free speech in United States’ history,” wrote Doughty.”

• Supreme Court Tosses Case Over Biden Coercion Of Social Media (ZH)

The Supreme Court on Wednesday tossed a case claiming that the Biden administration unlawfully coerced social media companies into removing content and banning users based on political views. In a 6-3 decision, the Court found that the plaintiffs did not have standing to sue – as opposed to tossing the case on merit – just like the vast majority of election fraud cases which didn’t make it past lower courts. Clearly it was easier to punt this one than focus on the mountain of evidence that the Biden administration and US intelligence agencies were directly pressuring social media platforms to censor free speech disfavorable to the regime. GOP attorneys general in Louisiana and Missouri, along with five social media users, filed the underlying lawsuit claiming that US government officials exceeded their authority by pressuring social media platforms to moderate content. The individual plaintiffs include Harvard’s Martin Kulldorff and Stanford’s Jay Bhattacharya, as well as Gateway Pundit owner Jim Hoft.

Turley

The laws sought to prevent social media companies from banning users based on their political views, even if users violate platform policies. The lawsuit included various claims relating to activities that occurred in 2020 and before, including efforts to deter the spread of false information about Covid and the presidential election. Donald Trump was president at the time, but the district court ruling focused on actions taken by the government after President Joe Biden took office in January 2021. In July last year, Louisiana-based U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty barred officials from “communication of any kind with social-media companies urging, encouraging, pressuring, or inducing in any manner the removal, deletion, suppression, or reduction of content containing protected free speech.” -NBC News. “If the allegations made by plaintiffs are true, the present case arguably involves the most massive attack against free speech in United States’ history,” wrote Doughty.

“The plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the merits in establishing that the government has used its power to silence the opposition.” Dozens of people and agencies were bound by the injunction including President Biden, White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, the Food and Drug Administration, Centers for Disease Control, the Treasury Department, State Department, the US Election Assistance Commission, the FBI and entire Justice Department, and the Department of Health and Human Services. Bhattacharya and Kulldorff, who are among the originators of the Great Barrington Declaration that denounced the lockdown regime, have been victims of social media censorship. For example, the pair says their censorship-triggering statements included assertions that “thinking everyone must be vaccinated is scientifically flawed,” questioning the value of masks, and stating that natural immunity is stronger than vaccine immunity.

While the case was dominated by Covid-19 censorship, it also encompasses the Justice Department’s efforts to suppress reporting about Hunter Biden’s “laptop from hell” in the run-up to the 2020 election. Doughty gave credence to that accusation. “The evidence thus far depicts an almost dystopian scenario,” wrote Doughty in a 155-page ruling. “During the COVID-19 pandemic, a period perhaps best characterized by widespread doubt and uncertainty, the United States Government seems to have assumed a role similar to an Orwellian ‘Ministry of Truth’.” “The White House defendants made it very clear to social-media companies what they wanted suppressed and what they wanted amplified,” wrote Doughty. “Faced with unrelenting pressure from the most powerful office in the world, the social-media companies apparently complied.”

Read more …

 

 

 

 

13 dogs
https://twitter.com/i/status/1805852394946712055

 

 

Rematch

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle June 23 2024

Jun 232024
 
 June 23, 2024  Posted by at 9:14 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  49 Responses »


Vincent van Gogh Weeping woman 1883

 

• Biden May Decline Nomination If He Does Poorly in June 27 Debate – Hersh (Sp.)
• A New Multipolar Security System Based On ‘Pax Rossiya’ (SCF)
• Is Washington Trying To Dump The Ukraine War Into The EU’s Lap? (Jay)
• The Only Way to End Confrontation Between Russia and the West (Lukyanov)
• The Ukrainian Border War Folly (David Stockman)
• Tens of Thousands of Ukrainians Hiding From Draft Officers – NYT (TASS)
• Belgium Warns Against Seizing Russian Money (RT)
• White Christians Being Replaced In Europe – Orban (RT)
• Sunak Accuses Farage Of Appeasing Putin (BBC)
• Wikipedia’s Political Bias Spreading To AI (RT)
• The Supreme Court Swatted Down Hunter Biden’s Hail Mary Pass (Turley)
• Common Sense And Memes Are Viruses To The New World Order (Lynn)
• Bibi Is Needy (DeMartino)
• UK Invents Phantom Skripals To Refuse To Testify In Novichok Inquiry (Helmer)

 

 

 

 

Cuomo Maher
https://twitter.com/i/status/1804499826546983385

 

 

Comer
https://twitter.com/i/status/1804207426297561197

 

 

Tucker J6

Jan 6
https://twitter.com/i/status/1804376332077535479

 

 

Judge Judy

 

 

Tesla

 

 

 

 

 

 

“..Biden is going to need to match the intensity he demonstrated at his State of the Union address in March if he wants to stay in the race, Hersh said..”

• Biden May Decline Nomination If He Does Poorly in June 27 Debate – Hersh (Sp.)

Democrats are discussing plans to have President Joe Biden decline the Democratic presidential nomination if he has a bad showing at the upcoming presidential debate on June 27, Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative journalist Seymour Hersh reported on Friday, citing a longtime friend of the US president. Hersh reported that there is a serious concern among the Democratic Party leadership and major Democratic donors about Biden’s ability to defeat former President Donald Trump in the November election. “One extreme possibility in the case of a very bad showing Thursday night, I have been told, is to obtain agreement from Biden and his family advisers for the president to come to the Democratic convention in Chicago in August and accept the accolades of a first-round delegate victory; then he would decline the nomination and throw the nominating process open to all,” Hersh said.

California Governor Gavin Newsom and Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker could be favorites to replace Biden, Hersh said. Next week, Biden is going to need to match the intensity he demonstrated at his State of the Union address in March if he wants to stay in the race, Hersh said. An aggregation of national polls by RealClearPolitics shows that Trump holds a half-a-point lead over Biden and leads him in all seven swing US states.

Read more …

“The U.S. and its Western partners – a global minority – have come to be seen by most people of the world as rogue states that have trashed international law..”

• A New Multipolar Security System Based On ‘Pax Rossiya’ (SCF)

For several years now, Russia, China and other members of the expanding BRICS alliance have been formulating progressive trade and financial relations of the emerging multipolar world order. That order is based on mutual respect and partnership grounded in international law and the UN Charter. The BRICS concept is rightly the zeitgeist of our time. It is rallying more nations to its fold especially those of the so-called Global South which for decades have been subjected to the unilateralism of Western hegemony. The trouble is that for a new world order based on equality and fairness to succeed in practice, it needs to be secure from arbitrary military aggression and imperialist tyranny. In other words, a new security architecture is required to underpin the development of a multipolar world. Russian President Vladimir Putin has been advocating for a new indivisible international security system. This week saw the plan for a new security arrangement put into action.

The Russian leader embarked on state visits to North Korea and Vietnam during which he signed new strategic partnership and defense accords. Ahead of his trip to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Putin outlined the integrated vision thus: “We are also ready for close cooperation to make international relations more democratic and stable… To do this, we will develop alternative mechanisms of trade and mutual settlements that are not controlled by the West, and jointly resist illegitimate unilateral restrictions. And at the same time – to build an architecture of equal and indivisible security in Eurasia.” The concept of indivisible security is by no means limited to Eurasia. Russia has signaled the same principles apply to Latin America, Africa and indeed every other corner of the world. During Putin’s meetings with Chairman Kim Jong Un of the DPRK and President Lo Tam of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, the strategic partnerships agreed were not merely about military defense and security.

They involved comprehensive partnerships for the development of trade, transport, technology, education, science and medicine. Nevertheless, it was clear that the commitment to strategic partnership was underpinned by new mutual defense accords. This was most explicit in the treaty signed with the DPRK which furnished “mutual assistance in the event of aggression against one of the parties”. This is a game-changer. It totally upends the geopolitical calculations of the United States and its NATO partners who have been unilaterally expanding military force and provocations in Eurasia and elsewhere. U.S. President Joe Biden’s administration has ramped up aggression in the Asia-Pacific against China and North Korea with impunity. Under his watch, the US has increasingly moved nuclear forces into the region to intimidate not only Beijing and Pyongyang but also Moscow. The Biden administration has been assiduous in forming hostile military formations in the region with its NATO partners, including Australia, New Zealand, Japan and South Korea.

Year after year, the United States has built up weapon systems in Taiwan to provoke China and on the Korean Peninsula to threaten North Korea. This unilateral aggression and “might is right” arrogance underpin the notion of Pax Americana that prevailed for decades after the Second World War. That notion was always a cruel euphemism for American imperialist violence to impose its economic and political interests. The Korean and Vietnam Wars in which millions of civilians were annihilated were the real-world grim translations of Pax Americana and its fraudulent “rules-based order”. Geopolitical perceptions have dramatically changed in a few short years. The U.S. and its Western partners – a global minority – have come to be seen by most people of the world as rogue states that have trashed international law through illegal wars and unilateral bullying with economic sanctions. The U.S. dollar and Washington’s relentless debt spending are seen as instruments of imperialist looting.

The BRICS multipolar world order is a welcome alternative to the mayhem of the Western-dominated system. The principles of fairness and cooperation are laudable and necessary to implement. But such principles must be reinforced with military defense and security for all. This is far from the one-sided “defense and security” of the United States and its NATO partners, which in reality is an Orwellian cover for aggression. The defense commitments given by Russia to the DPRK this week can be seen as long overdue. One may wonder how the U.S. and its allies got away with threatening the people of North Korea for so long and denying Pyongyang the sovereign right to self-defense. Admittedly, Russia did previously support UN sanctions on North Korea over its missile program. That’s over.

Read more …

“America wants to hand over the responsibility of Ukraine to the Europeans and shed responsibility for the mess that it has created..”

• Is Washington Trying To Dump The Ukraine War Into The EU’s Lap? (Jay)

With just a mere matter of weeks now before the U.S. presidential election some experts are wondering if Joe Biden is preparing, at the last minute, to wriggle free of the Ukrainian curse and tell voters that in the next term, if he were to be President, Ukraine funding will be reduced dramatically. This would, after all, be a cunning move to outfox Trump who has told reporters on numerous occasions that he would end the war once in office simply through cutting U.S. financial support.Either scenario places EU countries – and the EU itself in Brussels – in a quandary as their worst nightmare is coming true: America wants to hand over the responsibility of Ukraine to the Europeans and shed responsibility for the mess that it has created. One could even argue that relations now between the U.S. and EU countries are on a collision course given one recent offer Washington made to the EU in the form of a loan which the EU would guarantee but U.S. companies would benefit from.

As Hungary prepares to take the helm of the EU’s six month rotating presidency on July 1st, western elites are fretting over whether this time Budapest will veto outright the sanctions which are in place, which need to be signed off every six months. America in particular wants a quick fix solution but is indicating that it wants to hand over all the risk to Europe. It argues that those who hold Russian assets should be the ones to offer the guarantees against default – through interest on Russian cash held by them – and that U.S. Congress anyway is unlikely to sign off another batch of military aid, even in the form of a loan, at such short notice. Following a massive body blow from European elections, French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Olaf Scholz will tell President Joe Biden they reject the American proposal for Europe to act as sole guarantors for the loan, according to conversations with six senior diplomats and officials.

The offer was structured in such a way that EU countries would pay the interest, accept the risk and allow most of what was a 50bn dollar loan to benefit U.S. companies. Remarkable sting for the EU governments when it shows that the relationship between them and the Biden administration just sinks lower and lower each week. Of course, there is a great deal of anger from the EU side as many EU leaders feel as though the U.S. has cleaned up quite nicely from the whole business of war which has profited the U.S. on so many levels but has drained EU economies, explaining why Poland recently held a pole which claimed that a majority of those asked wanted funding for the Ukraine war to end. Europe has really been left holding the baby over the Ukraine war and the palpable resentment against the U.S. is certainly growing. The deal the U.S. pushed of course was never going to be a runner but more likely a new European Commission in September will borrow a new 50bn euro tranche from its seven year 1.2 trillion euro budget for Ukraine.

Even in this scenario, the EU is scraping the barrel and reaching new lows in throwing cash into the fire just as an ephemeral last-ditch effort to stay warm. But both the U.S. and EU realise that time is running out for whoever wants to pour more money into the black hole of Ukraine. Time is running out because while Ukraine desperately needs the money, there’s no certainty that a Donald Trump presidency would back any loan initiatives. A final agreement will now be delayed until at least in autumn with just a matter of few weeks before November 5 election. Relations between the U.S. and EU have never been so tipped in Washington’s favour. And that’s before Trump even gets into the White House.

Read more …

Talk.

• The Only Way to End Confrontation Between Russia and the West (Lukyanov)

The concept adopted at the end of the Cold War stated that NATO ensured European security, and a bigger NATO meant a more secure continent. As a first step towards this, everyone (including Moscow) agreed that a reunited Germany would remain a member of the bloc instead of receiving neutral status, as some had suggested earlier. Further, it was implied that each country had the right to choose whether or not to join any alliances. Theoretically, that is what sovereignty implies. But in practice, the geopolitical balance of power had always imposed restrictions that forced alliances to consider the reaction of non-member countries. However, the triumphalism that reigned in the West following the Cold War significantly reduced the willingness to take such reactions into account. In other words, NATO felt like it could do anything and no reply would follow.

The situation could have changed dramatically if Russia had considered the possibility of joining NATO, and if the bloc itself had considered such a scenario. Then the principle of the indivisibility of security, proclaimed in the 1990 Charter of Paris for a New Europe, would have been respected within the framework of the bloc. However, it was impossible for Russia to join NATO, since, even at its weakest, Russia remained one of the world’s largest military powers and possessed the largest nuclear arsenal. The hypothetical accession of such a state to NATO would mean the emergence of a second force within the club that would be on a par with the US, and therefore, would not obey it on the same level as other allies. This would change the very essence of the organization, and alter its principles of Atlanticism (simply because of Russia’s geographical location). No one was prepared for this. The qualitative transformation of NATO was never on the agenda.

As a result, NATO’s expansion, which in a sense became automated, pushed Russia further and further to the east. Moscow’s attempts to regulate this process – first through participation in joint institutions (such as the NATO-Russia Council of 2002, which was an expansion of the NATO-Russia Founding Act of 1997) and then through growing opposition (starting with Putin’s Munich Speech in 2007) – did not bring the desired results. In addition to the inertia of the West’s initial approach (which implied that the bloc’s very existence is security in itself), the West believed that Moscow didn’t have the right to set conditions and must only follow the rules set by the stronger and more successful Western community. This is how the EU eventually got involved in the current Ukraine war. Could relations between NATO and Russia have developed in a different way? The West believes that the persistence of Russia, which continued to consider NATO a threat to its security, led to the current military crisis. And, in fact, this became a self-fulfilling prophecy. But even assuming that this was true, the speed and ease with which NATO returned to a strong confrontation with Russia shows that it had been prepared for this.

Russia’s memorandum of December 2021 and the 2022 military operation in Ukraine were designed to put an end to the idea of NATO’s uncontested expansion as the only means of ensuring European security. Two-and-a-half years later, we see that the scale of the conflict has exceeded all initial expectations. Judging by Moscow’s statements, the confrontation may only come to an end when the principles on which European security is based are fundamentally reconsidered. This is not a territorial conflict, but a conflict which may only end when NATO abandons its main goal and function. So far, there is no compromise on the horizon. The Western side is not willing to agree that the results of the Cold War must be reconsidered, and the Russian side is not ready to retreat without this assurance. Thirty years after the signing of the Partnership for Peace program, there’s still no partnership or peace between Russia and NATO. And neither is there a clear understanding of why the two sides were unable to achieve it.

Read more …

Not one country. Never was.

• The Ukrainian Border War Folly (David Stockman)

once the iron-hand of totalitarian rule ended in 1991, the deep and historically rooted conflict between Ukrainian nationalism, language and politics of the central and western regions of the country and the Russian language and historical religious and political affinities of the Donbas and south came rushing to the surface. So-called democracy barely survived these contests until February 2014 when one of Washington’s “color revolutions” finally “succeeded”. That is to say, the Washington fomented and financed nationalist-led coupe d état ended the fragile post-communist equilibrium.

That’s the true meaning of the Maidan coup. It ended the tenuous cohesion that kept the artificial state of Ukraine intact for barely two decades after the Soviet demise. So save for Washington’s destructive intervention, the partition of a communist-confected state that had never been built to last would have eventually materialized. The evidence that the Maidan coup was the coup ‘d grace for the makeshift Ukrainian state is apparent in the maps below. These maps below tell you all you need to know about why this is a civil war, not an invasion of one neighbor by another. The first map is from the 2004 presidential election, which was won by the Ukrainian nationalist candidate, Yushchenko. The latter predominated in the orange areas of the map, over the pro-Russian Yanukovych, who swept the blue regions in the east and south.

2004 Ukraine Election Results—National Divorce In The Making

The second map is from the 2010 election, showing the same stark regional split, but this time the pro-Russian candidate, Yanukovych, won. In the map below, the dark blue parts to the far east (Donbas) indicate an 80% or better vote for Viktor Yanukovych in the 2010 election. By contrast, the dark red areas in the west voted 80% or more for the Ukrainian nationalist, Yulie Tymoshenko. That is to say, the skew in the Ukrainian electorate was so extreme as to make America’s current red state/blue state divide seem hardly noteworthy by comparison. As it happened, the sum of the pro-Yanukovych skews from the east and south (Donbas and Crimea) added up to 12.48 million votes and 48.95% of the total, while the sum of the extreme red skews in the center and west (the lands of old eastern Galicia and Poland) amounted to 11.59 million votes and 45.47% of the total.

Stated differently, it is hard to imagine an electorate more sharply divided on a regional/ethnic/language basis. Yet it was one which still produced a sufficient victory margin (3.6 percentage points) for Yanukovych – so as to be reluctantly accepted by all parties. That became especially clear when Tymoshenko, who was the incumbent prime minister, withdrew her election challenge a few weeks after the run-off in February 2010. At that point, of course, Russia had no beef with the Kiev government at all because essentially Yanukovych’s “Regions Party” was based on the pro-Russian parts (blue areas) of the Ukrainian electorate. But when Washington essentially put the anti-Russian regions in charge of Ukraine’s government by orchestrating, funding and immediately recognizing the Maidan coup, everything changed on a dime. That was especially the case when the new, illegal government enshrined in its constitution a requirement to join NATO at the earliest possible opportunity.

In effect, Washington’s 2014 Maidan coup was the equivalent of Khrushchev’s emplacement of missiles in Cuba during 1962. Even had Putin been as erudite and civilized as JFK, rather than the ruffian he actually is, he would have had little choice except to insist that NATO missiles 30 minutes from Moscow cannot stand. In a word, there has been no unprovoked “invasion” by Moscow of the transitory artifact known as the Ukrainian state. The latter effectively began and ended with the Soviet Union.Moreover, with respect to the actual underlying reason for intervention in Ukraine—NATO’s proxy war against Russia– a simple question recurs: Besides restocking the NATO arsenals depleted by the demolition derby in what remains of Ukraine, what’s the reason for NATO’s war? Alas, the question answers itself. The War Capital of the World on the Potomac insists upon it, and its vassals in Europe like Ursula von der Leyen nod, jawohl!

Read more …

“..hundreds of thousands more Ukrainians to be called up into the army..”

• Tens of Thousands of Ukrainians Hiding From Draft Officers – NYT (TASS)

Tens of thousands of Ukrainian men have gone into hiding as they avoid conscription for fear of dying in the conflict involving “bloody trench warfare,” The New York Times reported on Friday. While it is not clear how many men are hiding from authorities, in big cities like Kiev and Lvov, social media groups alerting members to mobilization include tens of thousands of people, the newspaper wrote. Ukrainian men expressed fear of dying in the conflict, the NYT continued. According to the newspaper, Kiev has been sending troops without “sufficient training” to the front to replace combat losses.

Military analysts agree that a lack of adequate training makes it difficult for Kiev to hold its lines, the newspaper concluded. Ukraine announced a general mobilization in February 2022, which it has extended periodically ever since, with the country’s authorities doing their utmost to prevent men of conscription age from dodging the draft, including a ban on male residents of Ukraine from leaving the country. On May 18, a law tightening mobilization rules came into force in Ukraine, allowing hundreds of thousands more Ukrainians to be called up into the army.

Read more …

In a video I posted June 18, Jim Rickards says: “..Russia will retaliate by putting a lien on $40 trillion at the Euroclear custodian..” That’s not Russian money, but the total of what Euroclear processes. A recipe for absolute chaos.

• Belgium Warns Against Seizing Russian Money (RT)

Belgium does not support the seizure of Russian assets that have been frozen by the EU as part of Ukraine-related sanctions, the country’s Finance Minister Vincent Van Peteghem said on Friday, highlighting the mounting risks related to the move. The West froze nearly $300 billion in assets belonging to the Central Bank of Russia following the launch of Moscow’s military campaign against Ukraine in February 2022, a move denounced by Moscow as “theft.” Around $280 billion of this sum is held in the EU, primarily in the Belgium-based depositary and clearing house Euroclear. “First of all, for our country there are two elements that are important: we did not touch the assets themselves, as the ownership title change would yield consequences both on the legal side and financial side that are unknown,” Van Peteghem said during a press conference after the bloc’s ECOFIN meeting in Luxembourg.

“And second, of course, risk sharing, that I think is important in the rollout of the instruments and is a crucial element of all discussion,” the minister added. Earlier this month, the G7 nations announced that they had reached an agreement on using interest from frozen Russian assets to finance a $50 billion loan to help Kiev buy weapons and rebuild damaged infrastructure. At the time, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni said that the confiscation of the assets was not on the table. In April, Van Peteghem stated that the bloc was close to reaching a political agreement on seizing the profits generated by Russia’s central bank reserves, stressing that the first tax collection could take place as early as July 1.

The idea of seizing the frozen Russian assets has been debated by EU lawmakers and the bloc’s allies for about two years. While the US and UK have called for the outright confiscation of the funds, multiple reports suggest that EU member states remain cautious regarding the move, citing the lack of a legal basis for such a measure as well as fears that Russia will take retaliatory steps. Some top officials have reportedly warned that the drastic move could undermine investors’ confidence in the EU’s financial system. The Kremlin has denounced the push to use its immobilized funds to provide support for Ukraine. Earlier this week, Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said that Moscow has a “wide arsenal” of political and economic countermeasures it can use to respond to the potential confiscation of its sovereign assets.

Read more …

Sounds familiar.

• White Christians Being Replaced In Europe – Orban (RT)

A “militant” faction of pro-migration politicians is overseeing the “replacement” of white European Christians with Muslim immigrants, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has declared. “In Europe there is an exchange of populations, the number of white, Christian, traditional – let’s say European – people is decreasing, the number of migrants being imported and the number of people belonging to the Muslim community born here is radically increasing,” Orban told Kossuth Radio on Friday. German politician Manfred Weber, who leads the centrist European People’s Party (EPP) in the European Parliament, is the “beelzebub” responsible for this alleged scheme, Orban continued, adding that European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen is Weber’s “little servant girl” responsible for its implementation.

The EPP remained the largest faction in the European Parliament after last month’s elections. However, the decline of the Greens and a surge in support for right-wing parties has left the EPP with fewer allies with whom to pass legislation. Hours after he spoke to Kossuth Radio, Orban flew to Berlin to meet with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz ahead of Hungary assuming the EU Council’s rotating presidency next month. The Hungarian PM claimed that Germany has suffered greatly as a result of immigration, and “no longer looks like it did ten years ago.” “This Germany is no longer the Germany that our parents and grandparents held up to us as an example,” he said, adding that the country is now a “colorful, changed multicultural world” in which migrants are “no longer guests.”

Hungary’s stance on immigration has placed the country at odds with Brussels in recent years. Earlier this month, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) ordered Budapest to pay €200 million ($216 million) for failing to comply with EU asylum law, and imposed a fine of €1 million per day until Hungary fully implements the legislation. According to the court, Budapest has limited migrants’ access to asylum procedures since 2020, making the process of filing applications “virtually impossible.” “It seems that illegal migrants are more important to the Brussels bureaucrats than their own European citizens,” Orban responded, vowing to “figure out a way, so [the ruling] hurts Brussels more than it hurts us.”

Orban was criticized in the German media for his comments on Friday, with Munich’s Merkur newspaper accusing him of spreading “conspiracy myths” about immigration. The idea of a so-called ‘Great Replacement’ is often written off by liberals as a racist conspiracy theory. However, the population share of white Europeans has been decreasing across the continent since the mid-20th century, and European leaders sometimes admit that they intend to use non-European immigration to replace the aging native workforce. Speaking in Athens earlier this year, European Commissioner for Home Affairs Ylva Johansson stated that “legal migration should grow by more or less 1 million per year” to achieve this goal.

Read more …

“..the ever-eastward expansion of Nato and the European Union was giving this man a reason to his Russian people to say, ‘They’re coming for us again’ and to go to war”.

• Sunak Accuses Farage Of Appeasing Putin (BBC)

Nigel Farage’s claim the West provoked Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was “completely wrong and only plays into Putin’s hands,” Rishi Sunak has said. The prime minister accused the Reform UK leader of “appeasement” that was “dangerous for Britain’s security”. In a BBC Panorama interview, Mr Farage said that “of course” the war was President Vladimir Putin’s fault. But he added that the expansion of the EU and Nato gave Mr Putin a “reason” to tell the Russian people “they’re coming for us again”. His remarks have prompted criticism from across the political spectrum. Labour’s shadow defence secretary John Healey said they made the Reform UK leader “unfit for any political office in our country, let alone leading a serious party in Parliament.” Former Conservative defence secretary Ben Wallace described Mr Farage as “pub bore”, who did not understand the “real world” of politics.

Speaking on an election campaign visit in London, Mr Sunak said: “What he (Mr Farage) said was completely wrong and only plays into Putin’s hands.”He added: “This is a man (Mr Putin) who deployed nerve agent on the streets of Britain, who is doing deals with countries like North Korea, and this kind of appeasement is dangerous for Britain’s security, the security of our allies that rely on us, and only emboldens Putin further.” In his Panorama interview, the former UKIP and Brexit Party leader was asked by Nick Robinson about his past comments on Mr Putin. “I said I disliked him as a person, but I admired him as a political operator because he’s managed to take control of running Russia,” he replied. He said it had been “obvious” to him for many years “that the ever-eastward expansion of Nato and the European Union was giving this man a reason to his Russian people to say, ‘They’re coming for us again’ and to go to war”.

Pressed further, he added: “We provoked this war. It’s, you know, of course it’s his fault – he’s used what we’ve done as an excuse.” After the interview aired on Friday, Mr Farage, a former member of the European Parliament, said on X that he was “one of the few figures that have been consistent and honest about the war with Russia”.Alongside the new statement, he reposted a speech in the European Parliament from 2014 in which he called for the West to “stop playing war games with Putin. “The Ukrainian presidency has told the BBC it will not be putting out an official statement on Mr Farage’s comments. But a source in the presidential office warned about the “virus of Putinism and the rise of war propaganda”, adding: “The task of civilized humanity is to fight this virus in the bud.”

Reform UK has been gaining ground on the Conservatives in the opinion polls since Mr Farage announced he was returning to front-line politics as the party’s leader shortly after the general election campaign got under way.
He has said his aim is for Reform to replace the Conservatives as the official opposition to Labour, which he says is certain to gain power on 4 July, although polling suggests the party may win only handful of seats at this election.

Read more …

“..its co-founder, Larry Sanger, saying last year that the website had become an instrument of “control” used by the US intelligence agencies to wage information warfare..”

• Wikipedia’s Political Bias Spreading To AI (RT)

Wikipedia’s tendency to negatively portray right-wing political figures is feeding into AI large language models (LLMs) that harvest data from the online encyclopedia, a US-based conservative think-tank has claimed. A report released on Thursday by the Manhattan Institute looked at evidence of political bias in English-language articles on Wikipedia, by correlating the names of Western leaders and prominent politicians with emotion-laden words. The study found “prevailing associations of negative emotions (e.g., anger and disgust) with right-leaning public figures; and positive emotions (e.g., joy) with left-leaning public figures,” suggesting “evidence of political bias embedded in Wikipedia articles.” “We find some of the aforementioned political associations embedded in Wikipedia articles popping up in OpenAI’s language models,” the report concluded.

The researchers noted that Wikipedia articles are likely a prominent part of OpenAI’s “secret corpus of data” used to train ChatGPT. The report acknowledges, however, that this pattern is not universal, and is more common in articles about US political figures, while there was no evidence of Wikipedia bias in entries on British politicians or US-based think tanks. For example, in references to recent US presidents, Donald Trump – now the Republican presidential frontrunner – was portrayed with the most negative sentiment, while Barack Obama was listed as having the most positive references. The report concluded that Wikipedia “is not living up to its stated neutral-point-of-view policy.”

The policy referred to, which Wikipedia describes as one of the pillars of the encyclopedia, stipulates that articles must exclude personal opinions and interpretations of the editor, be based on reliable sources, and explore multiple points of view when dealing with a controversial topic. Wikipedia has been repeatedly criticized for its supposedly biased takes on hot-button political issues, with its co-founder, Larry Sanger, saying last year that the website had become an instrument of “control” used by the US intelligence agencies to wage information warfare.

Read more …

“What is now left for Hunter are sentencing guidelines that strongly support jail time and a judge who has imposed such jail time in past cases..”

• The Supreme Court Swatted Down Hunter Biden’s Hail Mary Pass (Turley)

While the result in Washington was not as bad as the unanimous decision in Delaware, it may well have sealed his fate on appeal. U.S. District Judge Maryellen Noreika did not leave him much for appeal in overseeing a fair and textbook trial. The Biden legal team had been counting on Hail Mary passes since a Special Counsel was appointed. It almost worked. Special Counsel David Weiss seemed to work hard to avoid any felony charges against the president’s son. The Justice Department not only allowed the statute of limitations to run on major crimes, but sought to finalize an obscene plea agreement with no jail time for Hunter. In the hearing to accept the plea, Judge Noreika decided to ask a couple of cursory questions of the prosecutor, particularly about a sweeping immunity provision covering any and all crimes committed by Hunter.

The prosecutor admitted that he had never seen an agreement this generous for a defendant. The plea fell apart and the Biden team seemed unwilling to accept anything but a single throw victory. They told the prosecutor in court “just rip it up.” The Biden legal team then blundered in taking the case to trial with a jury nullification strategy. Some of us wrote that Hunter needed to plead guilty to avoid jail time. Instead, they hoped that a Delaware jury in Bidentown could never convict a Biden. They were wrong. That left the last pass to the Supreme Court, which just seemed to land in the stadium seats. In reality, it was never a strong throw. After all, Hunter was convicted for lying on gun forms, something that the Court was never likely to excuse.

What is now left for Hunter are sentencing guidelines that strongly support jail time and a judge who has imposed such jail time in past cases. The other group of people that may be even more upset with this ruling may be many in the media and Congress. Once again, the Court has shattered the false narrative that this is a hopelessly divided Court along ideological lines. This month the Court has continued to rule unanimously or nearly unanimously, including in cases like Rahimi in controversial constitutional claims. Instead, the Court rendered a reasonable, balanced accommodation for public safety under the Second Amendment. It is not clear who is more disappointed: Hunter or the Court critics.

Read more …

The New World Order can’t meme anymore than the left..

• Common Sense And Memes Are Viruses To The New World Order (Lynn)

Relativism, undeniably, trends in modernity. And Orwell was right: “The essential act of war is destruction, not necessarily of human lives, but of the products of human labour. War is a way of shattering to pieces, or pouring into the stratosphere, or sinking in the depths of the sea, materials which might otherwise be used to make the masses too comfortable, and hence, in the long run, too intelligent.” Orwell, George, ”1984”: part 2, chapter 9. So whether by Marxism or any other form of secular utopianism: The goals are always out with the “old” and in with the “new”. Order out of chaos. Dissolve and coagulate. Also like Orwell’s “1984”: The world’s global societal power structure is stratified into concentric rings of power. The Inner Party functions to continuously preserve and enrich itself; as the Outer Party (i.e. those following orders) and the Proles are utilized and cannibalized when necessary.

The circles of power have become increasingly interconnected in modernity; and technology allows the Inner Party to launch policies that are enforced by the Outer Party and unto the Proles. This process is also called “history”. The Outer Party depends upon the Inner Party for survival and it always remains a difficult challenge to convince the Proles of something they can’t, or won’t, see. As a result, history unwinds in inevitable, cyclical waves. Yet, the Inner Party has survived for generations – even before the establishment of the Federal Reserve in 1913 and its unleashing of the modern Fractional Reserve Banking monster. Slavery is rooted in economics; and so the Inner Party uses debt to implement and expand its various wars. The rich get richer as the poor suffer, starve, and die. While driving the other day, I listened to an “expert” on AM radio discussing the vast increase of carbon in Earth’s atmosphere and the conclusion was this: “Climate Change is real!” The radio voice seemed very confident in its conclusions and, by implication, it was ready to do everything necessary to stop what it perceived as a genuine threat. Always the same dialectics, again and again.

Is America having seizures? Or postmortem convulsions? At this point in time, I am convinced it’s the latter. While in communication with a retired retarded professor, she expressed exasperation at those who still plan to vote for Trump. After all, he was convicted by a jury of his peers and is now a convicted felon. In response, and from memory, I typed out a meme I saw on the internet: “He lived over 70 years without a criminal record. But when he ran for president he was charged with over 90 crimes! How can you explain that?” Silence. But… oops! Did you notice what I did there? Did you see how the Inner Party’s phony dialectics had me defending the proud promoter of Operation Warp Speed®?

When it was revealed that U.S. Senate ratification was required for the World Health Organization’s (WHO) Pandemic “Treaty”, it was, instead, transitioned into an “agreement”. Except that strategy went down in flames, too, at the WHO’s 77th World Health Assembly. In response, Team Biden, China, and other unelected WHO totalitarians stealthily passed new International Health Regulations (IHR) behind closed doors. This was done on June 1, 2024 in Geneva, Switzerland. The Ethiopian Communist, and WHO Director, Tedros Ghebreyesus, violated the IHR’s Article 55.2 eligibility requirements and with less than the required quorum of member states voting. This power grab was completely illegal and unlawfully elevated the WHO “from a global advisory-only body to an international enforcer of its mandates.” So we all better get the word out, before it’s too late. Especially now that it’s another election year so flu season is almost here.

Read more …

“Turning on a practically endless faucet of cash for a friend and then being criticized because it wasn’t endless enough..”

• Bibi Is Needy (DeMartino)

On Tuesday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin ‘Bibi’ Netanyahu released a video complaining about a short-lived pause of one weapon shipment from the United States. In the video, he directly criticized the administration of US President Joe Biden. “It is inconceivable that in the past few months, the administration has been withholding weapons and ammunitions to Israel,” The Israeli Prime Minister said, despite the United States being the largest provider of weapons to Israel and its most stalwart defender on the international stage. The White House canceled a meeting with high-ranking Israeli officials in response and attempted to assure the public that it had not stopped sending weapons to a country that has been accused of genocide by several nations. The decision to delay one shipment of weapons was in response to Israel’s decision to go forward with its Rafah invasion, despite pressure from the United States to hold off.

Biden has been dealing with protests over the US supplying weapons to Israel, but the pause on one shipment seemingly did nothing to slow Israel’s campaign. More than 6% of the Gaza population has been killed, seriously injured or remains missing. Turning on a practically endless faucet of cash for a friend and then being criticized because it wasn’t endless enough must be a familiar experience for Biden. Ukraine’s illegitimate President Volodymyr Zelensky complained earlier this year that aid from the US, which he had already received well over $110 billion worth, was arriving too slowly. But, considering who his family is, he is probably used to it. Last year, texts between Biden and his son Hunter were revealed that showed the younger Biden– despite earning millions allegedly on the back of his father’s name– complaining about being broke and asking his uncle James Biden for money.

Read more …

“The British have presented no evidence of Novichok on the Skripal home door handle; in the blood, skin, and urine testing of the Skripals in hospital; or in subsequent inquest and court proceedings..”

• UK Invents Phantom Skripals To Refuse To Testify In Novichok Inquiry (Helmer)

A new lawyer appeared in a London court on Friday claiming to represent Sergei and Yulia Skripal. Jack Holborn, a barrister specializing in what he calls human rights, told Lord Anthony Hughes, who is conducting a public inquiry into the alleged Novichok death of Dawn Sturgess in 2018, that the Skripals should not be called to give evidence or testify in the case. Holborn claimed the Skripals are fearful for their security. “No security measures are perfect”, he said. Holborn has not been in contact with the Skripals, however. He refuses to answer questions put to him on what visual contact or other communications he has had with either Sergei or Yulia Skripal. Instead, he was told what to say at the hearing by the law firm of Kingsley Napley which the British government is paying to show that the Skripals are participating in the Novichok case. The spokesman for Hughes and the inquiry was asked to explain Holborn’s presence in court for the first time on Friday. She was also asked what authority the Skripals had given Holborn to represent them.

The spokesman answered: “Kingsley Napley has been designated as the recognised legal representative of the Skripals under r[ule] 6 of the Inquiry Rules 2006. By rule 8, the recognised legal representative may appoint a team to assist them and Kingsley Napley have accordingly instructed counsel to appear on their clients’ behalf.”. In other words, there has been no contact between the lawyers who say they represent the Skripals, and the Skripals themselves. The judge and government are refusing to give evidence that Sergei Skripal is alive, and that Yulia Skripal is not in prison. The problem for the British Government is that if the Skripals are allowed to give live evidence at the Hughes inquiry, there is no telling what they may say to contradict or discredit the six-year official narrative of the Russian Novichok attack in England. The lawyer for the inquiry, Andrew O’Connor KC, told Hughes on Friday morning this was a “difficult question as to whether either or both of Sergei and Julia Skripal should give oral evidence.”

He also acknowledged there was the same problem in revealing what the Skripals have already said. “In the case of the Skripals, the transcripts of their police interviews have not yet been provided to CPs [Concerned Parties] but will be very shortly.” In fact, the Skripal transcripts will be so redacted, the officials and lawyers admitted in court, it is uncertain what the Skripals believe had happened to them, and why. Release of the redacted Skripal transcripts from March of 2018 risks being contradicted by fresh written statements to the Hughes inquiry from the Skripals, so that form of testimony is also being barred. Since March 4, 2018, when the Skripals slumped unconscious on a Salisbury town bench and were kept in hospital under police guard, three British prime ministers — Theresa May, Boris Johnson, and Rishi Sunak — have continued the story that three Russian military officers attacked the Skripals with a Novichok nerve agent they had brought by plane into England, and sprayed on to the door handle of Sergei Skripal’s home; that was several hours before he and his daughter showed symptoms and collapsed.

The British have presented no evidence of Novichok on the Skripal home door handle; in the blood, skin, and urine testing of the Skripals in hospital; or in subsequent inquest and court proceedings. The alleged Russian attack weapon – a perfume bottle atomiser – did not materialize for months until July 2018, when police claim to have found it on a kitchen bench in the home of another alleged victim, Dawn Sturgess, ten days – repeat ten days — after exhaustive police searches of the house had failed to find it. Sergei Skripal has not been seen in public since the day of the alleged Novichok attack, March 4, 2018. He has not been heard on the telephone by family members in Russia since June 26, 2019. Yulia Skripal was last seen in a government-directed interview at a US bomber base in England in May 2018; her last telephone call to Russia was heard on November 20, 2020. The Skripals have not been seen or heard from since.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Off-switch
https://twitter.com/i/status/1804219814627471641

 

 

Aurus

 

 

Only men

 

 

Brahmaputra
https://twitter.com/i/status/1804372316085981370

 

 

Coral
https://twitter.com/i/status/1804467986520002771

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle October 20 2019

Oct 202019
 
 October 20, 2019  Posted by at 9:45 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , ,  20 Responses »


Rembrandt van Rijn The three trees 1643

 

• Hillary Clinton Bails On DC Event That Tulsi Gabbard Is Attending (NYP)
• Dems Introduce Legislation To Block G7 Summit At Trump’s Doral Resort (Fox)
• Trump Ditches Plan To Host G7 At Doral Resort: ‘Irrational Hostility’ (G.)
• Trump Campaign Mocks Outrage Over Mulvaney Comments With T-Shirts (ZH)
• UK PM Sends Unsigned Request For Brexit Delay (BBC)
• Brexit Delay And Election Better Than Johnson’s Deal – Farage (R.)
• Parliament Tethers Britain to a Failing Experiment (OffG)
• “European Values” Is Slang For “European Power” (OffG)
• Libor Rigging Inquiry Shut Down By Serious Fraud Office (BBC)
• Boeing Board To Meet In Texas As Scrutiny Intensifies (R.)
• The Not-Com Bubble Is Popping (Atl.)
• Iraq Cleric Sadr Urges Supporters To Continue Anti-Government Protests (Rudaw)
• 10 Australia MPs Join Forces To Bring Home Julian Assange (DT.au)

 

 

NOTE: none of the people in the clip below have denied beating their wives.

• Hillary Clinton Bails On DC Event That Tulsi Gabbard Is Attending (NYP)

It looks like the “Queen of Warmongers” blinked. A face-to-face confrontation between Hillary Clinton and Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard set for next Friday was averted when Clinton backed out of the Fortune Most Powerful Women Summit in Washington, DC. Clinton aides cited a scheduling conflict when she announced her withdrawal from a speaking slot at the annual event. One insider told Slate that Clinton dropped out to protest the inclusion of former Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielson on the schedule. But Gabbard is on the bill, too — and Clinton’s pull-out came just hours after the former Secretary of State on Friday accused the Hawaii Democrat of being the “favorite of the Russians” on a podcast.


“I think they’ve got their eye on somebody who is currently in the Democratic primary and are grooming her to be the third-party candidate,” Clinton said. Gabbard fired back with a venomous tweet. “Thank you @HillaryClinton,” she posted. “You, the queen of warmongers, embodiment of corruption, and personification of the rot that has sickened the Democratic Party for so long, have finally come out from behind the curtain.” Gabbard continued the retort during an appearance on Tucker Carlson Tonight: “The reason why she’s doing this is because ultimately she knows she can’t control me. I stand against everything that she represents.”

Read more …

And these people have no idea when they’re being uber trolled. They use their political clout to spend taxpayer money on hot air.

• Dems Introduce Legislation To Block G7 Summit At Trump’s Doral Resort (Fox)

A trio of House Democrats introduced legislation Friday to block President Trump from hosting next year’s G7 summit at one of his Florida resorts. Reps. Lois Frankel from Florida, Bennie Thompson from Mississippi and Steve Cohen from Tennessee proposed the Trump’s Heist Undermines the G-7 (THUG) Act. A companion bill sponsored by Sens. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., and Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., will be introduced in the Senate, according to lawmakers. The House bill would prohibit funding for the three-day summit at Trump National Doral Golf Club in June. It would also require Trump to submit to Congress documents related to the decision to host the summit at Doral, lawmakers said.


 “[Trump] is unashamed of his corruption,” Frankel said in a press release. “He is abusing the office of the presidency and violating law by directing millions of dollars of American and foreign money to his family enterprises by holding an important meeting of world leaders at his Doral resort.” Acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney made the announcement on Thursday that next year’s G7 meeting will be held at Doral June 10-12. Mulvaney said the decision will save taxpayers millions because the resort will provide its services at cost. Democratic lawmakers claimed Friday that past G7 summits have cost “upwards of $40 million.”

Read more …

Meanwhile, the press and the Democrats have provided Trump with first of all a big laugh, plus an enormous amount of free advertizing for his resort. And they’re all righteous about it, they celebrate it as a major victory. Here’s the Guardian: “Donald Trump has been forced into a humiliating climbdown”.. Good god. Ditch the blinders.

• Trump Ditches Plan To Host G7 At Doral Resort: ‘Irrational Hostility’ (G.)

Donald Trump has been forced into a humiliating climbdown over plans to host the G7 meeting at his own luxury resort following a political outcry. The US president announced in a Saturday night tweet that he had reversed his decision and would seek an alternative venue to host world leaders next June. The move represented a rare admission of defeat by Trump, who typically digs in and fights to defend every controversial statement and policy. Even in his concession, the president complained bitterly that he thought he was “doing something very good for our country” by choosing the Trump National Doral, near Miami, to host G7 leaders.

“It is big, grand, on hundreds of acres, next to Miami international airport, has tremendous ballrooms & meeting rooms, and each delegation would have … its own 50 to 70 unit building,” he tweeted. Trump added that he had announced he would do it at no profit and at no cost to the US but, he claimed, both the media and Democrats had reacted unreasonably. “… Therefore, based on both media & Democrat crazed and irrational hostility, we will no longer consider Trump National Doral, Miami, as the host site for the G-7 in 2020,” the president continued. “We will begin the search for another site, including the possibility of Camp David, immediately. Thank you!”

The choice of the Trump National Doral was widely condemned as the most egregious example yet of the president abusing his position to enrich himself and his business. The resort was in need of a boost: in May the Washington Post reported that Doral’s operating income had fallen 69% since 2015. Trump’s u-turn was welcomed by ethics watchdogs. Noah Bookbinder, executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, said: “President Trump’s decision to award the G7 Conference to his own property was outrageous, corrupt and a constitutional violation. “It was stunningly corrupt even for a stunningly corrupt administration. His reversal of that decision is a bow to reality, but does not change how astonishing it was that a president ever thought this was appropriate, or that it was something he could get away with.”

Read more …

And of course the trolling continues, certainly after the success of the Doral narrative.

• Trump Campaign Mocks Outrage Over Mulvaney Comments With T-Shirts (ZH)

The Trump campaign’s latest trolling (after selling plastic straws and “Where’s Hunter?” T-shirts) comes after acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney told reporters last week that there’s “going to be political influence in foreign policy,” suggesting that the media “get over it.” In response, the Trump campaign turned Mulvaney’s comment into yet another T-shirt, as the rest of the media foused on his seeming admission that there was a quid pro quo with Ukraine. “Did he also mention to me in past the corruption related to the DNC server? Absolutely,” Mulvaney told reporters. “No question about that. But that’s it, and that’s why we held up the money.”


This was quickly seized on by White House reporters, who said Mulvaney described a quid pro quo for holding up security assistance to Ukraine unless the country’s alleged involvement with the DNC server was investigated. Mulvaney, later retracted his statement – saying “Let me be clear, there was absolutely no quid pro quo between Ukrainian military aid and any investigation into the 2016 election. The president never told me to withhold any money until the Ukrainians did anything related to the server.”

Read more …

Is there anybody left who knows where things stand? This move feels convoluted. 1 million protesters yesterday in London.

• UK PM Sends Unsigned Request For Brexit Delay (BBC)

Boris Johnson has sent a request to the EU for a delay to Brexit – but without his signature. The request was accompanied by a second letter, signed by Mr Johnson, which says he believes that a delay would be a mistake. The PM was required by law to ask the EU for an extension to the 31 October deadline after losing a Commons vote. EU Council President Donald Tusk tweeted that he had received the extension request. He added he would now consult EU leaders “on how to react”. Hours after losing a crunch vote in a historic Saturday session in the House of Commons, the prime minister ordered a senior diplomat to send an unsigned photocopy of the request for a delay, which was forced on him by MPs last month.


The second letter from Mr Johnson – signed off this time – makes clear he personally believes a delay would be a mistake. It says the government will press on with efforts to pass the revised Brexit deal agreed with EU leaders last week into law, and that he is confident of doing so by 31 October. A cover note from Sir Tim Barrow, the UK’s representative in Brussels, explained the first letter complied with the law as agreed by Parliament. The prime minister previously said he would “rather be dead in a ditch” than ask the EU to delay Brexit. BBC Political Editor Laura Kuenssberg described the decision to send three documents as “controversial”, predicting “there will be a fight about whether Boris Johnson is trying to circumvent the court”. She added: “This is heading straight for the court, and it may very quickly end up in the Supreme Court.

Read more …

Farage thinks he can win bigly in the elction.

• Brexit Delay And Election Better Than Johnson’s Deal – Farage (R.)

Brexit Party leader Nigel Farage said on Sunday a short delay to Brexit in order to hold a national election would be better than accepting Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s deal. “I want to leave on the 31 of October, but I’ll warn everybody that if this treaty goes through nothing will have changed at all, and I think far better to have a short delay and a general election where we might solve this,” Farage told Sky News, adding that Johnson’s deal was “rotten” and “not Brexit”.

Read more …

I like this from OffGuardian. We need alternative views. Part is on Britain…

• Parliament Tethers Britain to a Failing Experiment (OffG)

Brexit isn’t going to happen. Left or Right – Lexit or Rexit – it’s over. It’s time to make peace with that idea. Penned in by the absurd Benn Act, No Deal is off the table, which means Britain will be forced to either remain or accept a deal that’s Remain by another name. The Letwin Ammendment and Johnson’s unsigned extension request are just morbid theatre. Unneccasary nails in a well-sealed coffin. It’s all very Weekend at Bernies’ – A lame cast of characters, puppeteering Brexit’s corpse to keep up a tired joke that was never funny to begin with. Parliament has become an absurd pantomime, where a clown Prime Minister – his majority willfully destroyed – sets up straw men that the “opposition” bayonet with increasingly maniacal glee.

No thought is given to policy or consequences, only increasing the tally of Boris Johnson’s parliamentary defeats. Labour, and the bedraggled, hysterical remainers in the Lib Dems/TIG/Green Party, have become nothing but contrarians – automatically gain-saying anything tabled by the government for the simple joy of humiliating the nation’s Court Jester in Chief. Corbyn has been so successfully gaslighted by his remain-heavy PLP he doesn’t even realise he’s betraying his life-long principles, his mentor Tony Benn, and entire swaths of the Labour’s Northern heartlands, who all voted to leave. When a general election does come, it will mean nothing.

Labour will likely be destroyed as working-class voters either flock to the Brexit Party or simply collapse into the apathy of the voiceless, and stay home. If Labour scrapes together enough voters from Remain country in Scotland and London to claw their way to a small majority, well their socialist manifesto will be crippled by the EU’s austerity policy and restrictions on nationalisation. In either event, Corbyn will be replaced by a New Labour non-entity of little renown and less worth. The papers will declare socialism dead (again), and maybe clap Corbyn on the shoulder for doing “well, considering” and “changing the conversation”.

Read more …

…and Kit Knightly unloads on the EU as well.. (2nd part of same article)

• “European Values” Is Slang For “European Power” (OffG)

France is miserable, sick of austerity. Sick of spending cuts and falling standards and neo-liberal economics promising a trickle-down that never seems to come. In Paris – and many other French cities – the Yellow Vests are nearing their fiftieth straight week of protests, and don’t seem to be slowing down (Hopefully they plan something nice for their first birthday). People have lost eyes, hands, even lives. The Hong Kong protests – so long front-page news in the UK – have been a picnic in comparison. In Hungary, an elected President is held hostage by the bureaucracy of the EU. Whatever you think of Orban, he was democratically elected to enact the political promises he made during his campaign.

That Brussels can sanction him, and threaten to remove Hungary’s voting rights, is perverse. Anti-democracy in the name of democracy. They say it’s about “protecting European values”, but is it? That’s pretty hard to believe, considering the situation elsewhere in Europe… Spain will join France in the flames soon. They already sent thirteen politicians to prison for sedition. Take a moment to consider that – actual “sedition”. This comes after sending in riot police to break up a peaceful referendum. Spanish police beat voters, arrested protesters and destroyed ballot boxes. Madrid has faced no punishment, or even criticism, for this. They – unlike Orban – have escaped any sanction or censure.

Police attack Catalonian independence protests on the streets of Barcelona…and Brussels’ silence is deafening. (Imagine Russia had just jailed 13 opposition politicians for sedition. Imagine Maduro was blinding protestors with rubber bullets. The difference in coverage and attitude would be breathtaking.) What is the difference between Budapest and Paris? Or Moscow and Madrid? Well, Orban is anti-EU (as are the Gilets Jaunes). The governments of France and Spain are Pro EU, with a ferocity that fully justifies the capital P. Follow a pro-EU agenda of austerity, uncontrolled immigration and globalisation and you can blind as many protesters as you want. The harder you look, the more it seems “European values” is slang for “European power”.

Read more …

Just a rumor: “The decision comes because of evidence that implicates the Bank of England”

• Libor Rigging Inquiry Shut Down By Serious Fraud Office (BBC)

An investigation into the rigging of Libor, the benchmark interest rate that tracks the cost of borrowing cash, has been unexpectedly closed. The decision comes despite evidence that implicates the Bank of England. It means no one will now be prosecuted in the UK for so-called “low-balling”, where banks understate interest rates they pay to borrow cash. The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) said its decision followed a detailed review of the evidence. Thirteen traders and money brokers were prosecuted over four years by the SFO in connection with rigging Libor.


Six have been prosecuted by the US Department of Justice (DoJ). A further 11 traders have been prosecuting for manipulating Euribor, the eurozone equivalent of Libor. The SFO said aspects of its Euribor investigation remain open. In a statement, the SFO said: “Following a thorough investigation and a detailed review of the available evidence, there will be no further charges brought in this case. This decision was taken in line with the test in the Code for Crown Prosecutors.” The code states that the evidence must support a realistic prospect of conviction and must be in the public interest.

Read more …

The people who demanded the cost cuts that led to the drama now get together to fire a few 1000 employees. They should first fire themselves.

• Boeing Board To Meet In Texas As Scrutiny Intensifies (R.)

Boeing Co’s board of directors and top executives from its airplanes division and supply chain were due to meet on Sunday in San Antonio, Texas, two days after the U.S. planemaker was plunged into a fresh crisis over its banned 737 MAX jet. The meeting comes as pressure mounts on the world’s largest planemaker not only from investigations into the 737 MAX following two deadly crashes, but also from the financial burden caused by the jet’s safety ban and continued high production. Several industry sources said there was speculation inside the company of significant job cuts as Boeing, unable to deliver 737 MAX planes to customers, continues to drain cash.


And although Boeing has so far told suppliers it expects to maintain a production rate of 42 single-aisles monthly with plans to increase to a record level next near, rates may have to come down if regulators further delay the MAX’s return to service, the people said. The schedule for the board’s face-to-face meetings was set for Sunday and Monday in San Antonio, one of the people said, two days before Boeing reports earnings on Oct. 23. The week after, Boeing Chief Executive Officer Dennis Muilenburg – who was stripped of his job as board chairman eight days ago – is due to testify before U.S. Congress about the plane’s development.

Read more …

WeWork is not a mass mania?

• The Not-Com Bubble Is Popping (Atl.)

It is easy to look at today’s crop of sinking IPOs—like Uber, Lyft, and Peloton—or scuttled public offerings, like WeWork, and see an eerie resemblance to the dot-com bubble that popped in 2000. Both then and now, consumer-tech companies spent lavishly on advertising and struggled to find a path to profit. Both then and now, companies that bragged about their ability to change the world admitted suddenly that they were running out of money. Both then and now, the valuations of once-heralded tech enterprises were halved in a matter of weeks. Both then and now, there was a widespread sense of euphoria curdling into soberness, washed down with the realization that thousands of workers in once-promising firms were poised to lose their jobs.

But if you look closer, today’s correction isn’t much like the dot-com bubble at all. In fact, it might be more accurate to say that what’s happening today is the very opposite of the dot-com bubble. Let’s first understand what exactly that bubble was: a mania of stock speculation, in which ordinary investors—from taxi drivers to Laundromat owners to shoe-shiners—bid up the price of internet-related companies for no good reason other than “because, internet.” Companies realized that they could boost their stock price by simply adding the prefix e- (as in “e-Bay”) or the suffix com (as in Amazon.com) to their corporate names to entice, and arguably fool, nonprofessionals. “Americans could hardly run an errand without picking up a stock tip,” The New York Times reported in its postmortem.

[..] When the web browser Netscape went public on August 9, 1995—the day many cite as the beginning of the dot-com bubble—its stock skyrocketed from $28 to $75 in a matter of hours, even though the company wasn’t profitable. In today’s market, the opposite is happening: Unicorns with no positive earnings are getting slaughtered at the gates. WeWork’s valuation fell more than 80 percent pre-IPO when investors balked at its mounting losses. Peloton, Lyft, and Uber have also struggled to persuade public markets to grade them on a curve; all saw their stock prices fall on the day of the public offering. Institutions and retail investors are refusing to fork over to unicorns the valuations that private investors were expecting—particularly Softbank, a major backer of Uber, Lyft, and WeWork. This isn’t a picture of mass mania. It’s a picture of public sobriety, where the masses are diagnosing an acute fever in private markets.

Read more …

My list of mass protests yesterday included Chili, Ecuador, Lebanon, Barcelona, France, London, Puerto Rico, Hong Kong. Today we can add Iraq.

• Iraq Cleric Sadr Urges Supporters To Continue Anti-Government Protests (Rudaw)

Firebrand Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr has called on Iraqis to resume the nationwide protests against corruption, unemployment, and the lack of public services. Several of Iraq’s central and southern cities, including the capital Baghdad, were rocked by violent protests in early October, which left at least 108 dead and more than 6,000 injured. In a long statement published on his Facebook page late on Saturday, Sadr called on his supporters and the public to return to the streets on Friday, October 25 to resume the protests.


Sadr is head of the Sayirun alliance, the largest bloc in the Iraqi parliament. He is also head of the Saraya al-Salam militia, which is part of Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) umbrella, also known as Hashd al-Shaabi in Arabic. “The government leaders and politicians are in a state of fear because of you, they are completely unable to fix anything within this country,” Sadr’s statement read. “Therefore, I ask everyone to start the revolution which will clean Iraq from corrupters and fools.” Sadr has withdrawn his backing for the government of Adil Abdul-Mahdi in the wake of the protests and called for fresh elections. He accused Iraq’s top politicians of being under the influence of foreign powers – particularly arch rivals Iran and the United States.

Read more …

Is something positive happening? I’m not holding my breath for Australia to stand up to the US.

• 10 Australia MPs Join Forces To Bring Home Julian Assange (DT.au)

A group of 10 MPs from across the political spectrum have joined forces to form a Parliamentary Working Group focused on bringing home Wikileaks founder Julian Assange. LNP member George Christensen and independent Andrew Wilkie have agreed to be co-chairs and have put forward the proposed group for approval from the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives. It is understood the group includes Nationals MP Barnaby Joyce, members of the Labor Party and the cross bench. Mr Wilkie told News Corp Australia he hopes the group will raise the profile of Assange’s case and educate the public.

He believes people who may have been wary of Assange because of the rape allegations levelled against him will change their view when they know what is happening. He said Assange has not been charged with rape and the attempts to extradite him to the US have nothing to do with those allegations. Assange, 48, faces 18 counts in the US including conspiring to hack government computers and violating an espionage law. Australian Barrister Greg Barnes, who is acting as an Adviser to the Assange campaign said: “People are quite naive and misunderstand what is going on.” “If the United States get their way, he will probably be tried in secret, in a kangaroo court and given life in jail.”

The formation of the group comes ahead of Assange’s scheduled court appearance in London on Monday and calls for the Federal Government to intervene on Assange’s behalf. Assange is being detained in one of Britain’s toughest prisons Belmarsh and his legal team have warned his health is deteriorating. A full extradition hearing is not expected to go ahead until February. Mr Barnes said it is the first time that the US has sought to use its laws to prosecute a person who did not commit an act in a US jurisdiction or have any links to the US. “It is a dangerous step and it means that any journalist or person who publishes material deemed to be classified under US espionage laws could be prosecuted irrespective of having any link to the US.”

Read more …

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle October 7 2019

Oct 072019
 
 October 7, 2019  Posted by at 9:30 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,  23 Responses »


Print your own Assange mask

 

• The ‘Whistleblower’ Probably Isn’t (Taibbi)
• DNC Colluded With Ukraine To Boost Hillary By Harming Trump – Report (DWire)
• Bob Woodward: GOP Senators ‘Choking’ On Trump-Ukraine Scandal (WE)
• In Last Minute Call, Erdogan Agrees To Meet Trump Over Syria ‘Safe Zone’ (ZH)
• Arise, Commissioner Farage! (Pol.eu)
• Brexit Border Talk Stirs Up Bad Memories In Northern Ireland (G.)
• An Actual Conspiracy Kept Jeffrey Epstein’s Accomplices out of Prison
• Chinese Farmers Raise Mutant Pigs The Size Of Polar Bears (ZH)
• Lula’s Prosecutors Request His Release From Prison. He Refuses. (Greenwald)

 

 

Not even close.

• The ‘Whistleblower’ Probably Isn’t (Taibbi)

Start with the initial headline, in the story the Washington Post “broke” on September 18th: “TRUMP’S COMMUNICATIONS WITH FOREIGN LEADER ARE PART OF WHISTLEBLOWER COMPLAINT THAT SPURRED STANDOFF BETWEEN SPY CHIEF AND CONGRESS, FORMER OFFICIALS SAY”. The unnamed person at the center of this story sure didn’t sound like a whistleblower. Our intelligence community wouldn’t wipe its ass with a real whistleblower. Americans who’ve blown the whistle over serious offenses by the federal government either spend the rest of their lives overseas, like Edward Snowden, end up in jail, like Chelsea Manning, get arrested and ruined financially, like former NSA official Thomas Drake, have their homes raided by FBI like disabled NSA vet William Binney, or get charged with espionage like ex-CIA exposer-of-torture John Kiriakou.


It’s an insult to all of these people, and the suffering they’ve weathered, to frame the ballcarrier in the Beltway’s latest partisan power contest as a whistleblower. I’ve met a lot of whistleblowers, in both the public and private sector. Many end up broke, living in hotels, defamed, (often) divorced, and lucky if they have any kind of job. One I knew got turned down for a waitressing job because her previous employer wouldn’t vouch for her. She had little kids. The common thread in whistleblower stories is loneliness. Typically the employer has direct control over their ability to pursue another job in their profession. Many end up reviled as traitors, thieves, and liars. They often discover after going public that their loved ones have a limited appetite for sharing the ignominy. In virtually all cases, they end up having to start over, both personally and professionally.

Read more …

When will the MSM start publishing about the “DNC-UKRAINE SCANDAL”? The Director of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine was convicted in Ukraine for interfering in the U.S. presidential election in 2016…

• DNC Colluded With Ukraine To Boost Hillary By Harming Trump – Report (DWire)

The Blaze has released an audio recording that they recently obtained that appears to show Artem Sytnyk, Director of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine, admitting that he tried to boost the presidential campaign of Hillary Clinton by sabotaging then-candidate Donald Trump’s campaign. The connection between the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and the Ukrainian government was veteran Democratic operative Alexandra Chalupa, “who had worked in the White House Office of Public Liaison during the Clinton administration” and then “went on to work as a staffer, then as a consultant, for Democratic National Committee,” Politico reported.

Chalupa was working directly with the Ukrainian embassy in the United States to raise concerns about Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort and, according to Politico, she indicated that the Embassy was working “directly with reporters researching Trump, Manafort and Russia to point them in the right directions.” The Ukrainian embassy political officer who worked at the embassy at the time, Andrii Telizhenko, stated that the Ukrainians “were coordinating an investigation with the Hillary team on Paul Manafort with Alexandra Chalupa” and that “the embassy worked very closely with” Chalupa. The Blaze highlighted an email from WikiLeaks from Chalupa to Louise Miranda at the DNC:


“Hey, a lot coming down the pipe. I spoke to a delegation of 68 investigative journalists from Ukraine last night at the Library of Congress, the Open World Society forum. They put me on the program to speak specifically about Paul Manafort. I invited Michael Isikoff, who I’ve been working with for the past few weeks, and connected him to the Ukrainians. More offline tomorrow, since there was a big Trump component you and Lauren need to be aware of that will hit in the next few weeks. Something I’m working on that you should be aware of.” The Blaze then reported that Sytnyk, who eventually “was tried and convicted in Ukraine for interfering in the U.S. presidential election in 2016,” released a “black ledger” on Manafort during the 2016 presidential election that eventually led to Manafort’s downfall.

Read more …

Republicans drowning in donations.

• Bob Woodward: GOP Senators ‘Choking’ On Trump-Ukraine Scandal (WE)

Veteran journalist Bob Woodward said Republican senators are “choking” on President Trump’s Ukraine scandal. At his second appearance in Spokane, Washington, in as many days, the famed Watergate sleuth discussed the precarious situation GOP lawmakers find themselves in as Trump faces controversy for encouraging foreign countries to investigate Joe Biden, a political rival, and his son Hunter. “I know Republican senators, and they are choking on this,” Woodward said on Friday, according to the Spokesman-Review. “Whether they say that’s too much, I don’t know.” Some Republicans in the upper chamber have begun to break ranks after Trump openly encouraged Ukraine and China to investigate the Bidens on Thursday.

Among those who have vented publicly are Maine Sen. Susan Collins, Nebraska Sen. Ben Sasse, and Utah Sen. Mitt Romney, as well as Texas Rep. Will Hurd in the House. Trump, who claims his overtures were about corruption and not crippling a political opponent in the 2020 election, repeatedly castigated Romney on Saturday, even calling for his impeachment. In a discussion with college students on Thursday, Woodward said the situation for Trump is getting “more serious each day” and predicted that impeachment in the House “is almost certainly going to happen to Trump.” He added, “But then there’s a trial in the Senate.”


On Friday, Woodward acknowledged that Trump encouraging foreign countries to investigate the Biden family is “probably not criminal,” but he nonetheless referred to the controversy as being wide in scope. Speaking of the House impeachment inquiry, Woodward said, “They’re looking through a keyhole, and it’s a panorama.” Woodward also noted how some Republicans in the Senate are seeing an advantage from the Democrats’ impeachment venture. He mentioned that Sen. Lindsey Graham, a former Trump critic who has become one of his most vociferous defenders, is seeing an influx of donations. Woodward said the South Carolina Republican told him he “couldn’t count the money fast enough.”

Read more …

Erdogan blames the US for not establishing the safe zone.

• In Last Minute Call, Erdogan Agrees To Meet Trump Over Syria ‘Safe Zone’ (ZH)

Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan again threatened this weekend to initiate a military incursion into northeast Syria, where US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) are based (and bolstered locally by small American bases), saying an offensive “both on land and air” would come “as soon as today or tomorrow.” Like many threats of an “imminent” invasion, it appears this proverbial can will be kicked further down the road, as presidents Trump and Erdogan held a “last minute” phone call on Sunday, where it appears the two leaders came to some level of an understanding. They discussed Turkey’s proposed “safe zone” east of the Euphrates in Syria — which Erdogan has long urged a resistant Washington to cooperate militarily on — and though exact details of the exchange weren’t published, they agreed to meet in Washington next month upon Trump’s invitation.

“Erdogan expressed Turkey’s unease with U.S. military and security bureaucracies not doing what is required by the agreement between the two countries, the presidency said, adding that the two men agreed to meet,” Reuters reported of the call. As we reported previously, Turkey’s military is reportedly on high alert, ready to carry out the Turkish president’s orders on short notice, after a longtime military build-up along the border. “We will carry out this operation both on land and air as soon as today or tomorrow,” Erdogan said on Saturday. “We gave all warnings to our interlocutors regarding the east of Euphrates and we have acted with sufficient patience,” the Turkish president added.


He further slammed the prospect of cooperating with the US on a US-Turkey administered safe zone “a fairytale” given Washington’s recalcitrance regarding Syria’s Kurds, the ethnic group’s militias of which Turkey considers “terrorists”. The Kurdish dominated and US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) has vowed it will treat any invading Turkish soldiers as an act of war. In a statement the SDF said it would “not hesitate to turn any unprovoked (Turkish) attack into an all-out war” to defend its region in northeast Syria, according to Reuters.

Read more …

Given what Dominic Cummings thinks of Farage, hard to see him taking up a job with much publicity.

• Arise, Commissioner Farage! (Pol.eu)

London may not be planning to nominate a commissioner to Brussels but if it does, some say there’s only one option: Nigel Farage. Conservative MP Steve Baker told the Telegraph’s Chopper Brexit Podcast that the Brexit Party member of the European Parliament would be the obvious choice to be the U.K.’s European commissioner, if Brexit is delayed and the country is able to nominate one. “I think we should appoint somebody with about twenty years experience … we should appoint somebody who’s incredibly well-known throughout the institutions, somebody who can be absolutely relied upon at all times to support our exit from the European Union,” he said.


“And therefore I unashamedly back Nigel Farage to be our next European commissioner in the event, in the unfortunate event, should it transpire, though I think it unlikely, that we have to remain in.” Baker, who leads the pro-Brexit European Research Group of MPs in the U.K. parliament, said the idea would be “inspired by the film Armageddon,” referring to a 1998 science fiction movie. There is a scene where “they’re trying to save the world, and so what they do is they land on the asteroid, and they put a nuclear weapon in the heart of the asteroid, and Nigel Farage is that nuclear weapon,” Baker said. “I’ve reason to think he might say that he would accept such an offer,” Baker added, while noting that “my sympathy for Nigel Farage, which has not always been at very high levels, has dramatically increased the more that I am demonized.”

Read more …

A traumatized people. Too easily forgotten.

• Brexit Border Talk Stirs Up Bad Memories In Northern Ireland (G.)

Remnants of Hurricane Lorenzo unleashed wind and rain from the Atlantic across the area, a rural pocket of County Fermanagh that marks Northern Ireland’s border with the Republic. “Stay back, stay high, stay dry,” advised the authorities, and residents duly hunkered down. Lorenzo passed without major damage. [..] Around Gortmullan, businesses and ordinary people were left wondering if – and where – to seek cover, a dilemma dating from the 2016 referendum result that now thrummed with urgency. “We’re setting up new companies on both sides of the border,” said Liam McCaffrey, CEO of Quinn Industrial Holdings, which supplies building materials.

Customs checks would be bad enough, but Johnson’s apparent plan to give the Stormont assembly a veto over trading arrangements verged on surreal, said McCaffrey. Power sharing in Northern Ireland collapsed in January 2017 and shows little sign of reviving. “The future of how we trade is to be decided every four years by an assembly that hasn’t sat in three years? Bizarre.” Such was the challenge of Storm Boris. Perhaps it was hot air, a plan destined for oblivion to be superseded by who knows what. Or perhaps it was a blast of what is to come in a no-deal crash-out, or a deal negotiated in the next few weeks or after a general election. The uncertainty was head spinning.


[..] The 310-mile border, drawn in 1922 during the partition of Ireland, bristled with military patrols and fortifications during the Troubles. The 1998 Good Friday agreement and the EU’s single market rendered it invisible, helping to seal the peace. [..] A complex web connects the economies on both sides of the border. Trade in goods is worth about £5.2bn. About a third of Northern Ireland’s goods and services exports are sold to the Republic, while about a quarter of its imports come from the south. Downing Street says electronic paperwork and a “very small number” of physical inspections at traders’ premises would limit disruption. Farmers and business leaders dispute that. Some warn of disaster. Diageo, which makes Guinness and Baileys, estimates a hard border could cost it £1.3m, based on an estimate of an hour’s delay for each of the 18,000 beer trucks that traverse the border each year. Smaller businesses with tight margins could face ruin.

Read more …

How could this ever happen? “The parties anticipate that this agreement will not be made part of any public record. If the United States receives a Freedom of Information Act request or any compulsory process commanding the disclosure of the agreement, it will provide notice to Epstein before making that disclosure.”

• An Actual Conspiracy Kept Jeffrey Epstein’s Accomplices out of Prison (MJ)

But not limited to: It was just a four-word phrase, a bit of plain contractual verbiage, but even now, more than a decade later, Spencer Kuvin has a hard time expressing just how bizarre it was. “It’s incredibly odd language,” said Kuvin, an attorney in Florida. “I’ve never seen it before in a non-prosecution agreement.” Kuvin and I were talking about the infamous and inexplicable 2007 plea deal offered by then–US Attorney Alexander Acosta, last seen slinking out of the Labor Department’s back door. Kuvin had represented three of Epstein’s victims at the time of the agreement, and Kuvin is still exercised about the deal, in particular its brief immunity clause that continues to protect Epstein’s co-conspirators.

According to a ruling by US District Judge Kenneth Marra in February 2019, “from between about 1999 and 2007, Jeffrey Epstein sexually abused more than 30 minor girls…at his mansion in Palm Beach, Florida, and elsewhere in the United States and overseas.” The ruling goes on to describe a child sex ring: “In addition to his own sexual abuse of the victims, Epstein directed other persons to abuse the girls sexually. Epstein used paid employees to find and bring minor girls to him. Epstein worked in concert with others to obtain minors not only for his own sexual gratification, but also for the sexual gratification of others.”

But back in 2007, Epstein was charged only with procuring an underage girl for prostitution, having struck an unbelievable sweetheart deal with Acosta. Epstein served 13 months in a Palm Beach County jail, of which six days a week were spent on work release in his high-rise office, a limo chauffeuring him to and from jail. He was also required to register as a sex offender. The deal on its face is incredibly favorable to Epstein. If you look closer, things get even better for him:


“The United States also agrees that it will not institute any criminal charges against any potential co-conspirators of Epstein, including but not limited to Sarah Kellen, Adriana Ross, Lesley Groff, or Nadia Marcinkova.” The four women named had allegedly helped recruit underage girls for Epstein at his direction. But that four-word phrase “but not limited to” gave a free pass to anybody who would have helped Epstein acquire or traffic underage girls for sex. How could the government agree to immunize “any potential co-conspirators” of an alleged serial child rapist? The question is at the center of so many conspiracy theories surrounding Epstein’s life and death.

Read more …

Me when I see this, I’m thinking Dante’s Ninth Circle of Hell.

• Chinese Farmers Raise Mutant Pigs The Size Of Polar Bears (ZH)

Amid one of the worst food crises in recent memory, Chinese farmers are reportedly trying to breed larger pigs as the African swine fever – less affectionately known as ‘pig ebola’ – has destroyed over 100 million pigs, between one-third and a half of China’s supply of pigs by various estimates, causing pork prices to explode to levels never seen before. As Beijing scrambles to make up for the lost domestic supply with imports, even desperately waiving tariffs on American pork products in what China’s politicians tried to sell to their population (and Washington) as a “gesture of goodwill”, farmers in southern China have raised a pig that’s as heavy as a polar bear.

Once slaughtered, these giant mutant pigs can fetch a, well, giant price on the market. Here’s more from Bloomberg: “The 500 kilogram, or 1,102 pound, animal is part of a herd that’s being bred to become giant swine. At slaughter, some of the pigs can sell for more than 10,000 yuan ($1,399), over three times higher than the average monthly disposable income in Nanning, the capital of Guangxi province where Pang Cong, the farm’s owner, lives.” Soaring pork prices have encouraged small and large farms to experiment with DIY genetic experimentation, in the name of raising pigs that are about 40% heavier than the ‘normal’ weight of 125 kilos.

“High pork prices in the northeastern province of Jilin is prompting farmers to raise pigs to reach an average weight of 175 kilograms to 200 kilograms, higher than the normal weight of 125 kilograms. They want to raise them “as big as possible,” said Zhao Hailin, a hog farmer in the region.”

Read more …

The entire case is falling to bits.

• Lula’s Prosecutors Request His Release From Prison. He Refuses. (Greenwald)

The same Brazilian prosecutors who for years exhibited a single-minded fixation on jailing former President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva are now seeking his release from prison, requesting that a court allow him to serve the remainder of his 11-year sentence for corruption at home. But Lula — who believes the request is motivated by fear that prosecutorial and judicial improprieties in his case, which were revealed by The Intercept, will lead to the nullification of his conviction — is opposing these efforts, insisting that he will not leave prison until he receives full exoneration. In seeking his release, Lula’s prosecutors are almost certainly not motivated by humanitarian concerns. Quite the contrary: Those prosecutors have often displayed a near-pathological hatred for the two-term former president.

Last month, The Intercept, jointly with its reporting partner UOL, published previously secret Telegram messages in which the Operation Car Wash prosecutors responsible for prosecuting Lula cruelly mocked the tragic death of his 7-year-old grandson from meningitis earlier this year, as well as the 2017 death of his wife of 43 years from a stroke at the age of 66. One of the prosecutors who participated publicly apologized, but none of the others have. Far more likely is that the prosecutors are motivated by desperation to salvage their legacy after a series of defeats suffered by their once-untouchable, widely revered Car Wash investigation, ever since The Intercept, on June 9, began publishing reports based on a massive archive of secret chats between the prosecutors and Sergio Moro, the judge who oversaw most of the convictions, including Lula’s, and who now serves as President Jair Bolsonaro’s Minister of Justice and Public Security.


The prosecutors’ cynical gambit, it appears, is that the country’s Supreme Court — which two weeks ago nullified one of Moro’s anti-corruption convictions for the first time on the ground that he violated core rights of defendants — will feel less pressure to nullify Moro’s guilty verdict in Lula’s case if the ex-president is comfortably at home in São Paulo (albeit under house arrest) rather than lingering in a Curitiba prison. But this strategy ran into a massive roadblock when Lula demanded that he not be released from prison unless and until he is fully exonerated.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Politics and Algorithms

Jul 262019
 
 July 26, 2019  Posted by at 1:52 pm Finance, Primers Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,  8 Responses »


Edward Hopper Sailing 1911

 

It’s a development that has long been evident in continental Europe, and that has now arrived on the shores of the US and UK. It is the somewhat slow but very certain dissolution of long-existing political parties, organizations and groups. That’s what I was seeing during the Robert Mueller clown horror show on Wednesday.

Mueller was not just the Democratic Party’s last hope, he was their identity. He was the anti-Trump. Well, he no longer is, he is not fit to play that role anymore. And there is nobody to take it over who is not going to be highly contested by at least some parts of the party. In other words: it’s falling apart.

And that’s not necessarily a bad thing, it’s a natural process, parties change as conditions do and if they don’t do it fast enough they disappear. Look at the candidates the Dems have. Can anyone imagine the party, post-Mueller, uniting behind Joe Biden or Bernie Sanders or Kamala Harris? And then for one of them to beat Donald Trump in 2020?

I was just watching a little clip from Sean Hannity, doing what Trump did last week, which is going after the Squad. Who he said are anti-Israel socialists and, most importantly, the de facto leaders of the party, not Nancy Pelosi. That is a follow-up consequence of Mueller’s tragic defeat, the right can now go on the chase. The Squad is the face of the Dems because Trump and Hannity have made them that.

The upcoming Horowitz and Durham reports on their respective probes into “meddling into the meddling” will target many people in the Democratic Party, US intelligence services, and the media. In that order. Can the Dems survive such a thing? It’s hard to see.

 

There’s Bernie and the Squad, the declared socialists, who will never be accepted as leaders by a party so evidently predicated upon support for the arms industry. And they in turn can’t credibly support candidates who do. The Democratic Party will never be socialist, they will have to leave the label behind in order to share that message and remain believable.

But without them, what will be left? Joe Biden, or perhaps Hillary silently waiting in the wings? I don’t see it. Not after Mueller, not after two-three years of gambling all on red anti-Trump. At least the Squad have an identity, got to give them that. Whether it will sell in 2019 America is another thing altogether.

I personally think the term socialist is too tainted, on top of being too misinterpreted, for it to be “electable”, but I also understand there are large swaths of the US population who are in dire straits already with a recession on the horizon, but 2020 seems too soon. And I would ditch the term regardless. It’s like painting a target on your back for Trump and Hannity to aim at.

If you remember the 2016 campaign and the clown parade on stage with the likes of Marco Rubio and Jeb Bush glaring at the headlights, you know that the GOP has issues that are very similar to those of the Dems. But Trump came along.

The Dems have no Trump. They do have a DNC that will stifle any candidate they don’t like (Bernie!), though. Just think what they would have done if Trump had run as a Democrat (crazy, but not that crazy).

 

The UK’s issues are remarkably similar to those of the US. Only, in their case, the socialists have already taken over the left-wing party (if you can call the Dems left-wing). This has led to absolute stagnation. Tony Blair had moved Labour so far to the right (which he and his Blairites call center, because it sounds so much better), that injecting Jeremy Corbyn as leader was just too fast and furious.

So they labeled Corbyn an anti-semite, the most successful and equally empty smear campaign since Julian Assange was called a rapist. Corbyn never adequately responded, so he couldn’t profile himself and now the Blairites are again calling on him to leave. Oh, and he never gave a direct answer to the question of Brexit yes or no either. Pity. Corbyn’s support among the people is massive, but not in the party.

Which is why it’s now up to Boris Johnson to ‘deliver the will of the people’. And apparently the first thing the people want is 20,000 more policemen. Which were fired by the very party he at the time represented first as first mayor of London and then foreign minister, for goodness sake. His very own Tories closed 600 police stations since 2010 and will have to re-open many now.

Some survey must have told him it polled well. Just like polling was an essential part of pushing through Brexit. There’s a very revealing TV movie that came out 6 months ago called Brexit: The Uncivil War, that makes this very clear. The extent to which campaigns these days rely on data gathering and voter targeting will take a while yet to be understood, but they’re a future that is already here. Wikipedia in its description of the film puts it quite well:

 

After the opening credits, [Dominic] Cummings rejects an offer in 2015 by UKIP MP Douglas Carswell and political strategist Matthew Elliott to lead the Vote Leave campaign due to his contempt for “Westminister politics”, but accepts when Carswell promises Cummings full control.

The next sequences show Cummings outlining the core strategy on a whiteboard of narrow disciplined messaging delivered via algorithmic database-driven micro-targeting tools. Cummings rejects an approach by Nigel Farage and Arron Banks of Leave.EU to merge their campaigns, as his data shows Farage is an obstacle to winning an overall majority.

[..] In a eureka moment, Cummings refines the core message to “Take Back Control”, thus positioning Vote Leave as the historical status quo, and Remain as the “change” option. Cummings meets and hires Canadian Zack Massingham, co-founder of AggregateIQ, who offers to build a database using social media tools of [3 million] voters who are not on the UK electoral register but are inclined to vote to leave.

[..] In the final stages, high-profile senior Tory MPs Michael Gove and Boris Johnson join the Vote Leave campaign emphasising the need to “Take Back Control”, while Penny Mordaunt is shown on BBC raising concerns over the accession of Turkey. Gove and Johnson are shown as having some reticence over specific Vote Leave claims (e.g. £350 million for NHS, and 70 million potential Turkish emigrants) but are seen to overcome them.

 

Dominic Cummings, played in the movie by Benedict Cumberbatch, is an independent political adviser who belongs to no party. But guess what? He was the first adviser Boris Johnson hired after his nomination Wednesday. Cummings didn’t want Nigel Farage as the face of Brexit, because he polled poorly. He wanted Boris, because his numbers were better. Not because he didn’t think Boris was a bumbling fool, he did.

And now Cummings is back to finish the job. Far as I can see, that can only mean one thing: elections, and soon (it’s what Cummings does). A no-deal Brexit was voted down, in the same Parliament Boris Johnson now faces, 3 times, or was it 4? There is going to be a lot of opposition. Boris wants Brexit on October 31, and has practically bet his career on it. But there is going to be a lot of opposition.

He can’t have elections before September, because of the summer recess. So perhaps end of September?! But he has Dominic Cummings and his “algorithmic database-driven micro-targeting tools”. Without which Brexit would never have been voted in. So if you don’t want Brexit, you better come prepared.

Cummings and his techies weren’t -just- sending out mass mails or that kind of stuff. That’s already arcane. They were sending targeted personalized messages to individual voters, by the millions. Algorithms. AI. Tailor made. If you’re the opposition, and you don’t have those tools, then what do you have exactly?

Already thought before it all happened that it was funny that Boris Johnson’s ascension and Robert Mueller’s downfall were scheduled for the same day. There must be a pattern somewhere.

You can find the movie at HBO or Channel 4, I’m sure. Try this link for Channel 4. Seeing that movie, and thinking about the implications of the technology, the whole notion of Russian meddling becomes arcane as well. We just have no idea.

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle May 25 2019

May 252019
 
 May 25, 2019  Posted by at 10:24 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,  11 Responses »


 

• What Assange Charges Could Mean For Press Freedom (Jonathan Turley)
• A Threat to the Press and the American People (IC)
• Professional #Assange Smearers Finally Realize His Fate Is Tied To Theirs (CJ)
• The Belligerence of Empire (Orphan)
• Australian Government Urged To Intervene In Assange Case (G.)
• Trump Wants Investigation Into Australia’s Role In ‘Russian Hoax’ (G.)
• The Golem Strikes Back (Kunstler)
• Political Media Is a Hucksters’ Paradise (Taibbi)
• Trump Declares Emergency To Expedite Arms Sales To Saudi Arabia And UAE (CNN)
• For The First Time Ever, China Takes Over An Insolvent Bank (ZH)
• EU Fraud Watchdog Considering Nigel Farage Investigation (G.)
• We’ve Created A Civilisation Hell Bent On Destroying Itself (C.)

 

 

Hundreds of assessments of what the Assange charges mean. Turley’s not a bad place to start.

• What Assange Charges Could Mean For Press Freedom (Jonathan Turley)

For over a decade, there has been a raging debate over precisely what Julian Assange is – whistleblower, journalist, or spy. Now that question will have to be answered after the United States hit him with 17 new counts under the Espionage Act for receiving and publishing information from Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning. The Trump administration has now crossed the line that many counselled it to avoid – and may have triggered the most important press freedom case in the US in 300 years. While the status of Assange has long been hotly debated, his actions in publishing classified information on Wikileaks is a common component of journalism. Indeed, the most celebrated cases in history – such as the failed attempts to stop the release of the Pentagon Papers in 1971 – were based on the publications of classified evidence.

Assange’s supporters note that his publications revealed alleged war crimes in places like Afghanistan and Iraq that were unlikely to have been exposed otherwise. If it was a crime for Assange to receive and publish such information, much of the journalism in the US would become a de facto criminal enterprise. In April, the government avoided this threshold question by charging Assange with a single count of conspiracy to commit computer intrusion. The charge related to helping Manning obtain access to defence department computers in 2010. In doing so, the justice department stayed clear of charging him as a publisher as opposed to an intruder. That is until Thursday.

The charges were brought under the controversial Espionage Act of 1917. Passed after World War One, it was used to target anti-war activists and political dissidents. The law has long been denounced as unconstitutional in its criminalising of receiving and publishing classified information. It is no surprise that the justice department had to use this much-ridiculed law to achieve this ignoble goal. Counts nine through 17 against Assange concern the publications of “national defence information.” The justice department takes pains to try to argue that Assange is not a journalist and that the publication counts concern the disclosure of not just classified information but the actual names of intelligence sources. That however may establish that Assange is a poor journalist, but a journalist all the same.

Read more …

Everybody does what WikiLeaks does. Just not as successful.

• A Threat to the Press and the American People (IC)

The indictment says that Assange and WikiLeaks “repeatedly sought, obtained, and disseminated information that the United States classified due to the serious risk that unauthorized disclosure could harm the national security of the United States.” That is almost a textbook definition of the job of a reporter covering national security at a major news organization. Take a look at the tips pages of most news outlets, and you’ll see a remarkable similarity between what journalists ask for and what WikiLeaks sought. The indictment goes on to say that “WikiLeaks’s website explicitly solicited censored, otherwise restricted, and until September 2010, ‘classified’ materials.”


Today, virtually every major news organization has a similar secure drop box where sources can provide information anonymously. WikiLeaks popularized that technique for soliciting anonymous leaks, but it is now common journalistic practice. “Assange personally and publicly promoted WikiLeaks to encourage those with access to protected information, including classified information, to provide it to WikiLeaks for public disclosure,” the indictment says. Nearly every national security reporter goes on television, gives speeches, or launches book tours to promote their work and hopefully obtain new sources. All of this raises an obvious question: If the government can charge Assange for conspiring to obtain leaked documents, what would stop it from charging the CIA beat reporter at the New York Times for committing the same crime?

Read more …

Rachel Maddow is a giant blemish on our world.

• Professional #Assange Smearers Finally Realize His Fate Is Tied To Theirs (CJ)

“And, you know, I know you,” Maddow continued, pointing to the camera. “Given everything else that we know about the WikiLeaks guy, I can feel through the television right now your mixed feelings about what I am saying. I can feel what may be, perhaps, a certain lack of concern about Julian Assange’s ultimate fate, given his own gleeful and extensive personal role in trying to help a hostile foreign government interfere in our election in order to install their chosen president with WikiLeaks’ help. Okay? I know. Okay, I feel ya. I got it. But, it is a recurring theme in history, heck, it is a recurring theme in the Bible, that they always pick the least sympathetic figures to try this stuff on first.

Despite anyone’s feelings about this spectacularly unsympathetic character at the center of this international drama, you are going to see every journalistic institution in this country, every First Amendment supporter in this country, left, right and center, swallow their feelings about this particular human and denounce what the Trump administration is trying to do here. Because it would fundamentally change the United States of America.” Wow. Make no mistake, this is a hugely significant development. This isn’t just some columnist for the New York Times or the Guardian, this is Rachel effing Maddow, the Queen Mother of all tinfoil pussyhat-wearing Russiagate insanity.

This same pundit was just a couple of months ago not just smearing but outright lying about Assange, deceitfully telling her audience that the new legal rings closing around Assange were about his 2016 publications then instructing viewers not to Google anything about it because they’ll get computer viruses. Now that she’s recognized that this could actually hurt her and her network directly, she’s finally feeding her audience a different narrative out of sheer enlightened self-interest.

Read more …

Violence is the sole language of empire.

• The Belligerence of Empire (Orphan)

Violence is the sole language of empire. It is this only currency it uses to enforce its precepts and edicts, both at home and abroad. Eventually this language becomes internalized within the psyche of the subjects. Social and cultural conditioning maintained through constant subtle messaging via mass media begins to mold the public will toward that of authoritarian conformity. The American Empire is emblematic of this process. There is mass compliance to the dictates of the ruling class and this occurs most often without any prompting or debate whatsoever. In this dictatorship of money the poor are looked at with ridicule and contempt, and are often punished legally for their imposed poverty.

But the social conditioning of the American public has led toward a bizarre allegiance to its ruling class oppressors. Propaganda still works here and most are still besotted with the notion of America being a bastion of “freedom and democracy.” The growing gap between the ultra-wealthy and the poor and the gutting of civil liberties are ignored. And blind devotion is especially so when it comes to US foreign policy. Most Americans still believe they live in the greatest country on the planet. They believe the American military to be noble and that they always reluctantly go into or are forced into war. Indeed, both the Democrats and Republicans possess an uncanny ability to bridge their ideological distances when it comes to defending US militarism, the Pentagon and the war machine of imperialism.

But this is tied to the defense of capitalism, the ruling class, and the ultimate reason for war: the protection of that class’s global capital investments. The persecution of Chelsea Manning, much like the case of Julian Assange, is demonstrative of this. It is a crusade against truth tellers that has been applauded from both sides of the American establishment, liberal and conservative alike. It does not matter that she helped to expose American war crimes. On the contrary, this is seen as heresy to the Empire itself. Manning’s crime was exposing the underbelly of the beast. A war machine which targeted and killed civilians and journalists by soldiers behind a glowing screen thousands of miles away, as if they were playing a video game.

Read more …

They would have already if they wanted.

• Australian Government Urged To Intervene In Assange Case (G.)

The Australian film-maker who spent 15-months in a Cambodian jail on spying charges says he fears Julian Assange is being used as an “example” to other journalists as part of what he described as “a fundamental attack on the fourth estate”. James Ricketson spent more than a year inside the overcrowded Prey Sar prison in Phnom Penh on spying charges before his release last September after a public outcry and lobbying by the Australian government. On Friday he told Guardian Australia he hoped the Morrison government would make “a forthright public statement” in support of Assange and the principle of press freedom.


“I would like to think the Australian government is woking in the background to forge some kind of resolution that is fair and equitable in the Julian Assange case,” he said. “Although it was not clear to me at the time, it’s now clear that from at least January last year there were fairly high-level representations being made to the Cambodian government on my behalf. “The government had its own reasons for why it needed to keep that secret [but] it would certainly be nice if it were to make a public statement to the effect that we’re concerned about the fate of Julian Assange and the impact of this extradition attempt on investigative journalism in Australia and worldwide.”

Read more …

Talking about Australia…

• Trump Wants Investigation Into Australia’s Role In ‘Russian Hoax’ (G.)

Donald Trump has said he wants Australia’s role in setting off the FBI inquiry into links between Russia and his election campaign examined by the US attorney general, William Barr. It is a potentially explosive development for the historically solid US-Australian alliance and the first time Trump has publicly named Australia while discussing what he calls the “Russia hoax” and “witch hunt”. A spokesman for Marise Payne, Australia’s foreign affairs minister, responded to the comments on Saturday by saying: “Australia and the United States are the closest of allies.” “The government has not commented on these matters and doing so could prejudice any ongoing investigation,” he said.

Trump said he had declassified “potentially millions of pages” of intelligence documents related to surveillance activities on his campaign and Barr would be in charge of analysing it. “So what I’ve done is I’ve declassified everything,” Trump told reporters at the White House on Friday before leaving on a trip to Japan. “He can look and I hope he looks at the UK and I hope he looks at Australia and I hope he looks at Ukraine. “I hope he looks at everything, because there was a hoax that was perpetrated on our country.” Trump’s former campaign aide George Papadopoulos has claimed that Australia’s former high commissioner to the UK, Alexander Downer, spied on him during a meeting at a London bar in May 2016.

Downer has rejected this, but said that during the meeting Papadopoulos had told him Russia had damaging material on Trump’s presidential rival, Hillary Clinton. In an interview with the ABC’s Matt Bevan, Downer said Papadopoulos told him during the meeting he was confident Trump would win the election because the Russians had some information on Clinton which could be damaging to her if released. Downer then passed this information on to Canberra. Papadopoulos denies he ever mentioned Russia and Clinton during the meeting.

Read more …

“..the US Intel “community” trafficked in fictitious malarkey supplied by Mrs. Clinton..”

• The Golem Strikes Back (Kunstler)

There’s perhaps a lot to dislike about Donald J. Trump, US President No. 45. Despite all the grooming and tailoring, there’s little savoir faire there. He tweets not like a mellifluous songbird, but in snorts like a rooting aardvark. His every predilection is an affront to the refined Washington establishment: his dark business history, his beloved ormolu trappings, his Mickey-D cheeseburgers, the mystifying hair-doo. Even so, the bad faith of his antagonists exceeds even Mr. Trump’s defects and vices. The plot they concocted to get rid of him failed. And, yes, it was a plot, even a coup. And they fucked it up magnificently, leaving a paper trail as wide as Interstate-95.

Now all that paper is about to fall over the District of Columbia like radioactive ash, turning many current and former denizens of rogue agencies into the walking dead as they embark on the dismal journey between the grand juries and the federal prisons. Hence, the desperate rage of the impeachment faction, in direct proportion to their secret shameful knowledge that the entire RussiaGate melodrama was, in fact, a seditious subterfuge between the Hillary Clinton campaign and a great many key figures in government up-to-and-including former president Barack Obama, who could not have failed to be clued-in on all the action. Even before the declassification order, the true narrative of events has been plainly understood: that the US Intel “community” trafficked in fictitious malarkey supplied by Mrs. Clinton to illegally “meddle” in the 2016 election.

[..] The evidence already public indicates that Robert Mueller must have known as early as the date of his appointment (and likely before) that the predicating evidence for his inquiry was false. After all, his lead prosecutor, Andrew Weissmann, was informed of that in no uncertain terms by Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr in 2016. Justice may seek to know why Mr. Mueller did not inform the target of his inquiry that this was so. The answer to that may be that Mr. Mueller’s true mission was to disable Mr. Trump as long as possible while setting an obstruction of justice trap — which also failed tactically.

Read more …

“..Democratic organizers realized they’d come within a hair’s breadth of printing bumper stickers and posters for an unraveling one-man Enron.”

• Political Media Is a Hucksters’ Paradise (Taibbi)

Avenatti became an instant celebrity after he filed a lawsuit seeking to void the non-disclosure agreement between Trump and Daniels, in which she received a $130,000 payoff to be quiet about what she would later call “the least impressive sex I ever had.” In that, Avenatti had something cable television wanted more than anyone ever wanted anything: details about the president’s “smaller than average” tackle and Daniels’ tale of “getting fucked by a guy with Yeti pubes and a dick like the mushroom character in Mario Kart.” Avenatti leveraged being the gatekeeper of this story into daily TV appearances, where he quickly became a political figure in his own right, someone who would play the Democrats’ bare-knuckle answer to Trump.

By last summer in Iowa, he was already giving speeches as a presidential hopeful. CNN gushed: “Cribbing but amending Obama, Avenatti added, “When they go low, I say, we hit harder…” Whether by calling Michael Cohen a “thug,” or demanding an “immediate indictment” over the hush money issue, Avenatti could be counted on to take the maximally aggressive posture. Media figures couldn’t praise him enough. He was great, emotionally satisfying TV! Our own version of Trump! Ana Navarro compared him to the “Holy Spirit” on The View, while Joy Behar said “being a lawyer is minimal compared to what he’s doing.” MSNBC’s Stephanie Ruhle said, ”The Democrats could learn something from you.”

Brian Stelter, who later excused his admiration on the grounds Avenatti showed “Trump-like mastery” of media, said Avenatti should be taken “seriously as a contender.” In another forum he was called the “savior of the Republic.” Avenatti wasn’t the savior of anything. He turned out to be an epic buffoon and massive net minus for Democrat causes. His performance in the fight over Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court confirmation last fall – where the Maya Angelo-quoting self-described feminist ended up having his own witness tell NBC he’d “twisted” her words – was just one faceplant. He was soon after arrested for domestic violence. This helped lead to cancellation of campaign events, as Democratic organizers realized they’d come within a hair’s breadth of printing bumper stickers and posters for an unraveling one-man Enron.

Read more …

Empire.

• Trump Declares Emergency To Expedite Arms Sales To Saudi Arabia And UAE (CNN)

The Trump administration has declared an emergency to bypass Congress and expedite billions of dollars in arms sales to various countries — including Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates — citing the need to deter what it called “the malign influence” of Iran throughout the Middle East. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo formally told lawmakers Friday of the administration’s plans. “These sales will support our allies, enhance Middle East stability, and help these nations to deter and defend themselves from the Islamic Republic of Iran,” Pompeo said in a statement that put the value of the sales at $8.1 billion.


In a Friday letter to congressional lawmakers, Pompeo said that he “determined that an emergency exists, which requires the immediate sale of the defense articles and defense services” to Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Jordan “in order to deter further the malign influence of the Government of Iran throughout the Middle East region,” according to a copy obtained by CNN. The notification comes on the same day as President Donald Trump’s announcement that he is sending an additional 1,500 US troops to the Middle East to counter Iran. Pompeo noted in his statement that “today’s action will quickly augment our partners’ capacity to provide for their own self-defense and reinforce recent changes to US posture in the region to deter Iran.”

Read more …

First time they announce it anyway.

• For The First Time Ever, China Takes Over An Insolvent Bank (ZH)

There was a time when in the years following the financial crisis, every Friday the FDIC would report of one or more small and not small banks failing, as their liabilities exceeded their assets, who were taken over by larger peers with a taxpayer subsidy to cover the capital shortfall. And while this weekly event, also known as “FDIC Failure Friday” has faded from the US, for now, it has made a grand appearance in China. China’s financial regulators said on Friday the country’s banking and insurance regulator and the central bank, will take control of the small, troubled inner Mongolia-based Baoshang Bank due to the serious credit risks it poses.


The regulator’s control of Baoshang will last for a year starting on Friday, the People’s Bank of China (PBOC) and China Banking and Insurance Regulatory Commission (CBIRC) said on their websites. China Construction Bank (CCB) will be entrusted to handle the business operations of the small lender, based in the industrial city of Baotou, the statement said. Such a takeover by national authorities is extremely rare, and takes place amid gathering concerns among regulators and financial analysts about a renewed surge in bad debts…

… a record pace of corporate defaults, amounting to 39.2 billion yuan of domestic bond defaults in the first four months of the year, 3.4 times the total for the same period of 2018…

Moody’s analyst Yulia Wan told the WSJ that regulators likely decided to take over Baoshang to limit any fallout to businesses in Inner Mongolia. “The move is to reduce the risk of a shock to the local economy,” said said, adding that the Baoshang takeover appeared to be the first time that national authorities seized control of a bank since Chinese lenders started listing on stock markets in the 1990s. In the past when banks came under pressure, local authorities would pull together funds from local state-owned firms and investors, or have another bank stage a takeover.

Read more …

He’ll claim it’s a witch hunt.

• EU Fraud Watchdog Considering Nigel Farage Investigation (G.)

The European Union’s anti-fraud watchdog is considering whether Nigel Farage should be investigated for any illegal activity over lavish payment from Arron Banks, the Guardian has learned. The agency, which goes by its French acronym, Olaf, revealed it was carrying out an assessment, which could lead to a formal investigation. This “initial assessment … does not mean that the individuals in question are guilty of any wrongdoing”, it said. While not a full-blown inquiry, it is a rare and significant step for Olaf to consider investigating a member of the European parliament. The European parliament this week opened an investigation into revelations made by Channel 4 that the insurance tycoon Arron Banks funded a lavish lifestyle for Farage in the year of the Brexit referendum.


In 2016, Farage received expenses of about £450,000, including rent on a Chelsea home, furniture, security and promotional trips to the US, where he attended the Republican national convention. Nothing was declared, an apparent violation of the European parliament’s code of conduct, which states that MEPs must report expensive gifts and attendance at events bankrolled by third parties. “We are aware of the press reports and public statements on the matter you are referring to,” a spokesperson for Olaf said, in response to questions from the Guardian. “It is only after such an initial assessment, which is currently ongoing, that Olaf decides whether or not to open an investigation.” The agency usually takes two months to carry out an assessment, which will examine whether the case falls under its remit and if there is “sufficient suspicion of fraud, corruption or any illegal activity affecting the EU’s financial interests”.

Read more …

Death cult.

• We’ve Created A Civilisation Hell Bent On Destroying Itself (C.)

The coffee tasted bad. Acrid and with a sweet, sickly smell. The sort of coffee that results from overfilling the filter machine and then leaving the brew to stew on the hot plate for several hours. The sort of coffee I would drink continually during the day to keep whatever gears left in my head turning. Odours are powerfully connected to memories. And so it’s the smell of that bad coffee which has become entwined with the memory of my sudden realisation that we are facing utter ruin. It was the spring of 2011, and I had managed to corner a very senior member of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) during a coffee break at a workshop. The IPCC was established in 1988 as a response to increasing concern that the observed changes in the Earth’s climate are being largely caused by humans.

The IPCC reviews the vast amounts of science being generated around climate change and produces assessment reports every four years. Given the impact the IPPC’s findings can have on policy and industry, great care is made to carefully present and communicate its scientific findings. So I wasn’t expecting much when I straight out asked him how much warming he thought we were going to achieve before we manage to make the required cuts to greenhouse gas emissions. “Oh, I think we’re heading towards 3°C at least,” he said. “Ah, yes, but heading towards,” I countered: “We won’t get to 3°C, will we?” (Because whatever you think of the 2°C threshold that separates “safe” from “dangerous” climate change, 3°C is well beyond what much of the world could bear.)

“Not so,” he replied. That wasn’t his hedge, but his best assessment of where, after all the political, economic, and social wrangling we will end up. “But what about the many millions of people directly threatened,” I went on. “Those living in low-lying nations, the farmers affected by abrupt changes in weather, kids exposed to new diseases?” He gave a sigh, paused for a few seconds, and a sad, resigned smile crept over his face. He then simply said: “They will die.”

Read more …

 

 

 

 

 

 Older Entries