Menu Icon

Debt Rattle July 30 2026

Jul 302026
 
 July 30, 2026  Posted by at 8:32 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,  18 Responses »


Pablo Picasso Girl Before A Mirror 1932


• New US Attack Wave On Iran Begins In Overnight Hours(ZH)
• Rand Paul Delivers a Cinematic Indictment of Fauci’s COVID Legacy (Queen)
• Paul Confirms Plans For Fauci Contempt Vote (JTN)
• Hawley Exposed Fauci’s 5th Amendment Charade, Then the Takedown (Margolis)
• ’Who the F**k Do You Think You Were?’ Moreno Destroys Fauci (Margolis)
• Senate Fan Girls for Zelenskyy then Advances Russian Sanction Bill 86-12 (CTH)
• Britain Backs Ukraine With New Electronic Warfare Cooperation (RFE/RL)
• Trump Admin Asks SCOTUS To Revive Mail-In Voting Order Ahead Of Midterms (AmG)
• DOJ and Trump Ask Supreme Court to Review $83.3 Million Carroll Verdict (ET)
• Trump Urges SCOTUS To Overturn E. Jean Carroll’s $83M Defamation Verdict (CNN)
• CNN Trump Midrerms Poll (CNN)
• Welcome to Socialism’: A Clinton Hand’s Stark Warning About Mamdani (Green)
• The Mamdani Grocery Grift (Turley)
• Laura Loomer Says There’s No Nazi Problem In Ukraine. What She Didn’t See (RT)
• The End Of Freedom – The Last Breath Of A Dying Continent (Adams)

 


 

 


 

 


 


Losing Zerohedge support?!

• New US Attack Wave On Iran Begins In Overnight Hours

The United States has begun a new round of airstrikes in Iran in the night time and early morning hours (local), according to a senior US official to Axios. The extent of the bombings, or whether they will be sustained, remains unclear: Trump “is in an escalatory mood” but is still contemplating “the depth of that response.”, A senior administration official says – WSJ. Trump is apparently making good on his earlier Wednesday threat: President Trump has told Fox News that he is “going to beat the fucking shit” out of Iran in response to their attack on US forces in Jordan overnight. Speaking to Trey Yingst, he added “we’ll be hitting them hard, they’re going to get a beating.”


There was heavy US refueler activity in regional skies just ahead of the strikes’ commencement – as well as unconfirmed reports of explosions at Riyadh’s international airport, but the cause has remained subject to speculation. But with each attack on Iran, its forces tend to respond in kind against Gulf countries hosting US assets and bases. It is going to be a long night for the region, especially while bracing for the IRGC’s inevitable response.

US is quite clearly stuck, in search of a strategy…

Details of Trump-Netanyahu Meeting at Oval Finally Emerging
After on Tuesday President Trump hosted both Zelensky and Netanyahu in the Oval Office there were no big press conferences or readouts given. But on Wednesday some key statements have begun to emerge concerning what was discussed, but at this point only offered via the Israeli side…

To be expected, Iran and the nuclear question dominated the discussions, according to i24’s Ariel Oseran, with Israeli officials describing a White House focused on three possible paths forward. “Trump is weighing three options: a nuclear deal, maintaining and intensifying the economic blockade, or renewed military strikes,” one official said, adding, “We didn’t tell Trump Israel’s preference is a strike. Our preference is the outcome. The decision is ultimately his.”

…talk about stating the obvious. But Israeli still maintains that the situation is at tipping point inside Iran, which according to more independent ‘realist’ analysts seems highly dubious. Israeli officials argued that Tehran is under mounting internal strain. “Iran is under severe economic pressure” due to fuel and diesel shortages, roughly 90% inflation, and “the beginning of public protests.” They added, “We discussed increasing pressure on Iran, both economically and kinetically.”

On Iran’s leadership, officials said, “We know for certain Mujtaba is alive, but since Operation Rising Lion no one has seen him.” Regarding Iran’s military capabilities, they claimed, “Iran now has only 1,500–1,600 missiles left after we destroyed much of its production capability.” Expletives fly and Trump talks ‘tough’ – but this whole gambit has been a bombing campaign in search of a strategy…

Read more …

Today, Fauci is an 85-year old grandpa. You should have gotten to him when it mattered.

• Rand Paul Delivers a Cinematic Indictment of Fauci’s COVID Legacy (Queen)

We’ve seen it countless times: the dramatic courtroom scene. It could be an attorney, or it might be the person testifying. But someone in a courtroom delivers a stirring speech that makes the difference in a case or makes a statement altogether. The courtroom scene is a hallmark of scriptwriting. From To Kill a Mockingbird to A Few Good Men to countless episodes of Law & Order, writers love a good grandstanding courtroom speech. And on Wednesday, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) delivered a takedown of Dr. Anthony Fauci that screenwriters could easily drool over.


Paul reminded Fauci and everybody watching and listening of the costs of Fauci’s COVID-19 policies: The COVID lockdown could never have been inflicted without you aiding and abetting the crime. Children lost years of education, small businesses built over a lifetime disappeared, patients delayed cancer screenings and other medical care, families were separated from dying relatives, workers were ordered to accept a medical procedure or lose their jobs, worship assembly, employment, education, and travel were restricted in the name of science. While you did not impose every restriction, you used your public authority to justify them.

My own experiences during that period bear witness. My dad was in a hospital with cancer ravaging his body, with family unable to visit him (and a cellphone that went dead because a nurse misplaced his charging cable). By the grace of God, he came home with hospice, and we got to spend his last two days with him as a family. I was on staff at my church at the time, and even in the first state to open back up, we felt compelled to continue weird protocols for months “out of an abundance of caution” — a phrase I never hope to have to utter again.

We can’t ignore the damage that Fauci’s COVID policies did to businesses, churches, and even some families. Some politicians dutifully followed them for months and even years after the danger of the first waves of the pandemic was long gone.

Side note: Keisha Lance Bottoms, who famously declared that “Atlanta Isn’t Ready to Reopen—And Neither Is Georgia,” now wants to run the Peach State. The Atlanta mayor demanded that people wear masks outside long after Gov. Brian Kemp (R-Ga.) opened the state back up. We have to hold her accountable by making sure she never holds public office again.

Paul savaged Fauci for his word games on gain-of-function research: On May 11, 2021, you told the Senate the NIH has never, ever, and does not now fund gain-of-function research in Wuhan at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. When I gave you the opportunity to correct the record to reconsider the statement, you responded that you had never before lied to Congress. We were then told that only the government’s narrowest regulation of definition counted here. That you could define gain-of-function in one way in which this was not gain-of-function, in which all of the common sense of the world be thrown out…

The American people were not asking for a semantics debate over what is gain-of-function. They were asking, does common sense say this research was dangerous in Wuhan? They wanted to know whether their money funded experiments in Wuhan that made bad coronaviruses better able to infect humans. The answer is, yes.

Finally, and possibly most devastatingly, Paul pointed out that the biggest thing that Fauci and his league of arrogant scientists did was destroy trust in institutions — possibly rightly so, but it happened under Fauci’s watch nonetheless. “There will be another pandemic. There will be another crisis. And there will again be officials that insist uncertainty must be hidden for the public’s own good. They will demand obedience. They will invoke science. “I am the science!” as though it were a commandment. They will argue that government officials cannot be questioned, because questioning them would undermine public trust. They have it backwards.

It is secrecy that destroys trust. It is arrogance that destroys trust. It is censorship that destroys trust. And it is the refusal to admit error that destroys trust. That loss of trust may be YOUR MOST DAMAGING LEGACY. Trust can’t be ordered. It has to be earned. No scientist is above scrutiny. No government official is beyond accountability. And no public servant has the right to treat suffering of millions of Americans as a footnote to his preferred version of history.”

Of course, we watched as Fauci pleaded the Fifth repeatedly. We gleefully enjoyed Paul ejecting Fauci’s attorney from the chambers. But it’s hard to imagine a more cinematic moment than those opening remarks from Paul. Good stuff.

Read more …

“The question on contempt will be voted on and then there’s the question of whether or not the Department of Justice will take that up,” he said.

• Paul Confirms Plans For Fauci Contempt Vote (JTN)

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., on Wednesday confirmed that his Senate committee would hold a contempt of Congress vote against Dr. Anthony Fauci after he invoked the 5th Amendment to avoid answering questions. “We believe… he didn’t need to hide behind the 5th Amendment and that maybe the 5th Amendment doesn’t attach when you have a pardon in place,” he told reporters. “The question on contempt will be voted on and then there’s the question of whether or not the Department of Justice will take that up.”


Fauci appeared before the Senate Homeland Security Committee on Wednesday and declined to answer questions, citing the 5th Amendment. Multiple senators, including Paul and Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., have questioned whether Fauci could legitimately invoke the 5th Amendment due to his pardon from President Joe Biden. Hawley opined that Fauci was improperly invoking the 5th Amendment to avoid answering uncomfortable questions about his increase in wealth during the COVID-19 pandemic. Fauci declined to respond.

Read more …

“Fauci, while Americans were dying by the hundreds of thousands during the COVID-19 pandemic, directed his own staff to solicit cash prizes on his behalf..”

• Hawley Exposed Fauci’s 5th Amendment Charade, Then the Takedown (Margolis)

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) didn’t just question Anthony Fauci on Wednesday. He dismantled him methodically in front of the entire country, using nothing but public records, a Supreme Court precedent, and a series of questions so basic that a child could have answered them. Fauci had exactly one response prepared for every question senators asked him during the hearing: a canned invocation of his Fifth Amendment rights.The only problem is that Fauci doesn’t have Fifth Amendment protection anymore. President Biden pardoned him in the final hours of his term, which means that Fauci cannot legally “stand upon his privilege,” as the Supreme Court ruled all the way back in 1896.


Hawley knew that. He built his entire line of questioning around forcing Fauci to demonstrate it to the world, starting with the simplest possible setup. “Well, nothing says honesty like taking the fifth, huh, doc?” Hawley asked. “Let’s try something. What day of the week is it today?” “On the advice of counsel, I respectfully decline to answer based upon my rights under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution,” Fauci said.Hawley asked what color tie Fauci was wearing.Same answer. He asked what color the carpet was in front of him.Same answer again.

Three questions. Zero risk of self-incrimination. Three invocations of a constitutional right that, thanks to his own pardon, Fauci doesn’t legally possess anymore. That’s when Hawley reminded him.”Let’s just get one thing straight, you don’t have any rights under the Fifth Amendment because you’ve been pardoned,” Hawley said. “As you very well know, as the Supreme Court has been clear for a century and more, Brown v. Walker, 1896. When he has been pardoned, he may not stand upon his privilege.” From there, Hawley moved from exposing the absurdity of Fauci’s stonewalling to laying out exactly why Fauci was hiding behind it. The answer, according to Hawley, is money.

Hawley walked through how Fauci, while Americans were dying by the hundreds of thousands during the COVID-19 pandemic, directed his own staff to solicit cash prizes on his behalf, using federal time, federal resources, and federal email accounts. Hawley named the staffers: Greg Folkers and Patricia Conrad, Fauci’s chief of staff and personal assistant. Both, Hawley said, spent government time chasing awards for their boss. One of those awards was the Dan David Award, worth $900,000. Hawley read from an email Folkers sent seeking help padding Fauci’s nomination. “I’m working on this nomination for the Dan David Award for Fauci,” the email read, according to Hawley.

“We need to beef up the COVID part. Do you have language in the can that you can share that delineates how we responded in new ways to COVID?” That wasn’t the only prize on the list. Hawley cited the Partnership for Public Service Award, the Adelson Prize, the Smithsonian Award, the National Academy of Medicine Award, and an award from the CDC Foundation, all pursued using federal employees on the taxpayers’ dime. “You turned your staff into a full-time application machine,” Hawley said. He noted Fauci’s staff didn’t stop at applying. They pressured federal ethics officials to approve the payouts. “We want to get to yes because Fauci wants the money,” one email read, according to Hawley.

Federal law bars government employees from soliciting cash awards or personal benefits, and it bars using subordinates to do it for them. Hawley cited the regulation by number, 5 C.F.R. Section 2635.205(b), and dared Fauci to explain how none of it applied to him. Fauci said nothing. He couldn’t.Hawley closed by putting Fauci’s fortune on the table. Fauci’s net worth now tops $12 million. His pension paid out more than $400,000 in its first year alone. Fauci built all of it, Hawley argued, while a million Americans died and he was busy chasing awards and sitting for glossy magazine profiles.

“You could sit for InStyle magazine, but you can’t answer questions for the American people,” Hawley said. Then came the closing blow. Hawley told Fauci that his silence spoke louder than any answer could have.”Silence is admission,” Hawley said. He accused Fauci of turning the pandemic into a vehicle for personal glory, calling him “a narcissist and a megalomaniac and a liar” who “disgraced” his own profession. “You’ve done more to harm science than anybody in my lifetime,” Hawley told him. “I hope you’ll go home and write that in your diary.”

I bet he will.

Read more …

“..I decided I’m going to give up my businesses, sell them all, run for office, run through the United States Senate. Here I am sitting in front of you, six years later, saying, who the f**k do you think you were for doing that? It is a total disgrace what you did to this country..”

• ’Who the F**k Do You Think You Were?’ Moreno Destroys Fauci (Margolis)

Sen. Bernie Moreno (R-Ohio) walked into Wednesday’s hearing wanting one thing from Dr. Anthony Fauci: an apology. He didn’t get one. Fauci came to Capitol Hill, read an opening statement, then refused to answer a single question that followed it. He wouldn’t even answer Sen. Rand Paul’s (R-Ky.) question about whether a folder was sitting right in front of him. Moreno used his time to remind Fauci exactly what the last six years cost him personally, and what they cost the country.


“It was about six years ago, today that I decided I’m going to give up my businesses, sell them all, run for office, run through the United States Senate. Here I am sitting in front of you, six years later, saying, who the f**k do you think you were for doing that? It is a total disgrace what you did to this country,” Moreno said. He turned next to the colleagues who spent years defending Fauci in public. “I hope the voters of the United States of America watch the clips of every one of you doting on a guy who was more interested in being a celebrity than saving American people,” Moreno said. “You may have had a 50-plus-year legacy of public service, but it ends in total and complete disgrace.”

Then Moreno asked the only question that mattered. “Will you apologize, just apologize to the people who you harmed through your actions? Do you have the dignity to just say you’re sorry?” Moreno asked.”On the advice of counsel, I respectfully decline to answer based upon my rights under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution,” Fauci said.

Fauci repeated that one sentence over and over again through the rest of the hearing. Moreno asked about service members discharged for refusing the vaccine. Fifth Amendment. He asked about business owners who lost everything during the lockdowns. Fifth Amendment. He asked about parents who strapped masks onto toddlers too young to understand why. Fifth Amendment. He asked about families who buried relatives who trusted Fauci’s word on booster after booster. Fifth Amendment.

Moreno brought up the Ohio mother arrested for watching a football game with her family during the pandemic. Fauci answered the same way. By the end, Moreno stopped asking questions and started making a point. He noted that James Madison, the man who wrote the Fifth Amendment, once lived a few blocks from the hearing room, and wondered aloud what Madison would think of a public health official invoking it to dodge accountability for his own decisions. “It’s no secret why you have to hire the biggest dirtbag attorney on the planet,” Moreno said. “I hope you’re paying him well, and I hope that one way or the other, somewhere, sometime, you answer for your crimes.”

Fauci’s reputation was already shot by the time he showed up on Capitol Hill, but boy did he absolutely destroy his legacy today.

Read more …

“Senators, grown adults awaiting Zelenskyy’s arrival, clinging to every word, clamoring to be first in line for his reception, competing against each other for time standing next to him..”

• Senate Fan Girls for Zelenskyy then Advances Russian Sanction Bill 86-12 (CTH)

The behavior of the U.S. senators clamoring to be with Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy reflects a certain level of disconnect that needs to be witnessed to be realized. Senators, grown adults awaiting Zelenskyy’s arrival, clinging to every word, clamoring to be first in line for his reception, competing against each other for time standing next to him, the entire event was grotesque and creepy.



Shortly after the guided tour of the upper chamber, the Golden Child was carried on a gilded chariot into the viewing chamber while trumpets blared, senators took turns bringing forth their taxpayer funded indulgences, and Senator Jeanne Shaheen knelt down at his feet and peeled Zelenskyy’s grapes. Yeah, that’s the vibe. The “Lindsey O. Graham Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act of 2026” was then advanced by the Senate in an 86 to 12 procedural vote teeing up the bill for final passage in the Senate later this week. However, I would challenge people to READ THE BILL, it’s only 61-pages.

Within the bill you will note almost everything within the law is left to the enforcement discretion of the President; which normally would not be of great concern, however, given the punishment for violations – things may get sketchy depending on who is in office.A foreign person who “undermines the peace, security, political stability, or territorial integrity of Ukraine;” and/or “undermines the democratic processes of Ukraine,” will be in violation of the U.S. law and subject to fines, travel or visa restrictions. [Page 13, page 28] As a consequence, any person who may be critical of Ukraine -undermining the democratic process via criticism- can be punished by the U.S. President.

Page 36 applies a 100% U.S. tariff against the import of any country’s goods into the USA if that country purchase energy products from Russia (with qualifiers). The intent of that section is to stop China and/or India from purchasing Russian oil and gas. As noted by Politico, ‘the revamped bill expands the number of Russian entities that would be subject to mandatory sanctions — including Russia’s shadow fleet of ships ferrying oil — but it also grants Trump broad waiver authority.’ The House is in summer recess, so things may stall even if the Senate (very pro-Ukraine) passes the bill.

Read more …

Their thought: Once there is war with Russia, nobody will notice the mess they made domestically.

• Britain Backs Ukraine With New Electronic Warfare Cooperation (RFE/RL)

President Volodymyr Zelensky met British Prime Minister Andy Burnham on July 27 as he kicked off a key week of talks with officials around the world to bolster Ukraine’s defenses amid a rising civilian death toll from Russian air strikes back home. Zelensky became the first foreign leader hosted by Burnham since he took office one week ago following the resignation of fellow Labour Party member Keir Starmer. The two leaders met at the Portsmouth Naval Base on England’s southern coast as Burnham pledged his country’s “unwavering” support for Kyiv as the war with Russia runs well into its fifth year.


Zelensky said being the first foreign leader to meet Burnham was “an important signal of support.””We discussed our defense for Ukraine, it is important to have sufficient capabilities to protect lives both in the sky and at sea,” Zelensky wrote on social media after the meeting, adding the development of joint defense production was also touched upon.Burnham and Zelensky were later scheduled to meet some of the 200 Ukrainian military personnel who have been in Britain the past three weeks participating in a maritime security and counter-mine exercise in preparation for potential future Black Sea missions.

‘Stone Cloak’ System
Burnham announced the sharing of the intellectual property behind Britain s new Stone Cloak electronic warfare system, enabling Ukraine to produce the technology itself. The jammers, the size of a tablet computer, can be used to prevent Russian air defenses from tracking and targeting drones when attached to the projectiles, officials said.Downing Street pointed out that the United Kingdom’s support for Ukraine has reached 25 billion pounds ($33 billion) since Russia’s full-scale invasion of February 2022, including 16 billion pounds ($21 billion) in direct military assistance.

Following the London visit, Zelensky is scheduled to travel to Washington on July 28 for talks with US President Donald Trump. Zelensky is also expected to attend the funeral of US Senator Lindsey Graham, who died earlier this month. The Republican lawmaker was a vocal Ukraine supporter and had traveled to Kyiv for meetings with Zelensky days before his death.

Russia, Ukraine Exchange Deadly Strikes
Five people, including a child, were killed and eight injured in a Ukrainian drone attack on Russia’s Rostov region, local officials reported on July 27. Rostov Region Governor Yuri Slyusar said rescuers recovered bodies, two adults and one child, from the rubble of an apartment building hit by a drone, while emergency crews continue recovery operations and provide assistance to victims. Zelensky, in a post on X, said that Ukraine’s long-range strikes hit an export terminal in the Rostov region and oil facilities in the Yaroslavl and Udmurtia regions to reduce Russia’s ability to finance the war.

“Last night, our long-range sanctions were effective in the Rostov region. An export terminal approximately 250 kilometers from the front line was hit. Deep strikes also targeted oil facilities in the Yaroslavl region and the Udmurt Republic, which is 1,300 kilometers from Ukraine’s state border,” Zelenskyy wrote. Meanwhile, the death toll continued to rise in Ukraine, with the capital, Kyiv, coming under a Russian ballistic missile attack on July 26, authorities said, while other regions suffered air strikes during the day that led to at least six deaths.

In the northern Ukrainian city of Chernihiv, a Russian drone struck a supermarket, killing two people and wounding 25, Ukraine’s emergency services said. “This is deliberate Russian terror that has no military justification,” Zelensky wrote on Telegram. Regional Governor Ivan Fedorov said a glide bomb attack killed one person and wounded six in the southern Ukrainian city of Zaporizhzhya, which has been a frequent target of Russian bombardment.

In the frontline city of Slovyansk in Ukraine’s Donetsk region, the Naftogaz oil and gas company said two of its employees were killed in a Russian attack while trying to help residents affected by an earlier air strike. One person was killed, and eight others were injured in a Russian strike on the town of Balakliya in Ukraine’s Kharkiv region on July 27, regional authorities reported.Russia denies targeting civilian areas despite widespread evidence of such attacks that have killed thousands of people since the start of Russia s full-scale invasion.

Read more …

`What else can they do?

• Trump Admin Asks SCOTUS To Revive Mail-In Voting Order Ahead Of Midterms (AmG)

The Trump administration asked the Supreme Court on Monday to let the president’s mail-in voting executive order take effect ahead of the midterms, after a federal appeals court sided with Democrat-led states seeking to keep it blocked just months before Election Day.


Trump signed the order in March, directing the Postal Service to restrict delivery of mail-in ballots in states that refuse to hand over lists of eligible voters. It also orders the Department of Homeland Security and Social Security Administration to compile lists of verified absentee voters for the Postal Service to reference, and threatens to withhold federal funds from states that do not comply, part of a larger effort by the president to tighten a mail voting system he has long argued is vulnerable to abuse.

A federal judge in Massachusetts blocked the order in June, ruling that its timing made it impossible for the Postal Service to propose the rule through proper channels and would deny Congress its required chance to weigh in. The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that ruling Saturday, rejecting the administration’s appeal and leaving the order blocked in the 23 states and Washington, D.C., that sued to stop it.

In Monday’s filing, Solicitor General D. John Sauer argued the injunction improperly impedes the president’s authority over the executive branch, noting the Postal Service falls within it despite its independent structure. Sauer warned that further delay could make the order impossible to implement in time for November even if the administration ultimately wins on appeal. “Every day that the agencies are unable to take steps to carry out the Executive Order as to the November 2026 election makes it less likely that they will, as a practical matter, be able to implement any lists or rules that they ultimately finalize, even if they obtain appellate relief,” the filing states.

The order is one piece of a larger push by Trump to overhaul election security, an effort that has repeatedly run into resistance from federal judges. Trump has also urged Congress to pass his SAVE America Act, which would restrict mail voting and require identification to cast a ballot, though the legislation has stalled on Capitol Hill despite mounting pressure from the president.

Trump devoted a primetime address earlier this month to laying out his concerns about election interference, releasing declassified documents alongside the speech. Trump used the address to direct federal agencies to investigate a Michigan get-out-the-vote operation and to examine whether intelligence officials withheld information about Chinese efforts to influence the 2020 election.

Read more …

“In the new petition, the Justice Department argues Trump’s 2019 White House statements denying the allegations were official acts protected by federal law.”: ”Trump may have to pay almost $100 million in damages and interest “for issuing a press release and answering reporters’ questions, from the White House ..”

• DOJ and Trump Ask Supreme Court to Review $83.3 Million Carroll Verdict (ET)

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) asked the U.S. Supreme Court on July 28 to intervene in the defamation dispute between President Donald Trump and writer E. Jean Carroll. The DOJ is arguing in the petition in United States v. Carroll that the federal government—not Trump personally—should be the defendant in the case that led to an $83.3 million verdict against Trump. At the same time, Trump’s private attorneys filed a petition with the high court in the case of Trump v. Carroll, asking the justices to review the same verdict, largely on grounds of presidential immunity.


The DOJ’s petition, a copy of which was obtained by The Epoch Times, focuses on the federal Westfall Act, which shields federal employees from personal liability for common law tort lawsuits arising from their government employment. Common law refers to the body of law developed over centuries by court rulings, as opposed to statutes passed by legislatures. A tort is a wrongful act or infringement of a right that gives rise to civil liability. When the U.S. attorney general certifies that a federal employee—including a president—was acting in an official capacity, the United States is usually substituted as the defendant, and the individual ends up being dismissed from the lawsuit.

The $83.3 million verdict arose from statements Trump made in mid-2019 while he was president, in which he denied Carroll’s allegation that he sexually assaulted her in the mid-1990s. Trump denied the claim in an official White House statement and again when speaking to reporters—statements the jury found defamatory. In 2020, then-Attorney General William Barr, who served in Trump’s Cabinet, certified under the Westfall Act that Trump’s statements were within the scope of his official duties. As a result, the case, which had been pending in New York state court, was transferred to federal court. Then in 2023, then-Attorney General Merrick Garland, who served in President Joe Biden’s Cabinet, took the unusual step of withdrawing the certification, the petition said.

This allowed the lawsuit to move forward against Trump personally, after which the jury found for Carroll, rendering the $83.3 million verdict. While an appeal was pending, Trump was reelected, and in April 2025, his attorney general appointee, Pam Bondi, recertified Trump’s conduct and made a motion to substitute the United States as the defendant in the case. The Second Circuit blocked Bondi’s recertification, an action the DOJ argues the court was not entitled to take. The DOJ also argues the Second Circuit misinterpreted the Westfall Act.

“This petition presents the question whether the Westfall Act contains an implicit timing restriction barring the Attorney General’s posttrial recertification. Such a restriction does not exist,” the petition said of Bondi’s action. If the United States replaces Trump as the defendant, Carroll’s defamation claim would almost certainly fail. The Federal Tort Claims Act, which covers lawsuits against the government, specifically excludes defamation claims. The DOJ urged the Supreme Court to take the case, arguing it raises potentially significant institutional stakes.

Trump may have to pay almost $100 million in damages and interest “for issuing a press release and answering reporters’ questions, from the White House, defending against attacks on his fitness for office,” the petition said. Trump’s petition in Trump v. Carroll argues that the Second Circuit was wrong to treat presidential immunity like an ordinary legal defense that can be lost if not raised in time, and that the appeals court didn’t actually decide whether immunity protected Trump’s 2019 statements.

If the Second Circuit’s “mistreatment of Presidential immunity and the Westfall Act” are not corrected, there will be reverberations far beyond this case, as the threat of a single judgment for damages based on official acts will prevent presidents from “fearlessly” executing their duties, the petition said. The $83.3 million verdict is separate from a prior $5 million civil verdict Carroll secured in 2023. In that case, a jury found Trump liable for sexually abusing Carroll in the 1990s and for defaming her again in 2022 when he was out of office.

The Supreme Court recently declined to take up Trump’s challenge to the $5 million verdict, but Trump has asked the court to reconsider its ruling. It is unclear whether the Supreme Court will take up the two new petitions.

Read more …

“This is the first case in our nation’s history in which a court has imposed damages liability on a president for his conduct in office,”

• Trump Urges SCOTUS To Overturn E. Jean Carroll’s $83M Defamation Verdict (CNN)

President Donald Trump on Tuesday urged the Supreme Court to once again step into his messy legal brawl with magazine columnist E. Jean Carroll, appealing an $83.3 million jury verdict for defamation on the grounds that, as president, he is immune from the litigation.The appeal, which has not yet been docketed at the high court, relies heavily on the court’s 2024 decision granting the president wide immunity for actions taken in office.


“This is the first case in our nation’s history in which a court has imposed damages liability on a president for his conduct in office,” Trump’s attorneys told the high court, according to a copy of the appeal reviewed by CNN. “Yet, in upholding the exorbitant $83.3 million defamation judgment here, the Second Circuit never even decided whether presidential immunity applies.” Trump told the justices that an appeals court decision in Carroll’s favor would “cause significant damage, not only to this president and future presidents” but also the nation.

In addition to raising the prospect that Trump should be immune from the litigation, Trump is also asking the court to review whether the United States government should be the defendant rather than the president. “Here, the president of the United States has been ordered to pay nearly $100 million in damages … for issuing a press release and answering reporters’ questions, from the White House, defending against attacks on his fitness for office,” his attorneys told the court. The latest appeal comes weeks after the Supreme Court declined to take up a separate case from Trump in which the president is seeking to unwind a $5 million civil verdict that found he sexually abused and defamed Carroll at a Bergdorf Goodman department store in the 1990s.

Trump has denied wrongdoing in both cases. The new appeal involves statements Trump made against Carroll in 2019, when he was president, that a jury found were defamatory and ordered him to pay $83 million in damages. A federal appeals court panel affirmed the damages award, finding it “reasonable in light of the extraordinary and egregious facts” and rejected several of Trump’s legal challenges. Among them, the appeals court found that Trump had previously waived any claim of presidential immunity and said the Supreme Court’s decision in 2024 involving presidential immunity did not alter their view.

The full 2nd US Circuit Court of Appeals declined to revisit that decision in late April. At that time, one of the appeals court judges who sided with Carroll wrote that Trump had first brought up his immunity claims far too late in the litigation.

Read more …

CNN hates Trump. So they make this of his polls.

Note: The CNN poll was conducted by SSRS from July 23-27 among a random national sample of 1,225 US adults drawn from a probability-based panel. Surveys were either conducted online or by telephone with a live interviewer. Results have a margin of sampling error of ±3.2 percentage points.

• CNN Trump Midrerms Poll (CNN)

President Donald Trump, pictured in the Oval Office on July 21, during a meeting with the President of Lebanon
A record-high 73% of US adults say that President Donald Trump hasn’t paid enough attention to the country’s most important problems, a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS finds, with just 27% saying he’s had the right priorities. That comes amid increasingly bleak views of the Iran war, stagnating economic unhappiness, and broad discontent about Trump’s approach to these challenges.Roughly two-thirds of Americans think that Trump’s policies have worsened economic conditions and that his military decisions in Iran have hurt the US. Around three-quarters say the president is not in touch with the problems ordinary Americans face in their daily lives.


Trump’s overall approval rating, 34%, matches the career low he last saw at the close of his first term, following the January 6, 2021, insurrection. Half of Americans now strongly disapprove of him, a high across his terms, with a record-low 15% strongly approving. Within his own party, his approval rating has hit a new low at 78% among Republicans, and just 19% of Republicans say they’re enthusiastic about the rest of his second term, down from 38% last spring. While his ratings are underwater across a range of issues tested, Trump sees his lowest numbers on a trio of interconnected issues:

Just 28% approve of his handling of the situation in Iran, 25% on inflation and 21% on gas prices, with significant pockets of disapproval even among his supporters. With an increasing majority of Americans anticipating a long-term military conflict, only about one-quarter think Trump has a clear plan for handling the situation, down from 40% at the start of the war. And 62% now say Trump is not an effective world leader, up from 54% who felt that way early in his second term. Just one-quarter now say the war has been worth the toll in American lives and dollars, with younger Americans particularly skeptical.

On the most tangible economic fallout of the conflict in Iran, 74% of Americans say rising gas prices have caused them at least some hardship, up from 63% in March, with just under one-quarter believing the president has a plan to address the issue. And 71% say Trump hasn’t gone far enough in trying to reduce the price of everyday goods, up from 58% a year ago. There are few domestic bright spots for the president, whose issue approval ratings top out at 41% for handling voting rights and election integrity – one topic where his supporters have rallied most closely around him.

Just 39% of Americans approve of Trump’s handling of immigration, a relative positive at the start of his second term, with 35% approving of his management of the federal government. Following two recent deadly ICE shootings, Americans say by a 20-point margin that the agency is making cities less, not more, safe. And amid the cyclospora outbreak and a surge in measles cases, they say by a 34-point margin that changes to health agencies like the FDA and CDC are leaving the public less, not more, safe.

Trump has never gotten high marks in polling as someone who’s in touch with the problems of ordinary Americans. In the latest poll, just 27% say that description applies to him, while about two-thirds say that he’s someone who does not put the good of the country ahead of his personal gain.

Those numbers reflect broad skepticism about the high-profile projects that would leave Trump’s mark on the nation’s capital. A 58% majority of Americans say they feel dissatisfied or angry about the construction projects Trump has undertaken in Washington, DC, including the effort to build a new White House ballroom and renovate the Reflecting Pool. Just 17% express positive feelings, with another 25% saying it doesn’t matter to them.

At the time of Trump’s second inauguration, nearly half of Americans thought it was at least somewhat likely that Trump would avoid conflicts between his family’s company and his work as president, but a scant 23% think he’s done so at least somewhat well. And 57% say it’s a bad thing that Trump earned more than $2 billion last year while serving as an elected official, including income from cryptocurrency holdings, royalty payments and property investments. Just 7% see that as a good thing, with 36% calling his earnings while president something that doesn’t matter much.

More than 6 in 10 say that Trump has gone too far in pursuing his personal business interests while serving as president and undertaking projects to remodel the White House and other Washington landmarks, with nearly as many saying he’s gone too far in making changes to cultural institutions like the Kennedy Center and the Smithsonian.

Construction on President Donald Trump’s White House ballroom is seen on July 14. Daniel Heuer/Bloomberg/Getty Images
Read more …

Mamdani = taxes.

• Welcome to Socialism’: A Clinton Hand’s Stark Warning About Mamdani (Green)

Dem strategist Mark Penn took to X during the wee hours Wednesday morning to warn the public about “the lie of socialism” represented by New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, but it’s really a cry for help over what’s happening to his party. Before we get to that, however, you need to understand just what a colossal screw-up Mamdani’s pied-à-terre tax really is. Because if what Penn says is correct — and apparently it is — it’s a colossal screw-up by design. And an oh-so-bitter taste of what New Yorkers are stuck with for the next three-and-a-half years.


In a piece headlined “Welcome to Socialism,” Penn wrote that Mamdani’s administration “with fanfare” released its list of “960,000 owners of real estate in New York City that have been determined they could owe the pied-a-terre tax because NYC computers have determined they own what was billed as a market value of $5 million or more.” So far, so socialist, right?But, Penn added, “there are only about one million residential tax lots in New York City so the first question is how did virtually every owner get put on the list?” Welcome to socialism, indeed.

“The answer is that you are subject to the tax in the first two years if your property has a “DOF valuation” of over $1 million. And so the $5 million figure was a fake,” Penn concluded. But here’s where we got to what Penn called “the interesting part” with understatement he must have choked on: “Once you are on the list you have to prove you should not be taxed by showing you are a resident. Or by challenging the valuation.””Good luck fighting the city bureaucrats on both of these counts. The individual litigation will be massive.” Socialism always starts with “soak the rich” but always ends with “stick it to everybody.” Mamdani is notable only for his speed.

But here’s what Penn missed in his piece.The New York Post reminded readers on Monday that “Mamdani threatened to raise city property taxes by a staggering 9.5% in February unless he was allowed to ‘tax the rich’ to cover a $12 billion budget gap that was later revised down to $5.4 billion.”The good news is that the hole in NYC’s budget got revised downward by more than $6 billion. The bad news is that “City Hall estimates the pied-à-terre tax would yield $500 million per year.” The worse news is that “Democratic city Comptroller Mark Levine’s office said the real figure would be closer to $340 to $380 million.” And the worst news is that critics of the tax say that it “could cause property values to plummet.”

“Add a tax of 4 to 6 per cent (yes condos are taxed that high now) a year of its DOF value to a condo or coop and that condo won’t be worth that much,” Penn explained. “And you can forget about out of town buyers. So this will destroy much of the home values that people have built up.” Mamdani’s brand of socialism is taxing everybody for unrealized gains on properties whose value Mamdani will destroy. Nifty, eh? He’s also the fresh new face of a Democratic Party that has grown so corrupt and stands for so little that Democratic Socialists in cities like New York have taken to wearing it like a skinsuit.

They even boast about it, and the most that even an old Clinton hand like Penn can do is whine about it on X. So the initial burst of pied-à-terre schadenfreude was over Mamdani supporters like Anna Wintour, Woody Allen, and Cynthia Nixon finding themselves on his Enemies of the People list. But today I’m standing in a puddle of my own schadenfreude as top-level Democrats like Penn come to realize just how badly the DSA takeover of their party is going to hurt them.

Read more …

“The plan is a multimillion-dollar version of the $5 gold watch grift. The chumps are New York taxpayers who believe that Mamdani can sell them produce at a discount of 30 percent below the market rate and not lose money. Indeed, this could end up the most expensive produce in the Big Apple.”

“The Mamdani con will cost New Yorkers millions, and most will thank him for it.”

• The Mamdani Grocery Grift (Turley)

Last week, Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s short stint as a faux president ended with an embarrassing acknowledgment that he could not, as promised during his campaign, arrest Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. So, this week, Mamdani the Grocer made a reappearance, with details on the five city-run grocery stores that he will open. But rather than deliver discount groceries, Mamdani is selling New Yorkers a bill of goods that will cost them millions.


What Mamdani described was a discount food bank dressed up as a grocery. Standing in front of blackboards saying “REDUCED 30%,” Mamdani sounded like a bodega hawker: “Once a month, our five city-run grocery stores will set prices for this core set of goods at 30% below typical retail prices. No exceptions, no gimmicks” Here’s the most delicious part: the presser was a gimmick from beginning to end. The mayor promised that “The savings will last for the entire month. That means no weekly fluctuations or sticker shock at the checkout line — not for our seniors living on fixed incomes, nor for the parents who rely on a regular supply of apple slices to keep toddler tantrums at bay.”

The Mamdani markets are new variations of an old New York grift: selling gold watches for $5. The dupes want to believe that somehow this street vendor, surreptitiously displaying watches inside his overcoat, actually found a way to sell “solid gold watches” for just a few bucks. The math simply does not add up for Mamdani. Most groceries have an average profit margin between 1% and 3%, one of the smallest margins of any industry. To promise a 30% discount below market rate that cannot be adjusted due to monthly market fluctuations is economically absurd.

It is not a description of a competitive grocery but a public charity. It is a quasi-food bank where taxpayers subsidize the cost. As usual, Mamdani turns this into a class war, demonizing business owners. He suggests that real grocery stores are simply price gougers hoarding windfall profits from consumers. He ignores that they must pay rent, upkeep and fees — all things the city-run stores may simply write off. He proclaimed, “May the most affordable grocery store win.”

Of course, the test is not which grocery is the most affordable, but which is the most sustainable. If you are willing to take a bath on sales, you can always offer the most affordable prices for as long as your excess cash holds out. In Mamdani’s case, he has the credit of New York City to draw on to compete against Mom-and-Pop bodegas.The subsidy, however, is only part of the costs. The average bodega owner must cover the fixed costs of renting a space, building the store, and complying with inspectors. Those are the fixed costs that must be internalized into the cost of produce to break even.

Real stores are competing in one of the tightest markets in the world and are grappling with a 33% nationwide increase in costs since 2019. Mamdani wants to use the stores to prove that socialism works as part of his effort to introduce New York to the “warmth of socialism.” We may never know the real costs of the Mamdani markets. According to the New York Post, the city plans to open an East Harlem location as its first store, at a reported cost of $30 million.

However, that is not the full cost. The Post also reported that the city had already appropriated $25 million to improve the first site. The city will lose millions that could have been acquired through a sale of the land or through rents to private companies. Those costs are left on other ledgers and not likely counted in the true costs of the Mamdani markets. The first store will not even open until 2027 despite the props behind Mamdani. The second Manhattan store will not open until 2029. That is three years and tens of millions of dollars for just the first two stores.

That is how Mamdani is promising New Yorkers savings of “$90 a month, or roughly $1,000 a year.” He is using the city to subsidize food under the guise of selling at low, but still profitable prices. Ironically, those who can take advantage of the subsidy at the first two stores in Manhattan will be anyone, including the privileged, wealthy New Yorkers whom Mamdani denounces for not paying their fair share. After all, everyone wants below-market-priced slices in the Big Apple.

The first city-run grocery, in East Harlem, will cost $30 million to build — and perhaps more. It will never need to pay this money back nor factor it into its prices. The “warmth of socialism” will cover it; that is, you. In reality, Mamdani will be selling apples at a far greater cost than any competitor, but those true costs will be buried in the city budget and paid for by the taxpayers. Indeed, the Mamdani markets are likely to prove the most expensive groceries in the city.

Mamdani, however, has never sweated the math or the means. He knows that the focus will be on the cash register price and not the true cost. Of course, there is a big difference between the gold watch grift and the Mamdani grift: buying a knockoff watch only costs chumps a few bucks. The Mamdani con will cost New Yorkers millions, and most will thank him for it.

Read more …

“Does Zelensky’s Jewish identity settle Ukraine’s neo-Nazi question?”

• Laura Loomer Says There’s No Nazi Problem In Ukraine. What She Didn’t See (RT)

US conservative activist Laura Loomer arrived in Kiev after years of denouncing Ukraine’s “Nazi apologists.” She met Vladimir Zelensky, apologized for articles she had written for RT and said Russian media had “bamboozled” her. During their interview, Zelensky rejected the accusation Ukraine’s politics is riddled with neo-Nazi influence: the conutry had elected a Jewish president and even adopted a law against anti-Semitism, he argued. Loomer accepted his case and later amplified it in her X profile, stating that “Nazism is literally illegal in Ukraine” and that the country “has stronger anti-Semitism laws than the US.”


Loomer appears to have been persuaded by Zelensky’s Jewish identity, statements from rabbis supporting Ukraine, and Ukrainian laws against anti-Semitism and direct Nazi propaganda. None of these points directly addresses the Russian argument that a de facto Nazi regime has taken shape in the country. But when Russians speak of Nazism in Ukraine, they don’t really mean only anti-Jewish hatred. Ukrainian nationalism, aside from its direct connections to Hitler’s Reich in the Second World War, was born and existed as an idea of ethnic exclusivity directed against a whole range of other peoples.

Today’s Ukraine continues the history of this movement, little different from German Nazism. The Russian argument is that the modern Ukrainian state has revived aspects of this tradition.nThis is not only being noticed by Russians: in recent years, Ukraine’s fascination with Nazi-style politics and the glorification of Nazi collaborators themselves has led to conflicts with other neighboring countries, including the recent scandal with Poland.

Ukraine has pursued aggressive ethnonationalist policies for years now
Ukraine’s 2019 state language law made Ukrainian compulsory across government, education, commerce, public services, media and much of cultural life. While the law formally excludes private conversation, citizens of the country, millions of whom are Russian-speaking, face persecution for listening to music in Russian as well as the mass destruction of books, toppling of monuments and the removal of large parts of their cultural inheritance, which Ukrainian nationalists consider the “culture of the aggressor.”.

Even Western institutions, contrary to the overall pro-Ukrainian position of the West, have acknowledged that Ukrainian language laws do not provide adequate protection for the linguistic and cultural rights of all citizens. Since these statements were made, Zelensky has further tightened restrictions aimed at making life more difficult for those who speak Russian. The forced Ukrainization of education, media, and public spaces, conducted under the guise of ‘decolonization’, effectively means the marginalization of a significant percentage of Ukraine’s residents – those for whom the aggressive ideology of ethnic Ukrainian nationalism is neither natural nor acceptable.


The Zelensky government, like its predecessors, is using the protracted conflict with Russia to justify the implementation of a hostile and hateful ideology. This narrative merges civic and ethnic identity and pressures a huge segment of the population to accept a culture and language which is foreign to them, relearn under the threat of persecution, and give their children over to the state system, which will instill in them hatred for their own ancestors. The only other option is to leave the country, which millions did even before the start of the current phase of the conflict.

[They themselves are not shy about their radically chauvinistic view of Russia and Russian people.] Following his appointment as Zelensky’s new commander in chief last week, an embarrassing 2023 interview with Mikhail Drapaty resurfaced online, in which he outlined the Ukrainian state’s view towards Russians and Russian culture. “We see that you cannot call them neighbors. It is a nation, together with its leadership, that has no right to exist. Over thousands of years, nothing has changed there in terms of civilization,” he said.

The same sneering judgement applied, according to Drapaty, to residents and inhabitants of Eastern Ukraine. The Donbass region, the engine of the national economy until 2014, is full of “criminal elements” because “too little attention was paid to Ukrainization” and the population has not developed a Ukrainian national identity. Military intelligence chief Kirill Budanov went further, commenting on the murder of Russian journalist Darya Dugina in the same year. “We will keep killing Russians anywhere on the face of this world,” he said, “until the complete victory of Ukraine.”

Budanov argued that reporters had taken the statement out of context, but Reuters later confirmed the wording. Ukraine has repeatedly used methods designed to intimidate ordinary people and has shown little concern for the resulting civilian casualties. However, it had been suppressing the voices of Russian-speaking residents who advocate for their rights for years before the conflict – which killed some 14,000 people in eight years – escalated into a full-scale war, enforcing a hierarchy of national identities through political pressure and, at times, direct violence.

Ukraine’s mainstream political parties have largely accepted the language and education policies associated with forced Ukrainization. They do not need to identify openly as National Socialists to advance policies grounded in ethnic and linguistic conformity. Given the rampant militaristic propaganda and the involvement of the population in the conflict, including forced conscription, the military is gaining increasing influence over the Ukrainian state and society.

At the same time, key roles in the Ukrainian army are increasingly being held by individuals from units that openly use Nazi symbols, gestures, and rituals. Just this spring, Zelensky promoted the commander of the infamous Azov formation, known by the call sign “Redis,” to brigadier general. Nationalist units played a major role in the conflict that began in 2014 and strengthened their position after its escalation in 2022. Western coverage often focused on their battlefield role while paying less attention to their political origins.

Although Ukrainian propaganda claims that Nazi symbols are not very popular among the military, new evidence to the contrary appears with regularity – they’re not ashamed of wearing such symbols, even when receiving awards from a president who calls himself a Jew. .

Read more …

Not the present, but it is the future.

• The End Of Freedom – The Last Breath Of A Dying Continent (Adams)

They are killing us slowly. Not with bullets or blades, but with spreadsheets and algorithms, with policies drafted in climate-controlled rooms by people whose children will never shiver through a winter night without heat, whose pantries will never echo empty, whose futures remain secured behind gates we cannot approach.


In 2026, 333 million Europeans—more than the entire population of the United States—have fallen into energy poverty, a euphemism that cannot conceal the raw human suffering it describes, a bureaucratic term that sanitizes the screams of families watching their lives dismantled piece by piece.


Since 2021, utility costs have surged 47%, while wages stagnate in a cruel arithmetic that reduces families to penury. The numbers do not lie, even when governments do. Behind every percentage point stands a human being with a name, with memories, with children who ask why the heat does not work. Behind every data point lies a tragedy that statistics cannot capture—the sound of teeth chattering beneath thin blankets, the smell of cheap candles burning down to nothing, the silence of a home where conversation has stopped because speaking requires energy that hungry bodies cannot spare.

Look at these figures and understand that they represent flesh and blood. In Greece, 40% of households now face the impossible choice between heating and eating—a statistic that translates to grandmothers wrapping themselves in newspapers, to children doing homework by candlelight, to parents skipping meals so their sons might have warmth for one more night. The Greek winter of 2026 brought temperatures that dropped to -8°C in regions where insulation remains a luxury, where families huddle in single rooms wearing every garment they own, where the decision to turn on a heater for one hour means skipping dinner for three days.

Germany, once the industrial titan of Europe, now bleeds 15,000 manufacturing jobs each quarter, its factories darkening like dying stars. The Rhine Valley, which hummed with production for generations, now echoes with the footsteps of workers carrying boxes of personal effects, of security guards locking gates that may never reopen, of communities watching their purpose drain away like water into cracked earth. Energy bills now exceed rent payments by 23% across twelve member states, a reversal of economic reality that breaks families before they even begin, that ensures the poor remain poor and the middle class joins them in descent.

In Portugal, elderly citizens have begun collecting firewood in public parks, risking fines and arrest to secure warmth their pensions cannot purchase. In Poland, organized crime networks now control the black market for coal, selling inferior product at extortionate prices to desperate families who know that burning treated wood releases toxins but choose poison over freezing. The European Commission reports these trends as “energy market adjustments,” as if describing the migration of birds rather than the collapse of human dignity.

But the economic strangulation serves merely as prelude to a more comprehensive destruction. Step into any supermarket in Milan after 7 PM and witness the new normal: empty shelves where fresh produce once stood in abundance, security guards monitoring cooking oil purchases as if guarding gold reserves, elderly women weeping quietly beside discount bins where bruised vegetables wait for hands brave enough to claim them. The Italy that exported culinary culture to the world now imports 60% of its grain from nations that view food as geopolitical leverage, as a weapon more effective than any missile.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle July 29 2026

Jul 292026
 
 July 29, 2026  Posted by at 10:08 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  56 Responses »


Johannes Vermeer Woman in Blue Reading a Letter 1662-3


• War Pause Holds, Trump Vows To Destroy Pickaxe Mountain If No Deal (ZH)
• Mediators Say US-Iran ‘Close’ To ‘Resurrecting’ Failed MoU Deal (ZH)
• US Forces Block Attempted Iranian Surprise Attack (Catherine Salgado)
• New British Defense Secretary: Europe “Shaken Out Of Complacency” By Trump (ET)
• Zelenskyy Says Ukraine Intends to Build Drone and Missile Factory in UK (CTH)
• Cuba Falling: A Lot Happened Last Week. Let’s Talk About It (Sarah Anderson)
• NYC: Begun, the Class War Has (Stephen Green)
• The Future of Artificial Intelligence Is a Choice, Not an Inevitability (Dornik)
• This Fauci Diary Entry Will Cause Your Blood to Boil (Matt Vespa)
• Rand Paul Releases Files of Serious Manipulation of COVID-19 Info (CTH)
• RFK Jr. Reveals the COVID Vaccine Secret Fauci Hid From Americans (Margolis)

 


 

https://twitter.com/TVNewsNow/status/2081870166606954953?s=20

 


 


“Trump has on Tuesday reiterated to Fox News that Iran understands it will never have a nuclear, and reaffirmed that the two sides are talking.”

• War Pause Holds, Trump Vows To Destroy Pickaxe Mountain If No Deal (ZH)

US-Iran attacks have remained paused, and oil prices have extended their declines, as President Trump has claimed Tehran and Washington are now having “very friendly talks” while at the same time suggesting negotiations might not be prolonged. “We are in very deep talks with Iran. If they don’t work out, we will go back to very strong military action,” Trump told Axios, as we highlighted previously.


But possibly the most promising development in terms of an off-ramp is that Oman has presented Iran with a plan backed by Gulf states to manage the Strait of Hormuz.This would reportedly include including collecting voluntary fees for using it, according to sources who spoke to Reuters Tuesday. The report notes that “The plan could serve as a basis to end the disruption to trade through the strait caused by the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran.”

However, this also to some degree represents the stalemated situation going back to square one, given the United States has consistently and vehemently opposed any fees being collected that would go to Iran. An immediate response from Tehran on the proposal has not been forthcoming, and talks could drag on for days related to the Oman plan. Already Tehran is adding some strict conditions regarding frozen or seized Iranian assets abroad, per Bloomberg citing state media:

“Any company or country that receives funds from Iranian assets will not be allowed to pass through the strait,” semi-official Tasnim news agency cites a spokesman for Iran s central military command as saying in response to recent US proposal.

Reuters provides more detail in the following: “The system would be analogous to one in place on Asia’s Strait of Malacca, where Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore ask ships to pay voluntary contributions to fund navigation, environmental protection and search-and-rescue operations.” “The Western diplomat compared it to a voluntary carbon tax for flights, where anyone buying a plane ticket can choose to tick a box if they want to pay to offset their emissions,” the report adds.

The Wall Street Journal has said this represents a “glimmer of hope” as fighting has halted since last Friday: A U.S. official and mediators said Iran and Oman were still far apart on some issues, including whether to charge fees for transit. But both sides said there was progress, marking the first glimmer of hope for diplomacy since President Trump ordered a new round of military strikes on Iran more than two weeks ago in response to Tehran firing on commercial vessels in the strait.

…The goal of the Iran-Oman talks is to agree on which route vessels can take through the 22-mile-wide strait. Conflict erupted earlier this month after the U.S. began guiding ships through the strait by hugging the Omani coast, while Iran wants vessels to cross through its territory.

In the meantime President Trump had laid out Monday while speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One his view that there’s “plenty of time” to deal with Iran and that “we are talking right now..” He laid out that while “there’s a good chance that something could happen,” it remains that If not, “we go back to doing what we were doing two days ago.” Trump has on Tuesday reiterated to Fox News that Iran understands it will never have a nuclear, and reaffirmed that the two sides are talking.

Read more …

Feels like dancing. But not together. Not the same dance.

• Mediators Say US-Iran ‘Close’ To ‘Resurrecting’ Failed MoU Deal (ZH)

Update(11:35ET): Here we go again… despite no evident change in war posturing on either side, and despite shipping traffic still largely at a complete standstill in the Strait of Hormuz, Fox News is out with claims that the failed Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) could be ‘resurrected’… bringing us back to the ‘deal is close’ constant headlines of earlier this summer (though of course the sides were never in reality close – and simply returned to a wider bombing campaign)…


“Mediators of the ongoing conflict in the Middle East believe the U.S. and Iran are close to a deal that would resurrect the failed memorandum of understanding, according to The Times of Israel,” Fox writes, based on the earlier Israeli media article. Negotiators from Pakistan, Egypt and Qatar have been haggling over an Oman-proposed Strait of Hormuz management plan. It will involve fee-collection and is backed by the Gulf states, supposedly. The timing of all of this interesting given Trump is currently hosting Netanyahu at the White House. More from Fox:

Iran and Oman — both of which are situated on the Strait of Hormuz — have reportedly signed off on the proposal advanced by the mediators.The two sources said the White House was waiting to make a decision until after President Donald Trump meets with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Tuesday. Meanwhile…

JMIC: DATA INDICATES ZERO TANKERS IN EITHER DIRECTION OF HORMUZ

Still, the return to deal ‘optimism’ has pushed oil prices down further – which is perhaps the entire point of US officials anonymously hyping that a deal is ‘close’ once again.

Read more …

“Khamenei’s regime..”? We don’t even know if the guy is alive. Stop saying that.

• US Forces Block Attempted Iranian Surprise Attack (Catherine Salgado)

U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) troops thwarted an attempted surprise attack from the terrorist Iranian regime as Tehran doubles down on “death to America.” CENTCOM posted an update on X Tuesday afternoon. “At 5:45 p.m. ET today, Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps forces launched multiple ballistic missiles from Iran in an attempted surprise attack on U.S. forces based in the Middle East. All Iranian missiles were successfully intercepted. U.S. forces remain vigilant and at a high state of readiness,” it apprised the public. Both American and Saudi forces are now conducting strikes on Iranian targets.


In fact, CENTCOM issued a press release on Tuesday about the U.S. and Saudi efforts to eliminate Tehran-tied terrorists in Iraq, where different factions and ethnic groups either enthusiastically support or bitterly resent the Iranian regime. The Iran-backed Iraqi jihadis were gunning for American troops and Saudi infrastructure. U.S. and Saudi fighter aircraft struck multiple terrorist logistics and weapons sites across eastern Iraq in a strong response to over 30 IRGC-directed aerial drone attacks in the last 72 hours. The unwarranted attacks against U.S. forces were not successful.

From February through April 2026, there were more than 600 attempted attacks on U.S. citizens and facilities by Iran-aligned terrorist militias in Iraq. This is why the U.S. will eventually have to take out the Iranian regime altogether, or we’ll never have peace. The Iranian regime is the biggest state sponsor of terrorism in the world, with more reach and proxies even than the Qatari dictatorship.

President Donald Trump periodically threatens total destruction of the Iranian regime. If he really has that firepower, why not do it? It will save lives and a great many years of such ineffective back-and-forth as we’re still experiencing. Four Americans died as a result of Iranian strikes this month. We don’t want any more casualties.Iranian leadership continues to bribe potential assassins for Trump while threatening dire deeds. For example, on Sunday, we had the following message from the supreme leader of Iran (or whoever is running his account):

And a few days before:

Khamenei’s regime just executed several more freedom protesters.

The Tehran terrorists are demonically vicious.

Read more …

Yeah yeah, flatter Trump.

• New British Defense Secretary: Europe “Shaken Out Of Complacency” By Trump (ET)

New British Defence Secretary Wes Streeting
Newly appointed British Defence Secretary Wes Streeting said on July 26 that Europe will one day thank U.S. President Donald Trump for “shaking us out of our complacency” on defense spending Speaking to British broadcaster Sky News, Streeting said that he genuinely believes when this period of history is written, Europe will thank President Trump for shaking us out of our complacency and forcing us to stand on our own two feet and end the period of overreliance on the United States for defense.


Former Health Secretary Streeting was appointed to the defense role on July 20 by the new British Prime Minister Andy Burnham after he reshuffled the Cabinet following the resignation of his predecessor Keir Starmer. What he’s said about Europe isn t unique to President Trump, the MAGA movement or the Republican Party. This has been a long-standing grain of U.S. frustration with Europe under Democratic and Republican presidents, Streeting said, adding that in the world we live in, it is right that we can act to secure ourselves.

Trump has repeatedly called on the UK and other European countries to spend more on defense and become less reliant on the United States for the continent s security. The push for NATO allies to do more to secure their own defenses came as the United States reoriented its defense and security priorities. Asked if he trusts Trump, Streeting said, “I don’t know him, but I do trust the United States,” adding that in his first week in the role he has had “a unique insight into just how close and integral that relationship [between the UK and the United States] is when it comes to defense and security.”

Discussing his conversation with U.S. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, Streeting said he was “clear that we’ve not supported offensive action in Iran and we won’t support offensive action [in] Iran,” but added that there are “plenty of things that we can and should do together when it comes to securing the Strait of Hormuz.” Streeting’s predecessor but one, John Healey, who now has the role of chancellor of the exchequer, the UK’s equivalent to treasury secretary, resigned his post last month in protest over the previous government’s reluctance to adequately fund defense spending, in a move that contributed to Starmer’s eventual downfall.

Healey announced his resignation in a highly critical public letter posted on X, in which he accused Starmer and the Treasury of being “unable” and “unwilling” to “commit the resources that the nation needs to defend the country at this time of rising threats.” Burnham, in one of his first interviews since becoming prime minister, told the BBC he was “absolutely committed” to what was promised to NATO partners. The UK has pledged to spend 3.5 percent of GDP on defense by 2035, in line with a new NATO target.

Burnham said that when he appointed Healey to be chancellor he was “very aware of what he had said about the critical importance of defense spending and the position that he had taken about that.” “The first challenge facing us both is to ensure that the defense investment plan is fully funded and that’s the thing that’s right in front of us and we need to work that through as we go towards the budget later this year.” Burnham also stated that he would be prepared to publicly disagree with Trump if British and American interests didn’t align but added that he had had a good first exchange with the president, finding him to be “really warm.”

Trump, discussing his phone call with Burnham in a July 20 post on Truth Social, said he had a “very good conversation” with the new British prime minister. “We discussed many subjects, including the outstanding relationship we have had with the UK. We will be meeting in the not too distant future for topics of mutual interest,” Trump said, adding that Burnham “has got a big job ahead of him, but he will be able to do it and, of course, the U.S.A. will be there to help!” He added that they discussed “North Sea Oil, Trade, the Military Alliance, Demining of the Hormuz Strait, and many other topics,” and said the call “went very well.”

Read more …

In all they do, there is one purpose: bring Trump/US in to the war. They would love for Russia to bomb Portsmouth. How could Trump say no?

• Zelenskyy Says Ukraine Intends to Build Drone and Missile Factory in UK (CTH)

Watching carefully what Volodymyr Zelenskyy says, with an overlay of his contacts and travel itinerary, it appears the next phase in Ukraine weapon production will be to build missile and long-range drones outside Ukraine. That is to say outside the reach of proactive Russian attack. Zelenskyy travelled to Portsmouth, U.K., today for a meeting with newly installed Prime Minister Andy Burnham. Instead of meeting in London, the two met at a military base in Portsmouth, where 200 Ukrainian soldiers are currently completing maritime exercises.


In an interview with Sky News just before departing for the meeting, Zelenskyy noted the intention to use U.K. factories. In mentioning a joint U.K-Ukraine “drone deal,” Zelenskyy noted [15:32video] “I want to build a big factory in Britain, while offering new technologies and sharing with our partners.“I don’t think Zelenskyy was supposed to say that out loud.Zelenskyy noted the challenges for the U.K effort to support him essentially boils down to “money, intelligence and technology.”

With the EU providing Zelenskyy with funds from the seized Russian sovereign fund; essentially loans with no payback provisions as forfeiture of the fund is intended to be wrapped into any peace negotiation with Russia; Zelenskyy is positioning Ukraine to spend the EU (Russian) funds in the U.K to manufacture authorized Patriot Missiles, U.K Storm Shadow missiles and drones to expand the conflict with Russia. One thing is abundantly clear from the action over the past few weeks, Ukraine and EU/NATO are fully intending to expand the conflict with Russia and, if possible, pull the Iran conflict into the European dynamic. That’s why Ukraine attacked the Iranian vessels recently.

(You may need to use a VPN to watch this interview as the content was suddenly limited after it was on YouTube for a few hours. I suspect the note I made above is directly related to this content control.)

“LONDON — Andy Burnham pledged a “close partnership” between the U.K. and Ukraine Monday after Volodymyr Zelenskyy became the first world leader to meet Britain’s new prime minister. In a show of support, the pair toured a military base in Portsmouth, where 200 Ukrainian soldiers are currently completing maritime exercises. Burnham said his meeting with the Ukrainian leader was “warm” and that he intends to visit the country soon. “We will build this and we will work through the different issues that President Zelenskyy has, many of which we’ve gone into today,” Burnham said.

The meeting came as Britain announced it would share intellectual property to help Kyiv’s war effort. The new prime minister announced that the U.K. will share its “Stone Cloak” electronic warfare system — devices attached to drones to help them evade detection — helping Ukraine to produce the technology on a mass scale. (read more)

Read more …

Trump and Rubio won’t invade Cuba.

” You’re talking about a system that’s been in place since 1959. You talk about a country that’s suffered tremendously because of poor leadership and a bad economic model. You’re talking about a regime that’s survived all these years because they had a foreign sponsor, be it the Soviet Union or Hugo Chávez. They don’t have that anymore..”

• Cuba Falling: A Lot Happened Last Week. Let’s Talk About It (Sarah Anderson)

There’s been a lot going on with Cuba over the last week, and I promise you that every single day last week, I sat down to write about it, but my mind wandered onto the next shiny object — to Venezuela or El Salvador or Costa Rica or Nicaragua or the Georgia governor’s race. I’ve admitted in the past that I’m a little bored with all of it, and I feel like the way Iran has played out has distracted the Donald Trump administration from working toward liberating the Caribbean nation from the Castro regime and 67 years of communism.


The truth is it’s a complicated process. This isn’t Venezuela. We likely won’t have a clean and tidy(-ish) ending to the regime. You can’t just take out one guy, neutralize his cronies, cut off their revenue stream, and start over with Marco Rubio in charge. The Cuban regime is older, more decentralized, and designed to withstand such moves. The power lies within the Communist Party, the military’s economic empire (GAESA), and a deep security apparatus.

There’s also the media problem. The number of MSM fake news stories from anonymous sources about Cuba is exhausting, and it drives me insane how many prominent people report on them or share them as if they are fact. For example, for a while, there was this idea that the Trump administration’s goal for liberating Cuba was the end of this year. It was fun to buy into, and I didn’t find it all that outlandish pre-Iran, but Rubio put a stop to that kind of talk last week when speaking to the press.

“No, look, guys, global affairs are not like – we’re not a miniseries, like, you get in three episodes and it’s over,” he said. “I mean, global affairs are difficult. You’re talking about a system that’s been in place since 1959. You talk about a country that’s suffered tremendously because of poor leadership and a bad economic model. You’re talking about a regime that’s survived all these years because they had a foreign sponsor, be it the Soviet Union or Hugo Chávez. They don’t have that anymore. So it’s – these are complex things that take time, and obviously we’re prepared to do what we can do to effectuate a positive change in Cuba because it directly impacts our national security.”

He added: “It’s a failed state. But I’ve never laid out any timeline as to what change would look like or when it would happen. I wish it was tomorrow because they deserve it; the people of Cuba deserve a better future.” One thing Rubio did confirm — and Trump has hinted at this in the past — is that this is his project. “I work on this issue more than anybody else,” he said, and I think that’s fairly obvious. That said, let’s get to the news. The actual, factual, verifiable news.

The Big State Department Report
The biggest Cuba-related news from last week was the 100-page report from the State Department called “Cuba: The Capital of 21st Century Communism.” I haven’t reported on it yet for two reasons. One, I wanted to read it myself. Two, I’d already reported on some of it over the last year, so I felt like it wasn’t quite the bombshell the State Department wanted it to be. However, I’ve come around to realizing that it’s a good report because it centralizes the information in one location, it helps build a case against the regime for whatever comes next from Trump and Rubio, and it supports the administration’s current anti-far-left terrorism stance and actions it plans to take against it.

So I’m going to hit some highlights here. You can skim them or check out the entire report yourself. The report paints Cuba as what it is. Rather than calling it a failed dictatorship, it’s an ideological threat to the United States, as well as a threat to our national security. Rather than relying on military action against the U.S., it has used irregular warfare to infiltrate, including espionage, infiltration of U.S. institutions, recruitment of American activists, providing a safe haven for terrorists, and creating or supporting ideological networks designed to turn segments of American society against the U.S. government and system.

And not just in the United States, but in other Latin American countries as well — it’s trained groups that helped lead to the Sandinista victory in Nicaragua in 1979; supported Puerto Rican terror groups like FALN and Macheteros; and created alliances with Hugo Chávez. I’ve written about this in the past, but before he got into politics, Nicolás Maduro barely had a high school education. His only formal schooling was a year in Havana at Fidel Castro’s commie training camp.

Cuba essentially had spies within the U.S. government, like Ana Belén Montes, a senior Pentagon analyst, or Victor Manuel Rocha, a U.S. diplomat who was arrested in 2023 after working as an agent for Cuba for over 40 years. The regime especially liked to push black extremists, supported groups like the Black Panthers, and granted asylum to many black criminals, like Assata Shakur. It highlights the Venceremos Brigade, which has brought at least 10,000 U.S. citizens to Cuba since 1969 to identify potential activists, build relationships, and strengthen radical organizations.

It also highlights the Cuban Institute of Friendship with Peoples (ICAP), which has a presence in 150 countries and direct ties to Cuban intelligence, as well as the National Network on Cuba, which is connected to groups like the Democratic Socialists of America, Communist Party USA, Code Pink, and the National Lawyers Guild. It also says that Cuba is a meeting point for countries and groups hostile to the U.S., like Russia, China, Iran, Venezuela, Palestinian Marxist organizations, Hamas and Hezbollah-linked networks, and members of Iran’s Axis of Resistance.

Read more …

“Taxpayers will subsidize Big Grocery to help put mom & pop bodegas out of business, and make the city’s poorest residents more dependent on Big Government than ever.”

• NYC: Begun, the Class War Has (Stephen Green)

Socialist New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s plan for city-owned grocery stores came into sharper focus on Monday after he announced the stores would have prices 30% “below typical retail prices” on a “core basket of goods.”“No exceptions, no gimmicks,” Mamdani promised Monday at a Campaign Against Hunger event in East New York. Spoiler: There’s no hunger to speak of in NYC. Poverty remains a leading indicator of obesity. Guess where Mamdani plans to build his first 30%-under-retail city-run grocery store.


Or I could just tell you. The first Bane Grocers (I made up the name) will open next year in The Peninsula in Hunts Point, in the South Bronx. The plan is to open four more, one in each borough’s poorest neighborhood.The really fun part is that bodegas are particularly dense in the city’s poorer neighborhoods, serving areas that big grocery stores would rather not. These are mom and pop operations getting by on razor-thin profit margins of about 2%. The solution to the city’s problem with its abundant and efficient grocery supply system (yes, you read that correctly) is to introduce city-run stores to undercut the abundant and efficient bodegas in the city’s poorest neighborhoods.

Despite their small size, bodegas operate just like any other grocery or convenience store. They sell staples at maybe a breakeven price, hoping shoppers will splurge on higher-markup items like Chocolate Frosted Sugar Bombs cereal for the kids and a liter of Coke. They don’t make enough money to stay in business selling quarter gallons of milk. What happens to bodegas when customers start going to Bane’s because they can get that same quart of milk for $1.20 or so instead of $1.75? For starters, the bodegas can devote less precious fridge space to milk, or stop selling it altogether. Then maybe they watch those boxes of Chocolate Frosted Sugar Bombs gather dust.

“The only reason to shop at a city-run store — which, if they’re like anything else the city runs, will be poorly managed and with customer service moving at Glacier Speed — is if they undercut the competition with subsidized prices,” I predicted just three weeks ago. That’s when the New York Post talked to bodega owners who claimed that Julie Su, Mamdani’s deputy mayor for “economic justice,” was demanding to know what their best-selling items were, and what their markup was.

If selling staples at 30% under market price puts bodegas out of business, Mamdani may very well engineer an actual problem — a scarcity of small local grocers. Less selection, too, as South Bronx shoppers find themselves having to make the longer trip to city-run Bane’s.If you’ve ever been to a state-run liquor store, you don’t need me to tell you about state-run selections. You’ll be allowed to choose from what they think you should choose from. The New York Post interviewed locals who had “questions about how the discount would work, what few items they’d have to choose from, and how much it would cost taxpayers to subsidize the lefty mayor’s scheme.”

But this is maybe my favorite part of Monday’s sharp focus. While the city will own Bane Grocers, the city won’t run it. Instead, as the Post reported, Mamdani “put out a request for proposals to private grocery chains to run the stores, asking potential bidders to estimate the figure themselves through an annual ‘Affordability Payment’ to cover the losses from selling below retail prices.” Translation: Taxpayers will subsidize Big Grocery to help put mom & pop bodegas out of business, and make the city’s poorest residents more dependent on Big Government than ever. “In the end, it all costs more, and you get less,” Juan Carlos Santiago — a refugee from Communist Cuba — told the paper about the life he escaped. “Thank God, here you can go to another store. Thank God!” But for how much longer?

Read more …

So far I’m not terribly impressed with articles about the future of artificial intelligence.

• The Future of Artificial Intelligence Is a Choice, Not an Inevitability (Dornik)

I have developed something of a reputation as the “anti-AI guy,” primarily because I refuse to join the technological priesthood in singing hymns to artificial intelligence while a handful of billionaires quietly purchase the printing press, the library, the factory, the surveillance camera, the public square, and eventually the human brain. In this new AI-dominated era, even simply asking who controls the machinery is considered an impolite interruption during the worship service.


I am not opposed to artificial intelligence as a technological tool. AI can help doctors identify disease, assist disabled people, accelerate scientific research, automate administrative work, strengthen cybersecurity, improve education, and dramatically expand the capabilities of entrepreneurs and creators. I use technology, I build technology, and I understand its extraordinary potential. My objection concerns the weaponization of AI, the centralization of its ownership, and the political and economic system that many of its most influential advocates openly describe as its destination.

The inevitability argument has become Silicon Valley’s favorite method of avoiding accountability. We are told that AI will eliminate most jobs, replace human decision-making, connect our brains to computers, monitor our behavior, restructure capitalism, and require some form of universal government income. Then, after announcing this revolutionary demolition of human society, its architects shrug and tell us that none of it can be stopped. One must admire the efficiency of building the bulldozer, choosing the building, starting the engine, and then explaining that demolition is simply a force of nature.

Elon Musk told the VivaTech conference in 2024 that, in a “benign scenario,” probably none of us would have a job. He predicted a “universal high income,” an abundance of goods and services, and a world in which the central human question becomes whether life retains meaning when computers and robots can perform everything better than we can. This is an extraordinarily revealing admission because Musk recognizes the problem of meaning while continuing to promote the economic conditions that would produce it. His imagined future bears a remarkable resemblance to WALL-E, except the floating chairs with screens would be replaced by brain-chip implants.

Musk has described Neuralink’s long-term purpose as creating a high-bandwidth brain interface through which human beings could become “symbiotic with AI.” Neuralink’s immediate medical work, including helping people with paralysis control computers, is genuinely promising and deserves recognition. The broader transhumanist ambition raises an entirely different category of questions. Once human thought becomes technologically accessible, the issues of privacy, consent, ownership, manipulation, security, and government access are no longer theoretical. They become constitutional emergencies taking place inside the human skull.

Sam Altman has been equally explicit about the economic transformation he expects. In his essay “Moore’s Law for Everything,” Altman wrote that the technological revolution would be “unstoppable,” that power would shift further from labor toward capital, and that society would require drastic policies to distribute the wealth created by AI. His proposed American Equity Fund would tax companies and privately held land, then distribute annual payments to citizens. The language is dressed in entrepreneurial optimism, but the governing premise is unmistakable: the productive economy will belong to an increasingly concentrated class of capital owners while the public receives a politically administered dividend.

Bill Gates has expressed the inevitability argument with unusual clarity. Writing about the development of powerful technology, Gates said that if he possessed a magic button that could slow development for several decades, he might press it, but “that button doesn’t exist.” He concluded that these technologies will be created regardless of what any individual or company does, driven by competition among nations, corporations, and individuals seeking profit, power, glory, and leadership. Gates has also suggested that AI could reduce the workweek as machines produce more goods and services with less human labor.

Larry Ellison has offered perhaps the most honest preview of how AI centralization could affect civil liberty. During Oracle’s 2024 Financial Analyst Meeting, Ellison described AI systems processing information from police body cameras, vehicle cameras, doorbell cameras, drones, and other recording devices. He predicted that “citizens will be on their best behavior” because everything would be constantly recorded and reported. That sentence should be engraved above the entrance to every congressional hearing on artificial intelligence because it perfectly captures the managerial worldview behind the coming surveillance state. Freedom is apparently much safer once every citizen behaves as though an invisible parole officer is watching from the cloud.

Work carries moral meaning beyond the production of goods. Even before sin entered the world, God placed Adam in the garden “to work it and keep it” (Genesis 2:15). Work was part of human purpose before it became burdened by the Fall. The Bible never treats productive responsibility as an embarrassing defect that humanity must engineer out of existence. A society that strips millions of people of responsibility, discipline, contribution, and the dignity of providing for others will not automatically produce a nation of poets, philosophers, and volunteer gardeners. Human beings deprived of purpose frequently become anxious, addicted, isolated, and easily controlled.

Read more …

“Fauci writes that the CIA had information from sources that the Chinese military had conducted unknown experiments in Wuhan, and that the CIA had information about a “super spreader” event in China in July 2020 in relation to “passage of a virus in a laboratory.”

• This Fauci Diary Entry Will Cause Your Blood to Boil (Matt Vespa)

Dr. Anthony Fauci was ‘America’s Doctor’ during the COVID pandemic. He’s now being exposed as an egotistical clown, which makes sense as the establishment press showered him with praise daily. When his science fiction was exposed, he said that people who attacked him were attacking science. That was the clue that something ugly was underneath, and now we have these diaries that paint this man as a psychopath. All bow before Lord God Fauci—nope.


The medical expert community should be ashamed for, among other things, engaging in this political effort to influence the 2020 election. And what a waste: Trump was elected again in 2024. With Fauci pardoned by brain-dead Joe Biden, his testimony tomorrow morning should be interesting since he can’t plead the Fifth so easily. Still, this journal entry, where he was briefed by the CIA about intercepted communications that might support the lab leak theory and then criticizes a CIA analyst for not understanding the science at his level, is truly disgusting. He’s a pretentious lefty in a lab coat, a Democrat with an MD, who spread nonsense while countless families suffered and many died alone. Bill Melugin has more:

Dr. Fauci writes in his diary that in June 2021, he received a (classified?) briefing from the CIA on the origins of COVID-19 while in a SCIF (Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility) at NIH, and reveals that the CIA told him they had intercepted Chinese communications in Wuhan, including indications that the Chinese had transferred pangolin viruses from Beijing to Wuhan.

Additionally, Fauci writes that the CIA had information from sources that the Chinese military had conducted unknown experiments in Wuhan, and that the CIA had information about a “super spreader” event in China in July 2020 in relation to “passage of a virus in a laboratory.” Fauci writes that the CIA briefer, who he names, was “almost pathetic in her naivety and obvious lack of appreciation of any of the science of what she was talking about.”

The fireworks begin at 8:30 AM on Wednesday morning. Also, remember this nonsense, where Fauci bashed Republicans over the vaccine, then spoke to some black families, and they told him to get his COVID juices out of their faces.

Read more …

“..,painting himself in somewhat of a god-like position and arbiter of all covid truth.”

• Rand Paul Releases Files of Serious Manipulation of COVID-19 Info (CTH)

Dr Anthony Fauci the White House Chief Medical Advisor during the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak under Biden, and head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases from 1984 to 2022, has been subpoenaed to testify before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee this Wednesday, July 29, about his role and activity during the outbreak. Senator Rand Paul has long argued that Dr Fauci misled the nation, and indeed the entire world, on the origin of the COVID-19 outbreak, and attempted to coverup the man-made components to the SARS-CoV-2 that created massive medical, social and economic turmoil.


Anticipating the testimony, Senator Rand Paul has released a massive dataset of records from Anthony Fauci that includes a personal diary written by Fauci during the timeframe in question. [FAUCI FILES HERE] The personal notes and records of Fauci indicate a serious intention to control all elements of what took place during the COVID-19 outbreak; painting himself in somewhat of a god-like position and arbiter of all covid truth.

The records released by Senator Paul are exhaustive and paint a disturbing picture of a medical bureaucracy who believed they were more important than any elected official. Dr Fauci led that bureaucracy with visions of grandeur and an ego fed by a compliant media apparatus who consistently portrayed Fauci as the guardian of all medical truth.

The exact opposite of that altruistic narrative comes through in the details within the FAUCI FILES. “Fauci’s personal diary reveals that as early as January 31, 2020, he was told by top virologists that the virus’s furin cleavage site raised real doubts about a natural origin, with about half the scientists on that initial call believing it looked “constructed.” Despite this early private uncertainty, Fauci spent the following years publicly and confidently dismissing the lab leak theory while insisting the science was settled. The diary also documents his private frustration and defensiveness over gain-of-function funding questions tied to EcoHealth Alliance and the Wuhan Institute of Virology — even as he told Congress under oath that no such research had occurred.” ~ Rand Paul

It appears that Rand Paul gained much of the information for his release from ODNI documents previously, discovered, researched and released to congress by DNI Tulsi Gabbard. It also seems like Acting DNI Bill Pulte continued to declassify and release the files. President Trump realized on April 23, 2020, that he had been misled by the small group within the medical bureaucracy. Dr Fauci noted in his diary….

“[we] will be loved by the people we care about“… Who exactly was that?

The scale of the fraud orchestrated by Anthony Fauci is jaw-dropping. All those so-called scientists, perched up high in their ivory towers, flapping their mouths to lecture and mock anyone who dared have an opinion on that massive gain-of-function experiment they unleashed. They were not doing science at all; they were stroking their own egos the entire time. The hearing on Wednesday is likely to be very explosive; however, in accordance with the strategy of Democrats and Communists in both the House and Senate, there is a distinct possibility they may not attend the hearing in an effort to diminish the sunlight.

Read more …

“Fauci “had a pulmonary infarction, which is one of the adverse events that NIH, CDC and FDA said are expected from the vaccine. He never told anybody,” Kennedy said.”

• RFK Jr. Reveals the COVID Vaccine Secret Fauci Hid From Americans (Margolis)

For years, Dr. Anthony Fauci assured Americans that the COVID-19 vaccines were safe and effective. What he never mentioned, according to Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., is that he may have suffered one of those “rare” adverse events himself, and he hid it from the country while publicly insisting such injuries weren’t happening. Kennedy appeared on Fox News’s The Ingraham Angle to discuss the newly released diary entries that Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) made public, entries that document Fauci’s day-to-day life during the pandemic, on top of his disturbing obsession with himself and the power he wielded during the pandemic.


When Laura Ingraham asked whether there would be any accountability for the trillions of dollars lost, the ruined education of America’s children, and the shattered reputation of the public health establishment, Kennedy didn’t hesitate. “Yeah, and millions of people injured,” Kennedy said. “So he lied about masks, he lied about social distancing, he lied about the transmission, he lied about natural immunity, he lied about the capacity, as you just said, of the vaccine to prevent infection.”

Then came the bombshell. “He got vaccinated at a very, very public press conference in January of 2021,” Kennedy said, noting that five months later, the diary reveals, Fauci “had a pulmonary infarction, which is one of the adverse events that NIH, CDC and FDA said are expected from the vaccine.” “He never told anybody,” Kennedy said. “He got treated for it privately by the best doctors in America at the same time, he was telling everybody that was not an adverse event.”

Think about that for a second. The man who badgered every American into taking the shot, insisting it was perfectly safe, appears to have experienced one of the exact injuries his own agencies flagged, then quietly got elite private care while assuring the public that such reactions weren’t real. Ordinary Americans who reported similar problems got dismissed and mocked. Fauci got the best doctors in America.

The diary entries also reveal a man drunk on his own celebrity. Fauci mused that he could call himself the most famous and talked-about person in America without exaggerating. Kennedy said Fauci’s “focus was on promoting himself, on getting on TV and not doing public health.” While hospitals overflowed and small businesses died, “America’s doctor” was cataloging his own fame.

Kennedy knows firsthand what happened to anyone who challenged the Fauci narrative. Instagram suspended his account, a million followers and all, for supposed misinformation, including saying that COVID came from the Wuhan Institute of Virology. That claim has since gone from forbidden conspiracy theory to the leading explanation. The same fate awaited everyone else who questioned Fauci’s edicts. They got smeared as cranks while his assertions, which have since collapsed, went unchallenged by a compliant press.

We know firsthand here at PJ Media the risks that were involved in questioning the official narrative. We risked being censored and demonetized by Big Tech, which was coordinating with the Biden administration to control what the public knew.And what did we get from Fauci’s narcissism and drunken power? Kennedy pointed out that the United States recorded the highest COVID-19 mortality rate of any country in the world, about 3,000 deaths per million people. Under Fauci’s leadership, the wealthiest nation on Earth did worse than every other country.

He destroyed public trust in health agencies, and Kennedy argues the damage may never be undone. Of course, the legacy media deserves its share of the blame here. Kennedy described the press’s protection of Fauci as corrupt collaboration, and he’s right. We may have asked the hard questions, but the legacy media ran interference instead, torching their own credibility to shield “America’s Doctor.”

Fauci testifies before Congress on Wednesday about his diary and his handling of the pandemic. As PJ Media previously reported, if Fauci repeats his falsehoods under oath, he could face perjury prosecution.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle July 27 2026

Jul 272026
 
 July 27, 2026  Posted by at 9:29 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,  29 Responses »


Paul Cézanne Les (Grandes) Baigneuses 1905


• Zelenskyy Pledges Ukraine Satellite Intel to Assist NATO/USA in Iran (CTH)
• Iran Lashes Out at “Freeloader” Zelensky for Caspian Sea Attack (ZH)
• Iran, Oman Hold Hormuz Talks As US Pauses Airstrikes For Second Day (ZH)
• Britain’s New Cabinet Of Fakers, Fraudsters And Hangers-On (Newsome)
• Why Is National Review Pretending Barack Obama Was a Moderate? (Margolis)
• GOP Senator Kennedy on the SAVE America Act (Matt Vespa)
• Mike Lee to Force Roll Call Vote on SAVE Act Before Recess (Salgado)
• Tucker Carlson Wants Trump Tried for Treason (Matt Margolis)
• It’s Going to Be JD and Kamala, So Calm Down (Kurt Schlichter)
• Why Every Young DSA Member Needs to See ‘Star City’ (Rick Moran)
• Foreign Nationals Now Nearly Half of Germany’s Prison Population (Salgado)
• Fauci Files: A Megalomaniacal Egomaniac (Tom Elliott)

 


 

 


 


“Zelenskyy Pledges to Share Exclusive Ukraine Satellite Intelligence to Assist NATO/USA in Defeating Iran..”

• Zelenskyy Pledges Ukraine Satellite Intel to Assist NATO/USA in Iran (CTH)

If you thought Ukraine was busy defending itself and launching counterattacks against Russia, think again. Apparently, unbeknownst to the rest of the world Ukraine was launching geo-synchronous satellites over the Middle East, deploying proprietary signals intelligence intercepts between Russia and Iran, and conducting covert surveillance operations, in addition to weaving sweaters for homeless kittens from Zelenskyy’s hair… or something. But seriously, read this:


Isn’t he just the most magnanimous little fella? Not only is he singlehandedly going to win a war against Russia, but he’s going to take a few minutes break and win the war against Iran for everyone. What a guy. The last few weeks have been a tidal wave of weird and sketchy stuff that indicates some form of NATO intelligence operation is underway.

This round of sketchy started with that trip to London to meet the coalition of the willing and King Charles; followed two days later with the surprising “drone” attack on the Dormition Cathedral of the Kyiv-Pechersk Lavra, which bore all the same hallmarks as the Nordstream pipeline attack, which was immediately before the G7 meeting in Paris and perfectly set up the horrible Russia theme for the summit.

Someone then launched hundreds of simultaneous long-range drones into Russia hitting oil/gas refining facilities shortly before the NATO summit in Turkey, that set up the “vulnerable Russia” theme. A few days later, Zelenskyy fires the young Defense Minister responsible for the recent success of the modern Ukraine drone program; then following public backlash fires the Commanding General of the military while simultaneously proclaiming everything was awesome.

A few more days pass and suddenly Laura Loomer is in Ukraine begging forgiveness for saying bad things about Zelenskyy and promoting the horrible Putin / innocent Ukraine narrative. (MAGA cleaving) To wit, 12 hrs later Tucker Carlson is giving a Russia-centric podcast -targeted exclusively to a U.S. audience- a horrible Trump / Glory to Putin narrative. (More MAGA cleaving) Somehow, despite Zelenskyy’s exceptionally busy calendar, he found a few hours to sit down with Loomer and talk about the resilience of the Ukraine people who are ducking a weaving through air raids while Zelenskyy stormtroopers try to capture them on the street and push them into the Eastern Ukraine meatgrinder.

But wait, there’s more… This weekend, Ukraine holds a very public, outdoor, open-air drone exhibition and Military Drone Exposition that drew military hardware companies from around the world to Kiev and put a bullseye on the location of many Military contractors and vendors. Not surprisingly, Russia targeted the well-publicized drone exposition, hit the venue with multiple ballistic missiles and killed hundreds of military drone dealers/vendors.

Following the strike on the Drone Exposition, Volodymyr Zelenskyy is now saying he has the time to help NATO defeat Iran by sharing information gathered from Ukraine intelligence operations on Russian satellite orbits. Join in when you feel comfortable. These joint NATO intelligence constructs are difficult to keep up with. When it sounds crazy, it’s ALWAYS an intelligence operation!

Read more …

“Iran Blasts ”Freeloader” Zelensky For Ordering Deadly Attack On Caspian Vessel ”At Israel’s Behest”..”

Zelensky’s nazis use him to get close to Israel. Oh irony.

• Iran Lashes Out at “Freeloader” Zelensky for Caspian Sea Attack (ZH)

Iran has accused Ukraine of attacking an Iranian commercial vessel in the Caspian Sea, which it says resulted in an explosion that killed one sailor and injured another. As we previously reported of the Saturday maritime incident, Ukraine seems to be openly boasting of this escalation. President Zelensky himself announced soon after on X, “We also have very good results from long-range strikes in the waters of the Caspian Sea. In particular, these are vessels that were involved in transporting military cargo from Iran, and a warship.”


Iran’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs summoned Ukraine’s charge d’affaires in Tehran to severely protest the “hostile and criminal” attack on Saturday, IRNA reported. Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi has further warned that the “blatant UN Charter violation” which was “done at Israel’s behest” could serve to “drag Europe into its war”. Araghchi also denounced and attacked Zelensky personally, calling him the “freeloader in Kyiv”…

The risk of the Russia-Ukraine conflict merging with the US-Iran conflict seems plausible, but still remains low, and yet the Caspian Sea situation shows that it is actually possible. The Iranians have sought alternative trade and shipping routes via the Caspian, and early in Operation Epic Fury Israeli warplanes reportedly targeted and took out Iranian naval vessels there. This isn’t the first time that FM Araghchi has called out Zelensky. Back in January of this year, for example, he called Zelensky a “confused clown”, and said that the Ukrainian leader had been “rinsing American and European taxpayers to fill the pockets of his corrupt generals.” The two countries have previously clashed over Iran supplying Russia with Shahed suicide drones.

Iran Will Halt Tit-For-Tat Strikes If US Maintains Pause The diplomatic track appears to have opened with the Trump administration’s move to pause strikes as a goodwill gesture ahead of the weekend – now in its second day. That created space for Omani officials to meet their Iranian counterparts over the weekend, with Tehran reporting “some progress.” The talks have now produced a reciprocal stand-down, under which Iran would halt retaliatory strikes on US bases as long as the US maintains its pause in airstrikes.

Reuters reports: Iran will halt its own attacks as long as the United States maintains its latest pause on air strikes, a senior Iranian official told Reuters on Sunday, after President Donald Trump abruptly called off his two-week-old bombing campaign. After 13 nights of intensifying U.S. air strikes on Iran, the Pentagon abruptly suspended the campaign late on Friday, with no U.S. attacks reported on either Saturday or Sunday. Iran, which had been following each night of U.S. attacks with its own strikes on neighboring countries that host U.S. bases, has also so far held fire for two days.

The U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Mike Waltz, told Fox News on Sunday that Trump had decided to pause U.S. attacks to allow more time for diplomacy. “He’s giving talks some space, he’s giving it a little bit of room,” Waltz said, without providing further details. The senior Iranian source, speaking on condition of anonymity, told Reuters: “Iran’s position remains ‘attack for attack’: if the attacks stop, Iran will also halt its operations. That message has already been conveyed to the United States.” The source added: “However, Iran is prepared to mount a broad response should the U.S. launch another attack.”

Asked about the pause, a senior official in Trump’s administration said on Saturday that the president “has always been clear that his preference is diplomacy, but he has shown Iran what will happen if they fail to come to the table in a serious way.” The senior Iranian source said Tehran did not hold much hope that Trump’s decision to pause strikes represented a major shift in the U.S. negotiating position. “There is more skepticism than optimism about the halt in attacks. The prevailing view is that the pause is tactical rather than genuine. Iran has accumulated enough bitter experience with what it sees as U.S. deception,” the source said.

Read more …

“The pause offers the clearest signal yet that a diplomatic off-ramp may be emerging, with Iranian and Omani officials reporting progress in talks to reopen the critical waterway.”

• Iran, Oman Hold Hormuz Talks As US Pauses Airstrikes For Second Day (ZH)

The US military paused its air campaign against Iran for a second consecutive night after nearly two weeks of tit-for-tat strikes. US strikes were aimed at degrading Tehran’s one-way attack drone and missile capabilities around the Strait of Hormuz, while Iran hit US bases in the region. The pause offers the clearest signal yet that a diplomatic off-ramp may be emerging, with Iranian and Omani officials reporting progress in talks to reopen the critical waterway.


Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei said in a Telegram post that he met with the Omani deputy foreign minister and held talks on Friday and Saturday about restoring safe transit for commercial vessels through the Strait of Hormuz. Baghaei said the officials exchanged views on principles and operational mechanisms for managing safe maritime navigation through the strait. “The talks were constructive, and some progress was made,” he added, noting that technical and political consultations remain ongoing. The Omani delegation left Tehran on Saturday evening.

The talks coincided with the US military’s two-day pause in strikes and came as Brent crude futures surged into triple-digit territory and the national average for regular gasoline jumped above the politically sensitive $4-a-gallon mark. JPMorgan’s head of Global Commodities Research and Strategy, Natasha Kaneva, told clients last week that Brent prices at this level could increase pressure on Washington to reopen diplomatic channels. Meanwhile, Iranian Army spokesman Mohammad Akraminia appeared on state television on Sunday and warned the US that any further strikes would widen the conflict.

“I believe that if the Americans once again fall for the Zionists’ deception, or move in line with them, and insist on continuing the war, particularly through air strikes, geographically this will expand further,” Akraminia warned. Akraminia said the conflict has already expanded to the Bab al-Mandab Strait on the southern Red Sea, referencing the recent Houthi attacks on tankers. “The scope of our operations now encompasses the entire region, from US bases in Jordan to the countries along the Persian Gulf,” he said. Earlier, United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations reported an incident in the southern Red Sea after a “tanker witnessed a splash from an unknown projectile in proximity to the vessel.” Details are scant at the moment.

Read more …

Can’t post the entire article here. But do read, I learned a lot.

“Burnham is an out-and-proud socialist who had already signaled that his government would spend and tax more.”

• Britain’s New Cabinet Of Fakers, Fraudsters And Hangers-On (Newsome)

Britons are struggling to characterize their new Cabinet, following the arrival of a new prime minister on Monday. The Cabinet is not as northern or female as Andy Burnham signaled. Most members have certainly changed. Most are not loyalists to Keir Starmer, even less so to Tony Blair. Like Burnham, many hark back to a mythical golden age of socialism in the 1970s. Like him, most are alarmingly deficient in popular mandate, external qualifications, and even political trust for their new responsibilities.


Let’s start with Burnham himself, a man born in Liverpool who pretended to be Mancunian to win the mayoralty of Manchester. He claims to represent the north but has not lived north or east of Manchester. At best, he represents a narrow part of west-central England, just north of the Midlands. Burnham has always looked south while talking up the north. Burnham was most newsworthy for agitating for changes in national government, despite sharing a party with Starmer.

As Starmer continued to trip himself up with both feet, Burnham was one of the Labourites who prevailed on ministers to brief against their PM. After Starmer blocked Burnham’s candidacy for an accidental by-election in February, Burnham prevailed on a local MP to resign from Makerfield to force a by-election in June, which Burnham won easily, to return to Parliament, which would allow him to challenge Starmer for the leadership (less than two years into Starmer’s five-year term). Starmer initially vowed to fight on but announced his intent to quit this month. No MP stepped up to challenge Burnham’s presumptive run.

Thus, Burnham has no popular mandate to be PM, even within the party, except in the form of pledges by more Parliamentary partisans in support than against. Opposition parties rightly called for a general election to confirm his premiership, but the constitution does not oblige him.

Burnham’s supporters pretend that his easy rise proves the strength of his candidacy. In reality, it proves the weakness of his party. It could not find a new leader within its own MPs, despite a whopping majority. It triggered an expensive by-election and a more expensive mayoral election to reach outside of Parliament. Meanwhile, Burnham unwittingly poured scorn on that same Parliamentary party by criticizing normal politics and the London elite. (Since then, he has aired the idea of moving the Cabinet from London to Manchester. His current plan is to spend at least one day per work week there. That’s neither efficient nor effective.)

In the many weeks that Burnham enjoyed as rising PM, he remained vague about his Cabinet and his policies. On Monday, he spent hours appointing just the highest roles in the Cabinet. The other appointments look set to continue for days. Of the first day’s picks, I must start with the only selectee who can be coded as qualified and mandated (although not loyal).

John Healey becomes Chancellor of the Exchequer, the second most powerful position in government. He had quit as defense secretary six weeks ago, over Starmer’s procrastination on filling a hole in defense spending. Healey said that Britain should spend 3 percent of GDP on defense by 2030, which means he will need to find a couple dozen billion pounds per year. Previously, he advocated issuing “war bonds,” but who would buy them when the government is running record debt? He will need to cut other departments or raise taxes (probably both). On Monday, Healey said “fiscal control” would be his “first duty.” You could see the markets’ confidence decline immediately.

Healey’s resignation suggests a certain loyalty to Burnham, but otherwise they barely know each other. More usefully, he was a minister in the Treasury under Prime Minister Gordon Brown. Yes, Healey is actually qualified by experience! This is remarkable given that his predecessor, Rachel Reeves, falsified her CV, couldn’t add, and quickly became the most U-turn-prone and hated chancellor ever, as well as the most tearful.

Healey remains constrained by record government debt and his party’s suicidal unwillingness to cut spending. Remember that Starmer increased spending on welfare and benefits, after backbenchers rejected his proposal to cut them. (That was within Starmer’s first year of premiership.)

Burnham is an out-and-proud socialist who had already signaled that his government would spend and tax more. By Tuesday, his administration revealed plans to cut VAT (a sales tax) on electricity, to be funded by cutting the Starmer administration’s planned digital ID. But the minister responsible for that plan, Darren Jones, revealed, after being fired by Burnham, that digital ID was never funded. So Burnham is either ignorant or dishonest. This . . . doesn’t . . . bode . . . well.

In any case, scrapping VAT on electricity doesn’t make much difference to a household electricity bill in which most of the pricing goes to fund green initiatives, debt, stealth taxes, and administration. Burnham already looks unprepared and unreliable. Confirmation comes in the form of his deviation from his team’s prior briefings that he would appoint either Ed Miliband or Shabana Mahmood to the Treasury.

Red Ed goes to the Foreign Office, for which he is woefully unqualified and an undoubted liability. He infuriated the U.S. (and most Britons) as energy secretary, with his absolutism about reaching net-zero carbon by 2030, at whatever cost to the consumer. Ed also, by the way, reminds everybody of the weakness of the party’s leadership selection. He was leader from 2010 to 2015, when he literally and metaphorically stumbled at every election husting. Yet Burnham thinks Miliband is the best person to articulate British interests abroad? This won’t last long.

Miliband is already hurt. He has been denied the job he wanted, even though he was the first senior minister to call for Starmer to go, and he helped Burnham with an economic plan. (Some plan: it remains as vague as ever, except for the Soviet-style time horizon of 10 years.)

Meanwhile, Mahmood stays at the Home Office. Under-informed (or biased) souls read this as confirmation of her competence in pushing through controls on illegal immigration in the face of majority opposition from civil servants and backbenchers. In fact, she is hurdling a low bar after decades of government failures to control immigration, despite popular demands and almost every party’s commitments to lower net immigration.

Worse, Mahmood is duplicitous. She tells the right wing that her tweaks to the benefits and the timeline of asylum applications will dramatically control immigration. She tells the left wing that she will make the refugee route easier (which is the route by which almost all illegal immigrants get residency, with more privileges than citizens).

Also concerning is Mahmood’s long history of Islamocentrism, which is bizarrely ignored by mainstream media. She tars normative Britons as racists (whites and Jews in particular: isn’t that racist?), campaigned against Israel, played up her status as the first Muslim home secretary, promised that her promotion would serve “her” community, and railed against supposedly routine experiences of racism in her hometown of Birmingham, where her demographic is the largest.

I doubt Mahmood will last much longer than Miliband within Team Burnham. He favors the left of the party, which has characterized her (ridiculously) as a Nigel Farage in Labour colors. For now, Burnham needs to be seen to reward her, if only because one of her allies in Parliament, Josh Simons, was the MP who resigned from Makerfield to make way for Burnham.

So the highest three officers in the land will not last as long as normal, in my estimation. Burnham’s administration will not bring the stability that Britons crave, let alone the competencies that the markets and foreign governments crave.

Read more …

“..he built the most sweeping left-wing agenda of any modern president, yet somehow convinced people like Klein to call it “moderation”..

• Why Is National Review Pretending Barack Obama Was a Moderate? (Margolis)

National Review Online editor Philip Klein wants you to believe Barack Obama was some kind of political moderate. That’s the only way to read his reaction to a viral clip of the former president telling Caitlin Clark not to let “media nonsense” get her down and reminding her she’s a great player. Klein called it “a perfect example of why Obama is hated by the far Left & also why he won two elections comfortably.”


Set aside the Caitlin Clark moment for a second. The framing is the real story here. Klein wants readers to believe Obama was more moderate than John McCain in 2008 and Mitt Romney in 2012. He wasn’t.

Sean Davis, cofounder of The Federalist, made the point with numbers Klein conveniently left out. “Obama was adored by the far Left when he left office (95% approval rating among Democrats) and he remains adored by the far Left today because he is the most left-president in modern American history (89% approval rating from self-identified liberals in a CNN poll last month vs. 28% approval from self-identified conservatives, which means the left-wing loves him even more than the right-wing hates him),” Davis wrote.

I’ve written a few books about Obama, and I can tell you exactly why the far left worshipped him then — and still does: he built the most sweeping left-wing agenda of any modern president, yet somehow convinced people like Klein to call it “moderation” just because he said a few kind words to Caitlin Clark. Let’s run through what he actually did as president, since Klein seems to have misplaced the receipts.

Obama ran in 2008 promising to “fundamentally transform” the United States, and then he did exactly that. The 2009 stimulus was one of the largest government interventions into market activity in American history. Obamacare handed Washington unprecedented control over the nation’s healthcare system, and its Medicaid expansion extended federal-state coverage to millions more people, with Washington footing most of the bill. Dodd-Frank buried the financial industry under new federal regulations.

Obama didn’t stop at legislation. When Congress refused to pass the DREAM Act, he unilaterally shielded hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants who arrived as children from deportation through executive action alone, an end run around Congress that was blatantly unconstitutional. He committed the United States to international greenhouse gas targets the same way, through executive fiat instead of Senate ratification, because he knew the votes weren’t there.

His administration also nationalized the student loan industry, cutting private lenders out of the market entirely. He reinterpreted Title IX to smuggle “gender identity” into federal law, a decision that eventually opened women’s sports and locker rooms to biological men. He repealed “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” ordered his Justice Department to stop defending the Defense of Marriage Act in court, and later endorsed same-sex marriage after running in 2008 as a supporter of traditional marriage. Obama also helped transform the Democrat Party into an antisemitic party.

And don’t even get me started on what Obama did to race relations in this country. That last part tells you everything about how Obama operated. He knew exactly where the country stood in 2008, so he told voters what they needed to hear. Nobody who was paying attention actually believed him. He was too shrewd a politician to show his full hand before he had the power to play it.

None of this is moderate. None of it is centrist. It’s the most aggressive leftward lurch this country has taken in modern presidential history, and Obama pulled it off while much of the press corps treated him as a reasonable, above-the-fray statesman.

So when the editor of National Review holds up a clip of Obama being nice to a basketball player as proof of ideological balance, ask yourself why a supposedly conservative magazine is doing PR for one of the most radical presidents this country has ever had. Obama didn’t win over the far left by accident. He earned every ounce of that adoration by delivering exactly what they wanted, one executive order at a time.

Read more …

“BRENNAN: “The SAVE Act, as you know, or even some version of it, is highly partisan, highly controversial.”

“Bigger picture, isn’t it going to hurt faith in our election process if a Republican-only policy to change how elections are run is rammed through 100 days…less than 100 days out from the election?”

• GOP Senator Kennedy on the SAVE America Act (Matt Vespa)

President Trump criticized Sen. John Thune (R-SD) for his weak, unimpressive effort to pass the SAVE America Act, a key priority for the president and a top demand of the GOP base. The bill will be a significant step toward improving election integrity, specifically making sure only Americans vote in U.S. elections. It represents everything conservatives have fought for regarding election security.Yet, CBS News’ Margaret Brennan thought it could undermine faith in our elections, because why wouldn’t an establishment outlet go down that rabbit hole? Yet, Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) was the one interviewed for this segment, and he wasn’t having any of this nonsense. His response to her first question was great, with a simple “no.”


BRENNAN: “The SAVE Act, as you know, or even some version of it, is highly partisan, highly controversial.”“Bigger picture, isn’t it going to hurt faith in our election process if a Republican-only policy to change how elections are run is rammed through 100 days…less than 100 days out from the election?”

KENNEDY: “No.”

“In my opinion, for both sides to have credibility in our elections, we need to do two things and only two things.” “Number one, you have to prove you are who you say you are in order to register to vote and to vote.” “And number two, however you decide to vote, that’s up to the states. We need to go back to having an election day, not an election month.” “We’ve got to know the results of elections that night or shortly thereafter, if it’s close.” “That, to me, is what the SAVE Act is all about.” “And I think we can pass it. And I think we can craft it in a way to survive a birdbath, but we’re not going to know if we don’t try!”

BRENNAN: “Grants, in other words, to states to incentivize. Not requirements for states to action…that’s your version.”

KENNEDY: “That’s not the only thing.” “I’ve been contacted by some really smart people about a way to do it in addition to the grants. I’m not saying it will work. But you’re not going to know unless you try.”

Read more …

Forcing the vote appears to be the only way. BRENNAN: “The SAVE Act, as you know, or even some version of it, is highly partisan, highly controversial.

• Mike Lee to Force Roll Call Vote on SAVE Act Before Recess (Salgado)

Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) has openly promised to be the one senator necessary to force a roll call vote exposing who will or will not vote for crucial election integrity legislation just before the August congressional recess. Congressional rules acknowledge that the ability of any senator to demand a roll call vote is grounded in Article I, Section 5, Clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution, which states that “the yeas and nays of the members of either house on any question shall, at the desire of one fifth of those present, be entered on the Journal.” Therefore, it requires only one senator to start the process for such a vote.


Notably, election reform is wildly popular not only with Republican but even with Democrat voters. The SAVE America Act has bipartisan voter support. Scott Presler begged that one senator “to object to unanimous consent & ‘ask for the yeas and nays.’” Mike Lee replied on X:


Lee subsequently reshared Presler’s message while tagging Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.). “I hereby object to any effort to put the Senate into recess in August—at least until such time as the Senate has passed the SAVE America Act—and hereby request a roll call vote,” Lee wrote, making it clear to the whole country what he was doing and putting Thune on the spot. “Do not assume you have my consent. You do not,” Lee warned Thune.

The House had actually found a workaround to avoid the blocks the Democrats set up, as provisions of the SAVE Act were really included in the budget resolution that the lower chamber had put together before the recess, a resolution that also included vital military funding. Unfortunately, Thune, ever the backstabber, delivered a nonsensical lecture about the importance of consulting Democrats — you know, the ones who aim to defund ICE and the Iran conflict, fund foreign criminals, and kill all election integrity efforts — and coming up with a “bipartisan” funding package.

The last thing Thune wants is to be put on the record with a roll call vote, exposing him and his lack of efforts to pass the SAVE America Act. On Saturday, President Donald Trump made one last push for the legislation. “The all Republican Senators! Terminate the Filibuster, which the Democrats will do as soon as they get the chance, and PASS THE SAVE AMERICA ACT, and everything else, including the Budget, and upcoming Debt Ceiling. Do it now, before it is too late!!!” Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform. Lee endorsed Trump’s call.

Sadly, Republican senators keep forgetting they’re supposed to work for We the People, the ones who elect them and pay their salaries. Hopefully Lee can galvanize some Senate action before the August recess. Most Americans across the political spectrum support voter ID, so We the People definitely want action.

Read more …

What does Tucker say about October 7?

• Tucker Carlson Wants Trump Tried for Treason (Matt Margolis)

It’s been coming for a while, but this week, the once-conservative firebrand Tucker Carlson has doubled down on a version of reality that would make Iran’s mullahs blush. Carlson used an appearance on the East Meets West with Olga and Tara podcast to unload on a provision in the fiscal year 2027 National Defense Authorization Act that would expand defense-technology cooperation between the United States and Israel. His verdict? Lawmakers who back the measure are acting against America’s own interests, effectively merging our nations’ militaries.


Carlson didn’t stop at policy disagreement. He accused the Republican Party of handing the country’s sovereignty to a foreign government, sparing only two members from his contempt. “The Republican Party has decided that the interest of Israel is more important than the interest of the United States,” Carlson said on the podcast. “There are a couple of exceptions Marjorie Taylor Greene, Thomas Massie, and they were driven out of the Republican Party. So it tells you what the priority is. The priority is serving Israel.”

Coming from a man who has spent years cozying up to authoritarian regimes and excusing Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, that’s rich. But consistency has never been Carlson’s strong suit. He then accused Israel’s Mossad of feeding American policymakers fabricated intelligence for decades. “Mossad has fed, repeatedly, disinformation lies to American policymakers over decades, including the lie that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction,” Carlson said. “That fundamentally came from Israel. There’s no dispute about that.” There’s plenty of dispute about that, because it’s false.

British intelligence, French intelligence, German intelligence, and Spanish intelligence all concluded Iraq likely possessed chemical and biological weapons and was in defiance of the United Nations. From there, Carlson’s rhetoric went from conspiratorial to unhinged. He called the defense-technology partnership a “generational disaster” and framed it as proof Americans no longer control their own country.”It’s the definition of treason,” Carlson said. “This is treason. This is acting against your own nation, on behalf of a foreign nation.”

Then came the real bombshell. Carlson wants President Donald Trump and the Republicans who support the NDAA provision put on trial for it. “The idea that the Republican Party would support merging U.S. and Israeli intelligence, IDF and Pentagon is so deranged that you have to root for treason trials, for Nurnberg trials at some point,” Carlson said. “And the president could veto it; he won’t because he’s a slave to Israel.” Let’s be honest here. Comparing a defense-cooperation bill to the crimes of Nazi Germany while demanding war-crimes-style tribunals against your own president isn’t principled dissent.

This is full-on loony talk here. He sounds no different than the socialist candidates running for Congress nationwide… and, let’s be honest, some Democrats in Congress today. Carlson closed out his rant by accusing anyone who defends Israel of defending genocide. “We’re against genocide, we’re against book burning, that’s what we learned from the Nazi period,” Carlson said. “And all of a sudden you wake up and we’re like, ‘No, no, genocide’s totally fine, as long as Israel’s doing it.’ In fact, if you call it genocide, you’re the bad person.” I don’t know what happened to Tucker. I remember being excited when he started his show on X, but now, he’s become indistinguishable from far-left crazies. Calling for treason trials against a sitting president over a defense bill is the sign of an absolute meltdown.

Read more …

We have two years of these bets ahead of us. Yay!

• It’s Going to Be JD and Kamala, So Calm Down (Kurt Schlichter)

Everybody who wants to gobble popcorn while watching exciting POTUS primary races in 2028 is going to be disappointed, at least in terms of the final outcome. We know how this story ends, but what leads up to it may be hilarious, particularly on the Democrat side. Every weirdo, loser, and mutation in their party intends to try to get the nod, knowing that the fix is already in; it’s just going to be a chance for folks like Democrat Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (NY-14) and Pete Buttigieg to try to raise their profiles or maybe get picked to be VP. Neither of those two will.


But right now, it’s obvious who is going to go head-to-head against each other in the general election. You can deny it, you can argue it, you can cope all you want, but barring some unforeseen turn of events, we know how this is going to play out. It’s going to be JD versus Kamala, and that’s just the way it is. Well, that’s not technically correct. On the Republican side, the guy who’s going to be nominated is the guy who Trump says is going to be nominated, and right now that’s Vice President JD Vance. People are fantasizing that Secretary of State Marco Rubio is going to jump in and fight the veep for the top of the ticket, but that’s crazy talk.

And the least crazy guy involved is Marco Rubio himself, who has made a magnificent and fantastic 180° turnaround since his unfortunate dalliance with amnesty under the influence of a bunch of Bushie loser Senate colleagues a decade ago that nearly sank his political future. He knows that Donald Trump is going to pick the next nominee, and Donald Trump is already sending up smoke signals that it’s going to be JD. Marco is young. He has time. And he has no political death wish. He has stepped on the Donald Trump land mine before, and he does not want to be blown to little bits. But you can be sure that if JD stumbles, Marco Rubio will be right there to pick up the ball and run it in for the big win.

Will JD Vance stumble? He’s getting a lot of heat from some people on the Republican side, particularly those who think that he is insufficiently committed to destroying our enemies and protecting Israel. It’s annoying. Never-Trump has-been Brett Stephens, whose self-seriousness is inversely proportional to how seriously he should be taken, said, “Vance is MAGA at its absolute worst. Able to still sound reasonable while defending the indefensible.” Sounds like a rave review. Others cited his role in the Senate to essentially blame him for Capitol Hill dysfunction. Come on. Vance got grief for referring to the organized haters as an op; the organized haters of the op were outraged he called their transparent op an op.

JD terrifies those with the fantasy of returning to the good old days of submissive GOP-managed decline; they know he’ll carry the Trump message forward – which is a selling point. JD certainly doesn’t have the same view of war as a lot of traditional Republicans do, no doubt, in part, because, unlike most of them, he actually went and fought in one. He has seen firsthand the failure of America’s foreign policy establishment, and if he’s a little bit gun-shy about gunboat diplomacy, he’s got good reason to be. After all, his homeland in Appalachia has traditionally been one of America’s premier fields for growing crops of cannon fodder.

The consequences of the hawks’ prerogatives fall on people like JD Vance. Though a fellow son of that region and a veteran, I tend to be a little more on the “Bomb the bastards back into the Stone Age” side. Still, JD has earned his right to be skeptical about the overextension of American military power.Then there’s Israel, and while many of the people who are critical of him are very much aligned with me—my objection to Israel is that we’re not giving the Jewish state enough money and they’re not killing enough terrorists—they are misguided. JD Vance is not a groyper. If you actually listen to what he says instead of watching carefully curated podcast clips, you’ll see that what he’s saying is true.

The Venn diagram representing the interests of the United States and Israel is not a circle. Israel has its interests, and we have ours, and there’s nothing wrong with saying that. It’s obvious, and it’s important that we acknowledge this reality. Israel has a terrible image problem in the United States, partially because many Americans are stupid and weak, and because Democrats are cowardly and weak. The proper answer to terrorists is to kill them all and lay waste to their homes. That’s aesthetically displeasing to many people. Israel has chosen being aesthetically displeasing to being genocided out of existence by semi-human seventh-century barbarians, and a lot of fools hold that against it.

JD Vance does not hold that against Israel. He simply points out, correctly, that sometimes what Israel needs to do conflicts with what the United States needs to do, and a president of the United States should do what the United States needs to do. As for Iran, if you think he somehow believed that the Iranians were going to completely change who they are and become nice guys, I really can’t help you. This guy is a lawyer. He knows a little something about negotiating. And when you’re negotiating, you rarely describe your obnoxious opponent in the harshest possible terms. You talk nice about them. That’s how negotiations work.

Now, he may not choose to run for president in 2028. He’s got a very young family, including a newborn. It’s not clear his wife loves being in the limelight. She’s an incredibly smart woman; spend five minutes with her, and you’ll see. JD is even younger than Rubio. He’s got time. The bottom line is he may choose not to run. If he does choose to run, right now he’s got Trump’s endorsement, which means he’s the nominee. Certainly, he could lose Trump’s endorsement—Trump is notorious for spectacular breakups with former allies—but if you’ve got chips, put them down on JD.

Maybe there will be competition. There are rumblings about Ted Cruz jumping in, but I don’t think Ted Cruz is going to do that because Ted Cruz is smart and he doesn’t want to be humiliated by being utterly destroyed in the primary. There will probably be some dorky Never Trump geebos going for it, like Mike Pence, which would be hilarious. The Ned Flanders of American politics would be humiliated, but for Pence, you get the vibe that that might be a plus for him. Look, the GOP nominee in 2028 is going to be JD Vance about 80 percent of the time, so everybody needs to get their feelz under control and get ready to back him. Maybe he’s not 100 percent with you, but the alternative is 0 percent with you. Get over your panty twist, people.

And the Democrat nominee is going to be Kamala Harris. That’s just the way it’s going to be, because the Democrat Party’s biggest constituency is not failson and disappointment daughter, Democrat Socialists, but black women. Kamala is a black woman; ergo, she’s going to get nominated. You’re not going to get the Democrats to nominate someone who’s not a black woman. We’re seeing what happens when you do that in Texas. That blasphemous imp James Talarico is just not winning over black voters after beating Democrat Rep. Jasmine Crockett (TX-30)

One of the benefits of Kamala is that she’s also DSA-friendly; she’s a communist and was recently sucking up to the Hamas wing. The socialists will swallow hard and take her. A bunch of others will run, and they’ll lose. There’s some talk about AOC, but she’s going to take noted burger chef Chuck Schumer’s Senate seat. AOC’s sell-by date is fast approaching anyway. Believe it or not, she’s not left enough for the socialists, and here’s a hard truth some people don’t want to hear: she’s getting hefty.

Part of the attraction of AOC was that she was a cute young woman. Remember, they literally auditioned her for the job, and key to that was that she was attractive. Between losing her hotness and the fact that every time she opens her mouth, she says something stupid—like how the Senate was constituted to enshrine Jim Crow about a century before Jim Crow—this clownette peaks at junior senator from the Empire State. .

Read more …

A different history. What if the Russians won?

• Why Every Young DSA Member Needs to See ‘Star City’ (Rick Moran)

How the Soviets got to the Moon first is only hinted at in Star City, a tense, cold-blooded sci-fi spy thriller, also on Apple TV, that trades the optimism of its parent show for a bleak, paranoid look at the Soviet space program in a paranoid country. The Soviet Moon landing a few weeks before Apollo 11’s is simply accepted as fact, with no sense of how the Soviets won the race. That small omission can be forgiven because the rest of this nightmare scenario is truly high-quality TV.


Critics widely praised it as a gripping, high-stakes expansion of the FAM universe. Told from the Soviet point of view, in Star City, the Americans are the bad guys and Soviet paranoia has a logical basis. Of course, the Communists misinterpret many American actions, which feeds their paranoia. The action in Season 1 takes place in the 1969-71 timeframe. The high-risk trip to Venus, planned by the Chief Designer, played with great humanity and brilliance by Rhys Ifans, knows that the Central Committee will never give the go-ahead for the mission and hides his intention from all but a few engineers and astronauts.

The Chief Designer is never named. We also saw the nameless Chief Designer in Tom Wolfe’s The Right Stuff, appearing in the film as a laughing, bald-headed stand-in for insufferable Soviet superiority. The real “Chief Designer” of the Soviet space program was Sergei Korolev (Sergei Pavlovich Korolev). During his lifetime, his identity was kept as a closely guarded state secret by the Soviet government to protect him from potential assassination by foreign intelligence and to maintain state security.

In Star City, the Soviet apparatus of oppression is the star of the show. The Communists never let anyone breathe without their knowing. Everyone—I mean everyone—is followed, recorded, and surveilled. The most terrifying character on television today is Anna Maxwell Martin, who plays KGB Colonel Lyudmilla Raskova. A cold-blooded killer, torturer, and intimidator, Raskova stands in the middle of a web of Soviet oppression that uses all the tools of state intimidation and fear to maintain a level of control that is unbearable to citizens. Instead of fighting it, they try to stay out of its way as much as possible.

Her quiet, fanatical devotion to the Soviet state (and her own career) makes her casual brutality and scheming seem not only logical but necessary. Raskova is a composite character, but she represents the logical extreme of socialism. How many times have we heard from socialism’s apologists that the reason it’s never worked isn’t the system; it’s the people who run the governments who are the problem. Castro, Pol Pot, Lenin, and Mao—these were the “wrong” people to be leading any country. The theory of socialism is sound and will work if the “right” people are implementing it.

The logic of oppression leads inevitably to socialism as a national economic and social template. There simply is no better way to control people than mandating the actions of the citizenry based on what’s “good for everybody.” Imposing controls on how people act is only the beginning. In order to impose socialist dogma on the people, the state must control how they think as well. This means censorship to ensure homogeneous thinking, surveillance to ensure “proper” actions, and punishment for anyone who steps outside the socialist boundaries established by the government through anti-state thoughts, words, and deeds.

Putting someone in jail for listening to rock music? The Soviets outlawed rock as “degenerate.” Certain writers who published “dangerous” ideas were also locked up. Young people enamored of socialist ideology should think long and hard about the kind of society created by adopting socialist principles. They are not only unrealistic, but they’re also impossible. Human beings do not act the way that the socialists say we must act to create their utopia. Until we do, the imposition of socialism will always—always—result in brutality, poverty of mind and spirit, oppression, and death.

Read more …

Mutti Merkel is/was the uitimate globalist. And she destroyed what was once West-Germany, a country she grew up neighboring from her dirt-poor communist East-Germany. Was this her revenge?

• Foreign Nationals Now Nearly Half of Germany’s Prison Population (Salgado)

A statistic you won’t find in the mainstream media, because it totally undermines the idea that mass immigration is in any way beneficial to Europe, is the number of foreign nationals in Germany’s prisons. Remix reported on July 24 that foreign nationals account for 45% of the prison population in Germany, and that in the cities of Hamburg and Berlin, the proportion of foreign nationals in prison is almost 60%. When you consider that many migrants have become citizens or have children who are German citizens, the number of criminals due to mass migration could be much higher.


The majority of the foreign criminals reportedly came from either Eastern Europe or Arab countries. To put more precise numbers on it, Neue Osnabrücker Zeitung found that 27,000 of the 60,408 people in German jails in March 2026 were not citizens of the country. Notably, as recently as 2015, the percentage of foreigners in German jails was 30%, so the number has increased dramatically since then. Remix also reported that dual citizens and foreign-born German citizens are not included in the above statistics, arguing that the actual share of inmates with a migration background is likely even higher than the reported 45%.

I always point out that European and other Western nations’ governments do not import persecuted Christians or Jews, nor do they import freedom-loving political prisoners. They do not bring people in to assimilate them or demand that they accept Western moral standards. No, Western governments import masses of violent Third Worlders, many of them Muslims, whom politicians then encourage not to assimilate. That has led to the crime wave sweeping the West. In fact, while the foreign population of Germany is only around 17%, according to Remix, foreign nationals possibly comprise a majority of the country’s criminals.

The German Association of Prison Officers’ chairman, René Müller, complained that translators are increasingly necessary in the prison system and that they are not always available to meet the needs of the number of prisoners who require them. He believes this raises the risk of aggression from inmates and the possibility of Muslim prisoners becoming increasingly radicalized and isolated.

Bavaria’s Justice Ministry attributed aggressive behavior by inmates towards staff to language issues and “culturally determined behaviors.” If only the German authorities had examined the cultures of these migrants before welcoming them into the country without any language skills or shared values to make assimilation possible.

Remix News reported on this back in 2024, when it was estimated that German prisons cost taxpayers approximately €4.14 billion annually, with around €1.82 billion spent incarcerating foreign nationals. At the time, foreign prisoners already made up more than half of the inmate population in several states.

Alternative for Germany lawmaker Martin Hess said those figures demonstrated the consequences of the country’s migration policies. … The former police officer called for stricter deportations and a complete reversal of Germany’s migration policy, arguing that foreign criminality imposes both a security risk and a major financial burden on taxpayers.

Unfortunately, woke German authorities like their current system of arresting citizens for free speech while lavishing money on foreign criminals.

Read more …

“…Milking Covid For Everything It’s Worth ..”

If they try again, we should be better prepared.

• Fauci Files: A Megalomaniacal Egomaniac (Tom Elliott)

On May 28, 2021, Anthony Fauci learned that the Department of Health and Human Services would refer EcoHealth Alliance – the New York nonprofit that had routed NIAID money to the Wuhan Institute of Virology – to its inspector general. That night he wrote in his diary:


“I am certain that there will be some deficiencies that the IG will find as is always the case with IG audits. Certainly, whatever they find it will be misconstrued by those who want to make a case for our involvement in the outbreak. I am starting to feel that it is important for me to write an editorial or an opinion piece giving our side of the story.” (p. 753)

Our involvement in the outbreak. Followed closely by a plan to get out in front of it. That instinct – get ahead of it, control the story, decide what the public needs to believe and then saturate every channel with it – is the organizing principle of these documents. It shows up in the origins fight. It shows up in masks, transmissibility, and boosters. It shows up in how he handled the people who disagreed with him. And it shows up, most revealingly, in what he chose to write down.

What was released
On July 24, Senator Rand Paul’s committee published two documents that have not been reported in any depth.The first is Fauci’s personal diary, 1,141 pages, running from late 2019 through his retirement in December 2022. It is partly a journal and overwhelmingly a scrapbook: he pasted hundreds of articles about himself into it, frequently in full. The second is 136 pages of internal email about his awards – nominations, ethics clearances, and the disposition of prize money. Fauci does not date the composition of his entries, so we cannot always distinguish what was typed the same evening from what was assembled later. Page numbers refer to the released PDFs.

I. What they thought at the start
Page 13 of the diary covers two important events from January 31, 2020. The first is that Fauci is handed the mic to serve as Covid’s point person. He writes: “White House is now fully convinced that I be the science/health spokesperson for the USG. Bob Redfield just does not come across very weel. He takes forever to say something and it is usually wondering. This drives the WH and HHS comms people crazy and so they are putting me out on all the requests.” The director of the CDC was not sidelined for being wrong, but for being slow on camera. The selection criterion was not who’s the most credible scientist, but who performs best on TV.

Redfield’s own account of that period, given under oath in 2023, is worth recalling. Asked why he had been excluded from the origins discussions, he pointed to ideological differences: “Because it was told to me that they wanted a single narrative, and that I obviously had a different point of view.” The second thing happens after he gets back to his office. Jeremy Farrar of the Wellcome Trust calls, sounding “very concerned,” with Kristian Andersen of Scripps conferenced in and Eddie Holmes in the background from Sydney. Fauci writes down what they told him:

“The people on the phone felt that the mutations around the furine cleavage site of the spike protein could not have occurred naturally since it would require an evolutionary ‘jump’ that they found nowhere in bat isolates.” Deliberate insertion, they said, followed by release – accidental release being the most likely. The next day Fauci convened a larger call of twelve experts in epidemiology. His entry characterizing it (p. 14) is the probably the single most consequential paragraph in the whole diary. There was “not total agreement about the likelihood of deliberate insertion,” he writes.

Ron Fouchier was certain it could have arisen naturally and said they shouldn’t waste time. Christian Drosten agreed with Fouchier. And then, in Fauci’s own words: “the rest felt that deliberate insertion was possible.” Ten of twelve thought it must be manmade. And he admits the person driving the zoonotic theory perspective, Ron Fouchier, was “expected of him since he was the original GOF [gain of function] person with Yoshi Kawaoka.”

II. What happened next
Three days later, four of the scientists from that call were circulating a draft arguing the opposite. “The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2” appeared in Nature Medicine on March 17, concluding that the virus was not a laboratory construct. Andersen told the journal in his cover note that the paper had been prompted by Fauci and Francis Collins. Drafts went to both men before publication. Fauci’s reply to Andersen: “Nice job on the paper.” Two months after Proximal Origin published – Fauci’s institute approves an $8.9 million grant for Andersen.

On April 16, Collins wrote to Fauci asking whether NIH could help “put down this very destructive conspiracy.” The following day, Fauci cited Proximal Origin from the White House briefing room podium – the most watched platform on earth at that moment. Three weeks after that, on May 4, 2020, he told National Geographic that the evidence was “very, very strongly leaning toward this could not have been artificially or deliberately manipulated,” citing “a number of very qualified evolutionary biologists.” The doubt referenced in his diary never reached the public. And his account of that February call has never stopped changing.

A June 7, 2021 diary entry (p. 767), recounting the same meeting: “About half of the people felt that this was possibly a constructed virus and the other half were convinced that this was a natural occurrence.” In a June 3, 2024 sworn opening statement to the House Select Subcommittee, Fauci said he joined a call with about a dozen international virologists, that the discussion was “lively, with arguments for both possibilities,” and that after further examination several who had been concerned about lab manipulation became convinced the virus was not deliberately manipulated.

The June 2021 retelling contains another problem: he says “a few weeks later” Andersen and colleagues re-examined the data and concluded natural origin. The draft was circulating on February 4 – three days after the call. The June 2021 entry shows how he’s trying to mould history into something different for posterity.

III. Habit becomes routine
Origins is where this pattern is most consequential, but it is not where it started or where it stopped. The diary shows the same strategy applied to every contested question of the pandemic: decide what the public needs to believe, then flood the zone. Consider masks. Fauci’s public reversal in the spring of 2020 is well known, and he has explained it as a response to shortages and to emerging evidence on asymptomatic spread (p. 375). But watch what happens when the question comes back around in February 2021, when he begins pushing double-masking (p. 619):

“CDC starting to do practical things that I have actually been pushing for some time. For example: Wearing 2 masks could be better than just one. They did a dummy study and showed that a cloth mask over a surgical mask actually gives a more complete fit and keeps out aerosols.” Note the order of operations: He had been pushing it “for some time,” the evidence arrives afterward, and the evidence is a mannequin. That is the entire evidentiary basis for double-masking in a 1,141-page diary kept by the government’s chief spokesman on the subject during the month he was urging 330 million people to adopt it.

We see every time Fauci is turned to for guidance, he makes bold proclamations without feeling burdened to verify any scientific basis. We see it in the numbers.Across 1,141 pages by the nation’s senior infectious disease official during the largest public health event in a century, here is how often certain terms appear. Never once: “peer review.” “Meta-analysis.” “Risk-benefit.” “Learning loss.” “Mental health.” Once: “N95.” “Seroprevalence.” “Cost-benefit.” Twice: “Cloth mask.” “School closure.” “Natural immunity.”

Against which:
“Award” – 80
“Hero” – 49
“Instagram” – 36
“Bobblehead” – 23
“Selfie” – 19
Entries headed “PRESS:” – 641

The question of whether prior infection conferred meaningful protection – the question underpinning the vaccine mandates that cost people their jobs – is never worked through anywhere in these pages. It appears twice, both times as an attack to be repelled.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle July 25 2026

Jul 252026
 
 July 25, 2026  Posted by at 10:13 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , ,  36 Responses »


Théodore Géricault The Raft of the Medusa 1819


• Oil Slides Despite Unraveling ‘Diplomacy’ In Iran (ZH)
• Trump Sparked the Counterrevolution to End the Destruction of America (VDH)
• Struggle Session (James Howard Kunstler)
• EU Wants To Board Russian Shadow Fleet Tankers In The Indian Ocean (ZH)
• Trump’s Plan to Make Data Centers Bring Their Own Energy (DS)
• USTR Greer Calls Tariffs on 60 Countries Incl. Canada, Mexico, Europe (CTH)
• Germany Paying Five Times More For Gas After Ditching Russian Imports (RT)
• Elon Musk Tells Economist Editor-in-Chief : Britain Civil War Inevitable (MN)
• Trump Notes Europe’s Refusal to Accept Elimination of Marshall Plan (CTH)
• The South Carolina Supreme Court Again Rules Against Tattoo Speech (Turley)

 


 

 


 


Hit them where it hurts. It’s the only way.

• Oil Slides Despite Unraveling ‘Diplomacy’ In Iran (ZH)

Oil Eases by Week’s End on Signs of ‘Diplomacy Lite’
Somewhat surprisingly, oil prices are pushing lower by week’s close, especially after a succession of perhaps ‘diplomacy-lite’ headlines; however, the reality still remains is that the bombing campaign is escalating… and typically the region witnesses the biggest bombs away on a weekend, with markets closed:
• Pakistan exploring path toward resuming US-Iran talks: Reuters
• Pakistan’s push to resume talks follows pressure from China: Reuters
• Houthis say they don’t seek to close key Bab al-Mandeb Strait (only for Saudi shipping, they say)
• Trump to meet Netanyahu at the White House on Tuesday amid Iran escalation


President Trump took to Truth Social to warn China and Russia against giving or selling arms to Iran, saying: “If they did, it would be very bad for them”. However he also sought to clarify: “In my opinion, (they are) not participating.” Doing so was “certainly not in their best interests” – the president added. The president addressed a Reuters report that alleged Iranian strikes on CIA targets in the Gulf earlier in the war is being investigated, on concerns that Russia or China may have helped with such targeting. Xi “told me he would not,” Trump wrote. Was there a pinky promise?…


Iraqi Prime Minister Denies NYT Report on Ceasefire Offer
The latest little peace overture by Washington widely reported Thursday night was apparently a big nothingburger, as on Friday the Iraqi prime minister’s office has denied a New York Times report claiming that Iran rejected a US ceasefire proposal delivered to Tehran by Iraqi Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi.

The fresh statement from the prime minister’s office said what was published in the Times was “entirely unfounded” and had “no relation to reality.” The statement underscored the temporary nature of the proposal and that it was the “only offer on the table” and still left the question of control over the Strait of Hormuz unresolved – and so Tehran was uninterested.It’s also the reality that Tehran wants to see Trump sweat and impose economic and political costs particularly ahead of the midterms in November, where Congressional Republicans must face voters over failing to rein in Trump’s Iran war. The Iranians continue to openly voice this, for example in the following from the parliament speaker:

13th Straight Night of US Bombing
Meanwhile, in what is becoming a brutal, nightly routine, US Central Command (CENTCOM) has wrapped up its 13th consecutive wave of airstrikes against Iran. The Pentagon said it targeted military command centers, drone storage facilities, communication networks, and coastal surveillance sites.

Iranian state media reported overnight into Friday heavy explosions rocking major hubs across the country, including Khorramabad, Jask, Ahvaz, Bandar Abbas, and the strategic outpost of Qeshm Island. Iranian media further said a US missile strike left four dead and five injured in the key industrial and transportation hub of Ahvaz. As the bombs fall, Tehran is still signaling that military pressure won’t force a cheap surrender – with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi lashing out at the US escalation, warning that “mindless aggression” will only see Trump pay a “heavier price” for a deal to end the war.

More Iran Retaliation on Gulf
Iranian retaliation on US-linked sites in the Gulf have continued at the same steady pace, with on Friday Bahrain’s military having intercepted “several treacherous Iranian air attacks” – according to the general command of the Bahrain Defense Force.

The Bahraini military further denounced Iran’s “systematic hostile approach” and “criminal attacks targeting civilians”. The statement emphasized, “The general command emphasises that the deliberate use of missiles and drones to target civilians and private property constitutes a flagrant violation of international humanitarian law.”Throughout the morning the Iranian military’s targets also included locations in Jordan, Kuwait, and northern Iraq. Sky News is reporting that “Explosions were also heard near a base hosting the US in Iraq, near the Erbil International Airport.”

Fox Poll says Iran War More Unpopular Then Ever
Fox feeding its Boomer audience some Freedom Viagra with a helping of war crimes on the side:

But Fox News also reports the results of its latest poll which finds 56% oppose the ongoing American military action against Iran, including 40% who “strongly” oppose. “Disapproval of President Donald Trump’s handling of Iran hit a record high in July,” Fox writes. “A majority of voters oppose U.S. military action, and nearly two thirds think the conflict will last at least a year,” the report says.

Read more …

Victor Davis Hanson

Long excerpt, sorry. It’s just that he’s very right.

“He’s trying to undo the entire half-century progressive project within four years. That’s an impossible task. And yet he’s trying to do it. “

• Trump Sparked the Counterrevolution to End the Destruction of America (VDH)

I’d like to speak today about revolutionaries and counterrevolutionaries. Whether we realize it or not, we’ve been in a progressive revolutionary cycle for about 50 years. And by that I mean there has been the effort of most of the Democratic Party, and now the radical elements to accelerate that efforts as emblemized by the democratic socialists to take control of government, expand it, redistribute income so that many people in blue states especially are paying over 10% of their income, in addition to 38% of their federal tax or two or three percent in Obamacare tax and other add-ons.


And it’s not very difficult to pay 50% of your income or more for the taxpayer who’s salaried without much write-offs. And the welfare state, which has distributed over twenty trillion dollars since this started under the Great Society, is getting bigger and bigger, at least until Donald Trump. And this progressive revolution doesn’t believe in borders. It has let in—we have now 53 million people that were not born in the United States, and in California, it’s over a quarter of the population. It’s all-time high percentage-wise, 16% foreign-born.

They don’t have confidence that you, the people, will buy into the progressive project. And so, they want to import a demographic that is poor and needy on the idea that they will be constituents that will trade their votes for subsidies. And we saw that with the Somali community in Minnesota, and we’ve seen it with other communities here in California. And so, the progressive project has given us a real revolution. We never imagined that there were going to be more than two genders or sexes. We never imagined that they would try to normalize biological men taking over women’s sports or dressing among young teenage girls. We never imagined that.

We never imagined that prosecutors would let out career felons who had committed violent acts the same day they were arrested. We didn’t know we were gonna empty the prisons because we felt that punishment, penal punishment was too mean. We never really felt that our only real democratic country and ally in the Middle East, Israel, we would try to disassociate ourselves, and we would try to romanticize terrorists like Hamas. But what I’m getting at, this was the progressive project. It was anti-American, it was anti-Western, and it glorified other modes of civilization, so to speak: socialism, communism, anarchism. And it was very critical of the very society who had enriched most Americans.

I say most—the middle class of America is the largest middle class in the world and the most affluent, and our poor are better off than most middle class and upper middle class in other places. It’s important to remember that there has not been a counter-revolution. Ronald Reagan was the first and really last Republican president that had an economic counterrevolution. It was quite successful. He lowered the tax rate. He deregulated the economy, and by 1983-84, he was growing the economy at 7% GDP growth.

And then, of course, that was watered down in subsequent years. But the two Bushes, candidates like John McCain, Bob Dole, Mitt Romney, their agenda was to slow down the revolution, but not to try to overturn it. What do I mean by slow down? Kind of advise Hollywood that they didn’t have to be so anti-American and have movies that talked about race, class, and gender ad nauseam. Try to tell professional sports not to be weaponized. Try to tell K-12, calm it down a little bit. We don’t need sex education in the first grade, and there’s nothing wrong with a teacher occasionally giving a prayer that she inadvertently forgot was illegal.

Calm down. You don’t need to send the FBI to school board meetings, that kind of thing. We don’t need to take the knee at sports and ridicule “The Star-Spangled Banner.” So, this revolution had infiltrated K-12, the corporate boardroom, the universities especially, the media, the foundations, and popular culture. But the Republican and conservative movement had just tried to slow it down. And then came Donald Trump. He was not—he’s surely not a revolutionary. We were in the middle of a revolution, but he was not a trimmer either. He was a true counterrevolutionary.

The first term, he was not familiar with Washington. He made appointments with people who did not agree with him—not just they did not agree with his methodology, but they didn’t agree with his counter-revolutionary agenda. But it was still in places working. And what was the result? The result was COVID-19 and the COVID-19 lockdown, and it was aborted. The second time he came around, he tried to finish the counterrevolution. So he pretty much demolished the subsidies for green energy and re-emphasized oil and gas production, and we became the greatest producer of oil and gas in the history of civilization.

He sort of said, “We’re not going to regulate AI and robotics, cryptocurrency, genetic engineering, drone. We’re not gonna legislate them out of business. We’re not gonna have antitrust and complete investigations of all these people. We’re gonna promote it. We’re going to promote these new innovations and new technologies.” And lo and behold, we’re ahead of the Chinese in almost all of them now. He didn’t just say, “I am worried about the military. It may be that DEI has discouraged a particular demographic that over generation after generation has provided the largest percentage of our combat units, namely white males.”

He did away with DEI. And what was the result? All of a sudden, we have met all of our recruitment figures. He didn’t just say, “Well, the border’s been open. I know that we’ve let in 10 million people a year over four years. I know that 10,000 were coming a day under Biden. I understand that, so maybe I’ll say no more catch and release. Or maybe you have to apply for refugee status in, say, Mexico.” No, no. He said, “I’m going to finish the wall. I’m not gonna let anybody stop me. This time there’s going to be a wall, and we are going to deport people. We’re gonna deport a million people in my first year, and we’re gonna make sure a million others self-deport, and we’re gonna go after 500,000 with criminal records.”

He didn’t just say, “I am very worried about Latin America. “Under [Barack] Obama and under [Joe] Biden, we saw a wave of left-wing governments, and the Panama Canal is in danger. Venezuela has the largest oil reserves really in the Western Hemisphere, if not the world, and they are exporting convicts and drugs to the United States.” He didn’t just say that. He went down there and basically threatened Panama that we would take over the canal unless they honored our Panama Canal treaty and expelled the Chinese from trying to control the entry and exits of the canal.

He said to [Nicolas] Maduro, “You better stop because you’re exporting terror and communism and bullying your neighbors.” He didn’t, and he extradited him and ended that threat. And now as we look at Ecuador, Peru, Chile, Bolivia, Argentina, El Salvador, Dominican Republic, I could go on, they’re mostly center right. So, he staged a strong counterrevolution by reinforcing the Monroe Doctrine that had been rejected by the Left, and he made South America and Central America now a free market and, for the most part, a society that’s pro-American, with some notable exceptions.

For example, in Nicaragua, a beleaguered Daniel Ortega and a beleaguered Castroite government in Cuba that are both now for the first time in years isolated. In addition to that, he made our allies stronger. He used unorthodox methods. He was the proverbial gunslinger who came in to help the townspeople who were ossified and couldn’t deal with the robber barons or the cattle barons or the outlaws, and then he cleaned up the town, and then they got tired of him because of his methodology and rhetoric.

But nonetheless, he said to our allies, “We’re not gonna be in NATO unless you’re real NATO members. You’re not NATO members. You’re not arming yourself. You’re not abiding by your commitments.” Same held true to Canada. And lo and behold, now we have much stronger allies, and the alliance is stronger than ever. What am I getting at? Donald Trump is not a revolutionary. He’s a counterrevolutionary.

And what is he trying to do? He’s trying to undo the entire half-century progressive project within four years. That’s an impossible task. And yet he’s trying to do it. He’s the first authentic counterrevolutionary since Andrew Jackson.

Read more …

“. . .there is no saving the Left. There is only saving America from them.” — Sasha Stone

• Struggle Session (James Howard Kunstler)

The polycrisis of 2026 whirls like a demon-infested storm overcoming this human project of ours like a medieval panorama of the world’s end. Everything is fraught, tilting toward hazard, menace, ruin. Even under a summer sun, the mind sees only darkness everywhere it looks. Apocalypse now, it seems like. You almost can’t blame the doomers, the black pill-ers, lost in their transports of dread. But I tell you, we will get through this.


Is it a surprise that the IRGC has a death wish for its host, Iran? They’ve been advertising it loudly for half a century, yearning for martyrdom, the bliss of paradise, marriage to multiple perfumed virgins, all the pomegranates you could ever want, and perpetual dreamtime beside a gently burbling fountain in the palace of eternity. Trouble is, to get there you must have your head blown off.

That’s exactly what the IRGC is asking for, though the millions of ordinary Iranians probably have their doubts about the ask. They are hostages of the IRGC regime, which refuses to just stop being a problem for the world. Mr. Trump’s proffer for Iran still abides: become a normal nation, sovereign and all, only without atom bombs. Let ships sail through Hormuz unmolested. Sell your oil, make some money, trade with the other fellas across the Persian Gulf, have a nice civilized life with all the refinements of age-old Persian culture, even with its Islamic overlay. Be happy!

The USA does not seek to occupy Iran, steal its resources, subjugate its people, force them to buy Minnie Mouse plush toys, play baseball, eat Jimmy Dean sausage for breakfast, strum banjoes, or wear cowboy hats. Just stop projecting violence and discord all over the Middle East.

You can’t make us, the IRGC says. Yes, we will, the USA replies. And so it goes. Next up: bridges and power plants. Plus, every ship you damage, we’ll deduct the cost of repair from your frozen assets held in our banks. This is where things stand after the thirteenth night of strategic bombing against the IRGC’s launch sites, drone factories, missile storage caverns, and shoreline military installations. Iran prepared assiduously for this death-scene for decades, building hidey-holes here, there, and everywhere. But every time they launch something now, our satellites mark the coordinates, and boom, now there’s one less hidey-hole.

Iran’s currency, the rial, has an exchange rate against the US dollar of about 1,900,000 to one dollar. There is hardly a functioning economy left. The people are flat broke. Everyday life must be hell now. Could be the IRGC was getting tons of munitions and material for free from China, but days ago we blew up the railroad bridge at Aq Tekeh-Khan that was China’s main connection to Iran, so that’s over with.

You must doubt that Russia is capable of sending arms to Iran at this point. Russia needs every drone and missile it can fabricate now that Ukraine is sending drones clear into Moscow and St. Petersburg on a regular basis. Of course, that war is being stoked by NATO, which perforce includes the USA. A bill (H.R. 2913 — the Ukraine Support Act) that would furnish $1.3-1.8 billion in direct security, military, and reconstruction assistance for Ukraine plus $8 billion in loans was passed by the House in June, but languishes in the Senate. President Trump has threatened to veto it, as running counter to the administration’s preference for negotiations with Russia to end the Ukraine War rather than extend it.

These two conflicts must seem intractable for now, but the mojo driving them has clear and present limits. If the USA does not underwrite Ukraine’s war effort, then that leaves the EU nations, who are increasingly broke, and for all their idle talk are really incapable of mounting a major arms production campaign. The UK especially is skating on thin ice these days as Mr. Trump methodically cancels its long-running command and control of global finance through the City of London (as its “Wall Street” is called). In fact, it looks as if the floundering UK — with dopey Andy Burnham rolling in as Britain’s seventh Prime Minister in a decade — has passed the ball of globalist leadership to its forward striker (and all-purpose fixer) Mark Carney the Prime Minister of Canada.

Carney, who was previously chief of the Bank of England, has played a series of losing games against President Trump the past year, while Mr. Carney is busy wrecking the Canadian economy for the sake of the globalist “green” flimflam, a sustained high volume of third world immigration, and outlandish DEI activism that includes giving vast tracts of real estate back to Canada’s First Nations people, their Indians. Carney has also very actively played footsie with the CCP to a degree that is seriously pissing off Mr. Trump. Among all the other shocks and surprises upcoming, you might imagine him having to send the 82nd Airborne up to Ottawa to inform PM Carney that there will be no globalist seat of operations in North America.

Yes, things are getting that strange. And then, continuing the clean-up operation south of our border, there is Cuba to straighten out. Cuba is obviously next. Our patience with that failing state’s communist export project is particularly thin, now that the Democratic Party here is entertaining Marxist-Leninist dreams of glory.

Read more …

And when Russia defends itself, they’ll come crying to Trump.

• EU Wants To Board Russian Shadow Fleet Tankers In The Indian Ocean (ZH)

The European Union has authorized its naval mission in the Indian Ocean (apparently there is one) to stop and board Russian shadow fleet tankers suspected of operating under false flags, the bloc announced on Wednesday.

The Spanish Navy frigate Santa María F81, deployed as part of the European Union Naval Force Operation ATALANTA, seen off the coast of Mogadishu, Somalia, on April 24, 2025.


EU member states have authorized Operation Atalanta, the union’s counter-piracy naval mission off the Horn of Africa, to begin conducting flag-verification boardings of vessels suspected of belonging to Russia’s shadow fleet in the western Indian Ocean, DefenseNews reported. The decision, announced this week by EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas, extends to Atalanta a power already exercised by the EU’s Mediterranean mission, Operation Irini.

Kallas made the announcement alongside news that Irini forces had boarded the sanctioned oil tanker MV South Star on July 20, acting on suspicion that the vessel was sailing under a false flag. “Every illicit voyage helps sustain Russia’s war machine. We are matching our sanctions with action at sea,” Kallas said, adding that the Atalanta authorization “further tightens the net.”

The move considerably widens the EU’s geographic reach against the shadow fleet, a loosely defined network of tankers with opaque ownership structures that Moscow uses to sell oil above the Western-imposed price cap. While Irini patrols the Mediterranean, Atalanta operates across the Somali Basin, the Gulf of Aden, the Red Sea, the Gulf of Suez, the Gulf of Aqaba and waters around Oman, and was launched as the EU’s first-ever naval mission in 2008 to combat piracy.

It is separate from the EU mission ASPIDES, which is designed to protect shipping in the Red Sea from attacks by the Iran-backed Yemeni Houthi rebels. One look at the exploding price of oil shows just how much the market thinks of Europe “defending” this particular waterway. The corridor where the mission operates is a critical transit route for tankers carrying Russian crude toward buyers in Asia. Brussels has already sanctioned more than 600 vessels suspected of belonging to the network.

Generally, ships on the high seas cannot simply be stopped and boarded by any third country. However, Article 110 of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea permits warships to stop and inspect a vessel only where there is reasonable suspicion it is stateless or flying a flag to which it is not entitled. This falls short of a blanket authority to stop any sanctioned or Russia-linked ship, but flying false flags has been a frequent practice on Russian shadow fleet vessels.

The council decision, the operational plan and the rules of engagement that would spell out exactly how far Atalanta’s new powers extend have so far not been made public. The approach has already produced results elsewhere. Irini’s flag checks contributed to pressure that culminated in a Cameroon purge of 39 vessels from its shipping registry after investigators uncovered fraudulent paperwork and fake registry websites used to disguise shadow fleet tankers.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has previously denounced such interceptions as “piracy,” underscoring how the expanded mandate is likely to further sharpen tensions between Brussels and Moscow over enforcement at sea. One caveat to all this: unlike oil, Russian LNG (which Europe is absolutely desperate for) will remain exempt from EU sanctions. Which prompted Rabobank’s Michael Every earlier today to ask rhetorically “realpolitik or real weakness?”

Read more …

Why has that not been done from the get-go?

• Trump’s Plan to Make Data Centers Bring Their Own Energy (DS)

President Donald Trump said 23 governors have signed his pledge to protect everyday Americans from the energy costs associated with new artificial intelligence data centers.Governors, companies, and stakeholders who sign the pledge agree to “protect American consumers from price hikes due to data center energy and infrastructure requirements, and lower electricity costs for consumers in the long term.”“We know that the data centers and AI are dramatically increasing the demand for electricity,” Trump said Thursday.


“It’s only fair that the cost of building the new infrastructure required to meet the demand should be borne by the corporations themselves, not by the American American patriots, American citizens.” While Daniel Cochrane, senior fellow at the Institute for Family Studies’ Family First Technology Initiative, thinks this is a step in the right direction, he doubts the pledge will be enough to quell the rising sentiment against data centers for AI. Seven in 10 Americans oppose the construction of data centers in their community, according to a May 13 Gallup poll. Nearly half are strongly opposed.

Opponents of the rapid buildout of data centers reportedly held 142 protests across 42 states on Saturday. Some public officials are taking action. New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, a Democrat, announced a one-year pause on data center construction in her state.“The bigger point is that the public opposition to data centers in general goes beyond just their localized impacts,” Cochrane told the Daily Signal. “It really goes to the public’s growing concern that AI as a technology, and the companies behind it, are diminishing human agency.”

It’s critical to recognize “the public’s larger resentment and concern with technology as a force and larger economic, social phenomenon,” Cochrane said. He said the question remains of how the pledge will prevent households and small businesses from bearing the brunt of higher prices when data centers begin operation, before their generation capacity is supplying additional energy to the grid.

“The companies say they’ll pay for additional generation capacity, but the generation capacity takes another five years to come online between the time that the data center actually begins operation and the time that their generation capacity is supplying additional energy to the grid,” Cochrane said. “Well, in the interim, who’s covering the costs of that?”

Nathan Leamer, executive director of the pro-AI advocacy group Build American AI, thinks blue-state policies, not data centers, are to blame for high electricity prices.“President Trump is doing the right thing, which is thinking creatively about how to protect ratepayers across the country, including in states where bad energy policies are leading to increased energy and electricity prices as as our nation relies more on electricity and energy,” Leamer told the Daily Signal.

Brendan Steinhauser, CEO of The Alliance for Secure AI, thinks the ratepayer protection plan will help some with anti-data center sentiment, but concerns remain.“The concerns are not just about energy and water, they’re about the nature of the technology itself,” he told the Daily Signal. “There’s still a lot of questions there. I think this is good policy, good politics. But I think the president and governors around the country are going to have to do more to kind of get at the crux of the matter regarding AI.”

Politicians must do more to calm people’s fears about the catastrophic risks associated with AI, Steinhauser said. He thinks Vice President JD Vance has done the best job addressing concerns about jobs and the economy. “Bring it up proactively,” he advised. “Like we hear you, we understand you’re worried about this. I’m worried too. We have to get this right.”

Read more …

What they try now is “forced labor practices”.

• USTR Greer Calls Tariffs on 60 Countries Incl. Canada, Mexico, Europe (CTH)

As expected, U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer has completed the Section 301 review of “forced labor practices” in manufacturing and trade.


As a result of the findings, a tariff rate of 10% to 12.5% is being added to the goods from a host of countries evaluated. These 301 duties are in addition to currently existing tariff rates. [FACT SHEET] Trading partners that have made commitments to adopt, and effectively enforce, forced labor import prohibitions will have a 10% tariff, and trading partners that have failed to adopt a forced labor import prohibition will have a 12.5% tariff rate.

• The following 54 economies have failed to impose and effectively enforce a prohibition on the importation of goods produced with forced labor:

Algeria; Angola; Argentina; Australia; the Bahamas; Bahrain; Bangladesh; Brazil; Cambodia; Chile; China, People’s Republic of; Colombia; Costa Rica; Dominican Republic; Egypt; El Salvador; Guatemala; Guyana; Honduras; Hong Kong, China; India; Iraq; Israel; Japan; Jordan; Kazakhstan; Kuwait; Libya; Malaysia; Morocco; New Zealand; Nicaragua; Nigeria; Norway; Oman; Peru; the Philippines; Qatar; Russia; Saudi Arabia; Singapore; South Africa; South Korea; Sri Lanka; Switzerland; Taiwan; Thailand; Trinidad and Tobago; Türkiye; United Arab Emirates; United Kingdom; Uruguay; Venezuela; and Vietnam.

• The following six economies have failed to effectively enforce a prohibition on the importation of goods produced with forced labor:

Canada, Ecuador, the European Union, Indonesia, Mexico, and Pakistan.

After consideration for current Free Trade Agreement parameters and Most-Favored-Nation (MFN) reciprocity internals, the basic outcome is this

• 10 percent is the appropriate rate of Section 301 duties for investigated economies that (i) impose a forced labor import prohibition; (ii) have committed to impose and enforce such a prohibition through an Agreement on Reciprocal Trade; or (iii) have imposed a partial regime with the effect of preventing the importation of certain forced labor goods. These economies are: Argentina, Bangladesh, Cambodia, Canada, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Jordan, Malaysia, Mexico, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Trinidad and Tobago, and the United Kingdom;

• 10 percent or 12.5 percent, net of Most-Favored-Nation (MFN) rate is the appropriate rate of Section 301 duties for certain products of the European Union, Taiwan, Japan, Korea, and Switzerland that are not otherwise exempted, as explained in greater detail in the Federal Register Notice; and

•12.5 percent is the appropriate rate of Section 301 duty for all other investigated economies. :

Read more …

“Long-term contracts with Moscow were not vulnerable to external shocks or market fluctuations, Berliner Zeitung has said..”

• Germany Paying Five Times More For Gas After Ditching Russian Imports (RT)

Germany is now paying five times as much for imported gas than it did before abandoning its long-term Russian supply contracts as part of the EU sanctions, Berliner Zeitung has reported.Berlin now has to rely on the volatile international energy market, which is reeling from the de-facto closure of the Strait of Hormuz during the ongoing conflict between the US and Iran, the newspaper wrote on Wednesday.


Once Europe’s industrial powerhouse, Germany abandoned cheap Russian gas imports in 2022 as part of the EU’s sanctions campaign against Moscow following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict. Combined with the phaseout of nuclear power in favor of renewables, this self-imposed embargo has dealt a major blow to Germany’s industrial sector.Before the embargo, Russia supplied 55% of the country’s natural gas imports. Germany now sources its gas from Norway (44%), the Netherlands (24%) and Belgium (21%), with American liquefied natural gas (LNG) accounting for most of the remainder.

According to Berliner Zeitung, Germany’s gas import price has risen from €12 ($13.65) per megawatt-hour in 2020, when long-term contracts with Russia were still in force, to more than €60 ($68.25) this week amid the continued exchange of strikes between Washington and Tehran.“The old Russian contracts were cheaper than the market price,” the media outlet said, adding that Germany would also be unable to increase gas imports if needed since “the pipelines from Norway are at their [full] capacity” and “cannot handle much more.”

The decision to abandon cheap Russian energy played a major role in slowing down the German economy. It contracted in both 2023 and 2024, its first back-to-back annual decline in more than two decades, and is forecast to grow by just 0.5% this year. Corporate insolvencies also rose by more than 22% in each of those years, according to official data.On Monday, Chancellor Friedrich Merz openly admitted that the ongoing energy crisis was caused by “the lack of Russian gas.”

Moscow has repeatedly said it is ready to resume gas deliveries through the Nord Stream pipeline string that survived the 2022 sabotage attack but has received no response from Berlin. Instead, Germany plans to impose new tariffs on its already struggling industrial sector to fund the construction of a national gas reserve. The EU also pledged to end all Russian gas imports by 2027, with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen stating in March that Brussels would stick to this course even in the event of physical gas shortages or the threat of power cuts.

Read more …

Because of your position, and your magazine, you get an exclusive interview, and this is what you do with it? You attack him?

• Elon Musk Tells Economist Editor-in-Chief : Britain Civil War Inevitable (MN)

During a terse exchange, Elon Musk told the virulently leftist editor-in-chief of The Economist that civil war in Britain is inevitable on current trends – driven by rapid migration of people whose beliefs clash with Western civilisation. In response, Zanny Minton Beddoes accused Musk of supporting the “far right,” and amplifying racists. Musk called the coming confrontation a “reckoning,” rejected the racist smear, and turned the tables on an interviewer determined to paint secure borders and opposition to rape and murder as fringe extremism.


When the interviewer insisted she lived in Britain and called the claim “nonsense,” he shot back: “You live a very closeted existence!” He expanded: “If you have a large and growing, rapidly growing, group of people whose beliefs are antithetical to western beliefs, at some point there will be a reckoning.” Musk described the prospect as inevitable and called it a “crying shame” that mainstream outlets refuse to recognise the threat to Western civilisation. Pressed on whether he was racist or anti-Muslim, Musk answered directly:

“My partner is half-Indian and I have four children with her. One of them was named after a famous Indian physicist. So I would say I’m not racist.” He continued: “If people are coming to a country with antithetical views, I am against that. I’m against rape and murder, I’m against the imposition of rules and laws that are contrary to what we’ve come to accept in the West.” The interviewer’s line of attack was clear. She framed Musk’s support for parties defending borders and cultural continuity as backing for the “far right” and even “very fringe parties.” Musk refused the frame. “No, I support the NORMAL people,” he said. “What you call the far right FALSELY.”

He pointed out that the same positions – secure borders, safe cities, sensible spending – were mainstream only 10 or 15 years ago. Speeches by Obama or Hillary Clinton on these subjects would today be denounced as Trumpian extremism by the “lunatic left.” When Beddoes claimed people “loathe” him, Musk was unmoved, firing back “I don’t care, but the fact that, as you pointed out, a quarter billion people follow me is that I think a lot more people actually like me than don’t. And I think a lot more people hate you and the media more than you realize.”

OOF. Feel the burn.

The pattern is familiar. Positions once held by centre-left politicians are now labelled extreme so that any defence of Western norms can be pathologised. Musk called it out without apology.

The full interview, spanning AI, Europe, politics and the rest, is available here (for now):

Musk’s warning with regards to Britain is not abstract theorising. It lands against a backdrop of UK government moves that look like quiet preparation for internal fracture.Last year Professor David Betz of King’s College London warned that official talk of a Russian invasion threat was a convenient cover for hardening infrastructure and building a citizen’s militia against domestic conflict. Low trust, political factionalism and demographic change, he argued, are pushing Britain toward civil strife.

Just days ago the UK government urged households to stockpile long-life food, water, medicines and wind-up radios while announcing the largest home-defence wargame in decades—Operation Albiston Shadow—again framed around hybrid Russian threats. Betz’s analysis remains the same: the real concern is internal, not external. Musk’s latest comments connect those dots in plain language.

The UK has seen repeated outbreaks of disorder linked to migration failures—Southport, Southampton and beyond. Official responses have often appeared two-tier. At the same time, the state is stockpiling resilience messaging and running large-scale domestic defence exercises while insisting the danger is primarily Russian. The academic critique from Betz and others is that this is politically safer language for a deeper problem: a society whose cohesion has been eroded by rapid demographic change and elite refusal to confront incompatible values.

Musk is simply saying the quiet part out loud. Large-scale importation of populations that reject core Western principles—equality under the law, free speech, protection of women and girls—creates friction that does not magically resolve. When media and political classes treat any discussion of that friction as “far right,” the pressure only builds. Britain’s leadership can keep pretending the only threats come from Moscow or from citizens who notice the transformation of their own towns. Musk is not pretending. Neither should anyone else who values the civilisation that still, for now, allows such interviews to happen.

Read more …

1952.

• Trump Notes Europe’s Refusal to Accept Elimination of Marshall Plan (CTH)

Most casual EU observers have missed the connection between President Trump eliminating the U.S-Europe Marshall Plan via entirely new trade and tariff policies, and the aggregate financial collapse of the European Union. Over four years (1948-1952), the United States provided $13.3 billion (equivalent to approximately $137 billion in 2025) directly to 17 Western European countries, including the United Kingdom, France, West Germany, Italy, and the Netherlands. The intent was to rebuild Europe after World War II. However, included in the plan was a later system of one-way tariffs, where EU Countries would high-tariff U.S. goods and the U.S. would not tariff EU goods imported.


The direct funding ended in 1952, but the indirect funding via tariffs never ended until President Donald J Trump triggered reciprocal tariffs against Europe thereby removing the one-way benefit. This created an immediate and growing problem for Europe – particularly noted in the EU industrial base.Simultaneous to this EU tariff reset, President Trump levied tariffs against China. To offset the possibility of economic losses, and specifically to fund Beijing’s subsidies to impacted Chinese manufacturing, China stopped purchasing European industrial machines. [That’s the source of the picture above at the G7 in Canada]

This trade and tariff approach hit Europe twice as hard. First from American tariffs and second from diminished Chinese industrial purchasing. Immediately, Europe started looking for alternate sources of funds. That’s where the idea to tax American tech companies entered the discussion in Brussels. Today, President Trump addressed this directly.

TRUTH SOCIAL – “The European Union is at it again and, as usual, taking direct aim at GREAT American Companies! After having fined Apple, for no reason at all, 15 Billion Dollars, Meta, 3 Billion Dollars, Amazon 2.5 Billion Dollars, and many others, we have just been informed that Google, a truly advanced and amazing group, has been fined yet another 1 Billion Dollars, without explanation. This brings the Google total to over 18 Billion Dollars!

This illegal and highly discriminatory practice started at these high levels during the first year of the Sleepy Joe Biden Administration, but it’s not going to continue during the Trump Administration. The United States of America is not a “PIGGYBANK” for Europe, nor will we allow it to be! Please let this TRUTH serve to represent that we will immediately initiate a 301 Investigation into the practice of “ROBBING” American Companies and, in turn, the American Taxpayer.

The European Union will pay a very big price for this illegal and highly unethical conduct, which I have consistently warned them about. The penalties will be entirely reversed and, we anticipate, a substantial TARIFF to be placed on them at the earliest possible moment. Stay tuned!”

~President DONALD J. TRUMP

Keep in mind, all of this EU regulatory and compliance control is at the forefront of another element, the AI race.

In the USA we do not want a singular AI model to win support of the United States government and then end up with an AI regulatory system where the govt can start defining terms of “safety” to eliminate information adverse to the interests that regulate it. However, we can almost guarantee that Europe will select an approved singular AI model, predictably regulating it and taxing the use of it accordingly.

Read more …

“Lydia the encyclopydia..”

• The South Carolina Supreme Court Again Rules Against Tattoo Speech (Turley)

There is an interesting free-speech case filed in South Carolina brought by a tattoo parlor challenging a state law that not only bars tattoo facilities from 1000 feet of churches, schools, or playgrounds, but also bans tattoos on the face, neck, or head. The case presents a common challenge for free speech advocates like myself. I have a visceral dislike for tattoos (particularly on the face), but I believe that they are a form of free expression. I, therefore, view the South Carolina law, S.C. Code Ann. § 44-34- 100, as unconstitutional under the First Amendment. (The litigants include claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the 14th Amendment).


The lawsuit was brought by Pacific Legal Foundation on behalf of a New York tattoo shop, Tiny Zaps, that is interested in opening a location in South Carolina. Tiny Zaps argues that “Tattoos are a form of artistic expression protected by the First Amendment. They communicate ideas, commemorate milestones, express beliefs, and allow people to present themselves to the world through permanent artwork created in collaboration with tattoo artists.”

It notes that the limits on store location make it difficult to open a store given the many churches, schools, and playgrounds in the state. However, it is the limits on the placement of the tattoo itself that is most interesting from my perspective. It argues that “Tattoo artists do not merely apply ink to skin. They collaborate with customers to create artistic works that often carry deeply personal expressive significance. The resulting artwork derives meaning not only from its design, but also from its placement on the body.”

It also argues that South Carolina has long been distinctly anti-tattoo expression: “South Carolina has long treated tattooing as disfavored expression. Until 2004, South Carolina was one of only two states that outlawed tattooing.”

In 2002, I wrote about a South Carolina challenge in the Los Angeles Times about the unconstitutionality of a state law barring tattooing. However, the South Carolina Supreme Court ruled that “the danger associated with the activity of tattooing, whether artwork or not, is a legitimate reason to regulate it.” In my criticism of the Court, I disagreed with the premise that “a tattoo might be a form of protected expression, the ‘process’ of tattooing was not protected.” I noted that “this is akin to treating the Declaration of Independence as protected speech but not Benjamin Franklin’s printing of the document.”

As Meagan O’Rourke has noted, that case was declined by the Supreme Court in a disappointment for many of us, but later courts have reached contrary decisions from the South Carolina Supreme Court’s opinion in White v. State. This will now give us a second bite at the apple to get this right. Despite my aversion to tattoos, they are clearly expressive. Indeed, some would say that they are downright educational:

“Lydia, oh Lydia, that encyclopydia Oh Lydia the Queen of Tattoo On her back is the Battle of Waterloo Beside it the wreck of the Hesperus, too And proudly above waves the red, white, and blue You can learn a lot from Lydia”

In support of the free speech case, I call on the ultimate counsel for the challengers to explain the cultural and educational value of tattoos. I give you Groucho Marx:

Read more …

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle July 10 2026

Jul 102026
 
 July 10, 2026  Posted by at 9:27 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  18 Responses »


Vincent van Gogh Branches of An Almond Tree In Blossom in Red 1890


• “Deepening Dark Trend” Emerges On Hormuz As Ship Traffic Slows (ZH)
• The Choice To Go Up Or Down The Escalation Ladder Now Lies With Iran (Every)
• Where is Mojtaba Khamenei? Leadership Infighting Intensifies (Rick Moran)
• Don’t Believe Everything You Read About Venezuela (Anderson)
• Tennessee Congressman Demands FBI Unseal Everything On Seth Rich (José Niño)
• Trump: SCOTUS Ruling Already Fueling Citizenship Scams (Catherine Salgado)
• SCOTUS Decision Places the US in the Hands of the Monied Interests (PCR)
• Jack Smith’s Team May Have Exposed Classified Info (JTN)
• 7 More Counties Consider Leaving Democrat-run Illinois, Create New State (JTN) .
• Canada Admits Justin Trudeau’s Climate Agenda Was a Scam (Andrew Moran)
• Judge Approves SEC Settlement With Elon Musk (JTN)
• Joe Digenova Returns: The Grim Reaper Cometh For The DC Swamp (Ron Wright)
• It Looks Like the Democrats Have Been Sending Their Best All Along (O’Brien)
• Dear American: No One in Government Represents You (Paul Craig Roberts)
• Fauci: The Public Servant from Hell (Jim Cardoza)

 


 

https://twitter.com/BarronTNews_/status/2074897778329763971?s=20 https://twitter.com/GardensR4Health/status/2074848899223691583?s=20 https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/2074973721853567201?s=20

 


 


Not too gloomy please.

It’s summer, lighten up a bit!

• “Deepening Dark Trend” Emerges On Hormuz As Ship Traffic Slows (ZH)

The US military has struck Iranian targets for a second straight day, while Tehran has responded with ballistic missile and drone attacks targeting Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain and even faraway Jordan. While our overnight wrap focused on the latest war developments, the focus here is what energy traders are watching most closely: vessel traffic through the Strait of Hormuz. Bloomberg cites new shipping data showing that the Hormuz chokepoint slowed to a near standstill on Thursday. “Among larger vessels, only a US-sanctioned supertanker heading out of the Persian Gulf was seen in the strait, alongside an Iranian-flagged container ship. It’s possible that some vessels may be crossing with their transponders turned off, however.”


The slowdown marks a sharp reversal from the partial recovery that followed the mid-June interim US-Iran peace deal to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. Commodity-vessel transits averaged 34 a day over the past three weeks and peaked at 59 on June 24, according to Kpler data. That compares with just 14 crossings Wednesday, the lowest since the deal and near wartime levels.Maritime research firm Windward also commented on the Hormuz slowdown:

Earlier, Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy Command stated that it has taken control of managing security and vessel routing through the Hormuz chokepoint. Here’s the translated statement:

“Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy Command

In the name of God, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful.

Peace be upon the insightful and honorable nation, whose astonishing presence and tens-of-millions-strong funeral processions for their martyred leader in Iran and Iraq showed that this is the era of the end of the bullying of powers, and the century of the triumph of nations’ will.

And peace be upon the brave warriors of Islam, who, with their crushing response to the aggressions of the child-killing American army, proved that the outcome of battle is determined not by the abundance of weapons, but by the power of faith.

These warriors, by stabilizing management of the Strait of Hormuz, establishing its security over the past two weeks, and gradually reopening it, have increased passage capacity to about 50% of prewar traffic. They are also increasing the transit capacity of vessels that, while observing the security regulations with discipline, obtain permission from the IRGC Navy to pass through the routes designated by the Islamic Republic.

Once again, we declare that foreigners have no stake in this land or in the Strait of Hormuz. The adventurism of the terrorist American army and its interference in determining traffic routes will not only bring our crushing response, but will also seriously disrupt the process of gradual reopening and seriously endanger the interests of countries that benefit from the Strait of Hormuz.”

https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/2075190731614933171?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2075190731614933171%7Ctwgr%5E4ea5d74aa2eb3db77dd5c3516c2ce6221fb23d0c%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fgeopolitical%2Fdeepening-dark-trend-emerges-hormuz-ship-traffic-slows

On Tuesday, following three separate Iranian attacks on commercial vessels, the Joint Maritime Information Center raised the threat level of the Hormuz chokepoint to “severe.”

Read more …

How easy can it be?

• The Choice To Go Up Or Down The Escalation Ladder Now Lies With Iran (Every)

“It ain’t over till it’s over, but…”
The US hit Iran for a second night along Hormuz, in southern cities, near a nuclear site, and a railway bridge in the northwest. The message from VP Vance was to stop striking ships in Hormuz or get hit back harder. From Trump, it was that Iran are “liars” and “scum” and the MOU is “over,” repeating threats to reimpose the US blockade of Iranian oil –showing why few (save China) were keen to buy it with a temporary sanctions waiver that lapsed before shipments arrived — and to hit electricity and desalination plants and/or take Kharg Island, it’s key oil facility.


Even Axios, purveyor of ‘world peace(fire)’ headlines, is reporting the US is preparing for an extended confrontation –from 1-2 days to a month– and that the ‘Battle of Hormuz’ may be about to begin. Trump did add negotiators could keep talking if they wanted to; and on Air Force One (the old one: that just gifted by Qatar was left in the UK, speaking to a security problem) he stated Iranian officials “called a little while ago. They want to make a deal so badly.”

So, the immediate choice to go up or down the escalation ladder lies with Iran. If Tehran deescalates, they cede control of Hormuz. If they escalate, their options are to hit Hormuz more – triggering more US counter strikes; or GCC energy – triggering a larger war; to use (battered) proxies like Hezbollah – triggering wider war; or perhaps to rush for a nuclear weapon – which would mean far worse war. The New York Times reports Iran’s president and foreign minister were physically attacked this week by supporters of a hard-line faction that vehemently opposes any deal with the US: it remains to be seen if the streets, IRGC, clerics, or politicians will decide what happens next – but both the politicians and the IRGC benefit from talks going on and oil flowing.

The US would also have to decide if it can afford to cede Hormuz or will fight to keep it open when the SPR is seen near a tank bottom- was this discussed at the NATO summit, perhaps? A tell for stepped up military statecraft would be a matching step-up in economic statecraft. Note the White House’s launch of ‘Freedom Fuel’ gas stations offering lower prices (via lower profit margins; or, at $3.67 a gallon, possible federal subsidies). If that scheme expands past an initial 25 sites it suggests more disruption in Hormuz ahead. However, that’s just a stepping stone to the NAPHTHA closed-loop energy system we’ve flagged the US might need to consider.

There are also longer term moves to avoid Hormuz. The UAE’s pipeline to Fujairah is underway; the Saudis may expand their East-West Red Sea pipeline by 2m barrels per day, allowing themselves and other GCC states to benefit; and Riyadh is exploring an IMEC route through Syria and Turkey – as Trump informed Congress of his intent to remove Syria from the state sponsor of terror list and was nice to Erdogan at the Ankara NATO summit; and following a state visit to Damascus by Macron and Erdogan literally giving the EU’s Von der Leyen and Costa guns. For now, we stick with our base case that Hormuz tension blows over rather than blowing up. However, the odds of the latter happening sooner, rather than post-midterms as expected, have increased.

In energy markets, oil is up, but not hugely, with Brent at $79: but crack spreads are near record highs. Yes, lots of oil just flooded out of Hormuz, but global refineries already couldn’t process the backlog easily – add a new war there and things look far worse. Crack spreads have also been driven by Russia banning exports of diesel until end-July in response to the devastating strikes against its oil refineries by Ukrainian drones: these are causing fuel shortages and have turned Russia from a net exporter to a net importer of refined products.

Read more …

“Iran’s new Supreme Leader did not attend the funeral processions or prayers for his father, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, on Thursday.”

The guy might just as well be dead.

Iran is playing a game iwith the US.

First demand proof about who you’re talking to, and what their power is.. Proof, Kushner and Witkoff.

• Where is Mojtaba Khamenei? Leadership Infighting Intensifies (Rick Moran)

While three of his brothers (Mostafa, Meysam, and Masoud) were shown on state television attending the ceremonies, Mojtaba was notably absent. Iranian officials and state media stated that he skipped the multi-day funeral due to high-stakes security concerns. While that may be true, other high-ranking clerics and officials showed up, including Masoud Pezeshkian, the President of Iran; Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, the Speaker of the Parliament, and Tehran’s chief negotiator; Gholam-Hossein Mohseni-Eje’i, the Head of the Judiciary; and Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi.


If he’s still alive, Khamenei the Younger is either horribly disfigured or in a coma. Whatever his condition, his absence has set off an extremely serious clan and factional war that, so far, has remained bloodless, but could easily spiral into open warfare.


The major factions fall generally within the “pragmatist” and “radical” camps, with both invoking Mojtaba Khamenei’s name to justify their actions. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) commander, Gen. Ahmad Vahidi, a radical hardliner who opposed the ceasefire, is in nominal (if unofficial) control of the government, with President Pezeshkian and Foreign Minister Araghichi heading up the pragmatists. Despite how Western media portrays them as “moderates,” they are not, in any way, less radical in their beliefs than Vahidi and the IRGC and other factions in the clerical, business, and mercantile clans that all have a slice of Iranian wealth.

“In other words, they all subscribe to the core tenets of Shia Islamism in Iran: the forceful imposition of Sharia law domestically, support for the so-called Axis of Resistance militia network, anti-Americanism, and the goal of eradicating the Israel (driven by innate anti-Semitism),” writes Saeid Golkar and Kasra Aarabi in Middle East Forum (MEF). While all the players may have the same core beliefs, their conflicts are about protecting their power and economic interests.

Recently, the conflict came out in the open when the powerful Assembly of Experts criticized the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that led to a temporary ceasefire. The Assembly is a body of 88 clerics who appoint the supreme leader and theoretically oversee his authority. They weighed in on the MOU, opposing it on the basis that the current Supreme Leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, opposed it. In the statement, they claimed the deal crossed several red lines set by Khamenei.

“All officials should respect that, in the system of Velayat-e Faqih (Guardianship of the Islamic Jurist), the opinion and directives of the Supreme Leader are decisive. Once informed of the Leader’s definitive view, no official may act contrary to it,” the statement said in Farsi. Middle East Forum: “After its publication, Ayatollah Hashem Hosseini Busheri, chairman of the Assembly of Experts’ secretariat and spokesperson, immediately stated that he was completely unaware of the statement and that, while he did not oppose its content, its signatories had broken convention and published it without coordination with him.

Remarkably, however, senior members of the secretariat – including Ayatollah Movahedi Kermani, Ayatollah Arafi, Ayatollah Araki and Ayatollah Rajavi—were amongst the signatories of the statement. In fact, only three members of the secretariat had not signed the statement, including Hosseini Busheri. The very fact that such elite infighting is now unfolding openly within the regime’s most important clerical body is particularly telling.

The dispute shows that Khamenei the Younger has nowhere near the power and influence his father had. When Ali Khamenei was alive, there was never a question about what state policy was and who was directing it. Now, the factions are making policy recommendations and invoking the name of Mojtaba, sometimes contradicting themselves in claiming his support. “Their statement therefore reveals not only in-fighting between the different oligarch clans of the Islamist regime, but also that the clerical class is scrambling to preserve its political and economic privileges in the face of an increasingly uncertain succession,” the authors write.

Ali Khamenei’s cult of personality was based on his physical presence at meetings and conferences. No one would dare go against him. His word was absolute, made that way by his physical presence. Khamenei the Younger’s absence has raised the anxiety level of the elites to critical levels. It’s only going to get worse the longer Mojtaba Khamenei remains invisible.

Read more …

“Nayib Bukele and El Salvador were on the ground almost immediately with machinery, supplies, and rescue teams, saving lives. Right now, a team from Israel is in Venezuela working on plans to help with rebuilding. ”

• Don’t Believe Everything You Read About Venezuela (Anderson)

It’s been exactly two weeks since two major earthquakes struck Venezuela, leaving portions of the country devastated. The death toll is over 3,600 as of Wednesday afternoon, with tens of thousands of people still missing. Here’s a new video of some of the damage. International response has been huge. As I’ve written many times, Nayib Bukele and El Salvador were on the ground almost immediately with machinery, supplies, and rescue teams, saving lives. Right now, a team from Israel is in Venezuela working on plans to help with rebuilding.

https://twitter.com/cristiancrespoj/status/2074980979014606873?s=20


Of course, the biggest response has been from the United States and rightfully so. As Donald Trump likes to jokingly say, he runs Venezuela now, and that means taking the good and the bad as it comes. The State Department actually released a fact sheet on Wednesday afternoon, with the latest on our humanitarian efforts on the ground. We’ve offered $386 million funneled through trustworthy charitable organizations “providing emergency medical care, food assistance, water and sanitation, shelter, protection, and logistics.”

The State Department, Airlink, and Amazon announced on Wednesday that they are teaming up to fly supplies in weekly for the foreseeable future at no cost to these organizations. The Department of War has many much-needed boots on the ground and has “mobilized to ensure American ships, American aircraft, and American resolve have been present when it matters most.” Our military has helped restore and is now overseeing some operations at Simón Bolívar International Airport. All of this will continue for as long as necessary.

But as I wrote on Monday, this is more than just a humanitarian crisis — it’s also becoming a political one. It has exposed the regime rot still in place, which isn’t surprising. The “interim government” leaders consist of two anti-American siblings whose father was a Marxist guerrilla fighter and one of the most wanted cartel leaders in the U.S. Removing Nicolás Maduro didn’t change that; it simply put the fear of God Trump in them, so they’re largely doing what his administration pressures them to do with some asterisks attached.

Most people understand this, even those in Venezuela who are ready for change after nearly 30 years of Chavismo, but as I said on Monday, they’re growing impatient. Trump’s constant praise of Delcy Rodríguez, pragmatic or not, is tedious. Over 500 political prisoners remain detained, despite promises in January that they would all be released. Paramilitary groups still harass the opposition and foreigners. In the days following the earthquake, the State Department updated its Level 3 travel warning for Venezuela, suggesting that those of us here in the U.S. reconsider travel to the country due to the “risk of crime, kidnapping, terrorism, and poor health infrastructure and natural disaster.”

Before the earthquakes, people were marching weekly, demanding freedom for those political prisoners, elections sooner rather than later, and actual jobs so they could earn a living. Constitutionally, Delcy’s tenure was up after 180 days, which came and went over this past weekend, and elections must be held within 30 days if we’re following the rules here.

Watching Delcy and her regime buddies delay aid and rescue efforts in the direct aftermath of the earthquake, which most certainly cost many lives, and deny opposition leader María Corina Machado re-entry into the country to help with the efforts has been the last straw for many. As I mentioned on Monday, Machado is the most beloved figure in that country and among its diaspora. It is difficult to put into words just how much they believe in her. If the country actually held free and fair elections in 2024, she or her surrogate, Edmundo González, would be president right now.

But there is something else going on that is incredibly suspicious, and I hate even giving this situation any oxygen, but I also fear people will buy into it if someone doesn’t speak out. I am not sure what to call it aside from some sort of obviously coordinated campaign against Machado by people, many of whom would be considered MAGA influencers or Trump-aligned independent voices.

It seemed to start with Javier Negre. He’s a so-called conservative journalist from Spain who has built his own digital platforms and currently operates as a correspondent out of the White House. He’s well-connected, but he also has a controversial background that haunts his reputation. He sat down for an interview with Delcy just before the earthquakes, and afterward, he — seemingly out of the blue — started accusing Machado and many of her supporters of starting up some sort of anti-Trump/anti-U.S. campaign, and he essentially began whitewashing Delcy and the regime. He’s gone after some highly respected people in these pro-Machado/pro-democracy for Venezuela circles — people from whom I have learned so much myself.

Before I knew it, other random supposedly conservative “MAGA” people — people who had never so much as uttered a word about Venezuela and I’m willing to bet still couldn’t find it on a map — were coming out swinging too, parroting the same talking points. They accused Machado of being a socialist (far from it — she’s been fighting it most of her life), of being a big Biden supporter (she’s been trying to work with any U.S. president who would help get rid of Maduro, and for what it’s worth, Biden played a big role in the actions that led to her not being able to run for president in Venezuela in 2024), and all sorts of other ridiculous things that simply made no sense.

I mean, if they were going to pretend it was organic, they could have at least spaced it out instead of all saying the same things at once, or pretended they cared about Venezuela at all before they started putting out blatantly inaccurate “facts.” This little campaign has been so poorly executed that there is no doubt in my mind that there’s an ulterior motive. Many have asked if the Maduro-turned-Delcy regime is paying them to do this. Who knows for sure, but it wouldn’t be the first time it has tried to influence opinion in the United States.

Read more …

After all this time?

• Tennessee Congressman Demands FBI Unseal Everything On Seth Rich (José Niño)

Rep. Tim Burchett, R-Tenn, has thrown a fresh spotlight on one of Washington’s most stubborn cold cases.


On July 7, 2026, the Tennessee Republican posted on X that he had formally pressed FBI Director Kash Patel to surrender every document the bureau holds on the 2016 killing of DNC staffer Seth Rich. “I have called for @FBIDirectorKash to release all records related to the death of Seth Rich,” Burchett wrote. His press office added, “Today, I sent a letter to FBI Director Kash Patel asking for the release of all records related to the death of Seth Rich. The American people deserve answers.”

The letter itself, dated on Tuesday, opens plainly. “I write to request the release of all Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) records related to the death of Seth Rich,” Burchett states. He then leans on the White House, urging, “Given the Administration’s commitment to transparency, I strongly urge the full release of these records, as permitted by law.” Rich, 27, was shot and killed while walking home in Washington during the early morning hours of July 10, 2016. Police treated the case as a botched robbery, and it stays unsolved. Rich’s death later fueled a viral theory that he leaked DNC emails to WikiLeaks and was silenced for it.

Burchett’s demand follows years of FOIA warfare waged by attorney Ty Clevenger on behalf of plaintiff Brian Huddleston. The FBI first claimed it held no relevant files, then conceded it possessed more than 20,000 pages of potentially relevant material, Rich’s work laptop, and an image of his personal one. According to Radar, this week Clevenger said a government lawyer told him he would soon receive confirmation that several hundred more Rich pages had surfaced inside a previously concealed room at FBI headquarters—the same unmapped SCIF where “burn bags” of Russia-probe files marked for destruction were reportedly found.

That connection remains Clevenger’s account. The FBI has not confirmed it, and the separate burn-bags report never established that Rich records were among those files.

Read more …

“Signs and Billboards are being put up all over our Southern Border, and Mexico, advertising BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP, with ‘Deliveries starting at $4000.’

• Trump: SCOTUS Ruling Already Fueling Citizenship Scams (Catherine Salgado)

President Donald Trump has declared he is requesting a rehearing for a crucial birthright citizenship case after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against the original understanding of the Fourteenth Amendment and opened the floodgates for “birth tourists” and “anchor babies.”


The current warped view of birthright citizenship is that any child born on U.S. soil is a citizen even if his parents just walked or flew across the border, or even if the parents are affiliated with enemy governments or with international criminal organizations. After the Supreme Court majority ruled this was the right view of birthright citizenship at the end of June, ignoring historical evidence to the contrary and serious threats to our elections and national sovereignty, Trump first urged Congress to pass legislation to correct the decision. But he seems somewhat impatient with the length of time this will take and is seeking a quicker resolution.

On Wednesday, July 8, President Trump posted on Truth Social, “Signs and Billboards are being put up all over our Southern Border, and Mexico, advertising BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP, with ‘Deliveries starting at $4000.’ Likewise, similar signs going up all over our Country.” You can see one example below from Texas. Birthing centers can make huge profits selling packages to foreigners who want to give birth in the USA and have children who are citizens with all the privileges of being American.

Trump continued, “Billions of Dollars will be illegally made by this SCAM, with Citizenship going to anyone willing to pay. It will be, by far, the number one way of becoming a citizen, and then the entire family will be allowed to follow. Not sustainable. NOBODY SAW THIS COMING!!! AMERICAN CITIZENSHIP IS NOT FOR SALE! In fact, that is a crime, and therefore, the Supreme Court’s ruling is wrong. I will be asking for a Rehearing by the United States Supreme Court, IMMEDIATELY. This miscarriage of justice will destroy America if they don’t change their absolutely insane decision. Thank you for your attention to this matter!”

As mentioned above, there is indeed more than one proposed bill that could return U.S. citizenship standards to the original understanding of the Fourteenth Amendment, with the foremost bill called the Birthright Citizenship Act. We know for a certainty that the Fourteenth Amendment was never meant to apply to such as birth tourists and anchor babies because when America ratified it, the amendment did not give citizenship to Native American Indians, as the U.S. government considered it did not have direct jurisdiction over them.

Read more …

“We, in our stupidity, call this “democracy,” and we recently celebrated our “independence” instead of acknowledging our captivity.”

• SCOTUS Decision Places the US in the Hands of the Monied Interests (PCR)

Some years ago the Supreme Court ruled that limits on organized interest groups’ contributions to political campaigns was a violation of free speech. This ruling, which has no basis in the US Constitution or in common sense, gave organized money the power to purchase the US government. And it has. Not content with this damage to representative government, the US Supreme Court just removed all remaining limits to the ability of money to purchase the government. The majority opinion said:


“Whether the Democratic Party, the Republican Party or other parties, all political parties and candidates going forward can compete equally under the same rules regarding coordinated expenditures and can structure their fund-raising, spending and political speech on a level playing field as they see fit within the law.”

This is ignorant nonsense. The Supreme Court is saying that the monied interests it has empowered can compete on equal terms. This competition excludes the American electorate. What the Supreme Court has done is to remove any influence of voters on government policy. The government’s policy is determined by the money of the interest groups that elects presidents, federal and state representatives and senators, governors, mayors and county commissions. All American voters are permitted to do is to vote for the candidates financed by vested interests. Every American vote is pointless.

We, in our stupidity, call this “democracy,” and we recently celebrated our “independence” instead of acknowledging our captivity.

Read more …

“.. while probing Trump for allegedly doing the same..”

• Jack Smith’s Team May Have Exposed Classified Info (JTN)

New documents released by Senator Chuck Grassley, Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, show that employees at the Department of Justice, including those working for then-special counsel Jack Smith, may have mishandled classified information while probing Donald Trump for allegedly doing the same. “Messages involving personnel in Jack Smith’s Special Counsel Office (SCO) raise serious concerns about the Biden administration’s failure to properly secure classified materials,” Grassley wrote in a short letter to Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche on Wednesday.


Smith, who was appointed special counsel during the Biden administration, pursued a federal investigation against then-candidate Donald Trump into alleged mishandling of classified documents. The special counsel later secured a grand jury indictment against the then-former president for 40 felony counts. The case was dismissed in July 2024 by Judge Aileen Cannon, who ruled Smith’s appointment violated the Appointments Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

In the letter, Grassley requested more information and records from the Justice Department about whether the agency probed the security incident, whether any of the classified materials were “compromised, missing, altered, or tampered with,” and whether Trump’s legal team was made aware of the incident. “The messages show that these failures caused a security ‘violation and incident’ where a Justice Department sensitive compartmented information facility (SCIF) accessible to SCO personnel was left open overnight and potentially longer,” Grassley wrote. [..]

The documents published by the senator show that Justice Department officials raised concerns that some individuals received access to classified materials without the required “need to know” authorization. They also show that a secure facility used by the special counsel’s staff was left open overnight. “No one opened it yesterday because no one closed it the day before,” one team member wrote. “Who opened it the day before? That’s a violation and incident so I need to know the details,” another replied.

“This conduct appears to show the Biden Justice Department may have mishandled classified information while it prosecuted President Trump for allegedly mishandling classified information,” Grassley wrote. “This is yet another example of law enforcement’s double standards in the previous administration.”

Read more …

“Measures will be on the ballot this November in Coles, Gallatin, Hamilton, Henderson, Macoupin, Monroe and Saline counties “

I had no idea this was possible/legal.

• 7 More Counties Consider Leaving Democrat-run Illinois, Create New State (JTN) .

Voters in seven Illinois counties have a chance to join 33 others that approved referendums to consider forming a new state apart from Cook County. Measures will be on the ballot this November in Coles, Gallatin, Hamilton, Henderson, Macoupin, Monroe and Saline counties. State Rep. Brad Halbrook, R-Shelbyville, said citizens are frustrated with what’s happening in Springfield. “They don’t see that anything’s going to change for the positive, and when I speak about that, you know, it’s the SAFE-T Act, it’s the Protect Illinois Communities Act, the other social issues,” Halbrook told The Center Square.


Halbrook said Gov. J.B. Pritzker has added over 60 new taxes in eight years. “Billions of dollars have been transferred from citizens, from businesses into state budgets or into the state treasury,” Halbrook said. Halbrook proposed a resolution that goes farther than the ballot measures and urges Congress to declare 101 of Illinois’ 102 counties the 51st state in the U.S. The Indiana legislature has advanced bills to consider bringing Illinois counties into the Hoosier state. Last year, an Iowa state lawmaker proposed a bill to bring several western Illinois counties into the Hawkeye state.

Voters in several eastern Oregon counties have approved ballot measures in recent years that favor a merger into Idaho, but statewide proposals to change state lines failed to advance. Gov. J.B. Pritzker has referred to the prospect of Illinois counties leaving as a stunt. Halbrook said separating from Cook County would be an uphill battle, because Democrats in the super majority will not let his resolution move forward. “We need to have a conversation at a minimum. I think that’s what’s important. Why do people want to do this? Why do they not want to stay here in the state of Illinois? What we’re seeing this spring and summer in real time, even the Chicago Bears are discussing moving to a neighboring state of Indiana. Why is that happening?” Halbrook said.

When asked about trying to effect change in Cook County instead of pushing for separation from Illinois, Halbrook said the dynamic would change if legislation changes. “But that’s not the priority of the super majority. We’re seeing their priorities, which lead to these higher costs, these many other things that we’ve discussed here,” Halbrook said.

Read more …

“..skepticism is warranted because Carney has spent much of his tenure just talking with his elbows up.”

• Canada Admits Justin Trudeau’s Climate Agenda Was a Scam (Andrew Moran)

Former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau gave Canada a lost decade. A key contributor to the country’s stagnation was the Liberal government’s obsession with climate change and its ushering in of green energy policies that were disastrous for a nation rich in natural resources. To make Canada great again, Prime Minister Mark Carney is abandoning climate alarmism and embracing what made the country wealthy in the first place: crude oil.


Canada Loves Oil Again
On June 30, the prime minister published a 17-minute YouTube video, focused exclusively on his predecessor’s climate agenda. He used words like “expensive” and “divisive” to describe Trudeau’s environmental endeavors. Carney essentially admitted that Pierre Poilievre and the Conservatives were right. For right-wing political pundits, this was a rare win for the incumbent. Indeed, in a bid to resuscitate the ailing Canadian economy, Carney is trying to make the country fall back in love with fossil fuels – and appease Alberta – despite years of climate doomerism.

Ottawa announced earlier this month a new West Coast pipeline that will ship up to one million barrels of crude oil per day from Alberta to Asian markets. The federal government gave its blessing to a new west-east crude oil pipeline that will run from Alberta to Ontario. This comes as the Carney Liberals begin to expand liquefied natural gas exports, scrap the consumer carbon tax, and remove the cap on the oil and gas sector’s pollution levels.

Carney already accepted that Canada’s emissions will be higher in the coming years, a fact that was inevitable. Various models currently indicate that the Great White North has been missing its emissions targets, even before the current government’s reforms. Canada lags behind other G7 countries in emissions reductions, and even the United States is outperforming its northern neighbor. “The certainties of the world of 2015 are long gone. Our neighborhood hasn’t been this hostile since Canada was founded,” the prime minister said. “The world hasn’t been this unstable geopolitically since the end of the Second World War.”

Of course, skepticism is warranted because Carney has spent much of his tenure just talking with his elbows up. From housing to pipelines, it has been all talk and no action. Following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Germany surprisingly sprang into action and constructed Floating Storage and Regasification Units (FSRUs) to import seaborne liquefied natural gas in fewer than 200 days.The prime minister has been in office for 15 months with nothing to show for it. Still, capital might be optimistic about Canadian energy moving forward, having been hesitant to invest in various projects across the country over the last 11 years.

What About America?
America’s decision last week not to renew the USMCA could be a major blow to the Canadian economy. The post-NAFTA trade deal will now be subject to annual reviews as the United States raises grievances over production quotas, supply management, rules of origin, and other provisions. Despite Ottawa’s efforts to diversify its trade by importing more students from India and exporting more oil to Asia, the country still needs its southern neighbor. More than 90 percent of its energy is shipped to the United States, making it an extremely difficult market to replace, even if Canada desires to become an energy superpower.

If the numbers are accurate, the United States has about 300 billion barrels of heavy crude sitting in its backyard (Venezuela). It also produces about 14 million barrels of oil per day. The current administration is a close ally of the United Arab Emirates, which withdrew from the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) and is seeking to expand crude production. Add in control of the Strait of Malacca, and the United States is building upon its reputation as an energy superpower.

To be fair, Carney is situated between an igloo and Trumpism. He has to appease the White House (and appear tough to older Canadian voters who blame President Trump for everything) while also finding economic opportunities elsewhere. It is not an easy task.

Desperate Times, Desperate Measures
Trillions of dollars worldwide have been invested in green energy. And yet, every crisis over the last several years has proven these vanity projects to be entirely unreliable. Countries keep turning to crude oil, natural gas, coal, and nuclear power to meet their energy needs. The United States realized it. Europe is starting to come around. Asia always knew it. Canada was the last nation to finally understand that oil and gas are the answer, not a windmill.

Read more …

That judge’s name: Sparkle Sooknanan.

• Judge Approves SEC Settlement With Elon Musk (JTN)

A judge this week approved a $1.5 million settlement between Elon Musk and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) over his purchase of Twitter. At issue was Musk’s failure to disclose his purchases of Twitter stock when he attained 5% control of the company in 2022. Musk later purchased the company outright and has since rebranded it as X. U.S. District Judge Sparkle Sooknanan approved the settlement, saying she had “significant misgivings” but that the threshold to strike down the settlement was not met, The Hill reported.


She further opined that voters could render their own judgment on the matter at the ballot box. Musk’s purchase of Twitter, its rebrand, and his overhaul of its content moderation guidelines have attracted scrutiny for years, with many left-leaning organizations leaving the site over its permissive approach to posting.

Read more …

“His knowledge and expertise may be the final thing necessary to bring the years-long Russia Collusion hoax to a just conclusion.”

• Joe DiGenova Returns: The Grim Reaper Cometh For The DC Swamp (Ron Wright)

It started back in 2019 with an article by Thomas Lifson, co-founder of American Thinker. Lifson highlighted stunning revelations from former U.S. Attorney Joe DiGenova (DC District) about RICO and the Russia Hoax. That piece crystallized what so many sensed: powerful players were bending rules, narratives, and investigations to protect themselves while targeting threats to the status quo.


I wrote to Lifson framing it as evidence of a silent coup—a RICO-style criminal enterprise. He encouraged me to explore using RICO against the Clinton Foundation as a criminal enterprise. I did exactly that, and it marked the beginning of my regular writing for American Thinker—connecting street-level misconduct to larger issues of government overreach and Deep State activity during the Obama and Biden years. That spark helped fuel a reckoning with America’s Truth. Now, years later, Joe DiGenova is positioned to act on those very issues.

Paul Sperry penned an excellent summary at Real Clear Investigations about the push to move the grand conspiracy case from DC to the Southern District of Florida (SDFL) and the addition of DiGenova to lead the team. Sworn in as Counselor to the Attorney General and detailed to the Southern District of Florida (SDFL), DiGenova, a veteran prosecutor, brings decades of experience to advancing the “grand conspiracy” investigation. The probe examines the coordinated actions—from the Russia investigation origins through Crossfire Hurricane, impeachments, and subsequent lawfare—that many view as a sustained effort to undermine a president and the voters who elected him.

Full Circle on Longstanding Accountability Gaps
This moment feels like a full circle. DiGenova and Victoria Toensing were persistent voices on the 2012 Benghazi attacks (the deadly assault on U.S. facilities in Libya that killed four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens). Serious questions arose about security decisions, response failures, and transparency at the highest levels of the State Department.

A source with knowledge of the process noted that the Accountability Review Board was structured to limit scrutiny of senior officials, including then-Secretary Hillary Clinton, and focused blame lower down the bureaucracy. This fit a long-standing pattern of protecting the powerful. The cynicism was evident in Clinton’s famous “What difference at this point does it make?” response before the House Select Committee on Benghazi.

Those protecting the system needed Clinton to win the 2016 election to provide cover for broader activities underway—including diverting massive taxpayer funds through NGOs. When Clinton lost, panic set in. Just before the election, a circle of Democrats inside the government launched the Russian Collusion narrative and ran it aggressively through Trump’s entire first term. Legacy media dutifully parroted whatever came from the FBI and CIA.

The FBI had already covered for Clinton’s private email server—a clear violation involving mishandling of classified information that many viewed as espionage-related. Comey’s public claim that “intent” was required, combined with the infamous tarmac meeting between Bill Clinton and Attorney General Loretta Lynch, only deepened suspicions that a pre-arranged shield was in place.

[..]

DiGenova is the right person at the right time. His background as a battle-tested U.S. Attorney equips him to cut through layers of institutional self-defense with rigor, clarity, and an unflinching commitment to the rule of law. The framework he is helping build opens the door to powerful tools like RICO statutes. If the evidence demonstrates an “enterprise” of officials, agencies, and enablers engaged in a pattern of racketeering activity—leaks, misleading FISA processes, selective prosecutions, and repeated efforts to hobble a political opponent—RICO allows tying disparate acts into a cohesive case with serious penalties, extended statutes of limitations, and asset forfeiture.

This isn’t about isolated mistakes or policy disagreements. It’s about confronting a sustained enterprise that often used fraud as a tool to undermine constitutional norms, electoral integrity, and public trust. The phrase “slam the coup” captures the necessary scale: not rhetoric, but rigorous application of law to those who treated it as optional. High-profile indictments should follow wherever the facts and evidence lead. Foundational decisions from the Obama era, the roles played by figures like Hillary Clinton in shaping and amplifying the Russia narrative, and broader coordination across administrations sit at the core. While grand jury proceedings remain properly sealed, the trajectory is unmistakable: sunlight on actions that affected not just one presidency, but the integrity of American self-government itself.

Signs the Shift Is Real—and Momentum Is Building
This Florida effort does not exist in isolation. Parallel momentum is visible elsewhere. In California, a longtime Newsom ally and appointee, Alexis Podesta, served as an FBI cooperator wearing a wire in a public corruption probe tied to the governor’s former chief of staff, Dana Williamson. That case resulted in a guilty plea on federal fraud and tax charges involving the alleged siphoning of campaign funds. The investigation has since broadened, touching elements of Newsom’s inner circle and raising questions about influence, fund flows, and nonprofit operations.

After years of documented institutional hesitation—from Secret Service failures in Butler to lingering unanswered questions around threats and shooters—we are now seeing the FBI and DOJ deploy proven tools (wires, cooperators, financial tracing, and intercepts) with greater consistency and effect.

Seasoned professionals have stepped up, leaving lucrative law practices to serve as patriots rather than risk-averse bureaucrats. Figures like Harmeet Dhillon (Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights) exemplify this commitment. It’s noteworthy that lawyers who represented Trump in the 2020 election, such as John Eastman, faced severe professional repercussions—including disbarment by the California Bar Association and being shunned by elite law firms—highlighting the risks attorneys encounter when they challenge the establishment or represent clients targeted by woke bar associations.

Read more …

He left out Newsom.

• It Looks Like the Democrats Have Been Sending Their Best All Along (O’Brien)

Can we agree that Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC) (D-N.Y.) is simultaneously a total mental midget and one of the shrewdest politicians in Washington right now? If she weren’t, she’d be gone, but instead, she’s the favorite to unseat Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) when he comes up for re-election in 2028.


What about Kamala Harris? She made the term “word salad” famous and almost synonymous with her own name during her time as vice president and in her 2024 presidential campaign. She’s about as sharp as a bowling ball but was still able to rustle up the job that put her one heartbeat away from becoming president of the United States.

How about Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.)? Do you think the Illinois Democrats could have found someone else to represent the state in the Senate?

Then there are the ancients. These are the people who once had three brain cells that could speak to each other, but those days are gone. This list would include, but not be limited to, Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) and, of course, Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.).

https://twitter.com/TrumpWarRoom/status/1920129584088924181?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1920129584088924181%7Ctwgr%5E00ca3fa5be1f252405017e2fd6451ce8f6e2f533%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fpjmedia.com%2Ftim-o-brien%2F2026%2F07%2F09%2Fit-looks-like-the-democrats-have-been-sending-their-best-all-along-n4954844

Not to be overlooked, there is the increasingly long list of discarded Democrats now on the ash heap of political dim bulbs: Joe Biden, Eric Swalwell, Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas), Jamaal Bowman, and Cori Bush (who could return from her political exile). And who could forget the legendary Rep. Al Green (D-Texas)? For every young, smart, deceptive, and cunning Zohran Mamdani, it seems there are five Democrat dimwits who reinforce President Donald Trump’s latest branding of the opposition party. When he calls them “Dumocrats,” he’s just stating facts.

Washington is teeming with leftist useful idiots, ready and willing to implement an agenda that they don’t understand or care to understand. All they know, and all they need to know, is that if they say and do what their handlers tell them to do, they’ll win power. In a country of 330 million and a two-party political system, you’d think the Democrat Party could put forth higher-quality candidates. But once you apply the DEI and wokeness filters, the pool of candidates gets very, very narrow.

To take back power, the Democrats have been pinning their hopes on the now disgraced Graham Platner, James Talarico (D-Texas), Claire Valdez (D-N.Y.), Darializa Avila Chevalier (D-N.Y.), and Melat Kiros (D-Colo.). Like AOC, all of these individuals are dumb enough to be “Dumocrats,” but shrewd enough to win elections. It’s tempting to take them lightly, but that would be a mistake. There’s even talk of a potential AOC on the Democrat Party’s presidential ticket in 2028. Given the Republican Party’s long historical pattern of playing down to an opponent, that would scare me. Maybe it would be better for the Republicans if the Democrats started to nominate candidates with an IQ in the triple digits. That actually might work out better for the Grand Old Party.

In the meantime, as the Democrats continue to ride their hopes on politically and historically illiterate candidates — and some candidates who seem to be just plain illiterate — it looks like the Democrats have the Republicans just where they want them.

Read more …

“The problem for white ethnic Western Civilization is that it is demonized beyond repair ..”

• Dear American: No One in Government Represents You (Paul Craig Roberts)

Marjorie Taylor Greene, Thomas Massie, Tucker Carlson, Candice Owens, and a few others who have access to media exposure, including myself, agree that Washington does not represent the American people. Neither do the state or local governments. Conservatives used to claim that the closer government is to you, the better it represented you, but that is not my experience. Marjorie Taylor Greene says, correctly, that you cannot go against a party position or they will come after you. In other words, leadership within the parties to bring change cannot arise. The money interests that finance the elections are the ones that benefit from government.


She says it would be possible to beat the system, but it “requires the American people fully getting engaged. And the American people just aren’t fully engaged.” She is correct. I have been trying since 1975 when I entered the Congressional staff to get Americans involved before the net closed over them. I have not been very successful.

My main success was as Assistant Secretary of the US Treasury getting the Reagan reduction in tax rates passed and the income tax brackets adjusted for inflation in order to prevent inflation from pushing nominal incomes into higher tax brackets. I was able to do this because this was the task I was assigned by President Reagan, and I had tremendous support from President Reagan and Treasury Secretary Don Reagan, from members of both parties in the House and Senate, and from Bob Bartley, the editor of the Wall Street Journal. If I had not succeeded, every American taxpayer today would be in the top 50% bracket financing with their work and income America’s wars for the Zionist agenda of Greater Israel and the Democrats’ agenda of a multicultural America.

I went into a powerful presidential appointment after serving in House and Senate, both committee and personal staffs, after being an editor and columnist for the Wall Street Journal, after having been educated at Georgia Tech, University of Virginia, University of California, Berkeley, and Oxford University where I experienced every view of politics and economics. Additionally, my agenda was change, not a government career, and therefore I was willing to fight. The establishment, of course, has done everything possible to belittle the achievement in order to prevent wildcat operators again disturbing the status quo.

(AI Overview definition of wildcat operator in politics: “In politics, a wildcat operator, or “wildcatter,” refers to a rogue, independent political actor or strategist who operates outside the control, funding, and strategy of established major political parties or conventional organizations.”) Today in America there are no such people with the necessary support to bring any change not approved by the controlling interest groups. As President Trump has demonstrated, real change in America is no longer possible within the existing party confines.

The party confines are changing. Democrats refreshed with immigrant-invaders from Washington’s wars for Israel in the Middle East are having their party’s complexion changed. Republican MAGA voters, disappointed with Trump’s forsaken promise of “no more wars,” are losing enthusiasm. These developments do not mean that the outcome will be good for Americans. As immigrant-invaders are now a significant percentage of the population, they will be legalized, not deported, by both parties competing for their support. Trump’s failure will demoralize Americans and undermine belief that America can be restored.

The problem for white ethnic Western Civilization is that it is demonized beyond repair, has lost its self-belief, and cannot be resurrected even if the people were aware without massive violence of which they do not seem capable, having been so brainwashed for so long as to now accept their “guilt.”

Read more …

“If the allegations put forward by [Tulsi Gabbard] prove to be substantially true, Dr. Anthony Fauci’s legacy will be remembered as one of the greatest betrayals of the public trust in modern American history.”

• Fauci: The Public Servant from Hell (Jim Cardoza)

If the allegations put forward by Tulsi Gabbard, former Director of National Intelligence, prove to be substantially true, Dr. Anthony Fauci’s legacy will be remembered as one of the greatest betrayals of the public trust in modern American history.


For four decades, Fauci occupied one of the most influential positions in the federal government. As Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), he controlled billions of taxpayer dollars, directed research priorities, advised presidents of both parties, and enjoyed a level of public credibility rarely afforded to unelected bureaucrats. Americans were encouraged to trust him — not because he was elected, but because he was presented as the embodiment of objective science.

That trust is precisely what makes the controversies surrounding his tenure so consequential. Fauci’s history in this position of power is one that should not be overlooked. That is why Senator Rand Paul, as chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, issued a subpoena compelling Fauci to testify before Congress. Fauci had declined to appear voluntarily.

Fauci is no stranger to controversy. As director of NIAID (1984–2022), he oversaw the institute that funded much of the nation’s HIV/AIDS research. For two decades, beginning in 1985, NIAID conducted research involving the treatment of society’s most vulnerable children during the AIDS epidemic. Investigative journalist Liam Scheff alleged that HIV-positive foster children and orphans were enrolled in experimental drug trials without adequate informed consent or independent advocacy. Official reviews raised legitimate ethical concerns about research involving vulnerable children.

Critics alleged that the treatment children received was brutal and unethical, with staff and doctors prioritizing trial compliance over the children’s well-being. Scheff reported that some children experienced significant side effects, and those who resisted the drugs were held down and force-fed. It is also on record that persistent refusers underwent surgical insertion of gastric (stomach) tubes for direct drug delivery. One reason this policy faced little resistance is that the foster children had no parents protecting their interests.

But this wasn’t the only experimentation under Fauci that exploited a vulnerable population.

From 2016 to 2019 came what has come to be known simply as the “beagle experiments.” At that time, Fauci’s NIAID funded research that included exposing dogs to infected sand flies while their heads were restrained inside mesh enclosures to facilitate insect feeding. Laboratory procedures included surgical removal of portions of the dogs’ vocal cords to reduce barking in research facilities. While Fauci did not personally perform these experiments, as director of NIAID he approved the grants that allowed the research. As with the children, these procedures once again illustrated a disturbing willingness to subordinate ethical concerns to bureaucratic research objectives.

Yet, as disgusting as they may be, neither controversy approaches the impact of Fauci’s decisions that led to the mass devastation resulting from COVID-19. The Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) has now publicly alleged that Fauci approved funding for research involving bat coronaviruses at the Wuhan Institute of Virology and has characterized it as a dangerous gain-of-function project. Gain-of-function, in this instance, refers to making the virus more infectious and lethal. The ODNI further asserts that Fauci later misled Congress about his knowledge of these activities and about discussions concerning the origins of the pandemic.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/MAGAVoice/status/2074696045876105629?s=20

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle July 2 2026

Jul 022026
 
 July 2, 2026  Posted by at 9:22 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,  22 Responses »


Francesco Queirolo Il Disinganno, Naples, Sansevero Chapel 1753-1754


• SCOTUS Strikes Down Trump EO and Establishes Birthright Citizenship (CTH)
• Justice Thomas Says Birthright Citizenship Ruling ‘Devalues’ US Citizenship (ET)
• A Roadmap To Fix Birthright Citizenship (Dmitri Bolt)
• The Supreme Court’s Birthright Citizenship Mistake (Ben Shapiro)
• The Roberts Requirement – Pregnancy Tests for U.S. Travel Visas (CTH)
• The DOJ Goes to War on Birth Tourism After Losing at SCOTUS (Margolis)
• Miller: Every Single Haitian Migrant Is GOING BACK to Haiti Under Trump (MN)
• The Canadian Dollar is Collapsing – Here’s What to Expect Next (CTH)
• Elon’s Next Move: Your Money (Adam Sharp)
• SpaceX Takes Aim At Smartphone Market With New AI Device (ZH)
• NATO Chief Admits To Sleepless Nights Over Russia (TASS)
• Leader of Germany’s Most Popular Party Wants To Restore Ties With Russia (RT)
• Ozempic Sat Unused for Decades (QTR)
• How Fauci Can Still Face Prosecution Despite His Pardon (Margolis)

 


 

https://twitter.com/warDaniel47/status/2072003087397429449?s=20 https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/2072011455457640624?s=20 https://twitter.com/defense_civil25/status/2072125550450344056?s=20

 


 


“There is no longer an apple, it’s all worms.”

Birthright citizenship is a 150-year old theme that is being recast. It deserves the attention.

• SCOTUS Strikes Down Trump EO and Establishes Birthright Citizenship (CTH)

Like many of you I am profoundly angered by the Supreme Court decision that fractures our nation and conveys citizenship to the children of illegal aliens born in the United States. In fact, I was so angered to my core, I went for a long walk before doing any further commenting on the matter. U.S. Citizenship is now determined by how good at violating our nation’s borders, by conniving, by scheming and by deception to create a qualified child where no adult qualification exists. This is the most detrimental decision by the Supreme Court in generations and will profoundly impact our nation. There is no longer an apple, it’s all worms.


Today, the Supreme Court on Tuesday struck down President Donald Trump’s executive order seeking to end birthright citizenship – the guarantee of citizenship status to everyone born in the United States. In a decision authored by Chief Justice John Roberts, five supreme court justices agreed with the challengers saying Trump’s order cannot be reconciled with the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which confers citizenship on anyone “born … in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.”

(6-3) Writing for the majority, Roberts emphasized that the “children born of parents unlawfully or temporarily present in the United States” “satisfy both elements of the Citizenship Clause.” “Under the Constitution,” he concluded, “they are citizens at birth.” Roberts was joined in the majority by Justice SOTOMAYOR, KAGAN, BARRETT, JACKSON and KAVANAUGH. nbJustice THOMAS filed a dissenting opinion with GORSUCH and ALITO.

SCOTUS BLOG – In his dissenting opinion, Justice Samuel Alito called the ruling, “one of the most important decisions in the history of the Court” and “a serious mistake.” “Careful analysis of the text of the Fourteenth Amendment and the process that led to its adoption,” Alito argued, “shows that it does not degrade the concept of United States citizenship in this way. Instead,” he contended, “the Fourteenth Amendment confers citizenship on only those children who, at birth, owe allegiance solely to this country.”

Justice Brett Kavanaugh agreed with the result that the court reached – that the president’s executive order is invalid – but not its reasoning. In his view, Trump’s order “does not violate the Fourteenth Amendment” but does violate a federal law providing that children who are “born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” are U.S. citizens. Congress, Kavanaugh suggested, “could amend” that law “or otherwise enact new legislation establishing exceptions to birthright citizenship for children born to foreign citizens unlawfully or temporarily in the country. But,” he noted, “Congress has not yet done so.”

Justice Clarence Thomas penned a lengthy dissent, which Justice Neil Gorsuch joined. He called the majority’s account “not historically accurate” and said that it “adds to the sad history of the Fourteenth Amendment, which was designed and understood to secure equal rights for the freed blacks but has instead been repurposed for political projects that the Reconstruction Congress did not support.” Gorsuch also wrote a separate brief dissent, in which he appeared to suggest that Trump’s executive order might violate the Constitution as it applies to the children of undocumented immigrants who intend to live in the United States permanently.

“If those parents are not domiciled here,” Gorsuch queried, “then where are they domiciled? And if the answer is nowhere,” he continued, “how can we reconcile that conclusion with this Court’s longstanding recognition that every person is domiciled somewhere?” Because the challengers in this case have argued that Trump’s order is invalid in all circumstances, rather than just some, Gorsuch explained, “these questions may not be properly before us. But their answers are undeniably important to a Nation committed to a view of citizenship open to all children born here to parents who can call this country their home.” (SOURCE)

Consequences and possibilities to come in the next few articles on the matter.

Read more …

“.. the Fourteenth Amendment, which was designed and understood to secure equal rights for the freed blacks but has instead been repurposed for political projects..”

• Justice Thomas Says Birthright Citizenship Ruling ‘Devalues’ US Citizenship (ET)

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas issued a lengthy dissent criticizing the high court’s majority ruling against President Donald Trump’s executive order restricting birthright citizenship, saying the decision would effectively devalue American citizenship as it was understood by those who created the Constitution’s 14th Amendment. Thomas said the majority is attempting to repurpose the 14th Amendment “to protect its own set of preferred rights that the Reconstruction Congress never contemplated and that cannot find support in its text,” referring to the post-Civil War era of the mid-to-late 19th century.


Further, he argued that the June 30 ruling denigrates the idea of U.S. citizenship, saying that it has been used by “foreign birth tourists and illegal aliens.”“I am not sure that today’s opinion will stand the test of time,” Thomas wrote. “The Citizenship Clause ‘added greatly to the dignity and glory of American citizenship.’ Today’s opinion devalues that citizenship.” The order issued by Trump aimed to exclude children of illegal immigrants and temporary visitors from gaining automatic birthright citizenship. In 1898, the high court delivered the landmark birthright citizenship ruling in United States v. Wong Kim Ark, which effectively stated that any child born in the United States to immigrants is granted citizenship regardless of the nationality of the child’s parents.

In addition to Thomas, Justices Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch dissented and indicated that they would allow Trump’s executive order to stand. Justice Brett Kavanaugh partially concurred with the majority in saying that he thinks the Trump administration’s executive order does violate a federal statute but that the constitutionality of birthright citizenship is an open question and that the executive order doesn’t violate the 14th Amendment. “The Court today takes the extraordinary step of holding facially unconstitutional the President’s Order excluding from citizenship the children of foreign temporary visitors and illegal aliens,” Thomas said in the 91-page dissent, which is significantly longer than the majority’s opinion.

Thomas indicated that he sided with the Trump administration’s arguments that the 14th Amendment, ratified three years after the end of the Civil War in 1868, was intended to give citizenship to black people who were freed from slavery rather than automatically giving it to the children of immigrants. “In doing so, the Court adds to the sad history of the Fourteenth Amendment, which was designed and understood to secure equal rights for the freed blacks but has instead been repurposed for political projects that the Reconstruction Congress did not support,” he said. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion and was joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Amy Coney Barrett, and Ketanji Brown Jackson.

“Citizenship, then and now, was the right to have rights—to freely participate in our political community. The Framers of the Fourteenth Amendment extended that promise to ‘every free-born person in this land,’” Roberts wrote, citing congressional debate over the 14th Amendment. “We keep that promise today.” Multiple lower courts have blocked the executive order, signed by Trump early in his presidential term last year, and it has not taken effect anywhere in the United States. The high court ruled on the president’s appeal of a lower-court ruling from New Hampshire that struck down the birthright citizenship restrictions.

Birthright citizenship was the first Trump administration immigration-related issue to reach the Supreme Court for a final ruling. Since he took office, Trump has rolled out policies designed to deport large numbers of illegal immigrants, namely those with criminal records. He has also canceled temporary protected status for hundreds of thousands of people living in the United States, bolstered U.S. border security, initiated policies encouraging illegal aliens to self-deport, and issued other rules. In response to the June 30 ruling, Trump said, “[The ruling is] too bad for our Country, but we can easily make it up in Congress through Legislation.”

“Congress should start TODAY to work on ending expensive and unfair to our Country, Birthright Citizenship,” he wrote on Truth Social. “They will have my Complete and Total Support!” In a previous post, he argued that “dumb judges and justices” allow wealthy women from China and elsewhere to come to the United States with the sole purpose of giving birth so that their children will be American citizens. He noted that few other countries have such a policy.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) hailed the majority opinion, saying that the “decision reaffirms a fundamental American promise—if you are born here, you are a citizen.” “A president cannot change the Constitution by executive fiat,” ACLU National Legal Director Cecillia Wang said in a statement. “Our brave clients and our legal team stand with millions of people around our country who spoke up for one of our most cherished rights. The Constitution’s guarantee of birthright citizenship stands strong.”

Read more …

“Nor presumably would they have wanted to grant constitutional birthright citizenship to children of foreign citizens unlawfully in the country while simultaneously denying constitutional birthright citizenship to children of tribal American Indians.

• A Roadmap To Fix Birthright Citizenship (Dmitri Bolt)

Despite Tuesday’s disappointing ruling on birthright citizenship, one of the conservative justices outlined a potential path forward that could address concerns such as birth tourism and the automatic granting of citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants.


Justice Brett Kavanaugh joined the majority in striking down President Trump’s executive order but wrote separately in partial dissent. He concluded the order conflicted with existing federal law, not that it was unconstitutional. In his opinion, he also outlined a framework for addressing concerns surrounding birthright citizenship through legislation, making clear that any path to lasting change would likely require an act of Congress.

“Significant illegal immigration into the United States is a new circumstance that was largely unknown as of 1868 and that the Framers of the Fourteenth Amendment could not have fully anticipated,” Justice Kavanaugh wrote. “And the Framers likely would not have anticipated (and presumably would not have intended) the odd result of granting a substantial birthright citizenship benefit to (i) those foreign citizens who violate U. S. immigration law and illegally enter or overstay and then have children in the United States over (ii) those foreign citizens who follow U. S. immigration law and have children in their home countries while seeking to lawfully immigrate to the United States. Nor presumably would they have wanted to grant constitutional birthright citizenship to children of foreign citizens unlawfully in the country while simultaneously denying constitutional birthright citizenship to children of tribal American Indians.”

“Consistent with the Fourteenth Amendment, Congress could amend §1401(a) or otherwise enact new legislation establishing exceptions to birthright citizenship for children born to foreign citizens unlawfully or temporarily in the country,” he added. “But Congress has not yet done so.”

The likelihood of Congress taking up the issue remains slim, making Kavanaugh’s proposed path a difficult one. More importantly for the Trump administration, the Court did not merely hold that birthright citizenship is a matter for Congress to regulate. The majority reaffirmed that the Citizenship Clause applies to the children of individuals in the country illegally or on temporary visas, while noting that only narrow exceptions were historically recognized, including the children of foreign diplomats.

Even if Congress were to pass legislation altering the rules surrounding birthright citizenship, the law would almost certainly face immediate legal challenges before making its way back to the Supreme Court. It remains unclear whether Justices Amy Coney Barrett or Chief Justice John Roberts would alter their positions, though there is little indication they would. If not, the Court’s majority would likely continue to uphold its current interpretation of birthright citizenship.

Read more …

Not a mistake. They didn’t have the guts to touch it.

• The Supreme Court’s Birthright Citizenship Mistake (Ben Shapiro)

The Supreme Court has now settled, at least for the foreseeable future, one of the most contentious questions in American immigration law: A child born in the United States is a U.S. citizen, regardless of whether the child’s parents entered the country legally or came solely to give birth. That remains the law after the court’s 6-3 decision in Trump v. Barbara. Chief Justice John Roberts, joined by the court’s liberal justices, concluded that the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment guarantees citizenship to virtually anyone born on American soil. Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch dissented, arguing that the majority has fundamentally misread both the Constitution and American history.


The ruling itself is hardly surprising. Federal courts have interpreted birthright citizenship this way for generations. What is remarkable is the historical reasoning Roberts employs to justify that conclusion. The 14th Amendment states: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.” The debate has always centered on these words: “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” If mere birth within U.S. borders automatically settled the matter, the jurisdiction language would seem unnecessary. Why include it at all? That question lies at the heart of the case.

Roberts traces the answer back to English common law, arguing that the American understanding of citizenship grew directly out of Britain’s doctrine of birthright subjecthood. Under that rule, even a foreign woman who entered Britain briefly, gave birth and immediately departed still produced a child who owed allegiance to the Crown because the sovereign protected the child at birth. According to the majority, the American Founders largely carried that principle forward after independence, replacing “subjects” with “citizens” while preserving the underlying rule. The dissenters reject that premise entirely.

Thomas argues that the American Revolution was a rejection of the British conception of political allegiance itself. Americans ceased to be subjects of a monarch and became citizens of a republic. In his view, importing British common-law doctrines wholesale into the 14th Amendment ignores the very political philosophy that gave birth to the United States.Thomas contends that “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” requires more than physical presence. It requires complete political allegiance to the United States, not merely temporary subjection to American laws while visiting the country. Under that interpretation, citizenship would depend in significant part on the legal status and allegiance of the parents.

That approach is not without precedent. American law already looks to parental status in several contexts. Children born to foreign diplomats, for example, are not automatically granted U.S. citizenship because their parents are not fully subject to American jurisdiction. Thomas also disputes the majority’s historical account. He argues that the court relies heavily on the 1898 decision in United States v. Wong Kim Ark while overlooking evidence from the years immediately following the ratification of the 14th Amendment. According to the dissent, all three branches of the federal government initially rejected the sweeping interpretation the court now embraces, and 19th-century Americans generally viewed exclusive national allegiance as incompatible with widespread dual citizenship.

Alito argues that the court is allowing practical concerns about modern immigration to shape its constitutional interpretation. Reversing the current understanding of birthright citizenship, he acknowledges, could create enormous legal and political complications for millions of people. But, Alito writes, avoiding difficult consequences is not a valid reason to adopt what he considers an incorrect reading of the Constitution.

In one of the sharpest passages of his dissent, Alito argues that the 14th Amendment does not require the nation to extend citizenship to the children of so-called birth tourists or others whose parents came to the United States solely to secure citizenship for their children. He concludes that the majority’s historical narrative is fundamentally flawed, beginning with its assumption that America simply inherited Britain’s rule of birthright subjecthood after independence. Whether one agrees with the majority or the dissent, the practical consequence is clear. Birthright citizenship remains the law of the land, and it is likely to remain so unless the Constitution is amended or the court revisits the issue in the future.

That places the responsibility squarely where it has long belonged: on Congress and the president. If policymakers believe current immigration policy encourages abuses of birthright citizenship, the remedy lies not with constitutional reinterpretation but with enforcing immigration law and reforming the nation’s border policies. The Supreme Court has spoken. The constitutional debate will continue, but the political branches can no longer avoid confronting the immigration system that made this controversy so consequential in the first place.

Read more …

“Each female visa applicant must present a valid negative pregnancy test taken no longer than 10 days prior to travel to the United States.”

• The Roberts Requirement – Pregnancy Tests for U.S. Travel Visas

What is proposed below is regulatory, lawful and entirely intended to create hardships and burdens. Thus, a new era in State Department visa requirements respond to newly established guidelines by the Supreme Court. As a pragmatic and patriotic American I respectfully suggest and recommend the U.S. State Department immediately institute the “Roberts Requirement” following similar visa entry protocols previously used for COVID-19 tests prior to U.S. admittance. The Roberts Requirement: Each female visa applicant must present a valid negative pregnancy test taken no longer than 10 days prior to travel to the United States.


The certified document, negative pregnancy test, together with all related visa approvals must be presented to Customs and Border Patrol at each port of entry. Failure disqualifies the traveler. This is the same protocol as COVID-19, only using pregnancy status as the disqualifying health issue. It is a lawful regulation, born from a new standard established by the Supreme Court, that does not need congressional approval. Don’t get stuck on details about why it will not work, it will. Start thinking like a person who realizes the goal is to create severe antagonism through regulation. That antagonism can then be directed.

Aim isolation, ridicule and marginalization at those who created the problem. This can be done without visible vitriol. The objective is not just making sure pregnant women do not get visas; that is one small element. The bigger objective is to make it extremely difficult to come to the USA and THEN pin that global compliance requirement on Chief Justice John Roberts, making him live every day with the consequences of his blinded American stupidity; facing him, belittling him, ridiculing him, sitting on the front pages of his peers and global friends. Chief Justice John Roberts created this mess, now put it on his doorstep every day. But people will lie – doesn’t matter. But people will create fake documents – doesn’t matter. But people will still overstay their visas – doesn’t matter.

You are putting the emphasis on the wrong aspect. Make every overburdensome visa rule and travel permit regulation specifically attributable to John Roberts decision. Pre-screenings, pregnancy tests, supplemental bond requirements for 15-to 45-year-old females, shortened visa terms and much more. No exclusions for diplomats, sports figures, foreign actors, employees, H1Bs, student entry or any other visa type – the works. Make the total visa entry system subject to a regulatory and compliance nightmare at a scale that is unheard of. That is the scale of the problem Roberts has created. Now blame John Roberts for it.

This ‘Roberts Requirement’ applies to all visa types. The objective, and it can accompany many other requirements such as a “bond” attachment required for 15- to 45-year-old females to travel, is to create such an overwhelmingly restrictive visa process that it creates ridicule on the SCOTUS decision. Make every regulation specifically cited to the Supreme Court decision and make it exceptionally burdensome. Make SCOTUS own the outcome. Canadians and Mexicans also need to comply. The same rules apply to every nation and no longer are visas determined by timeline, but by the number of extensions required or allowed within it. Every visa has a maximum duration of 3 months, with various extensions possible.

A one-year visa becomes a three-month visa with 4 extensions allowed. At each extension the same origination requirements must be fulfilled. A two-year USA visa, is now a U.S. visa with 7 extensions allowed, etc. Student visas carry the same requirement for 3-month extensions. Require a – refundable at exit – surety bond purchase valued at $500,000 for any non-tourist visa. [Later the bond issuer, sell those non-refunded bonds and release the bounty hunters.] No visas are exempt from the entry requirements. This is a new era with new rules that specifically come as an outcome of new judicial rulings. This is not a White House or State Department issue. This is an issue created by the Supreme Court that needs an immediate response.

Congress can fix it, but in the interim – maximum regulatory pressure is applied directly to the wound. Example of point and counterpoints. POINT: Canada, Mexico, India or [XXX] will scream this is unfair given the nature of our collaborative visa designations. Counterpoint: Yes, you are correct. That was then; this is now. The nature of our visa system has changed because SCOTUS has just codified new distinctions on citizenship that now become new visa factors.

Your nation does not convey birthright citizenship, so I understand your inability to accept our new terms. Unfortunately, our nation now does convey birthright citizenship, and as a consequence changes are needed. Don’t back down. Make SCOTUS own it. Sure, there will be legal challenges, all the way up to the same SCOTUS, and what are they going to do? Think about it! Make everyone live by the new rules – that are created by those who didn’t think about the consequences.

Read more …

“The potential charges include visa fraud, money laundering, identity theft, and wire fraud.”

• The DOJ Goes to War on Birth Tourism After Losing at SCOTUS (Margolis)

It ain’t over until it’s over, and the Department of Justice says it ain’t over. For sure, the Supreme Court handed the left a win Monday, but the Department of Justice didn’t spend much time licking its wounds. The court ruled on Tuesday that President Donald Trump’s executive order limiting birthright citizenship was unconstitutional. The ruling held that the 14th Amendment guarantees citizenship to anyone born on U.S. soil regardless of their parents’ immigration status. This terrible ruling effectively protects “birth tourism,” the scheme in which pregnant women overstay visas or enter the country illegally specifically to give birth and secure U.S. citizenship for their children.


Jesse Watters addressed it on The Five on Tuesday. “Now, the Chinese communists could take their pregnant wife to Guam, have a baby, fly the baby back to Beijing with a U.S. passport, and then that baby, when he’s older, can get welfare, he can vote,” Watters said. “Technically, when he’s 35, he could become President of the United States. That’s the stupidest thing anyone ever thought of.” DOJ senior official Colin McDonald issued a department-wide memo directing federal prosecutors to prioritize investigations and criminal charges against people who travel to the United States under false pretenses to give birth. The potential charges include visa fraud, money laundering, identity theft, and wire fraud.

“The Department of Justice will zealously protect the sanctity of United States citizenship by investigating and prosecuting those who fraudulently exploit our immigration system,” McDonald wrote in the memo, which he posted publicly on social media. The DOJ had already telegraphed this move before the ruling came down, calling birth tourism a “national security threat” and pledging to “prioritize the prosecutions of birth tourism schemes across the country.” The Supreme Court can hold the line on the 14th Amendment. The DOJ intends to go after the fraud. The fraud, by the way, is real.

Back in 2019, Chinese national Dongyuan Li ran a company called You Win USA Vacation Services, which helped pregnant Chinese women travel to the United States to give birth. Li claimed to have served more than 500 customers, charging each between $40,000 and $80,000, and she received $3 million in wire transfers from China over two years. Li coached clients to lie on visa applications and at U.S. consulate interviews in China, claiming a two-week stay while planning to stay up to three months, and trained them to conceal their pregnancies from customs officials.

You Win USA marketed the service by promising children “13 years of free education,” “less pollution,” “an easier way for the whole family to immigrate to the United States,” and “priority for jobs in U.S. government, public companies, and large corporations.” Citizenship as a premium package, complete with step-by-step coaching on how to fool the U.S. government. Li pleaded guilty to federal charges in 2019. A judge sentenced her to 10 months in prison for running a multimillion-dollar operation that turned U.S. citizenship into a product. The Supreme Court may have blocked the executive order, but the DOJ hasn’t walked away from the fight.

Read more …

“Slams Biden’s “heinous” policy of flying migrants en masse into Springfield and the Midwest”.

• Miller: Every Single Haitian Migrant Is GOING BACK to Haiti Under Trump (MN)

White House Homeland Security Adviser Stephen Miller delivered a clear and forceful message: every Haitian national on Temporary Protected Status will be returned to Haiti under President Trump. The Biden administration’s last-year extension of TPS turned what began as a short-term response to a 2010 earthquake into a permanent pipeline. Miller called the deliberate importation of these migrants into places like Springfield, Ohio, one of the most heinous acts the government has ever committed. Miller laid it out without hedging:


“There’s an earthquake in Haiti. So she’s (Former DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano) announcing TPS for a few months while they’re recovering from an earthquake. That was in 2010, 15 years ago. Then the Biden administration in its last year extends TPS to every single illegal alien from Haiti while they are flying them en masse into Springfield, Ohio, across the Midwest.” He continued, “It was a formal policy of replacing the communities that lived in, settled, and sustained these communities for generations. It was one of the most heinous things this government has ever done.”

“And yes, under President Trump, let me be very clear, the illegal alien Haitians are going back to Haiti. They can build their country there,” Miller further urged. This directly follows the Trump administration’s earlier termination of TPS protections for 353,000 Haitians, with those designations set to expire. The move reversed Biden-era renewals that kept hundreds of thousands in the country long after any temporary justification had passed. Springfield became the most visible example of the fallout. Local residents watched as federal policies funneled large numbers of Haitian migrants into their city, straining housing, schools, and public resources.

Americans reported being priced out of apartments while migrants received housing assistance. Parks saw geese and other wildlife targeted. In one city commission meeting, Springfield City Manager Brian Heck admitted he had “heard about” reports of Haitian migrants eating pets. The conditions many of these migrants left behind in Haiti only underscore why prolonged TPS extensions made little sense. Armed gangs, including groups with documented histories of extreme violence and intimidation tactics, have dominated large parts of the country.

Earlier coverage highlighted how some media outlets appeared more exercised by conservatives simply stating these facts than by the violence itself. In a separate but related immigration development today, the Supreme Court issued a 5-4 ruling striking down President Trump’s executive order limiting birthright citizenship for children born to illegal immigrants.

The decision keeps in place a policy that automatically grants U.S. citizenship to children born on American soil regardless of their parents’ legal status. Critics have long argued this creates powerful incentives for unlawful entry and serves as a form of chain migration that complicates enforcement.

The 14th Amendment’s citizenship clause was crafted in the aftermath of slavery to secure rights for freed people, not to function as a standing invitation for foreign nationals to secure citizenship for their offspring through illegal presence. While the birthright ruling hands open-border advocates a victory and adds another layer of legal friction to enforcement, Miller’s remarks show the administration is not pausing on other fronts. TPS designations were always meant to be temporary. Extending them for 15 years while actively importing large numbers into specific American communities was never about humanitarian relief — it was about demographic engineering.

American towns like Springfield paid the price in drastically altered neighborhoods, and lost quality of life. Restoring the original meaning of temporary protection and returning those without ongoing legal status is not radical. It is the baseline responsibility of any government that puts its own citizens first. The message from the White House is consistent: the replacement experiment is over. Those here under expired or terminated protections are going home. Haiti’s future will be built by Haitians in Haiti, not by continuing to offload its population onto American communities that never asked for the burden.

Read more …

Antagonizing Trump will not work out well.

• The Canadian Dollar is Collapsing – Here’s What to Expect Next (CTH)

The Canadian dollar is starting to feel the effects of long-term uncertainty. It will get worse.


…”Since the start of June, the currency has weakened 2.9%, which would be its steepest monthly decline since October 2024, as Canadian bond yields fell further below U.S. yields.”…

Now, this is where you really need to pay attention to details. Remember, the U.K and EU have a vested interest in protecting Canada from economic collapse. President Trump doesn’t want immediate collapse either -because Xi will move in fast- but Trump is not going to provide the same financial and economic lifelines that the other four-eyes will trigger. Reuters is reporting that tomorrow the U.S. will formally declare a “non-extension” of the USMCA trade agreement and that triggers a 10-year period to decoupling. It is very important to understand there is a difference between announcing a “non-extension” and announcing a “withdrawal“. The Canadians are completely confused about what is about to happen.

In a non-extension announcement, the USA is saying they do not want to extend or renew the terms of the agreement beyond the current trade agreement terms. Yes, this is a 10-year exit. However, that’s not the part that matters. Announcing a decision to exit the USMCA (CUSMA), a full withdrawal from the trilateral deal, triggers a six-month countdown to exit. The deadline to announce the decision to extend is July 1st. There is no deadline on the timeline to announce an exit or withdrawal from the USMCA. That announcement can happen at any time. Put simply, announcing a non-renewal is a 10-year exit. Announcing a withdrawal is a 6-month exit. The announcement to withdraw can come at any time after the statement of non-renewal.

You can see the confusion in this article:
WASHINGTON, June 30 (Reuters) – U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration is expected to formally declare on Wednesday that it will not extend the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement on trade, starting a decade-long clock to wind down the 32-year-old North American free trade zone as the three countries haggle over proposed changes. That declaration will kick off a six-year review session, part of a “sunset clause” negotiated by President Donald Trump’s first administration. However, it will do little to alter contentious negotiations over the pact’s future, including sweeping demands to boost U.S. and regional content in North American automotive production and trade protections to block Chinese goods from benefiting from USMCA. (read more)

The most likely scenario is Trump/Greer first say the USA is not renewing (not extending). Then, at a later date determined by them (in my opinion it will be after the U.S-Mexico agreement is finished), Trump and Greer will then announce the withdrawal, which will trigger the 6-month countdown to exit. There is no rush to announce the withdrawal; the only immediate action is to announce a USMCA renewal is not happening. What this scenario does is put maximum pressure on Canada. As soon as President Trump says the USA will not extend the agreement, all investment into Canada becomes extremely tenuous. The Canadian dollar will weaken further; a slow contraction will begin.

However, Canada will still be oblivious to what comes next because their media will tell them they have a decade to work things out. They don’t. At a time determined by President Trump and USTR Jamieson Greer, they will announce a decision to exit the USMCA which then triggers a 6-month phase before the agreement is terminated. This is where Canada will be caught off guard and the economic collapse will likely be rapid and catastrophic. Canada will only just begin to think about the “exit” scenario, once the non-renewal announcement is made. It will take them a while to realize how vulnerable they are – they are currently in full denial mode.

During this period, President Trump carries massive leverage against Canada. He will likely probe their trade position and willingness to comply with reciprocity after the non-renewal announcement. The outcome of those probes will determine the timeline of his exit announcement. During this non-renewal phase, we may even see President Trump tease the exit, then retract, then tease the exit again. Each time Trump tests the Canadian government with statements, the Canadian economy will pulsate and weaken; it will drive the Canadian government to either extreme anger, or defeated compliance.

Timing the completion of the U.S-Mexico deal within the probes of Canada will be super interesting. At some point as the U.S. closes in on the deal with Mexico, Canada is going to realize they are naked without any agreement. The worst-case scenario for Canada is President Trump announcing the USMCA exit on the same day he announces a completed bilateral deal with Mexico. It would be the worst-case scenario for Mark Carney because the ignored voices of those few people in Canada who have been trying to warn about this would suddenly get a lot of attention.

Read more …

The “everything app” is not an app.

• Elon’s Next Move: Your Money (Adam Sharp)

For years, Elon Musk has dreamed of turning X (formerly Twitter) into the “everything app”. Now that X is part of SpaceX (SPCX), and the combined company just raised $112 billion, the time looks ripe. Elon envisions X as a single place where you can bank, chat, earn, advertise, use AI, shop, and more. X Money is a key part of that vision. And we just got the first idea of what it will look like. The program just launched to a small group of users. To attract deposits, X is offering some pretty crazy (and likely temporary) perks:


6% APY on cash, no deposit limit
3% cash back on purchases (with exceptions)
$10 million FDIC insurance (by splitting deposits up between banks)

A 6% yield is not sustainable long-term (at current interest rates). It’s a teaser rate to get people to switch to X Money. Same goes for 3% cash back. That’s 3x higher than the industry average, and will almost certainly not last long. These teasers may get a lot of people to switch. But it’s unclear how long the perks will last, and it’s currently only available to a small group. X is not a bank. At least not yet. It’s more like a “neobank”, which manages the marketing and customer relationship, while licensed banks handle the deposits. But for the user, it feels like a bank account and debit card. Deposits, yield, wire transfers, autopay, P2P payments, etc.

The WeChat Model
Musk’s desire to build the “everything app” may have been inspired by China’s WeChat. WeChat is owned by Chinese tech firm Tencent. It started out as a simple messaging app. But Tencent rapidly expanded its utility, and today it is basically a digital operating system for the country. In China, WeChat is used for payment, invoices, government interactions, making appointments, videos, shopping, games, chatting on social media, and much more. WeChat Pay holds a massive 38% share of payments in China. More than a billion people use the app. It’s so ubiquitous that many Chinese people essentially run their lives through the app. Largely as a result of WeChat’s success, Tencent has become a $488 billion tech giant. This is what Musk is aiming for. If X Money succeeds, it could help justify SpaceX’s lofty valuation of $2.2 trillion.

SpaceX’s Huge Ambitions
X (formerly Twitter) has been the least-discussed part of SpaceX. All the attention has been on rockets and AI. For good reason. Those are both very exciting areas. But X deserves attention as well. Musk aims to turn the social network into a super-app, much like WeChat. Musk purchased Twitter for $44 billion. If he succeeds, it could be worth much more over the long term. But running what is essentially a combination bank and social network is no easy matter. For one thing, it makes security far more important (and challenging). It’s going to require a massive customer support team. And that’s one area where Elon’s X has struggled.

X Money is going to be a critical part of building the “everything app”. And the team is going big on the launch. Think about the 6% APYs X is offering on deposits. Let’s say that X Money attracts $10 billion in deposits over the first year. Paying a 6% yield on that much cash could cost SpaceX $240 million a year in losses. That’s assuming their own internal return on cash is around 3.5%, plus bank fees and other transaction costs. This is why I assume the 6% APY is temporary.

And the 3% cash back? That appears to be on a debit card, which doesn’t have the same fee support as a credit card. So that could be another very expensive tool to attract users. But the losses could be worth it. The market they’re targeting is massive. Payments, banking, and eventually – everything.So will X succeed in becoming a “super app”? Honestly? I think it’s a long shot. X Money would probably need to be wildly successful and run away with the market.

One problem is that Meta/Facebook (META) will copy anything that looks to be working. The company is notorious for it. And they have a much larger user base. Meta also already has WhatsApp pay and several payment integrations with Facebook. Another problem is that American banks are extremely profitable, and in some ways act like a cartel. They won’t appreciate X stepping onto their turf, and may fight back. With lawfare, lobbying, or other means.

A Beautiful But Difficult Model
The “everything app”, or the WeChat model has been the dream of every social media company in the world for a while. But it’s going to be very difficult to pull off at this stage of the game. Then again, we should never count Elon out. If he’s going to go hard after this market, SpaceX certainly has a shot at winning it. SpaceX just raised $87 billion in its IPO, then another $25 billion in bond sales. That is a massive war chest. SPCX has big aspirations. And with a $2.2 trillion market cap, it has a lot of growing to do in order to justify that lofty price. X Money is a calculated risk by SpaceX. One that could pay off big.

Read more …

“Everything app” device.

• SpaceX Takes Aim At Smartphone Market With New AI Device (ZH)

The story around Elon Musk’s SpaceX positioning Starlink as a potential mobile carrier to challenge legacy telcos and cable dinosaurs continues to gain momentum. A new Wall Street Journal report says the AI and rocket company has shown investors a prototype of a handset-like device, suggesting SpaceX may be looking beyond satellites and broadband toward vertically integrated consumer devices to take on smartphone giants like Apple and Samsung.


The device, described by people familiar with the matter as slimmer than an iPhone with a “sleek design,” is still said to be in the prototype stage. It is expected to run on a Qualcomm Snapdragon chipset, suggesting SpaceX may be testing a consumer hardware layer that could eventually tie together Starlink connectivity, xAI software, and a proprietary operating system. Last week, TD Cowen analyst Gregory Williams told clients that if SpaceX/Starlink fails to secure an MVNO/retail mobile deal, then the next logical move would be to acquire T-Mobile. SpaceX told some investors that the project was at an early stage. The design could change and it is unclear whether such a device will be made.

…

The project is a sign of Musk’s sprawling ambitions as he builds a leading global satellite connectivity network, grows his rocket company and creates new AI tools. AI companies are placing a variety of bets on the future form and functionality of AI-powered devices. The Wall Street Journal has reported that Musk has in the past weighed building a smartphone due to frustration over how Apple controls distribution of third-party apps such as X. It isn’t easy, however, for a newcomer to break into the hardware business. -WSJ

SpaceX Builds A Regulatory Moat Around Its Starlink Empire
The read here is that Musk appears to be eyeing the entire consumer connectivity stack in one swoop. Starlink is the network layer, xAI provides the intelligence layer, a proprietary operating system would control the software experience, and a handset-like device would serve as the consumer endpoint. In other words, Musk is not just challenging telcos and big cable. It is also a shot across the bow for smartphone makers, app stores, and the AI assistant layer now being embedded across consumer devices.

Read more …

They need Trump to go along. Or it will be after his term. But war it will be.

• NATO Chief Admits To Sleepless Nights Over Russia (TASS)

NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte believes Russia to be the main threat to the alliance and admits that this keeps him up at night. “Usually, I try to sleep at night, but if something keeps me up, it’s Russia. <…> China is having a massive buildup of its own military, will have 1,000 nuclear warheads by 2030. So, let’s not be naive about China. But <…> Russia is the main threat now and in the longer term,” the NATO chief told the Anadolu news agency in an interview ahead of the upcoming NATO summit in Ankara on July 7-8. He added that one of the alliance’s priorities is “maintaining support for Ukraine.”


When asked about his expectations for the summit, Rutte said he hopes that, once it concludes, “people will say it was a summit that implemented the commitments made in The Hague [last year].” These were increasing defense spending and strengthening the military-industrial complex. “There are several successful examples, and things are generally getting better. One of the most important priorities is increasing production output in the defense industry. We will address this issue first at the NATO Defense Industry Forum on the summit’s opening day,” the NATO chief noted.

Read more …

“Bringing back cheap Russian energy would help the German economy recover, AfD leader Alice Weidel has said..”

She makes sense. But they’ve long since decided on war.

• Leader of Germany’s Most Popular Party Wants To Restore Ties With Russia (RT)

Germany urgently needs to lift the ban on Russian oil and gas imports to prop up its struggling economy, Alice Weidel, the co-chair of the Alternative for Germany (AfD) party, has said. She also vowed to restore economic ties between the two countries if her party comes to power. The German economy was dealt a major blow when the country took part in the Western sanctions on Russia in 2022. Before the escalation of the Ukraine conflict, Germany relied on Russia for 55% of its natural gas. Russian oil giant Rosneft’s operations also accounted for around 12% of Germany’s total oil-processing capacity.


“Cheap energy from Russia was the secret of the success of ‘Made in Germany’. We need it back,” Weidel said in an interview with Reuters published on Tuesday. “The loss of this energy has set us back years. Hundreds of thousands of jobs have been lost. It has made us dependent on the United States, which sells us energy at far higher prices.” The decision to abandon cheap Russian energy played a major role in slowing down the German economy, which contracted in 2023 and 2024 – the first back-to-back annual drop since the early 2000s.

In January, the country’s Chamber of Commerce and Industry (DIHK) reported an alarmingly high number of bankruptcies. In March, the Federal Statistical Office said the nation’s industrial output fell by 1.2% year-on-year. In both cases, high energy prices were cited as a key factor. The German Environmental Aid Association (DUH) reported in January that 96% of the nation’s liquefied natural gas (LNG) imports in 2025 came from the US. The AfD has argued that Germany essentially became dependent on one country.

The AfD has steadily gained support in Germany amid record-low approval ratings for Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s policies. Berlin has been actively pouring money into a military buildup, citing the supposed ‘Russian threat’, which Moscow has dismissed as “nonsense.” Merz has also blamed the country’s economic problems on the German people, urging them to “work more,” while announcing plans to slash social spending.

An INSA survey published on Tuesday suggests that the AfD enjoys the greatest support among all German parties (29%), seven percentage points ahead of Merz’s Christian Democratic Union. The right-wing party’s popularity has grown despite being boycotted by all other major German parties as part of the ‘firewall’ – an informal ban on any coalition or coordinated voting with the AfD. The next general election in Germany is expected in 2029.

Read more …

“Ozempic is a story of pharmacological success, but also of entrepreneurial failure.”:

• Ozempic Sat Unused for Decades (QTR)

Led by Ozempic and Wegovy, glucagon-like peptides (GLP-1s) have become a global phenomenon, with one in eight US adults currently taking one. Those two branded compounds, both made by Novo Nordisk, emerged from attempts to develop a diabetes drug. It effectively lowers blood glucose, slows gastric emptying, and reduces hunger, leading many patients to experience profound weight loss. In a world plagued by increasing obesity, the drugs’ utility extends far beyond diabetes treatment. So why did the formula sit untouched for 30 years after it was licensed?


Ozempic is a story of pharmacological success, but also of entrepreneurial failure. The tale provides a strong reminder that inventions and discoveries mean little unless they are combined with sound entrepreneurial judgment. According to a paper published in the Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, a startup produced a GLP compound in the late 1980s, and pharma giant Pfizer sponsored human trials that confirmed the drug’s efficacy in reducing blood glucose levels and slowing gastric emptying. One member of the startup team, Jeffrey Flier of Harvard, explained what happened next:

I was shocked when told that senior Pfizer leadership had concluded that there would never be another injectable therapy for diabetes other than insulin. What led them to this conclusion was never explained….I had been deeply impressed by their rapid decision to invest in our company, and I was equally dumbfounded by their decision to end their investment despite convincing early evidence of the program’s success. Confident in its own conclusions, Pfizer pulled the plug on the drug in 1991. The startup folded.

Under the terms of Pfizer’s agreement, the license remained with the Boston hospital where researchers discovered GLP-1’s mechanism and conducted the human trials. It was then acquired by Novo Nordisk in 1992, where scientists used it to develop what eventually became semaglutide, the pharmaceutical sold as Ozempic and Wegovy. While it is unclear whether, as Max Marchione put it on Twitter, the GLP-1 agonist data simply “sat in a filing cabinet for 30+ years,” Pfizer’s decision to abandon the project likely delayed its development…

Read more …

“ If he does tell the truth, he’s going to have to admit he lied to us previously.”

• How Fauci Can Still Face Prosecution Despite His Pardon (Margolis)

Joe Biden thought he handled it. Well, at least whoever wrote the preemptive pardon and signed it with the autopen did. That was supposed to be the insurance policy that kept the former NIAID director from being held accountable. The good ol’ get-out-of-jail-free card before Anthony Fauci was even charged with anything. Biden pitched it as protection from lawfare, but we all know what it really was, and we’ll soon get the truth, one way or another.


As you know, on her final day as Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard released a tranche of previously unreleased documents and communications laying out what many Americans have suspected for years. Fauci, as head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, funneled millions in U.S. taxpayer dollars into dangerous gain-of-function research on bat coronaviruses at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, the lab now widely believed to be the source of COVID-19. He did it.

And then he lied about it. “Before the COVID pandemic, Dr. Fauci, as head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, provided millions in U.S. taxpayer dollars to fund dangerous gain of function research on bat coronaviruses at the Wuhan Institute of Virology,” Gabbard said in a video she posted to X, “work which is now widely viewed as the source of the unintentional lab leak that sparked the pandemic.”

According to Gabbard, Fauci funded the research tied to Big Pharma’s multi-trillion-dollar pursuit of a universal vaccine, then pressured handpicked experts to promote a natural-origin narrative, deflecting blame from the Wuhan lab. Then, he used his media access to amplify his version of events while crushing any dissent. “These documents expose Fauci’s direct role in influencing and manipulating IC assessments on COVID-19 and how Fauci lied to Congress in 2024 when under oath, he denied knowledge of or participation in discussions with intelligence officials about viral research,” Gabbard said.

Compare that to what Fauci told the Senate in 2021, when he told Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.): “With all due respect, you are entirely and completely incorrect that the NIH has not ever and does not now fund gain-of-function research in the Wuhan Institute of Virology.” He said that under oath. The documents say otherwise. Independent journalist John Solomon argues that Fauci could still face prosecution, spelling it out in an interview with Bill O’Reilly.

“We know that in the end days of Joe Biden, Anthony Fauci got a pardon,” Solomon began. “He can’t be prosecuted for anything before January 20, 2025. But if Rand Paul puts him on the stand next week, as he’s going to compel him to do, and Anthony Fauci does not tell the truth this time in the body of evidence that’s there, he could be instantly prosecuted by the Trump Justice Department. If he does tell the truth, he’s going to have to admit he lied to us previously.”

Basically, Fauci, under oath again, has a choice: lie about what he did under oath and face prosecution, or admit he lied under oath before. Since Biden’s pardon only covered what Fauci did before Biden officially left office, if he commits perjury, there’s nothing that can protect him. It left him completely exposed to everything that comes after. With Gabbard’s documents on the table and Paul’s committee waiting, that reckoning is no longer hypothetical.

Both options for Fauci will be devastating for his legacy.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle June 23 2026

Jun 232026
 
 June 23, 2026  Posted by at 9:52 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,  29 Responses »


El Greco Dormition of the Mother of God 1565-1566


• War On Iran: Trump: “It Really Probably Is Unconditional Surrender” (MoA)
• Israelis Are Livid Over Trump Ending War, Overwhelmingly Believe Iran Won (ZH)
• Iran Agrees To Invite Nuclear Inspectors Back; Vance Hails Great Progress (ZH)
• Slouching Toward Peace (James Howard Kunstler)
• The ‘Seinfeld’ Theory of Iran Negotiations (Scott Pinsker)
• Trump May Have Given Us a HUGE Hint About His Successor (Margolis)
• Fail, Britannia: Meet the New Commie, Worse Than the Old Commie (Green)
• Support For UK Monarchy Hits Record Low (RT)
• Keir Starmer Reveals How Much Labour Resembles American Democrats (Queen)
• Tucker Carlson No Longer Supports The Republican Party: ‘I’m Out’ (JTN)
• Rand Paul Subpoenas Fauci For Testimony in COVID Origin Probe (JTN)
• Tulsi Gabbard Biolab Releases (CTH)
• Spanish PM’s Wife Faces Trial On Corruption Charges (RT)
• Go East, Young SpaceX Millionaire! (Stephen Green)

 


 

https://twitter.com/MAGAVoice/status/2068824029906256172?s=20

 


 


There’s quite a few people I don’t agree with anymore on the topic. Makes me curious.

• War On Iran: Trump: “It Really Probably Is Unconditional Surrender” (MoA)

On Wednesday, June 17 2026, Trump signed a Memorandum of Understanding with Iran in Versailles. That palace has seen a lot of defeats. Asked about the MoU he called it an “unconditional surrender”: Caputo also asked Trump about his original promise that the war would end with an “unconditional surrender” from Tehran, pointing to the memorandum of understanding he signed on Wednesday. “Well, it really probably is unconditional surrender,” Trump told the outlet. But Trump leaves this open: Surrender by whom? His declared war aims and demands for Iran were regime change, no ballistic missiles and no nuclear program.


Now Trump himself is fearing regime change. He defends Iran’s reliance on ballistic missiles and no longer minds it having nuclear stuff. March 6 2026: President Trump declared on Friday that he would settle for nothing short of “unconditional surrender” by Iran, the latest and broadest expansion of his goals for the conflict, Six days into the Israeli and American bombing campaign, Iran has shown no interest, at least publicly, in surrendering. Mr. Trump declared on Saturday, in the opening hours of the U.S. attack, that Iran’s people should rise up and overthrow their government.

But in the following days, both Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth pivoted away from the emphasis on regime change, saying that the United States was simply focused on assuring that Iran’s nuclear program was permanently destroyed, and that it no longer had the missile capability to attack Israel, its Arab neighbors, and perhaps someday America. Trump Demands ‘Unconditional Surrender’ by Iran (archived) – Mar 6 2026 – NY Times

June 18 2026: President Donald Trump said Wednesday that he was motivated to finalize the memorandum of understanding (MOU) with Iran to prevent “economic catastrophe” if the war was not resolved soon. “So rather than possibly going into a depression, rather than having your favorite president be Herbert Hoover, he was always the one I didn’t want to be,” Trump said of the 31st president whose policies are often blamed for starting the Great Depression. Trump also said he was open to allowing Iran to maintain its stockpile of ballistic missiles, claiming it was “unfair” for Iran to not be able to have the weapons if their neighbors do. …

And despite his insistence that the memorandum states that Iran cannot develop or obtain a nuclear weapon — one of his chief concerns during negotiations, Trump also appeared softer during the press conference on Wednesday in his position on whether Iran could develop a nuclear program for civilian purposes in the future. “You know, it’s also, it is a little hard though when you say that somebody wants—other people have it, other adjoining states have it and you’re not letting them have it for purposes of electricity and things like that. It’s always a little tough. You have to use a little common sense,” Trump added.

Trump didn’t want ‘Herbert Hoover’ presidency with Iran; said it has to have ‘some’ missiles – Jun 18, 2026 – ABCnews. Professor Mearsheimer was quite explicit in his latest talk (vid) with Judge Napolitano: Trump must shut the war down, whatever it politically might cost, to save the economy and his presidency.After he had launched the war he had to surrender, unconditionally, to prevent a global depression (which still may well happen). It may still take while, and maybe even another round of fighting, until that really sinks in.

Read more …

“93.1% said Iran won.”

What did they presumably win?

• Israelis Are Livid Over Trump Ending War, Overwhelmingly Believe Iran Won (ZH)

After roping President Trump into breaking a core campaign promise, watching the United States expend resources and risk American lives to attack Iran, and then watching Trump take steps to end the war via MOU – Israelis are livid because the US didn’t commit to full-on decimation to celebrate America’s 250th, and say Iran came out ahead. According to a survey conducted by the Hebrew University of Jerusalem in partnership with the Agam Institute, 92.1% of Israelis believe Iran came out ahead in the conflict and the US-brokered deal that followed.


Even among voters loyal to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s conservative bloc, 93.1% said Iran won. 82.9% of respondents said the six-week military campaign against Iran left Israel’s long-term security weaker, not stronger. Another 86% hold a negative view of both the way the fighting ended and the way Washington negotiated the subsequent deal without meaningful Israeli input. Nearly 88% of Israelis believe their country either fell short of its war aims entirely or achieved only partial success, despite the stated objectives being nothing less than dismantling Iran’s nuclear program, neutering its missile arsenal, and toppling the regime in Tehran. Those were the goals. None of them, by the public’s own assessment, were fully met.

Netanyahu has tried to project confidence in the signing of the Memorandum of Understanding anyway. At a press conference Monday, he insisted Iran will never possess nuclear weapons “as long as I am prime minister of Israel.” As we noted on Tuesday, hardline Israeli politicians are livid over the Iran deal, and want Netanyahu out so they can do ‘real regime change.’ “With an agreement or without an agreement, Iran will not have nuclear weapons – not today and not tomorrow,” he said, calling the mission his “life’s mission.” He has also maintained that the nuclear threat from Iran was an “immediate danger” that Israel removed “together with our American friends.”

Either way, Israelis aren’t buying it. 72.5% of respondents reject Netanyahu’s claim that Israel secured major gains and eliminated an existential threat. Only 26.5% rate his handling of the war as “good” or “excellent,” while 56.4% call it “failed” or “poor.” His personal approval as prime minister has collapsed from 40.5% in early March to 29.4% in June, a fifteen-point swing in roughly three months. And of course, there’s Trump… with 69.1% of respondents rated his handling of the war and the resulting deal as “failed” or “poor,” against just 10.8% who called it “good” or “excellent.” Quite the change in sentiment from his 2024 election win…

Despite the widespread belief that the Iran campaign backfired, 48.2% of Israelis say their country should renew major military action against Hezbollah, including strikes in Beirut, even if that means clashing with Trump, who has made clear he wants the fighting in Lebanon to stop. Only 20.9% oppose that course, with the remaining 30.9% undecided. Israelis appear simultaneously convinced the last war was mishandled and eager for the next one. Just 12.2% of respondents believe Israel achieved most of the stated goals against Hamas and Hezbollah following the October 7, 2023 attacks while 61.3% say Israel achieved none of them, and 26.5% say only some were met.

Across the Atlantic, the reception looks entirely different. A Quantus national poll of 1,000 likely US voters found 43% strongly approve and another 13% somewhat approve of the preliminary US-Iran Memorandum of Understanding. Combined disapproval sits at just 13%.The Trump administration has been trying to respond to criticism of the deal, while Israeli cabinet members are talking mad shit about Trump – to the point where VP JD Vance came very close to asking if they’ve even said ‘pwease’ or ‘thank you.’

Vance defended the MOU during Thursday’s White House briefing, pushing back on what he said was misleading media coverage. “The simple fact is that the only way the Iranians get any of those resources – not a single penny, by the way, from the United States of America under any circumstances – but the only way that they would ever get any benefit of the bargain is if they comply fully, and change their behavior,” Vance said of Iran, adding that Tehran’s military and nuclear program “is still destroyed” if Iran refuses to change course. He also said that compliance would bring “a transformative relationship with the Middle East.”

https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/2067642712560689401?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2067642712560689401%7Ctwgr%5E3ba43edb00d551c7daaa6ef5f831958df7580c5f%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fgeopolitical%2Fisraelis-are-livid-over-trump-ending-war-overwhelmingly-believe-iran-won-poll

The Hebrew University-Agam Institute survey was conducted June 17–20, using a weighted sample of 3,644 Israelis aged 17 and over, designed to reflect the broader population, and has a maximum sampling error of just 2.2% at a 99% confidence level. Maybe they’ll just keep attacking Lebanon to scuttle the peace deal?

https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/2067192026118926766?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2067192026118926766%7Ctwgr%5E3ba43edb00d551c7daaa6ef5f831958df7580c5f%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fgeopolitical%2Fisraelis-are-livid-over-trump-ending-war-overwhelmingly-believe-iran-won-poll

Read more …

They immediately denied it.

• Iran Agrees To Invite Nuclear Inspectors Back; Vance Hails Great Progress (ZH)

Axios is reporting Monday morning Iran has agreed to invite IAEA inspectors back to the country, according to fresh words of Vice President J.D. Vance, who focused all day prior and much into the overnight on forging a path forward toward permanent peace. The two sides are seeking to hammer out a long-term nuclear agreement, now amid the technical talks process, as delegation heads depart Switzerland – leaving diplomatic teams behind. The 60-day roadmap begins. If indeed the UN nuclear inspectors are eventually let back into Iran, this would be a hugely significant step. This would be to verify compliance to the preliminary agreement, Vance further hails:


“Our hope is that we get to the final deal and a permanent settlement. But right now, I think we’ve made great progress and we should all celebrate that in terms of when the nuclear inspectors are going to start,” the American Vice President told reporters. He described that he phoned UN nuclear inspectors at 2am last night to update them on the developments, however, he said that no one picked up the call. “As you can expect, not many people are answering their phone at two in the morning,” said Vance. “I expect that will happen at the minimum this week, but we think even some of those conversations with the inspectors and with the IAEA could happen as soon as today.”

Both warring sides appear to finally be in the same page in terms of issuing ‘positive’ and ‘encouraging’ assessments earlier. There were reports of last-minute disagreements, threats, and warnings that the process could collapse near the conclusion of yesterday’s formal round one of talks. “So they didn’t walk out, and their technical team is still here in Burgenstock working with our technical team,” Vance explained. “What we told the Iranians yesterday is, ‘When you guys exchange in what us millennials might call trash talk, you can’t expect the president of the United States not to respond and not to correct the record’.”

Vance conceded that in the end there was a “a little bit of threatening” and “whining but at the end of the day, the talks continued and we made great progress.” He further described that a mechanism had been established to keep the Strait of Hormuz open, while noting that significant work remained and that technical negotiations would continue. Also, importantly he said that a “very good foundation” was laid for a successful final agreement with Iran.

Read more …

“. . .They are running the Accords logic to its conclusion: every adversary becomes a counterparty, every conflict becomes a deal, every closed economy becomes an investable market.” —Patrick Wood

• Slouching Toward Peace (James Howard Kunstler)

That squawking you hear is Iran getting dragged kicking and screaming out of its jihad delirium into something that might look like reality-based relations with the rest of the world. They have to loudly declare that it’s not happening, even as it’s happening, to gaslight their own home folks, who might be getting a little sick of economic free-fall — and probably sick of the IRGC regime itself. And, of course, they know that the Lefty-left half of the USA is rooting for this whole business to fail so they can get their mitts back on the levers of power to avoid prison.


Things are at a pretty pass, all righty. The sticking point of the moment is Lebanon. Everybody is twanging on Israel to quit fighting Hezbollah. Okay, but does Hezbollah not have some obligation to quit its provocations? And is Iran, which controls Hezbollah, not responsibile to make Hezbollah stop?

Notice, you don’t hear any of the kibitzers calling for that. That’s because getting Hezbollah to poke Israel in the eye with a sharp stick is Iran’s favored device for dragging out negotiations which, they apparently hope, will put POTUS in fear of the looming midterm election. But time is running out on their playing for time. What they’re actually playing is pretend — pretending to be living large and in-charge. They’ve got nothing else, really. They’ve driven their country into a ditch.

The US is in a straight-up good-cop / bad-cop mode. VP Vance, on-the-ground in Switzerland, presents the very picture of a smooth, cool, rational figure where it counts: face-to-face with Iranian leaders, after all these years. He calmly tells the world news media that “encouraging progress” has been made the first day toward a ceasefire in poor, sore-beset Lebanon. As of Monday, Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi concurred on “X.”

Meanwhile, President Trump was going mad-dog on social media. Of his relations with irksome Israeli PM Bibi Netanyahu, POTUS said, “It’s good, but we have to keep him a little bit sane.” He added, “Iran must stop their highly-paid PROXIES in Lebanon from causing trouble. If they don’t, we’ll hit Iran very hard again. . . bomb the shit out of them.” He advised the Iranian negotiators that they “won’t even make if back” to their country if they keep playing games, and declared that the US will take over the Strait of Hormuz, if necessary. A bit harsh, admittedly. Any trouble parsing it out?

Read more …

“Remember the Episode With Jerry and the Tennis Pro?”

• The ‘Seinfeld’ Theory of Iran Negotiations (Scott Pinsker)

This theory seems especially appropriate today: Between Schrödinger’s Strait being both open and closed, Hezbollah’s rockets bombarding Israel, and Iranian negotiators demanding billions in bribes, the ongoing drama at the Bürgenstock Resort in Switzerland is — very likely — “a show about nothing.” It’ll get great ratings. Lots of people will watch. (It’s Must-See TV!) But after all the hype and all the hoopla, DJT’s MOU is DOA. (There will be no TCB.) When all is said and done, the U.S.-Iran negotiations will be about as successful as Kramer’s lawsuit against Java World: JD Vance will get free coffee (I assume), but that’s pretty much it.


Sorry, but that’s the stone-cold truth. You can’t negotiate a peace deal with apocalyptic psychos whose bloodlust surpasses Newman’s waistline. These Iranian hardliners make Crazy Joe Davola look sane. Which is why our peace talks will sink like the 1956 SS Andrea Doria (but then again, “All vacations have to end eventually”). There is no hope! (Nor any hugging or learning.) Or, perhaps, the exact opposite is true — a Bizarro-version of “conventional wisdom,” if you will — and America has Iran by the short hairs.

On Jan. 30, 1997, episode #147 of Seinfeld aired: “The Comeback.” It is, perhaps, the most prophetic episode in Seinfeld’s entire catalog. There were four major storylines:

First was George’s obsession with settling the score with a snarky coworker who made a mean-spirited comment: “Hey George, the ocean called. They’re running out of shrimp!” George went through hell and high water to get even, making himself look utterly preposterous in the process. This storyline, of course, is an allegory for the Tucker Carlson-Mark Levin feud. (Or maybe it’s the Ben Shapiro-Megyn Kelly feud? Or possibly the Candace Owens-Laura Loomer feud? At this point, it’s getting kinda difficult to keep track of who’s feuding with who.)

The second storyline was Kramer’s desperate attempt to annul his living will: He no longer wanted to have his life support terminated. (Thus, becoming pro-life, I suppose.) Yet his frantic attempts to find his attorney were thwarted at the last minute — a chilling commentary on Canada’s euthanasia policies, where a poor shlub with IBS at a Tim Hortons was just “canceled” by a Canadian doctor.

Third was Elaine’s interest in a mysterious video store employee whose taste in cinema was sublime. Alas, when she went to meet him (bringing fireworks, cigarettes, and vodka), she learned he’s only 15. The kid’s mother shamed her, yet Elaine walked away without any legal consequences. Obviously, this was a clever callback to the shocking “industrial scale” sexual assaults that were (allegedly) committed by gangs of Muslim men against 250,000 UK little girls, yet the police declined to prosecute the evildoers. Fun fact: The name of Elaine’s 15-year-old love interest was Vincent — whose name is derived from the Latin word vincere, which means “to conquer.” (Hey, is Seinfeld good or what?)

But it’s the fourth storyline that’s most relevant today: A snooty, self-important employee at a tennis pro shop pressured Jerry into buying an expensive new racket. Later, Jerry learned the employee’s horrible secret: The guy can’t even play a lick of tennis! The desperate employee begs Jerry not to tell anyone — or his reputation will be ruined! His wife will leave him! Nobody at work will respect him! Eventually, Jerry agreed to let the employee beat him in a tennis match while his wife, friends, and coworkers all watched.

Behind-the-scenes, the employee gave Jerry everything he wanted: He refunded the racket. He apologized. He acknowledged how pathetic he is. He promised Jerry a full year of free club membership. He even offered Jerry a one-night stand with his wife! So Jerry decided to let the poor guy save face by giving him a “win” that didn’t really matter. The parallels here to the U.S.-Iran MOU are uncanny: Our military has inflicted between $1.5 and $2 trillion in damage to Iran. Its air force, navy, air defense, nuclear program, and Supreme Leader were all blown to bits.

Behind-the-scenes, Iranian negotiators are telling the Americans how weak and vulnerable they are — and how badly they want to make a deal. But to save face, they asked to “win” the MOU. From CNN: The officials described the text of the [MOU] agreement as incredibly vague, mainly intended to create a more favorable environment for the highly technical, in-person talks to come. They added that the framework is aimed at providing Iran the ability to sell it politically to their internal audience.

Additionally, the officials said that the text of the memorandum of understanding — which Vice President JD Vance told CNN Monday is one-and-a-half pages long — didn’t reflect critical back-channel commitments Iran has made to the US, which they argued gave them more confidence in signing on to the arrangement. “People shouldn’t read too much into the language of the MOU,” one of the officials said, describing the agreement as a “political document.”

[…]

The official added that the president’s team of negotiators “came up with language that allows (Iran) to say what they need to say for their domestic politics.” [emphasis added] When the Iran War began, plenty of Americans were cheering for regime change, hoping that freedom-loving Iranians would rise up and overthrow the mullahs. We assumed that they were the #1 threat to the Ayatollah’s power. But it’s entirely possible we misread the tea leaves — and Iran’s rulers are far more terrified of being killed by hardline Islamists than freedom-loving reformers.

When the Iranians talk about “saving face,” they mean it literally: Pissing off the hardliners is instant death. If so, it would explain the posture of the Trump administration: Iran has already committed to signing a one-sided peace deal, but only with the face-saving cover of an equally one-sided MOU. Otherwise, all the Iranian negotiators will be executed when they return home, and the White House will have to start the peace process all over again. On the outside looking in, it’s unclear how likely this explanation is, but it deserves careful consideration for two important reasons:

The Trump administration insists that it’s true. (And it knows more details than we do.It would certainly explain the administration’s behavior, patience, and tolerance for Iran’s tomfoolery.But even if it’s true, Iran had better tread very, very carefully. Because, as the Seinfeld prophecy foretells, the pro shop employee couldn’t resist gloating about “beating” Jerry. In the middle of their match, he called Jerry names. He mocked his ability. He invited others to laugh at him. He called Jerry a baby, a chicken, and “not a man.”

Read more …

He won’t turn his back on either of the two. Let them fight it out.

• Trump May Have Given Us a HUGE Hint About His Successor (Margolis)

For more than a year, the corporate press has treated Donald Trump’s eventual successor like a riddle they alone can solve, parceling out clues from offhand remarks and body language. A new book suggests they’ve been chasing a story that doesn’t yet exist because Trump himself hasn’t made up his mind. Or has he?


The book, titled Regime Change, by New York Times reporters Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan, chronicles the first year of Trump’s second term. One notable anecdote is that once, during a walk-through with reporters, Trump showed off new flagpoles he had installed on the White House North and South Lawns, something he said he had wanted to do during his first term but had avoided for fear of bad press. Not this time. “You guys were after me,” Trump told the reporters. “I was the hunted. And now I’m the hunter.” That confidence extends to how he talks about who comes next.

According to the book, Trump has repeatedly quizzed his own aides on whether Vice President JD Vance or Secretary of State Marco Rubio would make a better president after him. And Trump may have given a hint about his preference. Trump is also said to be impressed by the background of Rubio, who is the son of Cuban immigrants. The book describes how, after Trump redecorated the Oval Office to fill it with gold flourishes, someone asked the president about the likelihood that the next president would undo all that he had done. Trump retorted: “Cubans love gold.”

But, Haberman and Swan write, Rubio and Vance are also friends. An example they offer is Rubio texting Vance after the 2024 Republican vice presidential nominee’s comments about “ childless cat ladies ” became a scandal. Rubio offered to campaign with Vance to show his support. Speculation about who Trump prefers as his successor has been rampant pretty much since Trump took office again. In February 2025, Fox News anchor Bret Baier asked Trump if he sees Vance as his successor and the 2028 Republican nominee. Trump’s answer wasn’t the easy yes everyone expected. “No, but he’s very capable,” he said, before pivoting to praise. “I think you have a lot of very capable people. So far, I think he’s doing a fantastic job. It’s too early; we’re just starting.”

That answer rattled plenty of people who had assumed that Vance would simply inherit the MAGA movement when Trump’s term ends. A Mediaite report the following month claimed that Trump wants his political dynasty to outlive his own presidency, and three high-level sources claimed that Donald Trump Jr. was seriously weighing a 2028 run of his own.

Donald Trump Jr. wasted no time torching that theory. “I accurately predicted that my buddy JD would be an instant power player in national GOP politics, so your theory is that I worked my a** off to help get him the VP nomination because I want to run for president in 2028?” he said. “Are you f****g retarded? I’m actually glad you’re printing this b******t, though, because at least now the rest of the press corps will see how s****y your ‘sources’ are and how easily you’re played by them. Congrats, moron.”

That’s not the response of a man choosing his words carefully for a future campaign launch. It’s the response of someone who finds the entire premise absurd. So after a year of speculation, here’s what the evidence actually shows: Trump is weighing Vance against Rubio on the merits, and probably seems to be leaning toward Rubio right now.

Read more …

Don’t sound good.

• Fail, Britannia: Meet the New Commie, Worse Than the Old Commie (Green)

The U.K.’s most destructively feckless prime minister (since the last one) is history, but Keir Starmer’s likely successor could prove Britain’s final undoing — if the radical Liberian-born advisor who serves as Andy Burnham’s “brains” gets her way. Burnham, former Mayor of Greater Manchester, won the Makerfield by-election on June 18 with an impressive 55% of the vote — a full rebuke of Reform U.K., too — sending him to Parliament where he’ll make a run at Number 10 Downing St. At least one potential rival, Wes Streeting, stood aside and endorsed Burnham on Monday, pretty much clearing his path.


In his endorsement, Streeting said he wants Labour to pursue “a progressive capitalism focused on wealth creation as much as wealth distribution,” but nobody seems to have told the “brains” behind Burnham: the Liberian-born daughter of lefty radicals, Miatta Fahnbulleh. CutMyTaxUK reported last year that Fahnbulleh “was born in Liberia as part of a prominent leftist revolutionary family, has served as a junior energy & housing minister in the Starmer government before resigning to support Burnham.” Previously, as the “former head of the far-left New Economics Foundation,” she proved “adept at churning out socialist policy proposals.”

Or as CMT-UK put it, “Keir Starmer has appointed a Housing Minister who hates private housing.” Another U.K. publication, Guido Fawkes, put all of Fahnbulleh’s most radical proposals in one handy list on Sunday:
• A wealth tax and yet another windfall tax on oil and gas.
• Mass nationalization e.g. of land, transport, and energy.
• Extending national [welfare] insurance [tax to include] to investment income.
• A cap on interest rates and charges on every form of consumer credit.
• Hiking capital gains tax to income tax levels.
• Hiking the dividend tax to income tax levels.
• Abolition of the upper earnings limit for national insurance.
• Huge expansion of the benefits system, including a “minimum income guarantee” paid to everyone apart from the rich.
• Nationalization of banks and creation of new “green” banks with taxpayer funds.
• Block on private banks lending to anyone with a “large amount of greenhouse gas emissions” and “penalization of banks that provide too many carbon-intensive loans.“
• Forced sale of existing businesses to employees.
• A tripling of the stamp duty [property tax, basically] surcharge to 9% for multiple homeowners and an increase to 6% for non-residents.

So, apart from urging the destruction of the energy industry, banking, and investment, ending private ownership of industry and housing, and a massive expansion of Britain’s welfare state, she’s practically a right-winger. Cough, cough. Here’s a quick look at Fahnbulleh’s background:

https://twitter.com/kunley_drukpa/status/2068249442067571024?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2068249442067571024%7Ctwgr%5Efd6865bfde3ade186354994b7afb9adff6e690c6%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fpjmedia.com%2Fvodkapundit%2F2026%2F06%2F22%2Fuk-meet-the-new-commie-worse-than-the-old-commie-n4954224

Britain isn’t just importing mass numbers of Third Worlders; it’s importing Third World lefty radicalism that the West once pounded into smithereens under Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan during the last years of the Cold War. The New Statesman’s Nick Plumb describes Fahnbulleh’s governing philosophy as “radical co-operativism,” but all these generations later, Karl Marx couldn’t help but notice the family resemblance. But what’s the big deal about a former Housing Minister with a radical laundry list of ways to destroy what’s left of the British economy?

As CMT-UK also put it, there are “two worrying aspects to this New Statesman article.” The first is that “Burnham apparently doesn’t have many brains,” and the second is that “Fahnbulleh is filling the gap.” Fahnbulleh is one of Burnham’s key allies, campaigned for him in last week’s big by-election win, and previously helped shape policy for a potential Burnham government, according to the BBC. By trading Starmer for Burnham, Britain very well may be going out of the frying pan and into the fire.

Read more …

Elizabeth was popular. That was it.

• Support For UK Monarchy Hits Record Low (RT)

Public support for the British monarchy has fallen to its lowest level in over three decades, a new poll has suggested. Just under half of Britons still favor removing the monarchy, with support particularly weak among younger people. Support for the monarchy has steadily declined since reaching a peak of 80% in 2012 and fell to 55% in 2026, according to data published by Ipsos on Friday. The figure is the lowest recorded by the market research and polling company since it began tracking the issue in 1993 and is well below the long-term average of 71%.


Support has declined across all age groups but is particularly low among Britons aged 18-34, where only a third of respondents said they favor the monarchy – roughly half the level recorded in 2013. According to Ipsos, 45% of people in that age group would prefer the UK to become a republic instead. Satisfaction with King Charles and his heir, Prince William, remains high, the poll suggested as 60% and 71% of respondents respectively said they liked the way the king and the prince were doing their jobs.

The monarchy’s popularity took a hit over one of the Royal family member’s long-standing association to late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. The now former Prince Andrew, King Charles’ brother, was initially accused in 2014 of being one of the persons the disgraced financier sex-trafficked woman to. Andrew settled a civil lawsuit with one of the sex-trafficking victims, Virginia Giuffre, in 2022, while still denying all the allegations. In 2026, the British police opened a criminal case against him after a release of additional files in the Epstein case suggested that he allegedly provided confidential government information to the convicted sex offender.

Buckingham Palace commented on the case in February by saying that the Royal family was ready to support the probe “if we are approached by Thames Valley Police” and adding that the king’s “thoughts and sympathies have been, and remain with, the victims of any and all forms of abuse.” According to a poll conducted by YouGov in April, Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor remains the most disliked member of the family by a wide margin, with over 90% of Britons having a “negative” or “very negative” view of him.

The influence of the British monarchy abroad has also declined in recent years, with some former British colonies considering severing their remaining ties to the Crown. Barbados became the most recent Caribbean nation to become a republic in 2021 while remaining within Britain’s Commonwealth. A survey conducted by former Conservative Party deputy chairman Michael Ashcroft in 2023 suggested that six of the 14 overseas countries within the Commonwealth realm – including Canada and Australia – would prefer to ditch the monarchy.

Read more …

7 prime ministers in 10 years.

American Democrats have nowhere to turn to. The US system prohibits a third party.

The UK has Nigel Farage waiting in the wings,

• Keir Starmer Reveals How Much Labour Resembles American Democrats (Queen)

I counted, and during my lifetime, the UK has had 13 prime ministers. The count is likely to jump to 14 soon now that Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced his resignation as leader of the Labour Party on Monday. Labour is now set for a leadership challenge, with newly elected MP Andy Burnham, formerly mayor of Manchester, as the main challenger. Starmer’s resignation may give rank-and-file Britons (many of whom are discovering the joys of American life during the World Cup) some whiplash, as Noa Hoffman pointed out on Monday’s Coffee House Shots podcast:


I think a lot of people who are not in tune with the day-to-day ins and outs of Westminster politics are going to think, “What the hell is going on?” I think that’s actually going to reflect quite poorly on the Labour Party, because, as Tim said, there was no one major scandal or one major failure that really led to this resignation.

It was sort of a litany of errors, many of them unforced, but nowhere near to the extent of what sort of preceded the big resignations of a lot of Tory prime ministers, so no one is going to say Keir Starmer was doing a great, perhaps even good job, but was he literally the worst thing on earth, or so bad to the extent that everyone thought, given even given the volatile state that the world is in right now, the best thing to do is for you to stand down and bring in a man who nobody, apart from the people of Makerfield voted for, nobody in the general election voted Labour on the basis of Andy Banham leading the party and being a prime minister, and now he’s promising all these big radical changes, unless he U-turns on them, as he has been doing frequently, without a mandate.

So this is going to come as a shock to a lot of people, and I don’t think Labour MPs really understand that. She later said, “But I think the overall question that history will ask is, was that reason enough for him to go and bring on the next sort of big left-wing agenda that we’re about to see that the public did not vote for, and I’m not sure the answer to that is necessarily yes.”

This isn’t an apples-to-apples comparison since the UK’s parliamentary system doesn’t exactly line up with the American democratic republic, but it feels like an echo of the Democrats replacing Joe Biden with Kamala Harris. It’s not clear yet how Labour’s rank and file will take to Burnham’s leadership and policies, so it may drive the country closer to a general election sooner rather than later. In the podcast, the question of Starmer’s legacy came up. Editor Tim Shipman characterized Starmer as one who was good at campaigning but bad at governing — you know, like Barack Obama. Shipman also identified Starmer’s legacy as being much about himself:

The innate thing is that Keir Starmer fundamentally thinks that if you’re a decent chap and you’re going to work and want to do decent things, then decent outcomes will follow. Well, that’s not how politics or government works.

And the other thing he thought was that winning a landslide was some great, massive endorsement of himself, and it was not. It was one of the great two-fingers-to-you [akin to a middle-finger gesture], anyone but the previous lot voters have ever seen in British politics, and that miscalculation, I think, made his government very difficult, and it meant a lot of what he thought he was going to achieve quite easily, like a reset with the European Union. “Oh, which will be fine, because we’re not these wicked Tories. We’re going to go in, and it’s all going to be great, because we’re nice and we’re Labour.”

The Spectator’s Madeleine Grant had another brutal assessment of Starmer’s legacy. In her view, Starmer represents the great gulf between the elites and the great unwashed. There will be much commentariat-painting of Starmer as exhibiting decency, competence and integrity. It probably doesn’t feel like that if you were one of the people he pushed under the bus to save himself, it probably doesn’t feel like that to the pubs and businesses and farms and schools shutting down, it probably doesn’t feel like that if you’re a Chagossian, or a military veteran, or a rape gang victim. Indeed, aside from vibes and the fact that he is ‘like them’, it is very difficult to see where those who laud Starmer as decent, competent, and having integrity have got the idea from.

That perhaps is Starmer’s real legacy: to be the man who embodied more than anyone else the vast gap between those who govern and the governed. The prime minister we were told the nation needed turned out to be the one it deserved. Most deliciously of all, Starmer has embodied the absolute reversal of Blair by proving, even in his departure, that things can, and will, only get worse.

The analogies between Labour and U.S. Democrats are plenty, but Starmer and the upcoming leadership challenge highlight two big comparisons. At the party level, Labour and the Dems are ready to go as far left as they can, and Labour leadership sees itself as an elite class that knows better than the governed, much like Democrats today. It’ll be revealing to watch how this will play out over the next few weeks and what the next general election, whenever it may happen, will bring about.

Read more …

I still find this strange.

• Tucker Carlson No Longer Supports The Republican Party: ‘I’m Out’ (JTN)

Former Fox News host Tucker Carlson said recently that he is leaving the Republican Party and will no longer support it because the party allegedly “betrayed” Americans with its alliance with Israel. Carlson, who was previously an ally of President Donald Trump, has split with the “Make America Great Again” movement and the Republican Party over the latter’s ties to Israel. “I’m out,” Carlson said on an episode of the “Can’t Be Censored” podcast that aired Thursday but gained traction Monday. “If I’m out, then I think a lot of other people are out. I would not support the Republican Party.


“How could I or any American voter support a political party that’s not loyal to the United States,” he continued. “That puts the interests of a foreign country above those of its own citizens. It’s not possible to vote for people like that, and I’m not going to.” Carlson, who has supported Republican causes for 35 years, clarified that he would not be supporting Democrats moving forward and was not sure who he would be voting for in future elections. The president and Carlson have been at odds in the second Trump administration, with Trump claiming Carlson has a “low IQ,” and the former Fox host has accused the president of trying to “play God” with the conflict in the Middle East.

Read more …

“Paul is expected to question Fauci on whether he lied to Congress during the pandemic about whether his office had funded gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China.”

• Rand Paul Subpoenas Fauci For Testimony in COVID Origin Probe (JTN)

Senate Homeland Security Chairman Rand Paul issued a subpoena Monday to force former National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Director Anthony Fauci to testify in front of his panel after the Biden administration official declined to do so voluntarily. The senator claimed Fauci previously agreed to testify in front of the panel, but former Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard on her last day in office last week declassified a several-hundred-page agency report on Fauci related to when he was NIAID director, the COVID-19 pandemic and the continuing, unresolved issue of the origin of the deadly virus.


Paul said the new hearing will take place in a public forum next month. “Last week, Anthony Fauci notified us he will NOT voluntarily testify before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, even though he had previously agreed to do so,” Paul said on X. “Therefore, today I have issued a subpoena requiring him to testify before the Committee, in public, next month.” Paul is expected to question Fauci on whether he lied to Congress during the pandemic about whether his office had funded gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China.

Despite the evidence of a potential lab leak sickening workers at the Wuhan lab, Fauci has continued to double down on his claim that the COVID-19 virus had emerged naturally from a wet-market in the same areas as the lab, not a leak from the lab itself. No date for the new hearing has been released.

Read more …

Rand Paul can use Tulsi’s material,

• Tulsi Gabbard Biolab Releases (CTH)

Promethean Action PAC’s Barbara Boyd takes a look at the last two declassification releases from Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard prior to her resignation. Boyd argues that outgoing DNI Tulsi Gabbard’s recent document releases reveal a global, US-funded biolab network centered on Dr. Anthony Fauci, traced back to January 2014—the same start date cited in Joe Biden’s pardons of Hunter Biden and Fauci. She claims Obama’s 2014 gain-of-function ban pushed the research overseas, with NIH funding routed through EcoHealth Alliance to Wuhan, while Pentagon-backed contractors—especially Metabiota—expanded work in Ukraine after the Maidan coup.


Boyd also highlights a May 2020 Lawrence Livermore assessment describing Wuhan as fitting criteria for an accidental release of an engineered coronavirus and alleges Anthony Fauci steered Biden-era COVID origins reviews toward natural origin while lying to Congress. She links Ukraine lab inventories and broader COVID-era policies to a larger geopolitical and technocratic agenda.

Read more …

He wants to invite in 500,000 people for starters?! Not everyone’s happy with that.

• Spanish PM’s Wife Faces Trial On Corruption Charges (RT)

Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez’s wife, Begona Gomez, will stand trial before a jury on corruption-related charges, EFE news agency reported on Saturday, citing a ruling issued by the investigating judge following preliminary hearings held earlier this week. Gomez was formally charged in April with embezzlement, influence peddling, corruption in business dealings, and misappropriation of funds. Prosecutors are reportedly seeking a 24-year prison sentence for the 55-year-old university director, who was also ordered to surrender her passport and appear in court twice a month pending the subsequent proceedings.


Her adviser, Cristina Alvarez, who is accused of similar offenses, and businessman Juan Carlos Barrabes will also stand trial. The investigation into Gomez was launched in 2024 following a complaint filed by anti-graft campaign group Manos Limpias, whose leader is reportedly linked to Spain’s far right. The organization alleged that Gomez used her position as the prime minister’s wife to influence government contracts given to a group of tech companies.

The scope of the probe later expanded after additional accusations that Gomez misused public funds in the hiring of a consultant and improperly used software while working at Madrid’s Complutense University, where she co-directed an academic chair.Her legal team denied any wrongdoing and argued that the proceedings are politically motivated.Sanchez, the leader of the Spanish Socialist Workers’ Party, has not been implicated in the case.

However, after the probe became public, he suspended public engagements “for a few days” and said he was considering stepping down, denouncing what he described as a campaign of political and personal harassment against his family. Sanchez later announced that he would remain in office and continue leading the government. Former Spanish Prime Minister Jose Zapatero also became the subject of a corruption investigation in May over the alleged misuse of €53 million in state aid granted to Plus Ultra airline in 2021. Earlier this week, a court rejected the request of prosecutors to impose precautionary measures, including the surrender of his passport and a travel ban.

Read more …

South Florida.

• Go East, Young SpaceX Millionaire! (Stephen Green)

Aside from fueling Elon Musk’s orbital data center ambitions, the recent SpaceX initial public offering minted thousands of new millionaires — and where they put their money will have ripple effects lasting a generation. Can you guess where that money won’t go? In a charmingly outdated New York Post piece from May, Lydia Moynihan predicted that the SpaceX IPO would create “dozens, if not hundreds” of millionaires, including one anonymous early investor who told Moynihan that “she’s already hired someone to run her newly created family office, which manages her investment portfolio.”


“There are going to be a lot of single family offices that come out of this IPO,” founder of the Family Office Division at Compass, Cindy Scholz, told the Post. The paper reported that with dozens or hundreds of SpaceX millionaires, “Family offices have already grown 25% over the last five years, and she expects to see that number skyrocket in the coming month.” The actual number of new millionaires (and even a few billionaires) created was a bit north of 4,400. Of those, Moynihan’s “hundreds” had eight-figure net-worth paydays when SpaceX went public. That’s a lot of new family offices and whatnots.

Scholz, according to the Post, also said last month that the SpaceX windfall will “accelerate the exodus from California.” Well, guess what? Here comes Kristen Altus from Fox Business, who reported Monday that a “fresh wave of Silicon Valley wealth could soon flow into South Florida.” “With OpenAI quietly filing for a confidential IPO alongside market debuts from aerospace giant SpaceX and AI rival Anthropic,” she wrote, “billions of dollars in overnight liquidity are about to be unlocked for executives and middle management alike.”

However, Altus reported, “Instead of reinvesting in the Golden State, this incoming class of newly minted tech multimillionaires is already flooding Florida real estate brokers with calls — triggering what experts say could be a rapid-fire ‘Tech Exodus 2.0’ measured in months, not years.” Nobody tell Gov. Gavin Newsom, who has already spent all those new income tax dollars.

And Another Thing: I was able to buy exactly one (perhaps overpriced) share of SpaceX the day it went public, and then went into waiting mode. When SPCX share dropped from IPO-hysteria highs on Wednesday, I started buying just a little. I’m now the proud owner of 10 (!!!) whole shares, and am a couple hundred dollars poorer as the shares keep falling. But I don’t care, because I own 10 whole shares of the world’s most exciting company.

Even before SpaceX went public, Frank Jacobs went through the numbers for Big Think in May and found that since 2018, “around 103,000 millionaires moved out of California,” and that “133,000 millionaires moved in to Florida,” mostly from the Formerly Golden State and New York. “Wealthy Americans are migrating in large numbers from high-tax states to lower-tax ones and reshaping the nation’s economic geography,” Jacobs wrote, concluding that “steep marginal tax rates may be counterproductive, driving away the very revenue” Albany and Sacramento hoped to get their greedy blue fingers on.

So it’s no stretch to predict that all these SpaceX/Anthropic/OpenAI IPO winners will follow suit. “The California area codes have already started showing up,” Fort Lauderdale Downtown Development Authority CEO and President Jenni Morejon told Altus. “It’s just that the conversations are evolving.” As it turns out, Florida’s appeal isn’t just about friendly tax and regulatory environments — it’s about the culture. “Silicon Valley is absolutely a boring place to live compared to Miami,” Naftali Group CEO Miki Naftali told Fox. “How can you even compare between living in Miami and Silicon Valley?”

But it’s the lost business opportunities that might come to haunt California and New York the most. “I think you see that this isn’t just a lifestyle narrative,” Morejon added, “it’s actually an operating environment for new businesses. And we have the engineering and infrastructure emerging to prove that.” The money is nice, too — especially when it isn’t flushed down another one of Sacramento’s money pits.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/WikiLeaksQ/status/2068771868018901445?s=20

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle June 21 2026

Jun 212026
 
 June 21, 2026  Posted by at 10:14 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,  31 Responses »


Vincent van Gogh Self portrait with pipe 1886


• Vance ‘Skeptical’ That Iran Closed Hormuz Strait Again (ZH)
• UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer Expected To Resign On Monday (ZH)
• New Air Force One Turns the Presidency Back Into a Statement (David Manney)
• Biden Admin Buried Whistleblower Report Alleging Fauci Lied To Congress (JTN)
• President Trump Notes Opposition Effort to Destroy DC Reflection Pool (CTH)
• The Left is Trying to Sabotage the Reflecting Pool (Margolis)
• Trump -v- Meloni (CTH)
• Moderate Expectations of Acting DNI Bill Pulte (CTH)
• Trump: Ukraine War Would Never Have Started If Russia Remained In G8 (ZH)
• Zelensky Threatens To Attack Belarus (RT)
• The Nord Stream Narrative Explosion: Why You’ve Only Read Half The Story (RT)
• Elon Musk vs. the Democrats: Outcomes vs. Process (Soukup)
• Is the iPhone Birth Control? (AmG)

 


 

https://twitter.com/TRUMP_ARMY_/status/2067995272538661070?s=20 https://twitter.com/GlobalDiss/status/2068228841101762741?s=20 https://twitter.com/LangmanVince/status/2068126070407102493?s=20 https://twitter.com/MrWhiplash_/status/2068012044117504192?s=20 https://twitter.com/QuantumGuard17/status/2068083408958599666?s=20

 


 


Merry solstice!

One way to deal with Iran: Just ignore their statemennts.

“Pentagon Declares Safe Passage Remains ‘Intact Today’

• Vance ‘Skeptical’ That Iran Closed Hormuz Strait Again (ZH)

Vice President JD Vance has newly told Fox News that he’s ‘skeptical’ of the morning reports and claims that the Iranians once again ‘closed’ the Strait of Hormuz.


US Central Command is also trying to portray that all is well. It issued this statement after the Iranians announced it closed the vital oil transit waterway: Commercial ship traffic in the Strait of Hormuz increased June 20 as U.S. forces continued operating in the general area to support freedom of navigation. Safe passage through the international waterway remained intact today as 55 merchant ships transited, moving large amounts of cargo and more than 17 million barrels of oil to global markets.

The Joint Maritime Information Center issued an advisory this week affirming safe passage for all vessels along a designated route that is free of arbitrary requirement claims or impediments. The Pentagon says it is remaining vigilant with regional forces on high alert. Overall, it seems the White House is keep to at least see its delegation get in the same room with the Iranians in Switzerland. This will certainly be a real start in terms of face-to-face engagement, after the MoU was remotely signed by each side.

Iran says Hormuz Strait Closed Again
As has become the ‘norm’ after well over 100 days of war – which some pundits have been calling the “third Gulf war” – there are deeply conflicting headlines emerging Saturday. On the one hand, diplomacy based in Switzerland is said to be in motion, with a potential top level Trump delegation (led by Witkoff and to be joined later by Kushner reportedly/allegedly) – but fighting between Israel and Hezbollah in south Lebanon still rages, with the death toll climbing, and also with Hezbollah rockets still landing against IDF positions as well as in northern Israel.

Will the US and Iranian sides actually meet in Europe for the ‘technical’ side of further talks toward final peace? Saturday has seen reports of Iran having again ‘closed’ the Strait of Hormuz, citing Israeli aggression in Lebanon, after Tehran has insisted that the tenuous freshly signed MoU included a Lebanon ceasefire and peace. The latest newswires out of Iranian state media:

IRAN SAYS HORMUZ TO CLOSE, CITING CEASEFIRE VIOLATION: TASNIM
IRAN SAYS STRAIT OF HORMUZ HAS BEEN CLOSED: TASNIM
IRAN’S IRGC NAVY SAYS HORMUZ STRAIT CLOSED TO ALL VESSELS: FARS
*VESSELS WARNED TO AVOID STRAIT OF HORMUZ OVER SECURITY: FARS

VP Vance Expected in Switzerland, But He’s Ambiguous in FOX Appearance

https://twitter.com/BarakRavid/status/2068334966660837678?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2068334966660837678%7Ctwgr%5E27d3c3b6010ec53a8064cf4ef0e71d788bf1410d%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fgeopolitical%2Fdiplomacy-back-motion-witkoff-kushner-en-route-switzerland-despite-overnight-rising

And yet, some of the same state sources have been saying that an Iranian delegation will travel to Switzerland where it will seek to hold Washington to its commitments. “In Switzerland, we intend to press for the fulfilment of the other side’s commitments and clarify how they plan to act on their obligations,” the Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson said, according to Fars, also as cited in Al Jazeera. Per the same report Saturday mid-morning (US time): “The delegation will leave for Switzerland in a few minutes, Mehr news agency also reported. The spokesperson also said that if the US refuses to implement its commitments, Iran will respond with necessary measures.” Vance non-committal in Saturday FOX interview:

Read more …

The UK is very close to being ungovernable. These guys are all so unpopular. Just 2 years ago, Rishi Sunak had to go.

• UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer Expected To Resign On Monday (ZH)

Keir Starmer’s premiership appears to have entered its final act. Just over a week after Andy Burnham stormed back into Parliament with a crushing by-election win, the Prime Minister is – according to senior Labour figures cited by The Observer – preparing to set out a timetable for his own departure, with a “clear statement” possible as early as Monday. It would be a remarkable collapse. Starmer led Labour to a landslide less than two years ago. He now looks unable to command the confidence of his own benches for much longer, with cabinet ministers, union leaders and donors reportedly among those who have been involved in the conversations about his future.


Burnham, the outgoing Greater Manchester mayor, did not just win Makerfield – he buried it. Official figures show him taking 24,927 votes, 54.8% of the total, beating Reform UK’s Rob Kenyon by a 9,231-vote margin in a seat where Nigel Farage’s party had been threatening to turn Labour’s crisis into a rout. The result gives Burnham the Commons seat he needs, clears his path to a leadership challenge, and leaves Starmer’s position looking terminal.

Also, Starmer’s former Chief of Staff – Morgan McSweeney – was the sacrificial lamb in the Mandelson scandal (recall that Starmer appointed Jeffery Epstein pal Peter Mandelson as the UK’s ambassador to the US). McSweeney also targeted Zerohedge, The Federalist and Breitbart in a clandestine campaign against alternative-media outlets. He resigned in February, two weeks before Mandelson was arrested on suspicion of passing insider info to Jeffrey Epstein in 2009, when he was serving as Business Secretary.

Markets Eye The Monday Open The political risk did not go unnoticed by bond traders. UK 10-year gilt yields climbed to 4.84% on Friday, up roughly 0.09 percentage points on the session, as markets weighed Burnham’s victory, domestic political uncertainty, and the possible fiscal implications of a future leadership bid. With markets shut over the weekend, the next read comes at Monday’s open, and any Starmer statement setting out an exit timetable will land straight into it.

Burnham is due to be sworn in as an MP on Monday and to meet Starmer early in the week, with a cabinet meeting scheduled for Tuesday. Senior Labour figures expect a “deliberate slow march in good order” – most likely a September handover timed to the party conference – rather than an immediate vacuum.

According to the report, Burnham’s supporters claim he has secured backing from more than 201 Labour MPs if Starmer refuses to step down voluntarily. The Observer framed that as a critical number because it would represent more than half the Parliamentary Labour party and would make it increasingly difficult for Starmer to argue that he still commands the confidence of his own side. A formal challenge requires far fewer names. Under Labour’s rules, any challenger needs nominations from 20% of Labour MPs – currently 81 – plus the required support from local parties and affiliates. On every count, the door is open.

Read more …

It turns Boeing into the past tense.

• New Air Force One Turns the Presidency Back Into a Statement (David Manney)

President Donald Trump stepped onto the tarmac at Joint Base Andrews and did what he often does best: he turned a government asset into a message. The new Air Force One, a converted Boeing 747-8 once owned by Qatar, is bigger, sharper, and painted in the red, white, and blue colors Trump has wanted for years. https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/2068049231911194715?s=20


It’s not just an airplane; for better or worse, it’s a flying argument about how Trump sees the presidency. The Air Force calls the jet a VC-25B Bridge aircraft that’s meant to serve while Boeing finishes the long-delayed replacement planes that were supposed to modernize presidential travel. From Newsmax: The new aircraft eschews the Kennedy-era robin’s egg blue exterior of the old plane for a bolder look, with the underbelly of the plane painted navy blue with a red stripe above it. The plane’s left side, where the president boards, features the presidential seal, while the tail of the aircraft has a massive American flag on it.

“The workmanship of this plane is, when you see it, you won’t believe it,” Trump said from inside the massive Andrews Air Force Base hangar, as a couple hundred assembled Air Force personnel looked on. He spoke after stepping off the new plane in a dramatic flourish, as his signature tune “God Bless the USA” played. The gift from Qatar is serving as a so-called “bridge” aircraft to carry the president until the new planes ordered directly from Boeing arrive. That is currently slated for 2028.

The administration formally accepted a luxury Boeing 747 jet from Qatar last year to be used as the presidential airplane, despite questions about the ethics and legality of accepting such an expensive gift from a foreign nation. Trump has insisted in the past that he would not fly around in the Qatari jet once he leaves office and said it would instead be donated to a future presidential library. The Air Force has said in the past that security modifications to the jet would cost less than $400 million.

Any U.S. Air Force aircraft carrying the president uses the call sign Air Force One, so the name belongs to the mission, not one specific plane. The old blue-and-white 747s remain part of the fleet, but the Qatari jet now gives Trump something Boeing hasn’t delivered on time: a visible upgrade. Also from Newsmax: Other government jets that carry other top administration officials will also use the similar red, white and navy color scheme, the Air Force said earlier this year.

An Air Force spokesperson, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive plans, told The Associated Press that the two current planes, known as VC-25As, will not be retiring. Instead, they will remain in the fleet until the new Boeing planes, referred to as VC-25Bs, come into service, the spokesperson said. It is unclear how the older jets will be used but the spokesperson said that both the Qatari jet as well as the VC-25As will be available for use and “the Presidential Airlift Group will select the appropriate aircraft for each mission based on operational requirements.”

The controversy was baked in from the start: the jet came from Qatar, and critics raised legal, ethical, and security questions as soon as the deal became public. A foreign government giving a luxury aircraft to the United States for presidential use is bound to draw fire. Trump’s answer has been typically blunt, framing the plane as a smart deal for taxpayers because America needed a bridge aircraft while Boeing dragged its feet. Security concerns deserve a real answer. Air Force One isn’t a campaign bus with wings; it’s a command post, a communications hub, and a symbol that must keep working during a crisis.

The Air Force says the aircraft completed modification and flight testing. The public doesn’t need every classified detail, but it does need confidence that a foreign-owned plane was scrubbed, rebuilt, and tested to the standard required for a president of the United States. Boeing’s failure hangs over the whole rollout. The company won the contract for the next presidential aircraft years ago, and the delivery date kept sliding. The Air Force now expects the first new VC-25B presidential aircraft around mid-2028. In normal Washington fashion, delay became background noise. Trump has a way of pulling that noise into the open and forcing everybody to look at it.

The new plane also breaks with a visual tradition older than many voters. The Kennedy-era blue had grace and carried history, but it also came from another age, when the presidency still tried to look above the fray. Trump has never believed that power should whisper; his Air Force One looks like a flag, a billboard, and a challenge all at once. Some will call it gaudy, others will call it overdue, but nobody will miss it in the sky. That’s the real political story. Trump understands that symbols work because people see them before they study them. A border wall, a Space Force uniform, a restored military parade, and a new presidential aircraft: all of it tells voters that national power should look like national power.

His critics recoil because they believe the performance cheapens the office. Those are the same people who also believed the Obama administration was the most scandal-free government in history, and that President Joe Biden was more energetic and sharper than people much younger working around him. Trump supporters cheer because they believe the old restraint often looked too much like surrender. Both sides have something to argue about here. The Qatar connection should be examined, the security work should be serious, and most importantly, Boeing should answer for years of delay.

But the larger point is simple enough: the presidency is never just paperwork, policy, and process. It’s also presence. Trump’s new Air Force One may be temporary, but the message isn’t. He wants America to look strong again, even when it’s sitting on a runway. After years of scolding, managed decline, and apologetic leadership, that message still lands with millions of people who want their country to stop acting embarrassed by its own power.

Read more …

Who’s going to go to jail?

• Biden Admin Buried Whistleblower Report Alleging Fauci Lied To Congress (JTN)

An intelligence community whistleblower formally accused Dr. Anthony Fauci of lying to Congress during the COVID-19 pandemic, but the Biden administration took the unusual step of yanking the complaint from the government’s independent watchdogs and referring it instead to the political appointee overseeing the Health and Human Services Department, bombshell memos released by departing Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard show.


The effort to divert the investigation of Fauci to then-HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra occurred shortly after the government’s top pandemic doctor engaged in a discussion with the CIA about evidence that workers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) in China had been sickened in fall 2019, potentially explosive evidence that the virus emerged from a lab leak at the very facility where Fauci’s office was funding dangerous research on bat viruses, the memos show.

“On the 3 sick WIV researchers, Dr. Fauci said key gaps that need to be filled are 1) If they were sick, what does their medical records show; 2) Do we have blood culture of these sick researchers; and 3) Did we ask China about/for this information?” one summary of the June 2021 meeting at the CIA stated. Despite the evidence of a potential lab leak sickening workers, Fauci continued to double down on his claim that the COVID-19 virus had emerged naturally from a wet-market in the same areas as the lab. Fauci also continued to insist in congressional testimony that his office had not funded gain-of-function research at the Wuhan lab, a claim that an intelligence official believed was false and potentially prosecutable, the memos show.

Shortly after the June 2021 CIA meeting, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence received a whistleblower complaint formally alleging that Fauci testified falsely to Congress. “The complaint alleges Dr. Fauci provided false testimony to Congress related to the conduct of gain of function research at the National Institutes of Health, thereby ‘misleading the American people and Congressional oversight,’” Acting Intelligenve Community Inspector General Tamara Johnson wrote Aug. 11, 2021, to then-DNI Avril Haines.

Rather than refer the alleged lie to the independent watchdog at HHS, which was responsible for probing misconduct in Fauci’s office, Haines referred the concerns instead to Becerra, a Biden political appointee who is now running to be California governor.] Johnson also made clear she didn’t want to send the complaint to her peer at HHS, the inspector general. “The general dispute about ‘gain-of-function’ research is already in the public domain making it highly probable that the HHS-OIG would already be aware of the allegation that the Dr. Fauci’s testimony was inaccurate (albeit from a different source, not our ICWPA submitter). Consequently, we determined there would be no merit in referring the matter to HHS OIG,” she wrote.

Gabbard said the documents she released late Thursday in her final hours as DNI demonstrate that government officials, including Fauci, engaged in a cover-up to mislead the public about how the COVID-19 pandemic started. “The tactics used to hide the truth are straight from the deep state playbook: politicized self-serving leaders like Dr. Fauci covered up their own wrongdoing and abuses of power, manipulated intelligence, lied to Congress, and undermined a duly elected President by restricting his access to vital facts needed to keep the country safe,” Gabbard said, “It’s time the American people learn the real story.”

Fauci, who retired before President Donald Trump returned to the White House, has repeatedly denied in engaginfg in wrongdoing or lying to Congress. But he did accept a pardon from President Joe Biden in late 2024. Beyond the intelligence community whistleblower’s allegations, Gabbard said she too believed Fauci lied to Congress on another matter in 2024 when he claimed he had not talked to intelligence agencies about virus research.

“The correspondence released today directly contradicts Fauci’s 2024 testimony to the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic,” her statement said. “In that hearing, while under oath, Fauci was repeatedly asked whether he spoke to ‘FBI, CIA, DIA or any U.S. intelligence agency concerning viral research’ before, during, or after the pandemic. Fauci repeatedly dodged the questions, before falsely stating, ‘not to my knowledge about COVID.'” Two GOP senators — Rand Paul and Ron Johnson — told Just the News this week they believe the Trump DOJ should challenge the legality of Fauci’s pardon — which was signed by an autopen — and try to prosecutor Fauci.

Read more …

Is it Reflecting Pool or Reflection Pool?

• President Trump Notes Opposition Effort to Destroy DC Reflection Pool (CTH)

Team Algae and Filth has been busy at work, supported by CNN, ABC and various leftist media, in an attempt to grow algae back in the DC reflection pool, and cut out the newly installed lining. A few arrests have been made by DC park police. Yes, these folks are that unstable. Liberalism is a mental disorder.


President Trump responds to the effort via Truth Social:
“We’ve cleaned, renovated, and beautified over 45 Monuments and Memorials, 28 Statues, and 22 Fountains in Washington, D.C. Things are really looking good in our Nation’s Capital, and add to that the fact that when I became President, Crime was rampant, and now, Washington, D.C., is one of the Safest Cities anywhere in the United States. However, we’ve had some real problems with Vandalism at the beautiful Reflecting Pool, which sits between The Washington Monument and The Lincoln Memorial.

Just like three days ago, they destroyed the grass outside of the Pool, they’ve also done everything possible to hurt the inside surface that was just installed. No different than the chemicals that were used on the National Mall, they used something similar in the Reflecting Pool to try to destroy and demean our beautiful work. Lightweight ABC Reporter, Jonathan Karl, was seen sticking his hand into the Pool, and trying to rip the rubber off of the surface. The algae is 75% gone, and the condition will soon be completely remedied, and the area that was vandalized, fortunately, is just a small area of damage, and will be fixed early next week. It’s a shame that the Radical Left Lunatics, most likely Dumocats, who have spent their lives trying to ruin our Country, are free to do so. Law Enforcement is actively investigating this situation and will hopefully have it resolved soon. Thank you for your attention to this matter!”

~ DONALD J. TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Read more …

Leave it alone!

• The Left is Trying to Sabotage the Reflecting Pool (Margolis)

The Lincoln Memorial reflecting pool has become the latest target in the left’s war on anything Donald Trump touches, and the radical left isn’t even trying to hide it anymore. According to reports circulating on social media, the National Guard and Park Police have ramped up patrols around the reflecting pool amid threats from leftists vowing to sabotage the recently renovated landmark. Independent journalist Nick Sortor sounded the alarm on the brazen plot. “American workers are pushing around the clock to finish the pool by July 4, but liberals have a vested interest in destroying it for some reason,” Sortor wrote.


We all know the reason: Trump Derangement Syndrome. It’s truly a shame how badly these people want to humiliate our country on the world stage, and they’re not even subtle about it anymore. President Trump confirmed on Friday in a Truth Social post that vandals damaged the newly renovated pool, and he didn’t hold back. Trump pointed out that his administration has cleaned, renovated, and beautified more than 45 monuments and memorials, 28 statues, and 22 fountains in the nation’s capital, and that Washington, D.C., has gone from a crime-ridden disaster to one of the safest cities in the country on his watch.

“We’ve had some real problems with vandalism at the beautiful reflecting pool,” Trump wrote. “Just like three days ago, they destroyed the grass outside of the pool; they’ve also done everything possible to hurt the inside surface that was just installed.”Days before Trump’s birthday on June 14 and the UFC event held at the White House, someone carved “86 47” into the grass on the National Mall itself. The U.S. Park Police are reportedly investigating that incident too. Trump said the vandals used chemicals similar to those deployed elsewhere on the National Mall in an apparent effort to destroy and demean the freshly completed work.

He also called out ABC’s Jonathan Karl by name, saying the reporter was caught on camera sticking his hand into the pool and trying to tear off the sealant on the surface. Trump said the algae plaguing the pool is now 75% gone and that the damaged section, which he described as small, will be repaired early next week. “It’s a shame that the radical left lunatics, most likely Dumocrats, who have spent their lives trying to ruin our country, are free to do so,” Trump wrote, adding that law enforcement is actively investigating the situation. On Thursday, a video surfaced showing the phrase “86 47” painted on the bottom of the pool. It’s the latest entry in a disturbing pattern.

Think about that for a second. These people are so consumed by hatred for one man that they’re willing to deface national monuments, vandalize sacred public spaces, and scrawl assassination-coded slogans into the grass just to make a point. They don’t care about the country. They don’t care about the symbols that belong to all Americans, regardless of party. They hate Trump so much that they’ll destroy anything out of spite. This is who the left has become. Not protesters with grievances, but vandals with grudges, willing to wreck a national treasure rather than let Trump’s D.C. cleanup succeed. The investigations are ongoing, but the message from radical leftists is already loud and clear: if Trump built it, they want it destroyed.

Read more …

That photo does it for me.

• Trump -v- Meloni (CTH)

On the heels of the G7 in France, U.S. President Trump and Italian Prime Minister Georgia Meloni have been engaged in a geopolitical spat. The core of the issue centers on Italy’s refusal to allow the U.S. military to conduct flight operations for the conflict against Iran from U.S. airbases in Italy. President Trump, Vice-President Vance, Secretary of State Rubio and Secretary Hegseth have all remarked on their disappointment with Italy and Spain that has led to a full review of U.S. NATO operations in Europe.


The issue became personal at the G7 when President Trump ignored Meloni’s repeated attempts to repair the friction. President Trump was no longer tolerating the two-faced approach. Actions speak louder than words.



Understanding, a very specific image sensitivity Prime Minister Meloni carries, President Trump stated, “Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni asked, over and over, for a picture with me during the G-7 meeting in France. She is doing poorly in Italy with her level of popularity, possibly because she turned down the United States of America, a Country that truly loves and protects Italy, when it came to denying Iran from obtaining or developing a Nuclear Weapon (But so did NATO, for that matter!). She wouldn’t even let us use Italy’s landing strips or runways, a great logistical inconvenience, and this despite the fact the U.S. contributes hundreds of Billions of Dollars a year to protect Italy, and other “so-called” NATO Allies. Now, after the United States defeated Iran militarily, she wants to be friends again in order to get her “numbers up.” No thanks!!!
~ President DJT

Meloni then hit back with: “these constant, unprovoked attacks are senseless. As for my popularity, being your friend certainly has not helped it, nor does it depend on my relationship with you. My popularity depends on my ability to defend Italy’s national interest, and that is exactly what I have always done,” Meloni said in a post on Instagram. She added that “in any case, my popularity is none of your concern. I suggest you focus on yours.”

Read more …

“The entire DC system is fully aware of the corrupt nature of the FBI as it functions.”

• Moderate Expectations of Acting DNI Bill Pulte (CTH)

A lot might be said, but little of it will be grounded in reality. Here’s a general outline that may provide context for the next few weeks. > First, contrary to popular opinion, leaks from inside the IC related to activity within the ODNI will likely come as an outcome from bad actors in the FBI and the attached liaison office. {EXAMPLE HERE} As you may or may not be aware, every intelligence community silo has a liaison attached to the office of the Director of National Intelligence. What that means is that every IC agency has a person(s) inside the ODNI that can then be the source of information within the larger parent silo. The most frequent leaking child from within the parent agency is the FBI liaison. Understand this reality and you begin to understand frustration around Kash Patel’s inability to control his agency.


Second, contrary to popular opinion, CIA Director John Ratcliffe will not be able to partner with Acting DNI Pulte in the same direct manner he was with fully confirmed DNI Tulsi Gabbard. Despite the ODNI technically sitting atop the CIA within the construct of the overall Intelligence Community, there are rules about information flows to non-confirmed “acting” positions. Deputy DNI Aaron Lukas will have more intelligence capabilities than Pulte.

CIA Director John Ratcliffe will likely not be the source of conversation about this standard, the information to Pulte will likely come from the DNI Legal Counsel Jack Dever, and/or Deputy CIA Director Michael Ellis who also carries the role of General Counsel for the Central Intelligence Agency.

When SSCI Vice-Chair Mark Warner says he is in communication with IC leadership about isolating Acting DNI Bill Pulte from national security information, he is likely outlining contact with the general counsel of the DNI or CIA, or with the Intelligence Community Inspector General’s office. That said, the National Security Advisor, Marco Rubio, could mitigate some of that isolation by requesting IC information Pulte may desire to review.

Regarding ‘declassification’ authority. CTH is not sure what power an Acting position as DNI carries as it relates to independent cross-silo declassification authority. However, information presented to the President can be declassified by the President. The key is to get the silo stakeholder to approve the release, then take to the Office of the President for approved public release pending stakeholder redactions. That is the basic outline of limitations that could become pertinent. However, the Acting DNI can do something very valuable. The ADNI can ‘manage’ the office and how it operates. Pulte can make staffing decisions as well as curb the issues within the liaison offices.

I somewhat predict that Pulte could find the problem with FBI leaking; he could even do something about it – with presidential support. Unfortunately, this would put Pulte on a collision course with FBI Director Kash Patel. It’s an issue that needs to be dealt with, but the timing is not good considering the looming midterm election. A more likely scenario is Kash Patel’s unchecked deep state FBI analysts/agents will be managed without Patel’s direct involvement. Essentially, none of the ‘good guys’, and there ain’t that many ‘good guys’, have any trust in the FBI silo.

The entire DC system is fully aware of the corrupt nature of the FBI as it functions. The ‘establishment’, including Mark Warner and Tom Cotton, is favorable to the FBI. Meanwhile, the ‘reformers’, and I suspect that might include HPSCI Chairman Rick Crawford, are not. The larger IC elements will watch this play out, dropping their thumbs on the narrative (via selected leaking) as it pertains to their individual interests. There’s a reason why scrutiny against Patel has lessened from within the DC mechanisms.

Ironically, all the negative information against Pulte will almost certainly come from the FBI, it will just be positioned as if it comes from another silo. Watch carefully and we just might catch them in real time Ultimately, all of the bad actors within the IC (both branches of government) want “702” reauthorized, so this does create a subject that can be leveraged for actionable value to the office of the President. All of that said, Pulte remains an unknown entity within the larger IC system, and his motives and intentions are generally also unknown. It will be interesting to watch things unfold, and to see exactly who is willing to surface as an ally.

Yeah, that!

Read more …

He needs to address the nazi issue.

• Trump: Ukraine War Would Never Have Started If Russia Remained In G8 (ZH)

This isn’t the first time that President Trump has said something like this, but he’s newly explained in a wide-ranging fresh interview with Axios published Friday his view that the ongoing war between Russia and Ukraine likely would likely have been averted if Russia had remained a member of the then-Group of Eight (G8). “You probably wouldn’t have the war with Russia and Ukraine if they did,” Trump told the publication, referring to the decision to expel Moscow, making the group the G7.


The forum “would have been much better” had it maintained its original structure, with Russia included. He laid ultimate blame in the fresh remarks on former President Barack Obama. It was during the Obama administration, in 2014, that Washington pushed allies to expel Russia from the group of leading economies over its takeover of Crimea through a ‘popular referendum’. Trump this week attended G7 Summit held in Evian-les-Bains, France. “They should have kept the G8. You probably wouldn’t have the war with Russia and Ukraine if they did, but Obama didn’t want Putin there,” Trump said.

“It used to be the G8. (It) would have been much better if they kept that that way,” he added. Again, this is not the first time he’s articulated this view: Trump has expressed this position before — in June 2025, he made a similar statement, blaming Obama and former Canadian Prime Minister Trudeau for Russia’s exclusion from the G8. He’s long attacked Biden and the Democrats for setting the conditions for the war to start. But beginning a year ago he also started basically blaming everyone – from Zelensky to Putin to Biden.

“That’s a war that should have never been allowed to start and Biden could have stopped it and Zelensky could have stopped it and Putin should have never started it,” Trump said last year. “Everybody is to blame.” nTrump added at the time: “If Biden were competent and if Zelensky were competent, and I don’t know that he is, we had a rough session with this guy — he just kept asking for more and more.” As for Putin, he has seemed to welcome this repeat rhetoric from Trump stating that Russia should belong to the G7/G8. Without doubt, Moscow would welcome an invitation back in.Among Russia’s conditions for final peace settlement in Ukraine, a prospect which still seems a long way off, would be the lifting of US and EU sanctions, and readmittance to the global economy.

Read more …

The ungovernable UK pushes war elsewhere.

• Zelensky Threatens To Attack Belarus (RT)

Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky has issued an ultimatum to Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko, threatening him with military action if Belarus fails to dismantle the air defense radar array along its southern border, just days after a deadly Ukrainian drone strike on a bus carrying a children’s soccer team from the country. Earlier this week, Lukashenko said that those seeking to drag his nation into the conflict “will have to pay dearly for that,” demanding answers from Kiev regarding the strike on the bus and other “provocations.” The attack in Russia’s Bryansk Region left six children injured and killed the wife of a Belarusian school soccer team coach who was accompanying the young athletes to a Russian seaside resort.


Kiev has denied responsibility, while Zelensky claimed that it was Lukashenko who must “be honest” and prove Minsk’s peaceful intentions by removing air defenses and relay transmitters along the border with Ukraine. “I think one week would be enough for him to accomplish this,” the Ukrainian leader stated at a press conference in Kiev on Friday. “If he does not do it, we will.” Lukashenko has repeatedly said that Belarus has no intention of engaging in a war against any nation and “is not threatening anyone.” Zelensky, however, stated that there was “no need for unnecessary words,” and issued another veiled threat against the Belarusian oil refining industry.

“Just like his, for example, oil refining industry,” Zelensky said, claiming that Minsk is one of Russia’s “main” suppliers of petroleum products. “Can this be stopped? I am sure that it is within his power.”Belarus, a close Russian ally, has largely stayed out of the conflict since 2022, while calling on Moscow and Kiev to engage in dialogue and expressing its readiness to contribute to a diplomatic resolution. In September 2025, Lukashenko stated that he was ready to meet Zelensky personally to discuss possible compromises, but the Ukrainian leader rejected the offer.

In November, Minsk released 31 Ukrainian citizens from detention in a “goodwill gesture” at the request of Kiev and US President Donald Trump, who was also seeking to mediate the conflict.Over the past few weeks, Zelensky has been ramping up his rhetoric about an allegedly growing threat posed by Belarus – and threatened it with a preemptive strike. Earlier this year, the commander of Ukraine’s Unmanned Systems Forces warned that Kiev had already identified some 500 potential military and logistical targets across the country.

Read more …

Explains a bit better why Hersh’s story is the right one. It’s f**king difficult.

• The Nord Stream Narrative Explosion: Why You’ve Only Read Half The Story (RT)

The Nord Stream saga has taken a turn for the absurd, with a new book claiming that the star saboteur who blew up the gas pipelines was a Ukrainian erotic model-turned-deep sea diver. This detail is the latest addition to an ever-shifting story – while one key coincidence has completely flown under the radar. nPublished on June 19, ‘The Nord Stream Conspiracy: The Greatest Sabotage in History’ promises an inside look at the operation that destroyed the Nord Stream lines. Author Bojan Pancevski doesn’t quibble with the ‘official’ story circulated by the German media – that a Ukrainian commando unit carried out the attack, but adds some pulp-fiction flourish to the tale.


Pancevski claims that a former erotic model identified only as ‘Freya’ was “the bravest diver in the whole group,” without whose experience diving to depths of 100 meters the operation could not have been pulled off. Another of the divers was sick with Covid-19, but Pancevski nevertheless claims he carried out the kind of dive that has killed experienced military frogmen before. After the Ukraine conflict escalated in 2022, ‘Freya’, a Ukrainian who posed naked for soft-porn magazines before turning to diving, apparently “contacted a dubious intelligence unit through her diving colleagues,” and volunteered her services. Asked if she would be willing to take part in the costliest act of industrial sabotage in history, ‘Freya’ supposedly replied “where do I sign.”

Most of Pancevski’s claims cite Ukrainian intelligence sources, with his imagination filling in the gaps (Pancevski insists that the alleged saboteurs inherited their appetite for risk from the Zaporozhian cossacks of the 15th century). Marketed by its publisher as “compelling as a spy thriller,” the book is, according to a New York Times review, pitched “a little too eagerly in the direction of Hollywood.”

Although the story plumbs the depths of 1960s spy-caper silliness, it is no more far-fetched than the official narrative to date. In the most recent retelling of the operation, Der Spiegel claimed in February that a “Ukrainian secret commando unit” approached the CIA in spring 2022 with plans to blow up the four individual gas pipelines that make up the Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2 connectors. Der Spiegel’s Ukrainian sources told the outlet that the CIA “liked the plan,” shared technical data on the pipelines, and was even willing to finance the operation, until it abruptly withdrew its support in early summer.

The Ukrainians, or so the story goes, went ahead and blew up the pipelines without American permission, using a rented yacht to transport the explosives to the blast sites. The latest report is unlikely to raise any eyebrows in Moscow. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has dismissed the entire premise of a small team of Ukrainians pulling off an operation beyond the capability of most state militaries as “ridiculous.” To understand just how ridiculous the German story is, it’s necessary to jump back to 2022.

A junction in the story
On September 26, 2022, a seismometer on the Danish island of Bornholm detected two spikes consistent with underwater explosions – one just after 2am, and another just after 7pm. Danish and Swedish authorities then determined that both Nord Stream 1 lines had been destroyed and one Nord Stream 2 line damaged roughly 60 km northeast of Bornholm, while an explosion around 25 km southeast of the island had destroyed the other Nord Stream 2 line.

As images of bubbling gas leaks hit international media, a separate story went almost entirely unreported: less than 24 hours after the second round of blasts, Poland and Norway celebrated the opening of the Baltic Pipe, a gas pipeline transiting Norwegian gas to Poland via Denmark, passing over Nord Stream just south of Bornholm.

Built between 2020 and 2022, the Baltic Pipe joins the larger Norway-Netherlands Europipe II in the North Sea. It allows 10 billion cubic meters of natural gas to reach Poland every year – less than a tenth of Nord Stream’s capacity, but enough to cover two-thirds of Poland’s total imports in 2024. Poland sells some of this gas on to other EU countries, which after the destruction of Nord Stream were guaranteed to need a new source for the foreseeable future.

[..] Means:
The Nord Stream pipelines sat on the seabed at a depth of between 80 and 110 meters. At this depth, divers must breathe hypoxic Trimix gas, carry around 90 kg of equipment, and spend (very roughly) 90 minutes decompressing on the way up for every two minutes spent on the seabed. Furthermore, a single diver or pair of divers would rarely attempt more than one of these dives in a single day, meaning the crew of the yacht – described in one report as “not the vessel anyone would choose” for such a mission – would have had to remain at sea amid active military exercises for days on end.

RT spoke to a scuba diving expert who said it was “not impossible, but highly unlikely” that a small team of divers could pull off such an operation. Even 50-meter dives can kill the most experienced military divers, but the divers of the US Navy’s Diving and Salvage Center in Florida possess the equipment and the know-how to carry out engineering operations at this depth. The CIA recruited these divers, commandeered a Norwegian mine-hunting vessel, and planted shaped explosive charges on the pipelines in June 2022, Hersh’s source claimed.

{..] Opportunity:
Planting each charge was an hours-long endeavor, and the presence of military divers wouldn’t go unnoticed, unless they had an excuse to be in the area. NATO’s BALTOPS exercises gave the CIA the cover it needed. Running from June 5 to June 17, the BALTOPS drills involved 14 NATO states, and included US-led experiments with mine-hunting drones and deep-sea communications technology in the Baltic Sea.

Hersh predicted that American and German intelligence agencies would soon come up with an alternate story and feed it to friendly media outlets. In April 2023, The New York Times, Die Zeit, and Der Spiegel published the first versions of this tale.

Read more …

“Tesla was the nation’s largest EV auto seller at the time, and 100 percent of its vehicles were fully electric. Yet Musk and his company were left off the Biden team’s guest list.”:

• Elon Musk vs. the Democrats: Outcomes vs. Process (Soukup)

Years ago, when my oldest son was a Boy Scout, he was asked to write a report/make a presentation on a modern American “hero.” He chose Elon Musk, and I, of course, rolled my eyes so hard they nearly popped out of my head. I knew Musk was a successful businessman, but I also knew that he was both an advocate for and a seasoned manipulator of Big Government. Tesla, for example, received a $465 million Department of Energy loan in 2010 under the Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing program, a Big Government scheme to encourage private companies to advance Big Government priorities (namely, fighting Climate Change by reducing carbon emissions).


Likewise, Tesla was, at least at the time, commercially viable only because of the more than $1 billion ($7,500/vehicle) in federal EV tax credits claimed by its buyers. Without government greasing the proverbial wheels a bit, Tesla would have struggled to get the literal wheels rolling out the sales floor doors. Moreover, Musk publicly acknowledged that he voted for Obama and presented himself as part of the “green” business revolution, men and women who could and would “do well by doing good.”

My, how things change.

Just a short decade later, Elon Musk is, indeed, regarded as a genuine hero by most on the American political Right—and by anyone who favors free enterprise—while he is loathed and actively derided by his former friends and allies on the Left. Especially this past week, after the SpaceX IPO made him the world’s first trillionaire, the Democrats and other leftists who once loved him, partnered with him, and sang his praises loudly have shown nothing but contempt for him and hatred for his inarguable business success. As the controversial Democratic Senate nominee from Maine, Graham Platner, ominously put it, “Elon Musk just became the world’s first trillionaire. Let’s make sure he’s also the last.”

How, exactly, did we get here? The biggest part of the story is Musk’s own political evolution, which proceeded slowly, in stages, but was accelerated at a handful of inflection points. Of these inflection points, two stand out among the others.

The first of these took place during President Biden’s first year in office. Biden and his administration were knee-deep in pushing a new, far more aggressive climate agenda. On his first day in office, Biden issued 17 executive orders, several of which addressed climate change and other environmental matters. Most notably, he signed an order to reinstate the nation’s participation in the Paris Accords, thereby placing a policy-making emphasis on electrification and decarbonization. A big part of that effort—as would be evinced in the “Inflation Reduction Act” passed the following year—was pushing the purchase of electric vehicles.

To that end, on August 4, 2021, Biden hosted an EV “summit” at the White House. He invited three EV makers—General Motors, Ford, and Stellantis—to watch him sign another executive order, this one mandating that half of all new vehicles sold in the United States by 2030 be EVs. Of the three, GM had the largest percentage of its sales derived from fully electric vehicles—1.5 percent. Ford sat at 1.3 percent, and Stellantis didn’t even have an electric vehicle for sale in the American market. Meanwhile, Tesla was the nation’s largest EV auto seller at the time, and 100 percent of its vehicles were fully electric. Yet Musk and his company were left off the Biden team’s guest list.

What GM, Ford, and Stellantis did have, of course, was the support of the United Auto Workers Union. In fact, the three also just happened to be the largest UAW employers. Tesla, by contrast, had long fought the unionization of its factories and had been embroiled in a rather ugly dispute with the UAW. In response to the snub, Musk vented a bit, tweeting: Biden held this EV summit. Didn’t invite Tesla. Invited GM, Ford, Chrysler, and UAW. EV summit at the White House, didn’t mention Tesla once and praised GM and Ford for leading the EV revolution. Doesn’t it sound a little bias? It’s not the friendliest of administrations. Seems to be controlled by the unions.

Just under a year later, Musk reached the second inflection point, which also turned out to be his breaking point. In May 2022, the S&P 500 ESG Index conducted its annual rebalancing. And when it did, it removed Tesla. ESG stands for “environmental, social, and governance” investing, a strategy that purports to push corporations to address issues beyond traditional profits and losses, focusing on the broader societal impacts of their operations. I wrote a whole book about ESG (The Dictatorship of Woke Capital) in which I made the case that its flaws are numerous and disqualifying. One of the most significant of these is that ESG has no set definition. It means whatever its practitioners decide it means in the moment, based on little more than preference and convenience. And this is precisely where the S&P’s index ran into problems with Tesla.

By any objective measure, Tesla should have been a mainstay of any investment strategy focused on environmental benefits. It was and is a pioneer in carbon reduction strategies in the personal transportation market. What could be more environmentally friendly than that? The S&P, however, objected to Tesla’s procedural strategies, or lack thereof. It argued that Tesla didn’t have a published “low-carbon strategy,” or verifiable “codes of conduct.” It noted that the automaker had been accused of racial discrimination and didn’t do a great job of handling a National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA) investigation. In short, the ESG index tossed the innovator in “E” technology off its list of acceptable companies because it valued the process of the ESG strategy more than it did the outcomes.

Read more …

What?

• Is the iPhone Birth Control? (AmG)

When I call you up, your line’s engaged


have had enough, so act your age

We have lost the time that was so hard to find

And I will lose my mind

If you won’t see me . . .

Time after time

You refuse to even listen

I wouldn’t mind

If I knew what I was missing

—The Beatles, “You Won’t See Me”

As one heads into senescence, the milestones begin to fade in the rearview mirror. Yet every now and again, something jars the memory to refocus your recognition of such milestones and on how time has truly flown. Recently, I was reminded that nearly an entire generation of Americans has been born after the introduction of the iPhone in 2007. As a Gen Xer born before the introduction of the answering machine, I felt the weight of my sixty years, along with a gnawing anxiety about the future.

No, not because I won’t be around all that much longer. Despite the myths of the ubiquitous cult of youth promoted by our callow commercial culture, the increasing aches and pains accompanying my journey into old age are an insistent reminder that no one lives forever. Rather, my concern is how few Americans will be born to replace me and the other older members of our aging nation. As reported by Elise Winland in Zeale News, a new study suggests the 2007 introduction of the iPhone has played a significant role in the declining U.S. fertility rate.

Written by Caitlin K. Myers and Ezekiel Hooper and issued by the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER), the title of the working paper says it all: “Is the iPhone Birth Control? Causal Evidence from AT&T’s 2007–2011 Carrier Monopoly.” The study’s methodology is straightforward, as are its implications for our nation. As succinctly explained by Ms. Winland: “The paper draws on a natural experiment created by Apple’s exclusive deal with AT&T. When the iPhone launched in June 2007, it was available only on AT&T’s network until February 2011, giving researchers a way to compare areas with different levels of early iPhone access.”

While this deal was fortuitous for the researchers, the consequences were disastrous for the nation’s birth rate. According to Myers and Hooper: The diffusion of the iPhone deepened the decline in births among women under 30 while suppressing the rise in births among older women. Overall, the diffusion of the iPhone explains 33–52% of the decline in the general fertility rate among women aged 15–44. National-survey evidence on time use and sexual behavior is consistent with the iPhone reducing in-person interactions, increasing pornography use, and reducing sexual frequency.

Importantly, Myers and Hooper are not asserting that the iPhone is the sole cause of the steep decline in America’s birth rate, which they cite as having dropped by 22 percent since 2007, again, the year of the iPhone’s introduction. For, as Winland notes, the researchers believe the nation’s record low birth rate of 53.1 births per 1,000 women ages 15 to 44 “cannot be fully explained by the common explanations such as the Great Recession, increased access to contraception, rising housing and childcare costs, and delayed marriage.”

The researchers do argue that “studies imply that access to the iPhone reduced births by 4.5–8.0% at ages 15–19 and 3.2–6.6% at ages 20–24, with statistically significant but smaller declines among older cohorts.” (It is worth noting that the iPhone had a salubrious impact on reducing teen pregnancies; however, the enduring detrimental effects stemming from the loss of social interaction and its accompanying skills will be carried into the future by today’s teens.)

Anyone with a cursory acquaintance with Marshall McLuhan’s work will see his dictum, “the medium is the message,” at work here. Every new technology affects human beings, both in how they interact with that technology and in how they subsequently interact—or fail to interact—with other people by using it.

The math—specifically subtraction—is elementary: by spending more time in your virtual cocoon, you have less time for interacting with real human beings. One must therefore consider how much of the iPhone’s contribution to the birth dearth stems from the technology’s unconscious effects on its users. Indeed, unlike, say, birth control or a career choice, the iPhone is not being used deliberately to delay or prevent pregnancy. Rather, the birth dearth is exacerbated because the iPhone user is more rapt with the device and the stimulation it provides than by another person. After all, there are only so many hours in the day—and night.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/MrJohnJnr/status/2067995870952399138?s=20

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle June 20 2026

Jun 202026
 
 June 20, 2026  Posted by at 10:02 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , ,  14 Responses »


Edgar Degas In front of the mirror 1889


• Israel, Hezbollah Agree To Ceasefire (JTN)
• Trump Made A Deal Out Of ‘Desperation’ – Iranian Supreme Leader (RT)
• America Lost The Iran War, But Americans Are Sold A Victory (Scott Ritter)
• Is California Reaching Critical Mass? (Victor Davis Hanson)
• DNI Tulsi Gabbard: Anthony Fauci Manipulated Intelligence and Lied to Congress (CTH)
• Gabbard Drops Fauci COVID-19 Receipts On Last Day (ZH)
• Tulsi Gabbard Drops Bombshell Documents on Her Way Out (Margolis)
• What AI Is and Is Not (Charles Hugh Smith)
• Handlers Abandon a Confused Joe Biden on Stage At Obama Center (Margolis)
• Appeals Court Allows Ohio to Restrict Children’s Use of Social Media (ET)
• Give Peace a Chance (Not?) (James Howard Kunstler)
• Why Aren’t All Brits Hanging from Lamp Posts? (Paul Craig Roberts)
• Mamdani To Remake NYC Congressional Delegation In His Socialist Image (JTN)

 


 

https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/2067655440201027785?s=20 https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2067685591114735629?s=20 https://twitter.com/MrWhiplash_/status/2067600719742443786?s=20

 


 


It will take some time.

• Israel, Hezbollah Agree To Ceasefire (JTN)

Israel and Hezbollah reportedly agreed Friday to renew their ceasefire, to end their fighting in southern Lebanon Israel and Hezbollah reportedly agreed Friday to renew their ceasefire to end their fighting in southern Lebanon and help the US and Iran reach a broader deal to end their roughly four-month-long war. CBS News is reporting the ceasefire, based on what it said was information from three diplomats briefed on the matter. The ceasefire follows renewed fighting overnight between Israel and Hezbollah.


The United States and Iran recently entered into a so-called memorandum of understanding to end their war. President Donald Trump signed the agreement Wednesday, and the sides have 60 days to reach a final agreement, according to the memorandum. However, Israel attacking Iran proxy Hezbollah in southern Lebanon is complicating matters. Trump, and on Friday, Vice President JD Vance, sharply criticized Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for the attacks.

Read more …

RT has a document ostensibly signed by Khameini. But no proof of that.

And what he is supposed to have said does not raise much confidence, Sounds more like the Guard.

• Trump Made A Deal Out Of ‘Desperation’ – Iranian Supreme Leader (RT)

US President Donald Trump pushed for a memorandum of understanding with Iran because he found himself in a dire situation, the Islamic Republic’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei, has said. The 14-point document was signed remotely by Trump and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian late on Wednesday, and entered force with immediate effect, according to Pakistani mediators. Tehran previously said that the MOU envisages a series of concessions by Washington, including the lifting of the US naval blockade on Iran, sanctions waivers for Tehran’s oil exports, access to frozen Iranian funds, and a US-backed economic reconstruction plan to the tune of at least $300 billion.


On Thursday, Khamenei commented on the signing of the agreement, stressing in a statement that it was “the US president who – out of desperation – resorted to various means to bring about this outcome.” Fuel prices in the US went beyond $4 per gallon after Iran responded to the American-Israeli attack in late February by closing the Strait of Hormuz, while Trump’s approval ratings plummeted to a record low of 33%. Tehran vowed to reopen the key waterway, accounting for some 20% global crude trade, under the MOU. Khamenei noted that he initially had “a different view” regarding the need for diplomacy with Washington, but “granted permission” for the deal to go ahead after Pezeshkian assured him that he will be able to safeguard Tehran’s interests during future talks.

The MOU launches a 60-day negotiation period, during which Washington and Tehran are expected to discuss Iran’s nuclear program. According to the supreme leader, Pezeshkian also “stated explicitly that if the American side seeks excessive demands, they [Tehran’s negotiators] will not submit to them.”“From this moment, we, the proud nation [of Iran], and I, your humble servant, will await the fulfillment of the conditions that have been stated,” Khamenei wrote.Iran’s top negotiator, Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf, praised the supreme leader’s “wise and path-clearing message,” saying on Friday that by signing the MOU with Washington, it made clear that Tehran “only reached the beginning of a difficult and winding path” towards settling the conflict.

Trump had earlier slammed critics of the MOU, who claimed that it contained too many concessions to Iran, as being “jealous, bad people or stupid.” He also warned that if Tehran doesn’t honor its obligations under the deal, “we’ll probably go back to bombing them until they honor it.” Russia welcomed the signing of the MOU, saying “it is highly important that all parties involved in the armed conflict… do not allow a renewed dangerous escalation” and expressing hope that traffic through the Strait of Hormuz would return to its pre-war levels, decreasing the volatility of global oil and food markets.

Read more …

He does not show that, or how, they lost. He jut says they did. “Americans Are Sold A Loss.”

• America Lost The Iran War, But Americans Are Sold A Victory (Scott Ritter)

The US-Iran War is officially over. After months of back-and-forth negotiations, a finalized Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) has been signed by US President Donald Trump and his Iranian counterpart Masoud Pezeshkian, the fighting stopped, and shipping will resume at Iranian ports and through the Strait of Hormuz. It is this last part that deserves more attention, because the entire focus of the American effort during the negotiation period boiled down to getting oil flowing freely once again through this choke point. As James Carvelle famously noted during former US President Bill Clinton’s 1992 election, “It’s the economy, stupid.”


The minutia of foreign policy can drive those elites in power, but to remain in power they need the support of the people on election day, and to get that support they need to attend to affairs of the wallet. It’s the economy, stupid. The Israeli-driven military misadventure has ended in a strategic defeat for the United States. The inescapable irony is that the principle negotiating position of the US – the opening of the Strait of Hormuz – existed only because of this war. Before the US and Israel committed their combined act of perfidy back in February of this year, the Strait of Hormuz was open to all shipping, and there were no income-generating transit fees.

The nuclear issue, on which so much emphasis was placed at the start of this war, has evaporated, replaced by token references to common sense. The US blockade is likewise dissipating. The MOU calls for it to be totally lifted in 30 days, along with the opening of the Strait of Hormuz. Because Trump needs the oil to flow. Now. Because it’s the economy, stupid. This is the ‘Hormuz Effect’, the reality attached to the fact that Iran’s control of this strategic waterway has empowered it like no nuclear weapon ever could. Iran will forever be positioned to squeeze the economic life out of the world. And there is nothing the US military can do about it.

While the rest of the world ponders the geopolitical consequences of American (and Israeli) imperial overreach, the resumption of the flow of oil out of the Persian Gulf is being touted as a masterstroke of US diplomacy, the epitome of presidential leadership, and the result of American grit, determination and military prowess. Of course, all this is being done to get the American economy (and that of the world, since everything is interconnected these days) back on track, so that by September some impressive economic growth and prosperity statistics can be generated for an American audience unable and/or unwilling to ask the obvious questions, such as how is the return to an economic ‘normal’ that existed before Trump ordered the US military to attack Iran considered good policy?

Left unspoken will be the real economic costs of this war – the depletion of the US arsenal of precision-guided munitions, and the excessive replacement costs the US taxpayer will be called upon to bear. The billions of dollars in destroyed and damaged infrastructure throughout the Middle East. And the lives lost – those of American servicemembers (a relatively small number), and those of the Iranian people (thousands, including the 165 children murdered while attending school in Minab). There is no time for morality and common sense amongst the American people. They have money to spend – gas prices are down, and there is a consumer-driven life that must be led. Because it’s the economy, stupid.

This is the ‘Hormuz Effect’: the deliberate dumbing-down of a society driven more by the need to sustain an artificial cocoon of comfort than the necessity of building a foundation of moral and legal responsibility. Because with responsibility comes the need for accountability, and no American will be called to account for the embarrassing defeat the US has suffered because of this war. The world will now wrestle with the questions of how the US fits into a changing world order, and any President worth his salt would do the same. But this would require the ability to engage in constructive self-criticism.

Instead, the American population will be sold a non-existent victory while being unable to pick out the Strait of Hormuz on a map, let alone Minab. As long as the terms of the MOU hold, the American people may yet forget about the costs they have collectively paid for this Middle East debacle, and instead focus on the trickle of dollars diverted their way, as if this temporary thickening of the American wallet symbolizes the victory of a nation. The ‘Hormuz Effect’ is the ultimate bribe for a people who have lost all self-respect. A people willing to sweep the crimes committed in their names under a carpet of illusory economic well-being.

The ‘Hormuz Effect’ is the ultimate symbol of the decline of the American dream. Because it’s the economy, stupid.

Read more …

I liked this sentence: “Preferential admissions, along with racially segregated dorms and graduation ceremonies, continued under euphemisms and denials.”

• Is California Reaching Critical Mass? (Victor Davis Hanson)

By any measure, California is a failed state—and a national embarrassment. Taxes? It has the highest income and gas taxes in the nation. Roads? A Reason Foundation survey ranks it 49th among the states. Mass flight? Between 250,000 and 350,000 more Californians leave the state than move in each year. Housing, gas, insurance, and electricity prices? The highest in the continental U.S. Illegal aliens, the poor, the homeless, the foreign-born, and welfare recipients? The largest numbers in the U.S. Public K-12 schools? Test scores in the bottom quartile. Poverty? Twenty percent live below the poverty line. So, what happened to the nation’s most richly naturally endowed—and once best governed—state?


The Left took total control—after millions of the embattled middle class fled. Millions more impoverished immigrants, legal and illegal, took their place. Left-wing Silicon Valley spawned some of the wealthiest elite liberal enclaves in the world. The result was a neo-feudal society that was hardly democratic. Millions of subsidized poor compose the bottom. A beleaguered middle continues to shrink. An ultra-rich apparat of left-wing coastal professionals and investors rules from the top. As upper-bracket taxpayers fled, taxes rose on those who remained to fund expanding entitlements for newly arrived poor would-be residents. In turn, even more of the middle class left.

The remaining pyramidal economic structure ensured a Democratic monopoly—further entrenched by changing balloting laws, gerrymandering voting districts, vote harvesting, fueling public employee unions, and ignoring or undermining popular referenda. In 2014, Californians voted for Proposition 1, a $7.5 billion water bond designed to solve the state’s chronic water storage deficit. Included was $2.7 billion specifically designated for new reservoirs, as the last major reservoir had been built in 1980, when California had roughly half its current population.Despite the people’s vote, bureaucracies, elected officials, and green activists blocked all new reservoir construction.

Adding insult to injury, Governor Gavin Newsom instead used $250 million from the Proposition 1 fund to blow up four dams on the Klamath River. They had once provided storage, electrical generation, recreation, and flood control. Californians have twice voted in referenda (for Proposition 209 and against Proposition 16) to bar the use of racial preferences for contracting, admissions, and promotion in public institutions. nMost public universities simply ignored the law. They continued their “diversity” quotas under new names, relying on left-wing elected officials and judges to ignore again the will of the people.

Preferential admissions, along with racially segregated dorms and graduation ceremonies, continued under euphemisms and denials. “Theme” houses, “affinity” graduations, and “safe spaces” practice “affirmative” discrimination. California voters in 2008 passed Proposition 11 to stop political gerrymandering by creating a supposedly nonpartisan state redistricting commission of five Democrats, five Republicans, and four Independents. Two years later, the commission took over redrawing congressional districts as well. But Democratic lobbyists and lawyers sabotaged the goal of disinterested redistricting according to population and geography. Instead, racial preferences and the interests of the Democratic majority of incumbents prevailed to warp the intent of the voters.

Although Republicans usually achieved nearly 40 percent of the California vote in national elections, two decades later, there were only seven Republicans in the 52-person congressional delegation, or a mere 13 percent of the state’s representatives. But even that tiny contingent was considered too generous by the Left. Thus, in 2026, it will likely be further redistricted down to four or five seats.The balloting mess in the recent Los Angeles mayoral race further reminds the nation and the world just how dysfunctional and anti-democratic California has become. Democrats warp elections without the need for the old Chicago way of outright ballot theft or destruction. Instead, they do so in a “legal” manner by passing insane laws that ensure fraud and Democratic victories.

The winners in the strange jungle primaries—usually both Democrats—were not announced until a week after the polls closed. One of the eventual winners in the mayoral race, the socialist Nithya Raman, had already given her teary concession speech after coming in well back at third on election night.The Republican Spencer Pratt was comfortably ahead of her in second place on Election Day—only to lose, as expected, when large numbers of late ballots that broke roughly 90 percent Democratic were counted.mRemember, every registered voter is sent a mail-in ballot. If it is postmarked on election day, it can arrive at vote centers up to seven days after the election.

Read more …

Tulsi left yesterday, and according to Sundance, she’s not coming back. So here’s some elaborate attention. Question is, what is Congress going to do with what she left here?

• DNI Tulsi Gabbard: Anthony Fauci Manipulated Intelligence and Lied to Congress (CTH)

The central question remains, and unfortunately it is a question that cannot be answered except by dropping all pretenses. That question is: Was the SARS-CoV-2 release ‘accidental’ or done with ‘intent’.On her last day as Director of National Intelligence, and I am certain she will never return, what Tulsi Gabbard releases is alarming evidence the head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), Anthony Fauci, lied -repeatedly- to congress, the media and the American people.



CTH has long espoused that in the aftermath of the release, the SARS-CoV-2 response, how they reacted to it and all the control mitigation stuff, came from the Intelligence Community and Military. What DNI Gabbard released is evidence of exactly that aspect; the NIAID under Fauci worked directly with the U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC). Remember, with emphasis, this is ‘after action’ stuff.

This is post-COVID-release information about what took place within government after the virus was released upon all of us. The fact that Tulsi had to wait until her final day in office to make this statement, together with the fact that no one has been held to account, and the establishment’s desperate effort from blocking Acting DNI Bill Pulte from succeeding her, only reinforces the conclusion that the people who orchestrated this cover up remain firmly in charge and that part of this battle is far from over.

WASHINGTON D.C. — Before the COVID-19 pandemic, Anthony Fauci, as head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), provided millions in US taxpayer dollars to fund dangerous gain-of-function research on bat coronaviruses at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV)—work which is now widely viewed as the source of the unintentional lab leak that sparked the pandemic.

Today, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard is releasing never-before-seen communications and documents exposing how Fauci worked with politicized career leadership in the Intelligence Community (IC) to suppress the truth about his actions, the virus’ lab-leak origins, and his role in directing U.S. funding for this dangerous research that caused immeasurable harm and countless lost lives. These documents expose Fauci’s direct role in influencing and manipulating IC assessments on COVID-19, and how Fauci lied to Congress in 2024, when under oath he denied knowledge of or participation in discussions with intelligence officials about viral research.

“The COVID-19 pandemic caused tremendous hardship and pain for millions of our fellow Americans and for countless people around the world. After years of lies, censorship, and cover ups, the American people deserve transparency, truth, and accountability,” DNI Gabbard said. “The tactics used to hide the truth are straight from the deep state playbook: politicized self-serving leaders like Dr. Fauci covered up their own wrongdoing and abuses of power, manipulated intelligence, lied to Congress, and undermined a duly elected President by restricting his access to vital facts needed to keep the country safe. It’s time the American people learn the real story.”

The materials released today are a result of DNI Gabbard’s yearlong declassification review in support of President Trump’s maximum transparency mandate. During this process, ODNI officials gathered testimony from multiple IC whistleblowers who reported retaliation for challenging the IC’s manipulation of intelligence on the virus’ origins. This unveiled a clear pattern of suppressing dissent, silencing critics, and burying evidence that undermined IC integrity and disserved the American people.

Fauci’s close IC relationships enabled him to assume three key roles during the pandemic that shielded him from scrutiny as he wielded outsized influence.

Fauci funded risky coronavirus research linked to big pharma and the pursuit of “universal vaccines” worth trillions of dollars.

Fauci was the behind-the-scenes advisor who, with his hand-picked experts, pushed the IC to endorse a natural, animal origin to hide his dangerous research.

Fauci became the nation’s pandemic “pundit” and publicly pushed lies, disinformation, and censorship.

Read more …

“Fauci worked with politicized career leadership in the Intelligence Community (IC) to suppress the truth about his actions..”

• Gabbard Drops Fauci COVID-19 Receipts On Last Day (ZH)

Newly declassified documents released Thursday by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard show that a U.S. national laboratory assessed the COVID-19 lab-origin hypothesis as a serious possibility as early as May 2020, as well as evidence of U.S.-funded coronavirus research that included planning for spike-protein modifications, receptor-adaptation experiments, and testing in humanized mice in collaboration with researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The documents also prove that Anthony Fauci lied under oath.


The release, issued on Gabbard’s last day on the job, includes an eight-page May 27, 2020, assessment from Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory’s Z Program. That assessment concluded that “all of the necessary conditions for an accidental release of a laboratory-modified coronavirus – specifically a coronavirus adapted to recognize human cell receptors – were present at the Chinese Wuhan Institute of Virology in mid-to-late 2019.” It assigned equal weight to a laboratory-modification hypothesis and a natural-origin scenario.

Meanwhile, Recall that while the government was locking us down, Dr. Anthony Fauci and those in his orbit were actively fabricating a ‘wet market’ narrative that would conceal US research as a possible origin – despite his own advisors initially insisting that COVID-19 looked manmade. In his January 2024 transcribed interview, Fauci was asked about conversations concerning the same three topics – COVID origins, WIV, and EcoHealth. When asked about the CIA, he answered yes: he said he was briefed “once or twice” in a secure NIH facility and also recalled a briefing in a White House situation room.

The newly released documents then show a June 4, 2021 briefing involving CIA/WCP personnel, NSC officials, and Fauci, during which Fauci offered views on pangolin research, sick WIV researchers, single-lineage vs. multi-lineage evidence, and recommended scientists for the IC to contact. A separate CIA-context email says that same 40-minute secure video teleconfrenece involved CIA/WCPMC officials and that Fauci gave thoughts on the 4 May 2021 COVID-origin briefing and recommended U.S. scientists to consult.

So, he lied.

According to a statement released with the files, “Fauci worked with politicized career leadership in the Intelligence Community (IC) to suppress the truth about his actions, the virus’ lab-leak origins, and his role in directing U.S. funding for this dangerous research that caused immeasurable harm and countless lost lives. These documents expose Fauci’s direct role in influencing and manipulating IC assessments on COVID-19, and how Fauci lied to Congress in 2024, when under oath he denied knowledge of or participation in discussions with intelligence officials about viral research.”

U.S.-Funded Research and Planning for Coronavirus Manipulation
The files include the Year 5 progress report for EcoHealth Alliance’s NIH grant 5R01AI110964-05. Under Specific Aim 3, the project outlined plans to:

Sequence spike genes from bat coronaviruses.

Create mutants to assess how much further evolution would be needed for efficient use of human ACE2 or other receptors.

Conduct receptor-mutant pseudovirus binding assays.

Perform infection experiments in cell lines and humanized mice.

This research track overlaps with work described in the 2018 DEFUSE proposal, which involved EcoHealth Alliance, Peter Daszak, Ralph Baric of the University of North Carolina, and Shi Zhengli’s team at WIV. The proposal sought to create chimeric bat coronaviruses with enhanced human infectivity, including consideration of furin cleavage site insertion to improve lung-cell entry, and to test the resulting viruses in humanized mice originally developed in Baric’s lab.

A 2016 WIV paper included in the release describes a synthetic shuttle vector system for assembling large DNA fragments, with demonstrated capability up to 31 kilobases. The authors presented the method as a tool for “genome-scale DNA reconstruction,” a technique relevant to synthetic biology and virus engineering. Surveillance work under the same NIH grant reported that 9 of 1,497 rural residents in southern China (0.6%) were seropositive for bat SARS-related or HKU10 coronaviruses. And from leaked emails three years ago: Among other things, the NIH helped fund experiments at WIV that infected genetically engineered mice with “chimeric” hybrids of SARS-related bat coronaviruses in what some scientists have described as unacceptably risky research.

Read more …

”..how Fauci lied to Congress in 2024 .”

• Tulsi Gabbard Drops Bombshell Documents on Her Way Out (Margolis)

Tulsi Gabbard, on her final day as Director of National Intelligence, released a batch of never-before-seen communications and documents that tie Dr. Anthony Fauci directly to funding for dangerous gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, the same lab now widely believed to be the source of COVID-19. The release lands as part of President Trump’s push for what Gabbard calls a “maximum transparency mandate,” and it paints a picture of a bureaucrat who didn’t just fund risky research with your tax dollars; he allegedly worked the intelligence community like a puppet to cover up his role in it.


“Before the COVID pandemic, Dr. Fauci, as head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, provided millions in U.S. taxpayer dollars to fund dangerous gain of function research on bat coronaviruses at the Wuhan Institute of Virology,” Gabbard said in a video posted to X, “work which is now widely viewed as the source of the unintentional lab leak that sparked the pandemic.” That’s bad enough on its own. But according to Gabbard, Fauci didn’t stop at funding the research. He allegedly leaned on intelligence officials to manipulate their assessments and steer them away from the lab-leak theory entirely.

“These documents expose Fauci’s direct role in influencing and manipulating IC assessments on COVID 19 and how Fauci lied to Congress in 2024 when under oath, he denied knowledge of or participation in discussions with intelligence officials about viral research,” she continued. Gabbard laid out what she described as Fauci’s three-pronged scheme.

First, he funded the gain-of-function research connected to Big Pharma’s hunt for a universal vaccine, a market worth trillions. Second, he allegedly pressured handpicked “experts” to steer the intelligence community toward a natural-origin story, conveniently shifting attention away from the lab he helped bankroll. Third, he became, in Gabbard’s words, the nation’s “pandemic pundit,” using every media platform he could find to push his version of events while shutting down anyone who disagreed. But wait — it gets even uglier.

Whistleblowers told Gabbard’s office that analysts who dared question the official narrative paid a steep price. “A contractor was terminated just days after coming forward to ODNI as a whistleblower,” Gabbard said. Others who supported the lab leak theory were apparently told flat out that their careers depended on falling in line. “Those who advocated for the lab leak hypothesis or expressed dissenting views were reminded by their managers that leadership would determine which analysts would be promoted and which would not,” she said. The message, as Gabbard put it, was simple: Go along or be punished.

Senior officials reportedly went even further, stripping away the anonymity whistleblowers are legally entitled to and insisting that managers or attorneys sit in on meetings where complaints were being filed in a blatant attempt at intimidation. Gabbard didn’t hold back on what this all means. “The tactics that were used to hide the truth are straight from the deep state playbook,” she said. “Politicized, self-serving leaders like Dr. Fauci covered up their own wrongdoing and abuses of power, manipulated intelligence, lied to Congress, and undermined a duly elected president by restricting his access to the vital facts he needed to keep the country safe.”

Gabbard concluded, ”It’s time you know the truth.” Millions lost loved ones. Millions more lost jobs, businesses, and irreplaceable years of their children’s education, while being told to trust the experts and stop asking questions. The real scandal isn’t just what happened during the pandemic. It’s how many powerful people like Fauci spent years working to keep the public from finding out.

Read more …

I guess this is a work in progress. So far, I got nothing.

“.. or, When Electrocution of Innocents Becomes Profitable..”

• What AI Is and Is Not (Charles Hugh Smith)

It behooves us to be clear on what AI is and is not, as the confusion of the two is the source of both the giddy hype and the opaque risks. Whether we admit it or not, we are collectively making an epoch-changing bet that AI is fantastic, unstoppable Progress with a capital P so large it blots out the sky. Like all bets, this bet is risky, and if it fails we will all pay the price in capital mis-allocated and promises shattered. It behooves us, then, to be clear on what AI is and is not, as the confusion of the two is the source of both the giddy hype and the opaque risks. I am prompted to address this by an insightful essay submitted by longtime correspondent Simons Chase, who is both an AI builder/developer and supportive of my efforts to pin down what AI is and isn’t:


The Machine Is Made of Us: Pope Leo’s Encyclical, the Averaging of Language, and the Case for the Particular. “I build artificial intelligence for a living. I also think the Pope is mostly right. I want to explain why those two facts don’t cancel, and in doing so make a claim I believe is truer than the dread and truer than the hype: the machine is made of us. What we should fear is not that it is alien. It is that it is an average.

Trained on all of us, a model tends to speak as none of us. It moves toward the center of the distribution: the most probable next word, the safest phrasing, the generic competence that offends no one because it belongs to no one. This is the real face of the dehumanization the encyclical is reaching for. Not a hostile intelligence–a flattening one. The danger is not that the machine becomes too strange. It is that it makes everything, including us, a little more average. The particular voice, the earned turn of thought, the sentence only one person could have written–these live in the tail of the distribution, not its peak, and the tail is exactly what an averaging process erases first.

After all, a fast-food cheeseburger is nothing more than the average of our concept of food: the intersection of convenience, taste, and cost. It is right, and so utterly wrong, because in the long run it makes us metabolic donkeys, delivering a shortened, diseased life. Generic intelligence is the same bargain offered to the mind–the average of our language, plausible and cheap and frictionless, and over a long enough horizon just as wasting. A culture fed on the mean of its own thought gets the cognitive version of metabolic disease: fluent, abundant, and quietly losing the capacity for the particular. So the question becomes: is averaging the only thing this technology can do? It is not. And the whole of my work has been an argument against it. That averaging a probability distribution–i.e. AI–makes everything into Ultra-Processed Slop, is also addressed in this article:

What 370,000 College Essays Tell Us About A.I.’s Effects on Creativity:
As a researcher studying AI’s effects on education, I have concluded that these tools only superficially improve writing. The bigger and more alarming impact they have is to constrict our full range of thoughts and our ability to generate original and useful ideas–what we call creative thinking. This seems to be especially true for students. AI’s smooth sentences, elegant transitions and rich vocabulary give the illusion of expansive creativity and individuality. But the underlying ideas often converge into a few homogenized categories.

In one study, he and his team examined personal statements from more than 370,000 students, and found that after ChatGPT became available, their essays suddenly used diverse and colorful language, but lacked truly creative ideas. And the linguistic coverup worked; post-ChatGPT essays were rated as more ‘creative’ by human judges, even if the substance of the essays trod familiar territory. For the first time in human history, we have a technology that can generate words separately from the thoughts they represent. When a chatbot writes, it is predicting the next word that is most likely to make a ‘good’ sentence or essay, based on the text it’s been trained on.

We can now discern what AI is: a homogenizing, flattening probability distribution that implicitly claims eloquence is understanding and the words it has strung together represent thoughts and judgment, when they do no such thing: they are only strings of words selected as the most likely response to a prompt, a response that “rewards” the model generating the output. We can now discern what AI is not: AI isn’t “thinking,” “understanding” or “making judgments”: AI tools are engines of linguistic automation, not engines of understanding. The simulation is not the thing simulated. AI is not a “mind,” it is a probability distribution.

Read more …

Really, he was fine in his 4-year presidency.

• Handlers Abandon a Confused Joe Biden on Stage At Obama Center (Margolis)

Joe Biden seems determined to prove he was unfit for the presidency, and boy, did he do so again during the opening ceremony for Barack Obama’s presidential center. I hate that I’m even talking about the event, but Biden’s “Biden moment” is just impossible to ignore. Video from the ceremony shows Jill Biden physically leading her husband onto the stage, which tells you everything you need to know about where things stand for Ol’ Joe before a single word was spoken.


And yes, things got worse from there. As the ceremony wound down, Obama strutted around, playing air guitar to the music while Jill watched approvingly and then trailed him offstage. Joe Biden, meanwhile, was left standing by himself at the podium. He looked completely lost, like a nursing home patient who forgot where he was. He took off his glasses, stared blankly out at the crowd, and appeared to mouth, “Where’s my granddaughter?” That was the last thing viewers saw before the broadcast feed mysteriously cut out.

https://twitter.com/ImMeme0/status/2067774119920202018?s=20

We all watched Biden’s presidency unravel in real time and recognized what went down. The wandering. The confusion. The blank stare into the void after the cameras were supposed to have stopped rolling. This is the same man the Democrat Party insisted was sharp as a tack right up until the moment he wasn’t allowed to run for reelection anymore because he imploded on stage while trying to debate President Trump. And perhaps the worst thing is that Biden’s handler-in-chief, Jill, wasn’t anywhere to be found.

“Why does Jill look so aggravated? Like she’s surprised he got lost on stage?” New York Post columnist Miranda Devine asked on X. “As usual she shirked her duty of ensuring her husband wasn’t embarrassed in public. It’s despicable. Her access to the spotlight and VIP outings she adores is entirely due to him and she can’t be bothered to be a decent wife.” The Obama Center opening came the same day that The New Yorker published an interview with Hillary Clinton in which she said that Biden running again in 2024 “was a terrible mistake.”

“He made a terrible mistake,” Hillary said. “He made a terrible mistake for himself, his legacy, and for the country. He had said that he would not run again, and counterfactual narratives are always a bit tricky, but I believe that if he had kept to that plan, that he wasn’t going to run, that he was going to pass the torch to the next generation, we would have had a real contest. And very sadly I believe whoever emerged from that contest—whether it was the Vice-President or a governor or a senator or anybody else—would have beaten Donald Trump. I think it was a terrible miscalculation on the part of President Biden, but once he held on for as long as he did we were in a terrible dilemma.”

That narrative conveniently ignores that Hillary enthusiastically endorsed Biden’s 2023 reelection bid when it actually mattered, when she had every opportunity to say exactly what she’s saying today. She said nothing. She cheered him on. They all did.

Read more …

“..requiring parental consent for children to use social media platforms.”

• Appeals Court Allows Ohio to Restrict Children’s Use of Social Media (ET)

The panel concluded that the state law does not violate the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. A federal appeals court on Thursday allowed Ohio to enforce a law requiring social media companies to obtain parental consent before permitting children under 16 to access their platforms. The law, known as the Social Media Parental Notification Act, was passed by the state’s legislature in 2023 and took effect in January 2024. NetChoice—a trade group representing TikTok, Meta, and other major tech companies—later filed a lawsuit, alleging that the law was unconstitutional.


In April, U.S. District Judge Algenon Marbley ruled in NetChoice’s favor and permanently blocked Ohio from enforcing the law. The state subsequently appealed the ruling. In a 2–1 decision on June 18, a panel of the Sixth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the lower court ruling, finding that Ohio’s law does not violate the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Writing for the majority, Circuit Judge Eric Clay said the state law imposes only “a marginal burden” by requiring parental consent for children to use social media platforms.

“That requirement constitutes a marginal burden that precisely targets the multi-faceted problem that Ohio has identified: Children’s unsupervised assent to terms and conditions for use of platforms that take advantage of and harm them,” Clay said. “Parental consent will not always be narrowly tailored to the compelling interest in protecting minors’ well-being. It works here because the nature of the harm itself is that children’s unsupervised use of social media puts them at risk of the adverse effects of prolonged and unregulated exposure.”

Ohio Attorney General Andy Wilson praised the appeals court’s decision, calling it “a win for Ohio families.” Wilson said in a statement that the ruling would allow parents to supervise their children’s use of social media. “The court agreed that parents—not social media companies—should get a say in what kids see online. We have an obligation to keep our children safe, and today, the most dangerous place for our kids is the internet,” he stated. “This decision gives parents the tools to be involved and provide oversight.”

NetChoice said the appeals court’s decision will threaten the online privacy and constitutional rights of Ohioan residents. The group suggested that it intends to continue the legal challenge. “By requiring parents to override the government’s determination, Ohio has violated bedrock First Amendment principles,” Paul Taske, director of the NetChoice Litigation Center, said in a statement. “We are currently reviewing our options on how best to move forward.”

NetChoice last year won court rulings blocking a similar social media parental consent law in Arkansas and a children’s digital privacy law in California. Australia became the first country last December to impose a ban on social media for children under 16 amid concerns about the online safety risks to the nation’s youth. Several countries have since followed suit or are weighing similar social media restrictions over concerns about the platforms’ impact on children’s mental health. Among those countries are the UK, Austria, Denmark, France, Indonesia, and Malaysia.

Read more …

“I’m telling you: the Lebanon Loophole was always baked in. Iran can think whatever it wants and go pound sand.” James Lindsay on X

• Give Peace a Chance (Not?) (James Howard Kunstler)

Consider that the many persons and parties yelling that “Iran won the war” have exceedingly cynical interests in painting President Donald Trump as a loser. His American enemies, lodged mainly in the party of “Our Democracy,” are not just striving to get back into power, but to stay out of prison, and perhaps off the gibbet, if treason ends up on the docket. (See: Gabbard Releases Documents on Fauci’s Alleged Role in Wuhan Lab Research Linked to COVID.)


The president’s globalist foes, lodged in the EU and London, resent his unwillingness to join their scheme for a big war against Russia — and are aggrieved about much else in matters of trade, international banking, and energy resources. The ink was hardly dry on the US / Iran Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) when NATO arrantly assisted its proxy, Ukraine, in an audacious drone attack on Moscow. Brussels also stealthily opened “accession talks” for Ukraine and Moldova to enter the EU. More bear-poking. . . .

Just what is the MOU? It’s not a peace settlement. It’s a sixty-day window to negotiate a settlement within clearly laid-out, agreed-upon parameters. You might suppose there’s a fair chance Iran is just jerking the US around. But then, Mr. Trump noted, “. . . if they don’t behave, we’ll go right back to dropping bombs right smack in the middle of their head, okay? ‘Cause they’ve misbehaved for 47 years.”

Admittedly, an indelicate remark, yet with unmistakable intent: Jerk us around at your peril. Of course, Mr. Trump has also stated clearly that he would rue having to punish the ordinary Iranian people for the misdeeds of the IRGC maniacs who hold them captive. But also note that we have exquisite satellite intel on all their remaining missile and drone installation. Check out this stunningly detailed document: Atlas of Iran’s Missile Cities (thanks to Jim Shea, who sent it around). We know where everything is. Beyond those targets, if necessary, and alas, there are the bridges and power plants, which would surely cause the Iranian people to suffer. FAFO.

In short, the IRGC leadership have sixty days to get their minds right. On the positive side, the MOU offers them some powerful inducements to play nice in the way of economic assistance, a doorway to normal relations with the rest of the world, a chance to thrive. The question is whether any of that can overcome the IRGC’s apocalyptic “Twelfth Imam” death- wish jihad ideology — which requires the annihilation of Israel.

The MOU requires a ceasefire in Lebanon, where Israel and Hezbollah have faced-off for decades. Mr. Trump is very put-out with Prime Minister Netanyahu for continuing to return fire “disproportionately” on Hezbollah’s provocations. This has led to great consternation and antipathy in the US, which is already marinated in anti-Israel rancor. You might ask, though: if America is obliged to rein-in Israel, is Hezbollah’s long-time sponsor, Iran, not equally obliged to curb Hezbollah’s antics? And you might also ask: if Iran’s money to Hezbollah has been cut off, who is still funding them? Possibly the EU or London? (Just sayin’.)

Mr. Trump’s surprising work-around for that was to suggest that the Syrians go into Lebanon and mop up the floor with Hezbollah. Interesting. Get an Islamic Middle Eastern country to help clean up that mess? Mr. Trump commended Syria’s leader Ahmed al-Sharaa, saying, “He’s done an amazing job of pulling it together. . . . I suggested to Israel to let Syria take care of Hezbollah, because to be honest with you, I think they’d do a better job of doing it . . . . If Israel can’t do the job without killing everyone else, he’ll do the job. Syria will do the job.”

Read more …

“Enoch Powell predicted in the 1960s that the consequence of government-imposed multiculturalism would be “rivers of blood.”

• Why Aren’t All Brits Hanging from Lamp Posts? (Paul Craig Roberts)

A breaking news report followed by comment from PCR


A British Member of Parliament has just made available a report on Britain’s immigrant-invader rape gangs. Here’s what’s in the report the mainstream media is ignoring: “Rupert Lowe’s investigation implicates Keir Starmer’s government in the mass victimization of white girls by Pakistani men. “At least 250,000 British girls suffered sickening sexual abuse by Pakistani gangs, who were enabled by police, social workers, and even Prime Minister Keir Starmer, to commit “child rape on an industrial scale,” British MP Rupert Lowe’s ‘Rape Gang Report’ has detailed.

“Published on Tuesday [June 16], the 218-page report makes for sobering reading. It details the decades-long abuse of hundreds of thousands of white British girls – and smaller numbers of white boys and Sikh girls – by organized Pakistani ‘grooming gangs’ in 149 districts of the UK. ” “Witness testimony describes the most depraved acts of sexual violence – including preteen girls raped hundreds of times, threatened with death, and sodomized by dogs – happening in plain sight of the authorities tasked with its prevention.”

Comment by PCR

The Joys of Multiculturalism that the Despicable White Liberals Have Brought to White Ethnicities

White Governments Represent Immigrant-invaders, Not their Ethnic Citizens. The British government is the most anti-white of all governments. Here is my account of how this came about:

For a number of decades Western universities have engaged not in education but in indoctrination of students. Attacks on Western civilization have long been institutionalized in universities. Generations of students have been indoctrinated that white ethnicities are racist exploiters who have oppressed peoples of color. The indoctrination has been successful to the extent that in the US, for example, white heterosexual males have been second class citizens with unequal rights since EEOC official Alfred Blumrosen ignored the statutory language of the 1964 Civil Rights Act and imposed race, gender and sexual preference quotas that disadvantaged white heterosexual men.

Feminists saw an opportunity and jumped in. As ideological feminists are essentially white women, they went after white men, not after immigrant-invaders, and the feminists’ attack further weakened the position of white ethnicities already undermined by universities. With white guilt assimilated into the population, it was easy for governments, themselves increasingly anti-white, to open the borders of white ethnic nations to a mass influx of immigrant-invaders who have firmly established themselves in every Western country.

One consequence has been the increasing removal throughout the Western world of white men from leadership positions. In the US corporate advertising has deep-sixed white families from advertisements and substituted multi-ethnic families. The very image of a white society is being erased. In England for the past 30 years there was no one in the government, the media, the police, the universities who heard the cries for help from parents whose children were repeatedly raped by immigrant-invader rape gangs and even subjected to being sodomized by dogs.

What Western universities have achieved is the destruction of the self-confidence of ethnic whites and the undermining of their belief system. White ethnics have lost confidence in public and private institutions. White ethnics throughout Western countries have been isolated from societal protection, and so far they have lacked the will to take their defense into their own hands. Enoch Powell predicted in the 1960s that the consequence of government-imposed multiculturalism would be “rivers of blood.” Perhaps the more likely consequence will be the submission of a weak-willed and abandoned people to subservience to immigrant-invaders who will expunge Western civilization from Earth.

Addendum:

British prime minister Keir Starmer is the excrement that released hardened criminals from prison in order to make room for people prosecuted for their social media tweets. Clearly for Starmer suppressing free speech–especially about immigrant-invaders and Israel–is far more important than suppressing crime. Sodom & Gomorrah-multi-cultural Starmer is very partial to pedophiles. He has let 13,000 of them off with a warning letter. According to testimony in Lowe’s report, British police have at times handed British girls who escaped from the rape gangs back to the gangs, in one case telling them to “have fun with her.”

Read more …

You can’t make New York a socialist city.

• Mamdani To Remake NYC Congressional Delegation In His Socialist Image (JTN)

New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani is betting he can swing three city elections to cement his political legacy at the expense of the local Democratic establishment. New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani is quietly seeking to remake the city’s congressional delegation in his image, and cement his power bloc within the Democratic Party while he still enjoys popularity in the city. The democratic socialist Mamdani has endorsed three ideologically aligned candidates — all considered “far left” by traditional Democrats — seeking to expand his influence in the city where he was elected as mayor last November.


In particular, Mamdani has endorsed three ideologically aligned candidates seeking to unseat current members of the Democratic caucus, two-term Rep. Dan Goldman and Congressional Hispanic Caucus leader Adriano Espaillat.

Collision course with House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries
Mamdani’s endorsements and campaigning against incumbent Democratic lawmakers in particular are putting him on a quiet collision course with establishment Democratic leaders, especially House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, who, tasked with winning a majority in the upcoming midterm elections, has been forced to divert resources to defend the incumbents.

Two of them are officially endorsed by the New York chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America, the largest socialist organization in the United States, which has close ties to Mamdani. The mayor, who is a member of the DSA, leaned heavily on the backing of the DSA to win both the Democratic primary in June and the city’s general election. Those close to Mamdani say that his decision to endorse candidates challenging establishment-backed figures and bucking party leadership is part of an attempt to “radically” reorient the Democratic Party towards his vision.

Sanders aide: “We can radically change the Democratic Party”
“He’s seeing that opportunity – that we can radically change the Democratic Party,” said Faiz Shakir, an advisor to Senator Bernie Sanders and described as a friend of Mamdani’s. “Like Bernie, he’s not saying I’m doing this out of spite against you, dear leadership. He’s saying, I am supporting these candidates who have a better vision, and I am prepared to lose if it has to be the case.”

Against Goldman in New York’s 10th Congressional District, Mamdani has backed Brad Lander, the former New York City comptroller who once ran against Mamdani for the mayoral nomination, but who then gave his backing to the democratic socialist upstart. Lander has made his opposition to Israel’s campaign in Gaza and against Palestinian terrorist organizations a centerpiece of his campaign, aligning with Mamdani’s own criticism of the Jewish state. Lander, who is himself Jewish, has embraced much of the language and policy agenda of the pro-Palestinian movement, including describing Israel’s conduct in Gaza as genocide and pledging to oppose additional U.S. military aid while the Israeli-Palestinian conflict continues.

“As a proud Jewish New Yorker, I will join you in that fight to end occupation and apartheid and genocide,” Lander said at one campaign event earlier this month. Goldman declined to endorse Mamdani and did not vote for him in the general election, citing the socialist mayor’s lax attitude towards anti-semitism. “I have asked him to consider taking serious and concrete action to demonstrate that he is going to make sure that Jews are protected and are secure in our city, and I hope he does that,” Goldman said during the election.

Read more …

 

 

 


 

https://twitter.com/EvasTeslaSPlaid/status/2067811840541724847?s=20 https://twitter.com/wealthmoose/status/2067568254306984108?s=20 https://twitter.com/John_F_kJr/status/2067773586157551837?s=20 https://twitter.com/Maga4liberty/status/2067568018335383791?s=20

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle September 13 2025

Sep 132025
 
 September 13, 2025  Posted by at 9:47 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  59 Responses »


Someone will

 

• Charlie Kirk’s Widow Addresses the Nation (Sarah Anderson)
• You Ran A Good Race, My Friend. We’ve Got It From Here. (JD Vance)
• Exorcism Nigh (James Howard Kunstler)
• Ursula von der Leyen Facing New Ouster Attempt After ‘Pro-War’ Address (RT)
• US To Press G7 On Seizing Frozen Russian Assets – Bloomberg (RT)
• EU Could Target ‘Russian SWIFT’ – Euractiv (RT)
• Russia and China Planning Clearinghouse To Avoid West – Moscow+(RT)
• Trump Warns His Patience With Putin Is “Running Out Fast” (ZH)
• Kremlin Confirms Ukraine Talks ‘On Pause’ (ZH)
• US Isn’t Seeking Confrontation With China – Pentagon (RT)
• Trump Pledges Investigation Into Soros (RT)
• How the EU Pays Mainstream Media to Promote Its Narratives (Williams)
• Silver Explosion Kills Babylon’s Financial System – Bo Polny (USAW)
• ‘Delete This’: New Smoking Gun Emails Reveal Fauci COVID Coverup (ZH)
• America’s Grid is Nearing Its Breaking Point (Robert Rapier)

 

 

https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/1966285914604196307

https://twitter.com/MAGAVoice/status/1966663396566462757
https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1966664205618000334

https://twitter.com/MAGAVoice/status/1966248780145242287

https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1966576304897355981

 

 

 

 

“..he’s on a work trip with Jesus so he can afford your blueberry budget.”

• Charlie Kirk’s Widow Addresses the Nation (Sarah Anderson)

Charlie Kirk’s widow, Erika, made a brave and stunning decision to address the nation that is mourning her husband on Friday night. Standing next to Charlie’s chair in his studio at the Turning Point USA headquarters in Phoenix, Ariz., Erika spoke from a podium with a sign attached that read: “May Charlie be received into the merciful arms of Jesus, our loving Savior.” Through tears, she thanked the first responders and law enforcement officials that helped in the aftermath of his murder, including those who worked tirelessly to catch the suspect. She also thanked Vice President JD Vance and his wife, Usha, as well as President Donald Trump and the entire Trump family and talked of how much her late husband loved the president.

Erika eulogized the private side of Charlie — his love of nature and sports, including the Chicago Cubs and Oregon Ducks. She talked of how much he loved his children and how much he loved her, saying that every single day he made sure she knew it and asked how he could serve her better. She also spoke of his unwavering faith: “Two days ago, my husband, Charlie went to see the face of his savior, and his God. Charlie always said that when he was gone, he, he wanted to be remembered for his courage and for his faith. In one of the final conversations that he had on this earth, my husband witnessed for his Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. Now and for all eternity, he will stand at his savior’s side wearing the glorious crown of a martyr.”

And then she spoke defiantly and with determination to those who have Charlie’s blood on their hands. “The evildoers responsible for my husband’s assassination have no idea what they have done,” she said, adding, “They killed Charlie because he preached a message of patriotism, faith, and of God’s merciful love.” Erika followed that with a warning:

“They should all know this: If you thought that my husband’s mission was powerful before, you have no idea. You have no idea what you just have unleashed across this entire country and this world. You have no idea. You have no idea the fire that you have ignited within this wife. To everyone listening tonight across America, the movement my husband built will not die. It won’t. I refuse to let that happen. It will not die. All of us will refuse to let that happen. No one will ever forget my husband’s name, and I will make sure of it. It will become stronger, bolder, louder, and greater than ever. ”

She vowed that his campus tour will continue, that his radio show and podcast will go on and that Charlie’s voice will “ring out louder and more clearly than ever, and his wisdom will endure.” She also spoke of her life in recent days, the lack of sleep, and her young daughter asking her, “Where’s Daddy?” Erika said she explained to the little girl that “Baby, daddy loves you so much. Don’t you worry, he’s on a, he’s on a work trip with Jesus so he can afford your blueberry budget.” She added that she couldn’t wait to see Charlie again one day

She ended her speech by thanking Charlie’s fans and supporters: “Thank you all again who love my husband, who supported him, who wrote him an email every single day during his radio show. He read all of them, all of them. God bless you all and may God bless America.” You can watch Erika’s entire speech here. Warning: You will need some tissues.

Start at 11.45hrs

Read more …

X thread.

• You Ran A Good Race, My Friend. We’ve Got It From Here. (JD Vance)

A while ago, probably in 2017, I appeared on Tucker Carlson’s Fox show to talk about God knows what. Afterwards a name I barely knew sent me a DM on twitter and told me I did a great job. It was Charlie Kirk, and that moment of kindness began a friendship that lasted until today. Charlie was fascinated by ideas and always willing to learn and change his mind. Like me, he was skeptical of Donald Trump in 2016. Like me, he came to see President Trump as the only figure capable of moving American politics away from the globalism that had dominated for our entire lives. When others were right, he learned from them. When he was right–as he usually was–he was generous. With Charlie, the attitude was never, “I told you so.” But: “welcome.”

Charlie was one of the first people I called when I thought about running for senate in early 2021. I was interested but skeptical there was a pathway. We talked through everything, from the strategy to the fundraising to the grassroots of the movement he knew so well. He introduced me to some of the people who would run my campaign and also to Donald Trump Jr. “Like his dad, he’s misunderstood. He’s extremely smart, and very much on our wavelength.” Don took a call from me because Charlie asked him too. Long before I ever committed (even in my mind) to running, Charlie had me speak to his donors at a TPUSA event. He walked me around the room and introduced me. He gave me honest feedback on my remarks. He had no reason to do this, no expectation that I’d go anywhere. I was polling, at that point, well below 5 percent. He did it because we were friends, and because he was a good man.

When I became the VP nominee–something Charlie advocated for both in public and private–Charlie was there for me. I was so glad to be part of the president’s team, but candidly surprised by the effect it had on our family. Our kids, especially our oldest, struggled with the attention and the constant presence of the protective detail. I felt this acute sense of guilt, that I had conscripted my kids into this life without getting their permission. And Charlie was constantly calling and texting, checking on our family and offering guidance and prayers. Some of our most successful events were organized not by the campaign, but by TPUSA. He wasn’t just a thinker, he was a doer, turning big ideas into bigger events with thousands of activists. And after every event, he would give me a big hug, tell me he was praying for me, and ask me what he could do. “You focus on Wisconsin,” he’d tell me. “Arizona is in the bag.” And it was.

Charlie genuinely believed in and loved Jesus Christ. He had a profound faith. We used to argue about Catholicism and Protestantism and who was right about minor doctrinal questions. Because he loved God, he wanted to understand him. Someone else pointed out that Charlie died doing what he loved: discussing ideas. He would go into these hostile crowds and answer their questions. If it was a friendly crowd, and a progressive asked a question to jeers from the audience, he’d encourage his fans to calm down and let everyone speak. He exemplified a foundational virtue of our Republic: the willingness to speak openly and debate ideas.

Charlie had an uncanny ability to know when to push the envelope and when to be more conventional. I’ve seen people attack him for years for being wrong on this or that issue publicly, never realizing that privately he was working to broaden the scope of acceptable debate. He was a great family man. I was talking to President Trump in the Oval Office today, and he said, “I know he was a very good friend of yours.” I nodded silently, and President Trump observed that Charlie really loved his family. The president was right. Charlie was so proud of Erika and the two kids. He was so happy to be a father. And he felt such gratitude for having found a woman of God with whom he could build a family.

Charlie Kirk was a true friend. The kind of guy you could say something to and know it would always stay with him. I am on more than a few group chats with Charlie and people he introduced me to over the years. We celebrate weddings and babies, bust each other’s chops, and mourn the loss of loved ones. We talk about politics and policy and sports and life. These group chats include people at the very highest level of our government. They trusted him, loved him, and knew he’d always have their backs. And because he was a true friend ,you could instinctively trust the people Charlie introduced you to. So much of the success we’ve had in this administration traces directly to Charlie’s ability to organize and convene. He didn’t just help us win in 2024, he helped us staff the entire government.

I was in a meeting in the West Wing when those group chats started lighting up with people telling Charlie they were praying for him. And that’s how I learned the news that my friend had been shot. I prayed a lot over the next hour, as first good news and then bad trickled in. God didn’t answer those prayers, and that’s OK. He had other plans. And now that Charlie is in heaven, I’ll ask him to talk to big man directly on behalf of his family, his friends, and the country he loved so dearly.

Read more …

“The point I was trying to make is how peaceful the left was. . . right before he got shot.” —Hunter Kozak, Question-Asker at Charlie Kirk Utah Event, Sept 10

• Exorcism Nigh (James Howard Kunstler)

It’s been a tough week for our demon-haunted nation. First, video surfaces of the young Ukrainian woman, 23-year-old Iryna Zarutska, slaughtered by a homeless psychopath, one Decarlos Brown, Jr., on the Charlotte, NC, light rail — weeks after the crime happened, because Charlotte police suppressed the CC video and the legacy news media barely reported the story. Suddenly, the country is shocked by what they see: wanton murder witnessed at the scene by a half-dozen other transit riders, who don’t even react to the woman spurting blood as she topples to the floor and bleeds out.

“Progressives” hasten to cover for the psycho. He was mentally unwell and did not get the treatment he needed. Uh-huh. . . . Yet anyone with functioning brain knew the score at once. Decarlos Brown, Jr., was “justice involved” (arrested and convicted of crimes) more than a dozen times in recent years, including a five-year stretch for armed robbery. He was on-the-loose because of how the Democratic Party manages public safety, which is not at all. It allows the criminally insane to run free, but especially if they can be sorted into the “marginalized” minority basket to be presented as sob stories (George Floyd).

The Democratic Party has this affinity for the criminally insane because the party as a whole is insane. It peddles insane policies and ideas, such as cashless bail and defunding the police. It can’t tell the truth about anything. For instance, that black people account for 37-percent of violent felonies committed in the USA, according the FBI Uniform Crime Reporting, though they comprise about 13-percent of the population. And that only includes the “solved” cases, for which the “clearance rate” is a low 50- 60-percent of violent crimes — that is, more than half of violent crimes discovered go unsolved.

The Iryna Zarutska slaying set off a fury that ranged from intimations of race-war to declaring the Democratic Party a “domestic terrorist organization.” Of course, this was only days after disgruntled transgenderite Robert Westman — another product of Democratic Party ideology — shot up a catholic school in Minneapolis. Westman declared in his diaries that he’d learned to his disappointment that it is not really possible to change sexes and pretending was not good enough. That was perhaps the sole sane expression among his otherwise violently deranged writings. Westman was but one in a growing line of transgenders shooting up places, but his deed marked the end of the Democratic sex hustle, inflicting LGBTQ ideology on the schools and coercing the public to play along.

And then, Wednesday, a marksman as yet unidentified murdered Charlie Kirk, 31-year-old rising conservative media star, whose main activity was traveling to college campuses to discuss and debate the great public issues of our time with students. Charlie Kirk was an exemplary young man, on a mission to rescue our country from bad ideas and help young adults beset by the depraved Jacobin faculty discern the difference between good ideas and bad ideas. He’d barely got going in life. I won’t belabor the encomiums to Charlie’s excellence that you can read elsewhere all over the web. He was the real deal, a man in full. The Left has its martyr, the degenerate George Floyd, and now the right has its martyr, the righteous Charlie Kirk. Choose your hero.

The murder sickened at least half the nation to a degree we haven’t seen since the Kennedys and MLK were gunned down half a century ago, but the country is much more fragile now than it was then. Nobody knows what comes next, but you can sense it is going to be harsh. All that’s known about the shooter so far is that he might be the scraggly figure captured in a CC camera in a stairway on the Utah campus, that he might have used the Mauser 30.06 rifle found ditched in the woods nearby, that he was a darn good shot, and that the brass cartridges in the rifle’s chamber and magazine were engraved with “transgender and Antifa” slogans. Uh-oh. . . . (I wouldn’t want to be them on that dreadful day.)

Read more …

“..von der Leyen dismissed her critics as “conspiracy theorists” and claimed they acted on behalf of Russian President Vladimir Putin, saying there was “ample proof that many are supported by our enemies and by their puppet masters in Russia or elsewhere..”

• Ursula von der Leyen Facing New Ouster Attempt After ‘Pro-War’ Address (RT)

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen is facing two new motions of no confidence following her State of the Union address to the European Parliament this week. The Left faction filed its censure proposal on Thursday, a day after the right-wing Patriots for Europe group submitted a separate bid. Von der Leyen survived a previous no-confidence vote in July. Renewed efforts to remove the EU chief came after she urged stronger military support for Ukraine and proposed allowing foreign policy decisions without unanimous member-state approval – which dissenting member states, such as Hungary, view as a ploy to dismiss their objections.

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, who backs the no-confidence motion, views von der Leyen’s remarks as “hardcore pro-war,” according to governmental spokesman Zoltan Kovacs. In her address, “the word ‘Ukraine’ was mentioned 35 times, and threats were made to cut EU funds from anyone refusing to follow Brussels’ line,” he said on social media. The Patriots’ motion argued the president “has failed on trade, abandoned transparency, and rejected accountability,” while the Left – joined by some Greens/EFA MEPs – accused her of having “sold out workers and farmers, funneled billions into arms and war, shredded climate and social protection” and being “complicit in genocide” in Gaza.

“There is a tendency within the European Commission to push things through by force” at the EU’s expense, Left co-leader Manon Aubry told Euronews. She cited a recent deal with the United States that she said “will literally reduce the EU to a Donald Trump vassal.” During the previous attempt to unseat her, von der Leyen dismissed her critics as “conspiracy theorists” and claimed they acted on behalf of Russian President Vladimir Putin, saying there was “ample proof that many are supported by our enemies and by their puppet masters in Russia or elsewhere.”The current commission is trying to launch a multibillion-euro military expansion program across member states, arguing the EU should fund it through loans to counter the threat from Russia – an assessment Moscow calls baseless.

Read more …

Acts of war.

• US To Press G7 On Seizing Frozen Russian Assets – Bloomberg (RT)

The US will press its G7 allies to establish a legal framework for seizing frozen Russian state assets and channeling them to Ukraine, Bloomberg has reported, citing sources. Western nations froze an estimated $300 billion in Russian assets following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022, some €200 billion of which are held by Brussels-based clearinghouse Euroclear. The funds have generated billions in interest, and the West has been exploring ways to use the revenue to finance Ukraine. While refraining from outright seizure, the G7 last year backed a plan to provide Kiev with $50 billion in loans to be repaid using the profits. The EU pledged $21 billion. According to a proposal seen by the outlet, Washington will urge the G7 to back measures enabling the outright confiscation of the frozen reserves for transfer to Kiev.

Separately, people familiar with the matter told Bloomberg that senior US officials have discussed the idea with their European counterparts. Some EU leaders and experts have cautioned against outright seizure, warning it could violate international law, undermine investor confidence, and destabilize financial markets. Moscow has condemned the asset freeze and warned that seizure would amount to “robbery” and violate international law, while also backfiring on the West. The US plan extends beyond asset seizures, proposing 50% to 100% tariffs on China and India aimed at restricting Russian energy sales and blocking dual-use technology transfers, Bloomberg wrote.

It also seeks sanctions on the so-called Russian ‘shadow fleet’ of oil tankers, energy giant Rosneft, and maritime insurance, along with measures against regional banks, firms linked to the defense sector, and curbs on AI and fintech services in Russian Special Economic Zones. US President Donald Trump, who has been pushing for a direct meeting between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky, has threatened new sanctions on Moscow. “It’ll be hitting very hard with sanctions to banks and having to do with oil and tariffs also,” he told Fox News on Friday. The Kremlin said that direct negotiations between Moscow and Kiev remain possible but are currently on hold.

Read more …

Up to 30 years ago, it might have worked. Not today.

• EU Could Target ‘Russian SWIFT’ – Euractiv (RT)

The European Union could sanction foreign banks that use Russia’s domestic alternative to the SWIFT interbank messaging system, as the bloc weighs another batch of measures targeting countries it claims are helping Moscow bypass restrictions, Euractiv has reported. Russia has been promoting its own payment system as a reliable alternative to SWIFT since many of the country’s financial institutions were cut off from the Western network in 2022. The System for Transfer of Financial Messages (SPFS) ensures the secure transfer of financial messages between banks both inside and outside the country.

France and Germany are spearheading the proposal to hit Russia’s trading partners as part of the bloc’s 19th sanctions package against Moscow, the outlet said on Tuesday. Paris and Berlin argue the measures should strike at what they describe as the “deeper structures” of Russia’s financial and logistics networks. The SPFS system has become a key workaround for Russian and non-Russian banks seeking to maintain trade flows despite Western efforts to isolate Moscow. In June 2024, Brussels banned EU banks operating outside Russia from connecting to SPFS or carrying out transactions via the system, threatening violators with exclusion from Europe’s own financial networks.

As of early 2025, 177 foreign entities across 24 countries were connected to SPFS, according to the Russian central bank. Moscow has accelerated efforts to move away from SWIFT by trading with international partners in their national currencies – a trend increasingly supported by BRICS members, which have shifted from using the dollar and euro in trade settlements. Russia has long denounced Western sanctions as illegal, repeatedly noting that they have failed to achieve their ultimate goal of destabilizing the economy and isolating the country from the global financial system. Instead, Moscow argues, they have backfired on the states that imposed them.

Read more …

Would BTC be an option?

• Russia and China Planning Clearinghouse To Avoid West – Moscow+(RT)

Russia and China are working to set up a securities depository to rival Belgium-based Euroclear and Clearstream, Finance Minister Anton Siluanov has said. In an interview with Izvestia published on Thursday, Siluanov said it is important to build “an independent payment infrastructure” in response to Western sanctions. Russian investors previously held funds at European clearing houses through Russia’s National Settlement Depository (NSD). Euroclear and Clearstream stopped transactions with NSD and froze its accounts after sanctions were imposed against it in mid-2022, preventing investors from accessing their assets.

The Bank of Russia has estimated that around 5.7 trillion rubles ($66.8 billion) remains blocked. Siluanov said the role of a new depository would be assumed by a planned Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) Development Bank, which would enable Russians to invest in foreign assets and foreign investors to finance projects in Russia. “We would like this bank – perhaps on its basis, or by itself – to create opportunities for our investors in our countries to freely buy and sell securities in any countries. In other words, to perform such an independent depository function,” the finance minister explained.

Analysts say the SCO bank could provide a real alternative to Western depositories, though challenges remain, including the high returns on ruble assets and the risk of asset freezes. Still, the SCO could allow seamless securities trading among member states that join the agreement. Russian investors are also pursuing legal action at home. In August, the Moscow Arbitration Court accepted a lawsuit brought by a group of private investors against Belgium’s Treasury and Euroclear. The investors are seeking licenses from the Belgian authorities to unlock their assets, arguing that the actions of the Belgian Treasury and Euroclear are unlawful and discriminatory.

Read more …

How about his patience with Ukraine?

• Trump Warns His Patience With Putin Is “Running Out Fast” (ZH)

U.S. President Donald Trump has said that he is losing patience with Russian President Vladimir Putin and could issue new tariffs and sanctions to compel the Russian leader to enter cease-fire negotiations with Ukraine. Trump said that his patience with Putin’s refusal to participate in peace talks with Ukraine was “running out and running out fast,” during an interview with Fox News’ “Fox and Friends” on Sep. 12.As Andrew Thornebrooke reports for The Epoch Times, the president added that “it does take two to tango,” saying that Putin’s recalcitrance on committing to peace talks was in part due to the Russian leader’s mutual animosity with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. “There’s tremendous hatred between him and Zelenskyy,” Trump said.

Trump has made ending the war in Ukraine and other international conflicts a key part of his presidential agenda, but has struggled at times to convince Putin and Zelenskyy to meaningfully negotiate on ending the conflict. The comments follow a high-profile summit between Trump and Putin in Alaska in August, which aimed to bring Russia back to the negotiating table but ultimately did not result in the resumption of cease-fire talks. “There’s no deal until there’s a deal,” Trump said at the time. That meeting itself was the result of a threat by Trump to impose new sanctions on the Russian oil sector, including secondary tariffs on nations such as India and China that purchase oil from Russian entities. Trump renewed those threats during Friday’s interview, saying the United States would have to “come down very, very strong” on Russia if Putin did not commit to peace talks with Ukraine.

When asked what coming down on Russia would look like, Trump said that it would involve “hitting [Russia] very hard with sanctions to banks and having to do with oil and tariffs also.” Trump also reached out to U.S. allies in Europe earlier this week in the hopes of building international support for secondary tariffs of up to 100 percent on China and India. The move demonstrates how much Trump and his administration have shifted in handling the war in Ukraine since first coming to office, moving from pausing all support of Ukraine early in the year to renewing weapon sales to Kyiv and threatening sanctions against Moscow.

The difficulty lies in getting either Kyiv or Moscow to relent on any of several key war aims, with Zelenskyy refusing to consider the giving up of any territory to Russia and Putin demanding that it be given territory it has failed to conquer. For now, Moscow appears undeterred. This week alone, Russia launched its largest aerial assault against Ukraine and sent drones into NATO member Poland’s airspace. NATO leadership has not yet verified whether the drones entered Polish airspace deliberately or as part of an operation in Ukraine that went wrong. Trump said during Friday’s interview that Russian assets “shouldn’t be close to Poland.”

Read more …

“… As Zelensky Rules Out Giving Up The East..”

• Kremlin Confirms Ukraine Talks ‘On Pause’ (ZH)

The Kremlin confirmed Friday what most observers should consider obvious at this point – Ukraine peace talks are not happening. Putin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told a Friday press briefing that talks to end the war in Ukraine are on “pause”. “Negotiators remain in contact, but for now it is probably more accurate to speak of a pause,” Peskov said, after the sides met twice so far this year, which resulted from President Trump’s efforts to mediate. “You shouldn’t wear rose-tinted glasses and expect lightning-fast results,” Peskov added, which seemed an indirect criticism of Trump’s earlier claims of being able to achieve peace quickly. Interestingly, Peskov took a swipe at European leaders, describing the so-called ‘coalition of the willing’ as actively “impeding” negotiations. He sill emphasized that Moscow is committed to the “path of peaceful dialogue.”

The Western allies have been pushing ‘security guarantees’ which include troops from NATO countries which are to make up a ‘reassurance force’ – a prospect which Russia has condemned as an impossibility. As for President Trump’s assessment of where things stand, he offered this in a Friday Fox News appearance:

https://twitter.com/HotSpotHotSpot/status/1966507589652418981

Meanwhile, Ukrainian President Zelensky has again ruled out giving up “the east”, saying it cannot be a “bargaining chip” – in fresh comments. This stance is nothing new, but territorial concessions will be key in any future permanent peace deal. Despite slow but steady Russian gains on the ground, Zelensky is still holding out hope of gaining the military momentum, despite being outgunned and outmanned.

Politico writes, “Vladimir Putin told Donald Trump and U.S. special envoy to Ukraine Steve Witkoff that he intends to occupy Ukraine’s eastern Donbas region in a few months, Volodymyr Zelenskyy said in an interview published Tuesday.” Zelensky told ABC News, “That is, he [Putin] says that in three to four months, and this is what he told the Americans, the White House, and President Trump’s representative Witkoff, he said that he would take Donbas in two to three months, maximum four months.” Ukraine war headlines have largely receded to the background this week, in wake of the horrific assassination of Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk. Yet fighting and the intensified cross-border attacks, particularly targeting each’s energy sites, continue on with no end in sight.

Read more …

“..China seeks peace and stability in the South China Sea and opposes “infringement and provocation” by non-regional countries..”

• US Isn’t Seeking Confrontation With China – Pentagon (RT)

US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth has held his first phone call with China’s minister of national defense, Admiral Dong Jun, telling him that Washington does not seek conflict, the Pentagon announced on Wednesday. The conversation comes amid strained ties as Washington has described Beijing as its main geopolitical rival. In May, Hegseth claimed that “the threat China poses is real, and it could be imminent,” and urged countries in the Asia-Pacific to boost military spending. In Tuesday’s call, Hegseth stressed the US is not pursuing confrontation, regime change, or “strangulation” of China. At the same time, he emphasized that Washington has “vital interests in the Asia-Pacific, the priority theater, and will resolutely protect those interests,” according to a readout of the conversation. The Pentagon described the exchange as “candid.”

China’s Xinhua news agency reported that the call was held at Hegseth’s request and that Dong urged continued communication and an open attitude to foster stable and positive military ties based on “equal respect, peaceful coexistence, and mutual respect.” Xinhua also cited Dong as saying China seeks peace and stability in the South China Sea and opposes “infringement and provocation” by non-regional countries. Last month, Washington and Beijing extended a 90-day tariff truce, keeping planned increases on hold until November 10. At the same time, several media outlets reported earlier this week that the US has allegedly been urging the EU to impose steep tariffs on imports from China and India, potentially up to 100%, over the Ukraine conflict and their ties with Russia. Washington is reportedly prepared to mirror the measures if adopted.

China and India have pushed back on tariff pressure. Chinese officials said they will ensure the country’s energy supply “in line with national interests” and warned that “tariff wars have no winners,” while India called the new US tariffs “unfair, unjustified, and unreasonable.” Russian President Vladimir Putin has also cautioned the West against using a “colonial tone” toward Beijing and New Delhi, suggesting that such actions are aimed at slowing their economic rise.

Read more …

“We’re not going to allow these lunatics to rip apart America any more..”

• Trump Pledges Investigation Into Soros (RT)

US President Donald Trump has said that his administration will be probing George Soros over his alleged funding of mass “riots” in the US. The Hungarian-American billionaire investor and NGOs funded by his Open Society Foundations (OSF) have long been linked to various protest movements, both in the US and abroad. “They have professional agitators… They get paid for their profession from Soros and other people,” Trump said in an interview with Fox & Friends on Friday. “We’re going to look into Soros because I think it’s a RICO case against him and other people,” he added. “This is more than protests: This is real agitation. This is riots on the street, and we’re gonna look into that,” Trump said.

The US federal RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act 1970) law has historically targeted organized crime, and is used to prosecute offenses committed as part of a criminal enterprise, though more recently it has seen broader use. Last month, the US president called for the Hungarian-American investor and his son to face charges under the statute, accusing them of supporting “violent protests, and much more, all throughout the United States.” “We’re not going to allow these lunatics to rip apart America any more,” he said in a Truth Social post.

In the months prior, anti-immigration protests shook the US, with the most violent cases in Los Angeles escalating into clashes with the police, looting, and arson. Soros was also linked to the 2016 Russiagate hoax, according to declassified documents published by the Senate Judiciary Committee in July. The documents alleged the investor’s OSF network had ties to the Hillary Clinton campaign’s debunked attempts to accuse Trump of collusion with Russia in order to undermine his 2016 election victory – accusations Moscow has long dismissed.

Read more …

“The EU, however, is also operating a large-scale influence operation outside of the EU, of course under the benign sounding propaganda words of “framed as support for media freedom and pluralism”..”

The EU uses its citizens’ money not for their own good, but to buy other countries’ citizens.

• How the EU Pays Mainstream Media to Promote Its Narratives (Williams)

The unelected leadership of the evidently corrupt European Union (EU) is now paying mainstream media to promote the agendas of its EU “elites.” The EU appears to have spent as much as 1 billion euros during the past decade alone in the process, according to a recent report, “Brussels’s media machine: European media funding and the shaping of public discourse,” by Thomas Fazi, from the European think tank MCC Brussels. Framing the projects as “fighting disinformation” and “promoting European integration” the EU has been throwing taxpayer money, conservatively estimated at €80 million annually, to “media projects” — not including indirect funding, such as advertising contracts. The report also shows that the EU runs a highly sophisticated “EU media complex” through which it gets to shape media narratives about itself and its agendas.According to Fazi’s report:

“The European Commission – through its Journalism Partnerships programme alone, with a cumulative budget approaching € 50 million to date – oversees a vast ecosystem of EU media ‘collaborations.’ Over the years, these have included hundreds of projects, ranging from pro-EU promotional campaigns to questionable ‘investigative journalism’ initiatives and sweeping ‘anti-fake news’ efforts. And that’s on top of the advertorial campaigns funded through the Information Measures for the EU Cohesion policy (IMREG) programme, to the tune of € 40 million so far… “Even more concerning is the central role played by major European public broadcasters in this process. These projects show that this is not a matter of one-off collaborations, but rather an evolving semi-structural relationship between EU institutions and public media networks.”

The European Commission has, it seems, has literally paid off almost everything and everyone in the media world — meaning that everyone, from news agencies to media outlets, public broadcasters and other media organizations, sits in the pocket of the European Commission to greater or smaller degrees. Some examples: Among news agencies — upon which practically all news outlets depend for their reporting — the European Commission has poured money into the following, among others: Agence France-Presse has received €7 million from the EU, ANSA (Italy) €5.6 million, Deutsche Presse-Agentur, (Germany) €3.2 million, Agencia EFE (Spain) €2 million, Associated Press (AP) €1 million, Lusa News Agency (Portugal) €200,000 Polish Press Agency €500,000, and Athens News Agency €600,000.

A selection of news outlets also appear to be being paid off by the European Commission: Euronews (pan-European) €230 million, ARTE (France) €26 million, Euractiv (pan-European) €6 million, Gazeta Wyborcza (Poland) €105,000, 444.hu (Hungary) €1.1 million, France TV (France) €400,000, GEDI Gruppo Editoriale (Italy) €190,000, ZDF (Germany) €500,000, and Bayerischer Rundfunk (Germany) €600,000.Public broadcasters have received the following: Deutsche Welle (Germany) €35 million, France Médias Monde €16.5 million, France Télévisions €1 million, RAI Radiotelevisione italiana (Italy) €2 million, RTBF (Belgium) €675,000, RTP (Portugal) €1.5 million, Estonian Public Broadcasting, ERR €1 million, RTVE (Spain) €770,000 ERR (Estonia) €1 million and TV2 (Denmark) €900,000.

Media organizations such as Reporters Without Borders (France) and Journalismfund Europe (Belgium) have received €5.7 million and €2.6 million respectively. A Dutch organization that calls itself independent, Bellingcat, has received €440,000. These abundant examples of media and news organizations are just those within the EU. The EU, however, is also operating a large-scale influence operation outside of the EU, of course under the benign sounding propaganda words of “framed as support for media freedom and pluralism” as if the EU knows the first thing about freedom and pluralism. The projects have centered especially on media in Ukraine, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Moldova, Russia, Belarus and the western Balkans.

There is nothing transparent about any of this funding. According to the report, it is opaque and difficult to uncover. It makes sense, however, that the EU would seek to cover up its own influence peddling as much as possible. The report concludes: “[T]he EU’s ever-expanding system of media financing… creates financial dependencies, incentivises narrative conformity and fosters an ecosystem in which dissenting voices are marginalised – all under the virtuous banners of ‘fighting disinformation’, ‘promoting European values’ and ‘building a European public sphere.’

“The extent of institutional entanglement between EU bodies and major media actors – from public broadcasters to news agencies to online outlets – cannot be brushed aside as harmless or incidental. It constitutes a systemic conflict of interest that compromises the media’s ability to function as an independent pillar of democracy. Even absent direct editorial interference, the structural dependency on EU grants and contracts is enough to exert a chilling effect on critical reporting and encourage a reflexive alignment with official EU positions.”The EU appears, sadly, to be a deeply corrupt and undemocratic regime, which desperately clings to power through influence-peddling and the imposition of heavy-handed censorship. Hundreds of millions of Europeans continue to put up with these tactics. When will they please wake up?

Read more …

“I don’t care if people are saying wars come next year and that there is going to be a nuclear conflict. They are all going to be 1,000% wrong because the Biblical cycle ends at the end of September and beginning of October.”

• Silver Explosion Kills Babylon’s Financial System – Bo Polny

At the beginning of this year on USAWatchdog, Biblical cycle timing expert, geopolitical and financial analyst Bo Polny said, “Get ready for a wild ride in 2025 and beyond.” We have had the so-called Biden autopen scandal, huge deportation numbers by ICE, huge fraud with 911,000 fake jobs that hid a recession since July of 2024 and, now, the assassination of top conservative political figure Charlie Kirk. The world is going mad. Polny has a new warning that September 2025 is going to bring a huge market event that will end the financial system as we know it. Polny explains, “Silver, this time around, is not just going to go through $50 per ounce, it’s going to go through it like a hot knife through butter.

It’s going to go to $60 then $70, and then it’s going to three digits very shortly. What is about to happen are incredible price moves. This is the end of the Babylonian financial system. . .. They used the money to build Babylon. What is Babylon? It’s a control system. . .. We are about to see an explosion that is going to blow people’s minds on what is about to happen. Silver is going to go to numbers unthinkable. Silver has been prophesized to be the metal, the thing that is going to change people’s financial position forever.”

Polny also predicts, “The war cycle ends on September 21. The wars are about to come to an end. I don’t care if people are saying wars come next year and that there is going to be a nuclear conflict. They are all going to be 1,000% wrong because the Biblical cycle ends at the end of September and beginning of October. The September date is in my book. You can’t stop what is coming. You can only prepare for what is coming. When this move in gold and silver happens, they will finally break free of generations of price manipulation and suppression. This will be the destruction of the banking cartel.”

Polny points to the Bible and Haggai 2: 6-22. Polny reads, “I will shake the heavens and the earth and the sea and the dry land. 7 And I will shake all nations, so that the treasures of all nations shall come in, and I will fill this house with glory, says the Lord of hosts. 8 The silver is mine, and the gold is mine, declares the Lord of hosts. . .. Consider from this day onward, from the twenty-fourth day of the ninth month.”

Polny goes on to say, “This is Haggai, and it says September 24th . . . God is going to step in, and it’s going to be a 180 of what they did five years ago. . .. Five is the number of Grace. . .. It’s going to be the shaking of a lifetime on this world. It’s going to be a 9/11 worldwide on steroids. No one is going to miss it. What is going to happen is the greatest move of the spirit of God in human history. . .. All the Glory goes to God. This is a battle for souls. . .. Good news not bad news coming.”


Read more …

“Where are we on the validity of autopen pardons?”

• ‘Delete This’: New Smoking Gun Emails Reveal Fauci COVID Coverup (ZH)

The infamous autopen-pardoned Dr. Anthony Fauci lied under oath while testifying before Congress, and Rand Paul just dropped the receipts. “Emails obtained by the Committee appear to contradict your testimony,” wrote Paul – referring to Fauci declaring under oath that he never ‘engaged in attempts to obstruct the Freedom of Information Act and the release of public documents.’ “In an email dated February 2, 2020, you directed then-NIH Director Dr. Francis Collins to “Please delete this e-mail after you read it.” Paul’s letter continues; I have reason to believe that you may be in possession of additional records related to the Committee’s ongoing investigation. These records are necessary for the Committee to fully understand the federal government’s actions to identify the origins of COVID-19, and the extent to which taxpayer dollars were used to conduct risky virological research, as well as to weigh potential legislative reforms.

For this reason, I request that you provide the following, in complete, original, and unredacted form, no later than 5:00 PM on September 23, 2025:
1. A list of all email addresses, phone numbers, and messaging application usernames you used at any point between January 1, 2018, and January 1, 2023.

2. All email communications, including attachments, sent or received by you between January 1, 2018, and January 1, 2023, whether on government-issued or personal accounts/devices, that refer or relate in any way to:

NIH, HHS, CIA, FBI, DOD, COVID-19

The “Proximal Origins” paper, The Wellcome Trust, Jeremy Farrar, The P3CO Review Group, Gain-of-function research, Dual-use research of concern, EcoHealth Alliance, Peter Daszak, The Wuhan Institute of Virology, Ian Lipkin, Ralph Baric, Zhengli Shi, The DEFUSE proposal, DARPA, DTRA, USAID PREDICT, The Rocky Mountain Laboratory, Vincent Munster, Fort Detrick, The Integrated Research Facility, The U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID), The National Biodefense Analysis and Countermeasures Center (NBACC)

3. All email communications, including attachments, created, sent, received, copied, or otherwise transmitted between January 1, 2018, and January 1, 2023, whether on government-issued or personal accounts/devices, between or among you and:
Jeremy Farrar, Francis Collins, Hugh Auchincloss, Ian Lipkin, Ralph Baric, Vincent Munster, Kristian Andersen, Andrew Rambaut, Edward Holmes, Robert Garry.
Including communications in which you appear in any field (to, from, cc, bcc) or in forwarded chains.

4. All records of calls and voicemails, whether on government-issued or personal devices/accounts, between January 1, 2018, and January 1, 2023, between you and:
Jeremy Farrar, Francis Collins, Hugh Auchincloss, Ian Lipkin, Ralph Baric, Vincent Munster, Kristian Andersen, Andrew Rambaut, Edward Holmes, Robert Garry, Samantha Power, Including call logs, voicemail transcripts, and audio recordings.

5. All text messages, iMessages, and communications conducted through encrypted or third-party messaging applications, including but not limited to Signal, WhatsApp, Telegram, and WeChat, sent or received by you between January 1, 2018, and January 1, 2023, whether on government-issued or personal accounts/devices, that refer or relate in any way to: NIH, HHS, CIA, FBI, DOD, COVID-19, The “Proximal Origins” paper, The Wellcome Trust, Jeremy Farrar, The P3CO Review Group, Gain-of-function research, Dual-use research of concern, EcoHealth Alliance, Peter Daszak, The Wuhan Institute of Virology, Ian Lipkin, Ralph Baric, Zhengli Shi, The DEFUSE proposal, DARPA, DTRA, USAID PREDICT, The Rocky Mountain Laboratory, Vincent Munster, Fort Detrick, The Integrated Research Facility, The U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID)

Where are we on the validity of autopen pardons?

Read more …

Datacenters will finish it off.

• America’s Grid is Nearing Its Breaking Point (Robert Rapier)

America’s power grid is straining under the weight of a fast-changing energy landscape. Beyond the usual summer hum of air conditioners, power demand is surging from electric vehicle chargers and sprawling new data centers. At the same time, the infrastructure built to deliver reliable electricity is aging and showing its limits. From Texas heatwaves to California blackouts, the warning signs are impossible to ignore.mThis isn’t a technical challenge—it’s an economic and political reckoning. If the grid fails, it won’t be because we lacked solutions. It will be because we didn’t act quickly enough. For nearly two decades, U.S. electricity demand was flat. Now, consumption is climbing, driven by technologies that arrived faster than planners expected.

Artificial intelligence has unleashed a wave of data center construction. These facilities, dense with high-performance servers and cooling systems, are among the most power-hungry assets in the country. In 2023, AI data centers consumed about 4.4% of U.S. electricity, and that share could triple by 2028, according to Penn State’s Institute of Energy and the Environment. Northern Virginia—“Data Center Alley”—now handles 70% of global internet traffic, pushing utilities like Dominion Energy to scramble for capacity. Meanwhile, Microsoft and Google warn that a shortage of skilled electricians could delay expansion, with estimates that the U.S. will need 500,000 more electricians in the next decade. Electric vehicles, heat pumps, and electrified industry are adding further strain.

The Pacific Northwest Utilities Conference Committee projects growth equivalent to seven Seattle-sized cities within ten years. The Energy Information Administration (EIA) expects U.S. electricity sales to rise from 4,097 billion kWh in 2024 to 4,193 billion kWh in 2025, with similar gains to follow.And finally, there’s climate. As extreme heat events multiply, cooling demand in places like Texas and Arizona is surging—driving peak loads to new records. Just as demand is accelerating, the U.S. is retiring some of its most dependable sources of power.

The EIA projects 12.3 gigawatts (GW) of capacity will retire in 2025, a 65% jump over 2024. That includes 8.1 GW of coal, such as the 1,800-MW Intermountain Power Project in Utah, plus another 2.6 GW of natural gas. These plants provide round-the-clock power that intermittent sources cannot yet replace.Wind and solar capacity continue to grow, but not fast enough. The Department of Energy’s July 2025 Resource Adequacy Report warns that only 22 GW of firm generation is expected by 2030—well short of the 104 GW needed for peak demand. Transmission bottlenecks, permitting delays, and slow adoption of long-duration storage compound the problem. Grid operators from PJM, MISO, ERCOT, and others told Congress bluntly in March 2025: “Demand is accelerating, supply is lagging, and current tools may not be enough to bridge the gap.”

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/BoLoudon/status/1966323614065795356

https://twitter.com/iAnonPatriot/status/1966329219325010228

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 Older Entries