Menu Icon

Debt Rattle July 19 2025

Jul 192025
 
 July 19, 2025  Posted by at 9:00 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , ,  41 Responses »


Paul Gauguin Tahitian scene 1892

 

• Tulsi Gabbard: ‘Overwhelming Evidence’ Of Obama Coup Plot Against Trump (RT)
• FBI Allegedly Told Agents to Flag Mentions of Trump in Epstein Files (Sp.)
• Guess Who’s Behind WSJ’s Trump-Epstein ‘Bombshell’? (Margolis)
• RFK Jr. Rejects Dystopian WHO Pandemic Amendments (Salgado)
• White House Explains Trump’s Swollen Ankles and Bruised Hand (RT)
• Navarro: Why Retail Sales Growth Exceeds all Wall Street Projections (CTH)
• Trump Eyes Executive Order To Open Up Retirement Funds To Crypto: FT (CT)
• Ukraine’s ‘Rout’ Will Continue – Medvedev (RT)
• EU Reveals 18th Sanctions Package Against Moscow (RT)
• Putin Aide Gives Verdict On New EU Sanctions (RT)
• Brussels Budget Plan Could Destroy EU – Orban (RT)
• France a ‘Fiscal Time Bomb’ For EU – Bloomberg (RT)
• Freedom Caucus Attempts to Block Central Bank Digital Currency (Caldwell)
• Release Ghislaine Maxwell (Paul Craig Roberts)
• American AI Could Die in Court Before It Ever Takes Off (Rotella)
• Artificial Intelligence Breeds Mindless Inhumanity (RCW)

 

 

 

 

tucker

letter

 

 

 

 

Obama, Clapper, Brennan, Comey, Susan Rice, Andrew McCabe, Loretta Lynch. At a meeting in the White House. Start there.

Q: what effect has the made up smear had on today’s relations with Russia?

• Tulsi Gabbard: ‘Overwhelming Evidence’ Of Obama Coup Plot Against Trump (RT)

Former President Barack Obama’s administration deliberately manipulated intelligence to frame Russia for interfering in the 2016 presidential election, according to newly declassified documents released on Friday by America’s Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard. Gabbard unveiled more than 100 pages of emails, memos, and internal communications, which she described as “overwhelming evidence” of a coordinated effort by senior Obama-era officials to politicize intelligence and launch the multi-year Trump–Russia collusion investigation. She dubbed it “a treasonous conspiracy to subvert the will of the American people.” The scandal severely damaged relations between Moscow and Washington, leading to sanctions, asset seizures, and a breakdown in normal diplomacy.

https://twitter.com/DNIGabbard/status/1946271402971312514?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1946271402971312514%7Ctwgr%5E5e032d175c5299fac3a017ebc97f6cb0f695d014%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rt.com%2Fnews%2F621667-russiagate-probe-trump-obama%2F

”This intelligence was weaponized,” Gabbard said. “It was used as a justification for endless smears, for sanctions from Congress, and for covert investigations.” She added: “When key internal assessments found that Russia ‘did not impact recent U.S. election results,’ those findings were suppressed.” “For months before the 2016 election, the Intelligence Community maintained that Russia lacked both the intent and capability to hack U.S. elections,” Gabbard noted. “But once President Trump won, everything changed.” One document — a draft President’s Daily Brief dated December 8, 2016 — stated Russia “did not impact recent U.S. election results” through cyberattacks. The report, prepared by the CIA, NSA, FBI, DHS, and other agencies, found no evidence of voting interference.

Yet Fox News reported on Friday that the document was pulled — “based on new guidance,” according to internal emails. Hours later, a high-level Situation Room meeting took place, attended by officials including DNI James Clapper, CIA Director John Brennan, National Security Adviser Susan Rice, FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, and Attorney General Loretta Lynch.

According to declassified notes, attendees agreed to produce a new intelligence assessment at President Obama’s request. That report, released on January 6, 2017, claimed Russia had intervened in the election to help Donald Trump — directly contradicting earlier assessments. Gabbard claims the revised assessment leaned on the discredited Steele Dossier — compiled by a former British spy — while sidelining dissenting views within the intelligence apparatus. “This was not intelligence gathering,” Gabbard stated. “It was narrative building.”

Confirmed as DNI earlier this year — after a contentious process — Gabbard says she has forwarded the documents to the Department of Justice. She has urged investigations into former CIA Director John Brennan and former FBI Director James Comey, who are reportedly facing criminal inquiries. “No matter how powerful, every person involved must be brought to justice,” she stressed. “Our nation’s integrity depends on accountability.” “The integrity of our democratic republic depends on full accountability,” Gabbard concluded. “Nothing less will restore the public’s trust — and ensure nothing like this ever happens again.”

Read more …

“..1,000 staff to work 24-hour shifts in March to review 100,000 Epstein-related records for rapid release..”

Q: why does Kash Patel’s FBI look for mentions of Trump?

• FBI Allegedly Told Agents to Flag Mentions of Trump in Epstein Files (Sp.)

The FBI allegedly urged the agents to track US President Donald Trump references in the Epstein case, US Senator Dick Durbin said in a letter addressed to Attorney General Pam Bondi. Durbin claimed the FBI was pressured to assign around 1,000 staff to work 24-hour shifts in March to review 100,000 Epstein-related records for rapid release, with untrained personnel from the New York office reportedly assisting in the process. “My office was told that these personnel were instructed to “flag” any records in which President Trump was mentioned,” Durbin said. Durbin went on to say that despite weeks of intensive review, it took the US Department of Justice (DOJ) over three more months to conclude there was no incriminating “client list.”

He added that the July 7 memo omitted any mention of a whistleblower or promised documents, and suggested public trust was further eroded by the release of allegedly altered surveillance footage from outside Epstein’s cell. Durbin questioned the accuracy of previous public statements regarding Epstein-related records and said the lack of transparency may undermine trust in the DOJ’s July 7 conclusion that no incriminating “client list” exists. In his letter, Senator Durbin requested answers by August 1, including whether all Epstein files have been personally reviewed, why a “client list” was publicly claimed in February but not released, and details about a whistleblower’s disclosure of additional records. He also asked for the names of ethics officials consulted, reasons for assigning 1,000 FBI staff to 24-hour shifts, and why mentions of Trump were flagged and how those records were handled.

Read more …

Russiagate all over again.

• Guess Who’s Behind WSJ’s Trump-Epstein ‘Bombshell’? (Margolis)

The Wall Street Journal embarrassed itself Thursday by hyping a so-called Trump-Epstein “bombshell” that amounted to nothing more than a disputed birthday card from 2003 that they won’t show, and that Trump denies writing and is now suing over. The rest of the story was recycled material long in the public domain. Desperate to revive the left’s failed narrative tying Trump to Epstein, the Journal grasped at straws while ignoring Epstein’s far more substantial connections to powerful Democrats like Bill Clinton, who flew on Epstein’s jet multiple times and visited his island — facts the media still downplays to this day. Joe Palazzolo, one of the Wall Street Journal reporters who broke the “blockbuster” story, previously worked for Main Justice, which is his only prior reporting experience listed in his bio.

Joe joined the Journal in 2010 from trade publication Main Justice, where he covered the U.S. Justice Department. Before moving to the investigations team in 2019, he reported on national legal affairs for the Journal for seven years, focusing on the nation’s prisons, courts, gun laws and law enforcement. Why does this matter? Well, Main Justice is a publication founded by Mary Jacoby. That name may not be familiar to you, but she is the wife of Glenn Simpson — the guy who founded Fusion GPS. That’s the outfit Hillary Clinton and the DNC paid to concoct the infamous Steele Dossier that fueled the Russian collusion hoax. Guess where Glenn and Mary cut their teeth before exporting their political dirty tricks to the broader media? That’s right —The Wall Street Journal.

The incestuous relationships aren’t even hidden; they practically serve them up on a silver platter and still expect us to act surprised when another so-called “bombshell” arrives containing every DNC talking point, T’s crossed and I’s dotted. President Trump isn’t playing along this time. He’s suing the Wall Street Journal, calling the Epstein birthday letter story complete fiction, and arguing that basic journalistic integrity—like letting him respond to an accusation—was discarded in the left’s rush to get another “scandal” published. Considering the history here, it’s not just plausible, it’s likely. How many times have we watched these operatives masquerade as journalists, deliver a conveniently-timed anti-Trump narrative, and then retreat behind the thin veil of press freedom when challenged?

Jacoby’s not just media-connected; her father is a longtime executive at Stephens Investments, whose attorney back in the day was none other than Hillary Clinton at the Rose Law Firm. It’s all part of the same Clinton-DNC-Fusion GPS web that keeps resurfacing every time there’s a new “scandal” targeting Trump. Once again, a Trump “bombshell” traces back to the same partisan ecosystem that gave us the Steele Dossier. The deeper you look, the clearer it becomes: This isn’t journalism; it’s narrative warfare. And after this stunt from the Journal, it’s no wonder Americans are tuning the media out in record numbers.

Read more …

Sounds like a narrow escape. What about EU countries?

• RFK Jr. Rejects Dystopian WHO Pandemic Amendments (Salgado)

Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. just announced the defeat of authoritarian World Health Organization amendments that tended toward an anti-freedom, unhealthful, unscientific dystopia. Kennedy joined with Secretary of State Marco Rubio to formally reject the amendments. Critics have long warned these modifications would essentially have given the WHO total control to dictate the United States’ national response to anything it arbitrarily labeled a pandemic.

“The proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations open the door to the kind of narrative management, propaganda, and censorship that we saw during the COVID pandemic,” Kennedy said in a Friday press release. “The United States can cooperate with other nations without jeopardizing our civil liberties, without undermining our Constitution, and without ceding away America’s treasured sovereignty.” This follows Trump’s withdrawal from the WHO, as the press release noted: “The amended IHR would give the WHO the ability to order global lockdowns, travel restrictions, or any other measures it sees fit to respond to nebulous “potential public health risks.” These regulations are set to become binding if not rejected by July 19, 2025, regardless of the United States’ withdrawal from the WHO.”

Rubio also issued a statement. “Terminology throughout the amendments to the 2024 International Health Regulations is vague and broad, risking WHO-coordinated international responses that focus on political issues like solidarity, rather than rapid and effective actions,” he said. “Our Agencies have been and will continue to be clear: we will put Americans first in all our actions and we will not tolerate international policies that infringe on Americans’ speech, privacy, or personal liberties.” Dr. Robert Malone, mRNA pioneer and critic of the WHO’s disastrous COVID-19 policies, celebrated: “Big win indeed. The worm turns, and elections have consequences.” They certainly do.

The IHR amendments would have allowed the WHO to dictate lockdowns and other policies to the United States if it determined that there were “potential public health risks.” And the WHO got to define exactly what constituted a requisite health risk. That could be a cold virus, bird flu, even potentially obesity — there was a lot of latitude for the WHO, which proved itself untrustworthy during COVID. Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ) also praised the news. “WHO is an unaccountable international organization that hands individuals’ healthcare freedoms to corrupt bureaucrats,” he stated. “I’m thankful for Secretary Kennedy’s firm stance against WHO’s Pandemic Agreement that will protect Americans’ health freedom and privacy. Let’s Make America Great and Healthy Again.”

Read more …

Shaking so many hands you get bruises on yours.

• White House Explains Trump’s Swollen Ankles and Bruised Hand (RT)

The White House has released a memo from President Donald Trump’s physician explaining recent visible changes in his limbs, which some observers had taken as indicators of a serious health condition. In a memo issued Thursday, Dr. Sean P. Barbabella said Trump has been diagnosed with chronic venous insufficiency, a condition he described as “benign” and common among people over the age of 70. Trump, 79, was recently seen with swelling in his legs, which Dr. Barbabella attributed to the condition. Chronic venous insufficiency is typically age-related and involves malfunctioning of one-way valves in the veins, which are responsible for returning blood to the heart.

The legs are often affected because the veins there must work harder against gravity. People who spend extended periods standing are more susceptible to the disorder. According to the statement, no signs of more serious vascular conditions – such as deep vein thrombosis – were found. Barbabella also explained that recurring bruising on the back of Trump’s right hand was the result of “soft tissue irritation from frequent handshaking” and preventive aspirin use. While swelling in Trump’s ankles gained attention last week, the bruises on his hand have been visible since at least October, fueling speculation that he was undergoing intravenous treatment.

Trump and his staff have repeatedly said the marks are due to vigorous handshaking. Many senior US officials are of advanced age. Critics argue that the country’s political system favors seniority and has effectively turned into a gerontocracy. President Joe Biden’s age became a major campaign issue during last year’s presidential election. His aides were accused of hiding signs of cognitive decline to keep him in the race. Biden dropped out of the campaign less than four months before Election Day after a disastrous debate performance against Trump.

Read more …

“With inflation low, retail sales high, and with a previously reported drop in U.S. imports, the second quarter GDP is likely to be much stronger than anyone previously predicted..”

• Navarro: Why Retail Sales Growth Exceeds all Wall Street Projections (CTH)

White House Trade and Economic Advisor Peter Navarro takes a well deserved victory lap on the latest U.S. consumer sales news. The Census Bureau report yesterday highlighted that consumer sales remain strong at +0.6%, significantly higher than all economists forecast. Retail sales growth is important because approximately two-thirds of the U.S. GDP growth is driven by consumer sales. With inflation low, retail sales high, and with a previously reported drop in U.S. imports, the second quarter GDP is likely to be much stronger than anyone previously predicted. Thus, Peter Navarro is leaning forward against the naysayers. This is essentially a repeat of the 2017/2018 economic outcome from President Trump’s first term in office.

The tariffs, which are applied to the ‘cost’ side of the dynamic, are mostly being absorbed by major producing nations who are reliant upon export to the U.S. market. Simultaneously, the tariffs are generating income – essentially exfiltrating foreign wealth and returning those funds to the USA; a complete reversal of the rust-belt dynamic. What Peter Navarro outlines is the core of MAGAnomics. This is also the baseline for our CTH assembly in support of economic nationalism, which is why we ended up in conflict with the Chamber of Commerce Republicans. Tariffs are a tool to leverage reciprocal trade, and as long as nations like China continue taking measures to subsidize their exports, the tariffs simultaneously take wealth (those subsidies) from Beijing and return it to the USA.

This reality has always been the model we predicted would be successful for Americans, and I will remind everyone that ONLY DONALD TRUMP could deliver this MAGAnomic program. Everything else, Epstein, Musk, etc. is chaff and countermeasures deployed by both Democrats and Republicans in an effort to take back control of the money flow. Remember, Democrats want power – Republicans want money. Democrats use money to get power, while Republicans use power to get money. This is how the two-wings of the DC UniParty vulture maintain status. You can see that if you take away the money, democrats lose power.

Simultaneously if you take away control of the money, the republicans go bananas. This dual reality forms the baseline of the elite club opposition against President Trump. At the core of the opposition you find money, control of the USA treasury as a weapon. When you understand that aspect, you understand the motives of Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell. FED Chair Powell’s refusal to lower interest rates is an attempt to assist both wings of DC by trying -and failing- to influence the money flows. Democrats support Powell’s approach because they want power. Republicans are willfully blind to Powell’s approach because they want to get back in control of the money. Pro-America economic policy, MAGAnomics, is like kryptonite to Washington DC.

Read more …

People easily get nervous about their pensions.

• Trump Eyes Executive Order To Open Up Retirement Funds To Crypto: FT (CT)

US President Donald Trump is reportedly set to sign an executive order that could allow American 401(k) retirement plans to invest in alternative assets outside of stocks and bonds, such as cryptocurrencies. The executive order could be signed sometime this week, the Financial Times reported on Thursday, citing three people who have been briefed on the plans. The new 401(k) investment options could run across a broad spectrum of assets, including digital assets, metals and funds focused on infrastructure deals, corporate takeovers and private loans. The executive order would instruct Washington regulatory agencies to investigate the best path forward for 401(k) plans to start investing in crypto, and investigate any remaining obstacles to making it a reality, according to the Financial Times.

However, in a statement to Cointelegraph, White House spokesman Kush Desai said nothing should be deemed as official unless it comes from Trump himself. “President Trump is committed to restoring prosperity for everyday Americans and safeguarding their economic future,” he said. “No decisions should be deemed official, however, unless they come from President Trump himself.” In May, the US Labor Department rescinded guidance issued during the Biden administration that limited the inclusion of cryptocurrency in 401(k) retirement plans. Meanwhile, in April, Cointelegraph reported that financial services company Fidelity, which has $5.9 trillion in assets under management, introduced a new retirement account allowing Americans to invest in crypto.

A 401(k) is a retirement savings plan offered by many US employers that allows employees to save and invest a portion of their paycheck in the funds before taxes are taken out. Typically, investments focus on mutual funds, exchange-traded funds, stocks and bonds, depending on the plan. The 401(k) market held $8.9 trillion in assets as of Sept. 30, 2024, in more than 715,000 plans. At a state level, in March, North Carolina lawmakers already introduced bills in the House and Senate that could see the state’s treasurer allocate up to 5% of various state retirement funds into crypto like Bitcoin. In November last year, the United Kingdom-based pension specialist Cartwright reported that an “unnamed scheme” had made a 3% allocation of Bitcoin into its pension fund. Meanwhile, Japan’s Government Pension Investment Fund was also considering Bitcoin as a potential diversification tool in March last year.

Read more …

“Strikes against objects in the so-called Ukraine, including Kiev, will be carried out with increasing force..”

• Ukraine’s ‘Rout’ Will Continue – Medvedev (RT)

Russia will continue to rout Ukrainian forces on the battlefield despite the EU’s decision to impose its 18th package of sanctions against the country, former President Dmitry Medvedev said on Friday. The EU member states had approved the sweeping economic restrictions earlier in the day, mostly targeting Russia’s energy and financial sectors, in another attempt to pressure the country over the Ukraine conflict. Moscow has repeatedly condemned the sanctions as “illegal.” The measures will not derail Moscow with regards to the conflict any more than the previous 17 packages did, according to Medvedev, who now serves as deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council.

“Our economy will, of course, survive, and the rout of the Banderite regime will continue. Strikes against objects in the so-called Ukraine, including Kiev, will be carried out with increasing force,” he wrote on Telegram. Moscow should politically steer away from the EU and distance itself from the bloc, he added. Brussels’ new sanctions bar all transactions with 22 additional banks, as well as with the Russian Direct Investment Fund. The package also imposes a ban on utilizing the Nord Stream gas pipelines, which were mostly disabled by sabotage in 2022 and have remained unused since.

The ban also bars the provision of goods and services for the pipeline, “thus preventing the completion, maintenance, operation and any future use” of the gas infrastructure, the European Council said in a statement on Friday. Additionally, the new restrictions add a further 105 ships to a blacklist of what Brussels calls the “shadow fleet” engaged in transporting Russian crude and bypassing the bloc’s “price cap” on Moscow’s oil exports. The sanctions lower the price ceiling and add a mechanism for adjusting to future changes in market conditions. Russia has “built up a certain immunity” to sanctions and “adapted to life” under them, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told journalists on Friday, commenting on the EU decision.

Read more …

Guess they don’t mind looking stupid.

• EU Reveals 18th Sanctions Package Against Moscow (RT)

The EU has managed to approve its 18th sanctions package against Russia over the Ukraine conflict, targeting Moscow’s energy and banking sectors, the bloc’s foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas has said. The Kremlin has decried the unilateral restrictions by Brussels as “illegal.” A previous attempt to greenlight the package, which requires the approval of all 27 member states, failed earlier this week due to opposition from Slovakia. However, Bratislava said on Thursday that it would be “counterproductive” to block the sanctions further, after it received guarantees from the European Commission regarding the availability of gas and oil. Following the meeting of EU ambassadors in Brussels on Friday, Kallas wrote in a post on X that the bloc “just approved one of its strongest sanctions packages against Russia to date.”

According to Kallas, the bloc will maintain economic pressure on Moscow until the Ukraine conflict is settled. Russia has on numerous occasions expressed its readiness to explore a diplomatic solution with Kiev, but insists that it should be legally binding and address the root causes of the crisis. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov noted later on Friday that Moscow “repeatedly said that we consider such unilateral restrictions to be illegal. We oppose them.” Russia has already obtained “a certain immunity” and adapted to functioning under the sanctions, he stressed. Peskov also pointed out that the economic curbs are a “double-edged sword,” which creates “a negative effect” not only for Moscow, but also for the state which impose them.

The new sanctions ban transactions with 22 Russian banks and the Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF), and forbids the use of the Nord Stream gas pipelines, which were crippled by underwater blasts in 2022 and remain inoperable, diplomatic sources have told Euronews. The measures also upgrade the EU price cap on Russian crude oil, fixed at $60 per barrel, replacing it with a dynamic mechanism that remains 15% lower than the average market price, according to the sources. In addition, the curbs add another 105 vessels to a blacklist of what Brussels calls the “shadow fleet” involved in transporting Russian oil, bypassing the bloc’s restrictions, they said. This puts the overall number of tanker ships denied access to EU ports and service at over 400.

Since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict, Russia has redirected its energy sales to Asia, with China and India being the main buyers. Some member countries, including Hungary and Slovakia, have been critical of the EU sanctions against Russia, saying that they harm the bloc’s economy, while being unable to stop the fighting between Moscow and Kiev.

Read more …

“Last year, despite all the sanctions pressure, Russia’s GDP grew by 4.3%, versus a 0.7% growth rate in the Eurozone..”

• Putin Aide Gives Verdict On New EU Sanctions (RT)

EU sanctions on Russia are far more damaging to the bloc’s member states than they are to Moscow, presidential investment envoy Kirill Dmitriev said on Telegram on Friday. Brussels announced the adoption of its 18th package of sanctions against Russia earlier in the day, targeting the country’s hydrocarbon exports and banking sector. One of the financial institutions sanctioned was the Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF), of which Dmitriev is the CEO. According to the presidential envoy, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen pushed for sanctions on the fund because the RDIF “facilitates the settlement of the Ukrainian conflict, promotes dialogue between Russia and the United States, and invests in the growth of the Russian economy.”

The EU elite is afraid of peace and continues to remain captive to hostile narratives, destroying the economy of the entire EU with its own hands.The economic restrictions are destructive to bloc member states, depriving them of stable energy supplies and access to the Russian market, Dmitriev argued. “Last year, despite all the sanctions pressure, Russia’s GDP grew by 4.3%, versus a 0.7% growth rate in the Eurozone,” he said. The RDIF calls for “unwinding the sanctions spiral,” Dmitriev said. He argued that, despite the imposition of more than 30,000 sanctions against Russia, the measures have failed to force Moscow into acting “in opposition to Russian national interests.”

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Friday that Moscow has developed “a certain immunity” to the Western sanctions. According to Russian President Vladimir Putin, such unilateral economic restrictions harm the economies of the very states that turn to them. “The more sanctions are imposed, the greater the damage to the imposers,” at the Eurasian Economic Union summit in Minsk last month.

Read more …

“This budget would destroy the European Union. I don’t think this budget will even survive next year..”

• Brussels Budget Plan Could Destroy EU – Orban (RT)

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has sharply criticized the European Union’s proposed seven-year budget, claiming its primary objective is to facilitate Ukraine’s accession and warning that it could spell disaster for the bloc. Orban, a frequent critic of the EU leadership, blasted the draft Multiannual Financial Framework for 2028-2034, which was unveiled earlier this week by the European Commission, during an interview with Kossuth Radio on Friday. “This budget would destroy the European Union. I don’t think this budget will even survive next year,” Orban said. He predicted that the EU’s executive would either have to withdraw the proposal or make significant revisions before national governments would consider approving it.

The Hungarian leader accused the commission of proposing reckless cuts, particularly in agricultural subsidies, likening the approach to an unskilled surgeon who fatally injures a patient during a botched procedure. Orban reiterated his long-standing claim that Brussels is advancing foreign policy goals – namely, integration of Ukraine – at the expense of EU citizens. “This budget has only one obvious purpose, and that is to admit Ukraine to the European Union,” he said, citing financial analysts who estimate that as much as 25% of the funds could be directed toward benefiting Kiev in various forms.

The Hungarian leader said he did not expect Ukraine to qualify for EU membership anytime soon, adding that officials in Brussels are presenting Kiev as “already overripe” for entry. He cautioned that once Ukraine were admitted, the decision would be virtually irreversible regardless of future consequences. The European Commission has defended the proposed €2 trillion ($2.33 trillion) budget, saying it would increase flexibility, reduce bureaucracy, and boost economic competitiveness. Orban, however, dismissed it as a “budget of hopelessness,” better suited for a bloc “preparing for stagnation and merely trying to avoid disintegration.”

Read more …

Talking about the EU…

• France a ‘Fiscal Time Bomb’ For EU – Bloomberg (RT)

France’s efforts to tackle its growing deficit have reignited concerns about EU stability, with financial markets bracing for the fallout, Bloomberg has reported, citing ING Groep NV strategists. The euro dropped to a one-month low this week, driven by tensions over French Prime Minister Francois Bayrou’s massive deficit-cutting plan. His proposals, including slashing public sector jobs and curbing welfare spending, could fuel debate in France’s minority government and undermine investor confidence, the strategists warned. In a note seen by Bloomberg, currency strategist Francesco Pesole warned on Wednesday that while the euro’s decline was largely dollar-driven, it was also due to political and fiscal challenges in France.

“The French deficit story has been very much in the background as of late, but [Tuesday] probably served as a reminder that it is a ticking bomb for EU sentiment,” Pesole wrote, adding “We could start seeing some FX spillovers in the coming months.” Bayrou’s €43.8 billion ($50.9 billion) plan targets a deficit that reached 5.8% of GDP last year – double the EU’s 3% limit. He warned on Tuesday that excessive debt posed a “mortal danger” and proposed scrapping public holidays to boost productivity and freezing pensions. The proposals have faced backlash, with left-wing parties accusing the government of prioritizing military spending over social welfare. Jean-Luc Melenchon, leader of La France Insoumise, called for Bayrou’s resignation, saying “these injustices cannot be tolerated any longer.”

France’s military budget is slated to rise to €64 billion in 2027, double what the country spent in 2017. President Emmanuel Macron has announced an additional €6.5 billion in funding over the next two years, citing heightened threats to European security. A new defense review released this month warned of a potential “major war” in Europe by 2030, listing Moscow among the top threats. The Kremlin has dismissed claims it is planning to attack the West, accusing NATO of using Russia as a pretext for military expansion. Bayrou, who has survived eight no-confidence motions, must secure parliamentary backing for his proposals before presenting the full budget in October. The right-wing National Rally party has opposed the cuts and called for another vote on his government.

Read more …

Quite a few have woken up.

• Freedom Caucus Attempts to Block Central Bank Digital Currency (Caldwell)

After slowing down the Republican leadership’s attempt to advance a bundle of cryptocurrency market reform bills, the conservative House Freedom Caucus and its allies appear to have secured a promise to prohibit the Federal Reserve from issuing a digital U.S. dollar. Caucus members contend that’s a victory for Americans’ freedoms. The deal allowed for House Republicans to advance three important pieces of cryptocurrency legislation and stick to a sufficient timeline for passing a rescissions bill defunding public broadcasting and foreign aid facing a Friday deadline. “This is a significant win for the American people as a government-controlled digital currency poses a direct threat to financial privacy and economic freedom,” House Freedom Caucus Chairman Andy Harris, R-Md., wrote on the social media platform X on Wednesday night after securing an agreement with House leadership to put anti-central bank digital currency provisions in the annual defense authorization bill.

“By securing these protections, we will be taking a critical step to stop government overreach and to preserve individual liberty,” he added. But the agreement came only after a multiday slog of negotiations on Capitol Hill. On Tuesday, House GOP leadership brought a rule to the House floor to advance three cryptocurrency bills: the GENIUS, CLARITY, and Anti-CBDC Surveillance acts. The rule ultimately failed. The GENIUS and CLARITY acts resolve questions about the regulatory framework surrounding cryptocurrency, which has long been messy and decentralized, with a number of regulators navigating vague boundaries. But Freedom Caucus members and their allies expressed concerns that Congress might pass these first two acts, but neglect to advance safeguards against central bank digital currency.

Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, explained Wednesday that he and his conservative cohort view a government digital currency as a threat to liberty and privacy. “We believe a line in the sand is that we’ve got to have an emphatic statement from the government of the United States that the government is not going to be tracking your money to prevent you from being able to buy guns … to buy gasoline, if they want to go to all [electric vehicles],” he said. “To prevent you from being able to live your life freely and be able to monitor your transactions like the Chinese Communist Party. We don’t do that here. This is a country that’s supposed to embrace freedom,” Roy said. The vote on the rule to advance the three crypto bills failed 196-223 on Tuesday when 13 Republicans joined Democrats in opposition, demanding that leadership embed anti-CBDC provisions into one of the other pieces of cryptocurrency legislation.

President Donald Trump met with the GOP holdouts at the White House on Tuesday night and shortly afterward announced he had come to a deal with the members, who “all agreed to vote tomorrow morning in favor of the rule.” The next day, Harris said, they had found a deal with the White House to insert anti-CBDC provisions into the CLARITY Act. “Under this agreement, the Rules Committee will reconvene later [Wednesday] to add clear, strong anti–central bank digital currency (CBDC) provisions to the CLARITY legislation,” he wrote. But the agreement ran into some headwinds quickly when the House Rules Committee canceled its planned 4 p.m. meeting. “There was some sort of an agreement that doesn’t appear to exist anymore, and that’s all I got to say,” said Roy.

Punchbowl News reported that much of this gridlock was due to worries from Chairman French Hill, R-Ark., of the Financial Services Committee and Chairman Glenn Thompson, R-Pa., of the Agriculture Committee, since adding anti-CBDC provisions might make passing the CLARITY Act more difficult. “I think those discussions actually continue,” Hill said Wednesday of Trump’s negotiations with holdouts. The Wednesday vote ended up being the longest recorded vote in the history of the House of Representatives, breaking a record that was set earlier this month when leadership advanced the budget reconciliation measure known as the “Big, Beautiful Bill.” The gridlock was ultimately resolved late in the night when leadership came up with a final compromise—inserting anti-CBDC provisions into the annual National Defense Authorization Act.

This compromise yielded the votes to advance the three cryptocurrency bills. The rule passed 217-212 after being held open for more than nine hours. “House Freedom Caucus Members reached an agreement tonight to advance the president’s cryptocurrency agenda and, as part of this agreement, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) will include strong anti–Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) protections in this must-pass legislation,” Harris wrote Wednesday night. He added, “This is exactly why the House Freedom Caucus fights—‘Freedom‘ is our middle name—and we will continue to fight to protect the rights of Americans every day.” House Majority Whip Tom Emmer, R-Minn., who created the anti-CBDC bill, also applauded integrating the CBDC legislation into the defense authorization bill.

https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1945941691313144182

“Even Republicans years ago were saying ‘Oh, we’re falling behind the Chinese; they have the digital yuan.’ You know what they use that for? That is a surveillance tool,” he said Thursday. “That is completely against any American value that we know of, and we’ve got to prevent our central government from ever creating this surveillance tool here in the United States of America.” Rep. Tim Burchett, R-Tenn., who was a holdout throughout the process, spoke proudly of the deal. “We did what we set out to do. We went a little slower, and guess what—we got there a little faster,” he said shortly after the vote. “Big Brother loses once again.” Now, it will be up to Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, R-La., to hold the Senate’s feet to the fire to keep the anti-CBDC provisions in the NDAA. The GENIUS Act ultimately passed on a 308-122 vote Thursday. The CLARITY Act also passed, 294-134. The Anti-CBDC Surveillance Act passed by a much narrower 219-210 margin. GENIUS will now go to the president’s desk for final signature.

Read more …

“..Ghislaine’s attorneys, unless they are bought off or threatened, should have her out of prison tomorrow..”

• Release Ghislaine Maxwell (Paul Craig Roberts)

Ghislaine has been convicted for being an accessory to Epstein’s sex-trafficking of underaged kids. But we now have it from President Trump and the Attorney General of the United States that there is no Epstein client list that provides proof that Epstein was engaged in sex-trafficking for “at least a decade” as the BBC claims. Did Epstein keep all his clients, dates, times, and partners in his head? If there is no client list and nothing in the Epstein file, how were Epstein and Ghislaine convicted? Where is the evidence? As officially there is no evidence, Ghislaine’s attorneys, unless they are bought off or threatened, should have her out of prison tomorrow. Trump and Bondi obviously did not realize the consequences of denying the undeniable. Their denial has not disposed of the problem but has elevated it.

But what if there was no sex-trafficking? What if Epstein’s operation was a honey pot entrapment of American elites? Epstein did not need to make money sex-trafficking underage kids. He was well endowed by Mossad. Epstein’s job was to provide blackmail information that Israel could use to force the foreign policy of the United States to conform with the foreign policy of Israel. He succeeded. The American Establishment, those on the client list, called on Trump as did Netanyahu. Unless you are insouciant, you have noticed that Netanyahu rushed to the White House for the third time in six months, allegedly to discuss the Iranian threat. But there was no news conference. There has been no reporting of what was discussed. Such an important meeting, and no reportable results.

My take is that Netanyahu appeared in order to add Israel’s heavy weight to that of the ruling American Establishment that release of Epstein information is a no-no. If the Epstein files are released, then all the years of work, expense, and effort put into collecting blackmail capability over the American ruling class is wasted. Once the files are released and the information is pubic, Israel’s blackmail information is useless. Moreover, it becomes public knowledge that Israel was blackmailing the American elite to serve Israel’s, not America’s interest. The American Establishment cannot afford to have itself discredited, and Mossad cannot afford to have its blackmail information over the ruling American Establishment made worthless by its public exposure. That, dear reader, is the story of the Epstein Saga.

Read more …

“Today, every AI developer is one bad headline away from a class action lawsuit..”

• American AI Could Die in Court Before It Ever Takes Off (Rotella)

“Uh oh—have you guys completed your income tax? Things kind of happened real fast down there, and I need an extension.”—Apollo 13 astronaut Jack Swigert. Even in space, Americans worry about taxes. That’s not a screenwriter’s joke. Hours before Apollo 13 almost ended in disaster, astronaut Jack Swigert, called in as a last-minute replacement, wasn’t worried about launch. He was worried about filing his taxes. Only in America could bureaucracy follow you into orbit. That story says everything about our national identity. We cherish the rule of law. We believe in due process. But in the race to lead in artificial intelligence, it’s becoming clear: The very systems we treasure may be the ones slowing us down.

The 2 Biggest Threats to US Artificial Intelligence Leadership. Right now, America is out front in both generative AI (which predicts content) and agentic AI (which makes autonomous decisions). But two very American forces are putting that lead at risk:

(1) A regulatory Rubik’s Cube. Congress recently passed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act to jumpstart AI innovation. But it stripped out a crucial provision: a 10-year moratorium on conflicting state-level AI laws. Now, companies face 50 different interpretations of what AI is allowed to do. Some states require bias audits. Others impose disclosure mandates. A tool that’s legal in Florida could get fined in California. Even top-tier compliance lawyers can’t map it all out fast enough. Because AI models cross state lines the moment they’re deployed, this isn’t just inefficient, it’s paralyzing.

(2) A litigation gold rush. Trial lawyers have found their next deep-pocketed target: AI. I say this as someone who used to be one of them and now defends companies against the legal risks of AI deployment. Lawsuits are already moving. The most prominent? A federal case against UnitedHealthcare, accusing the company of using AI to deny long-term care without sufficient human oversight. And that’s only the beginning. The playbook is already forming.

Here are the claims AI developers are now defending against:
• Product liability for algorithmic defects.
• Failure to warn about tool misuse.
• Discrimination based on automated decisions.
• Negligence for not keeping a “human in the loop.”

In America, you don’t have to prove intent. Just tie the harm to an AI tool and let a jury decide. Today, every AI developer is one bad headline away from a class action lawsuit. Let’s be clear: Our legal system is the envy of the world. But when lawsuits are filed before laws are even written, we aren’t protecting consumers, we’re punishing innovators for playing on a field without any lines drawn. Let me be crystal clear: We do not want China’s system. We don’t want central planning. We don’t want censorship. And we don’t want a government-controlled tech industry. But it would be naive to pretend China faces the same friction.

Yes, they have courts. But they don’t have:
• Billboards from class action lawyers.
• Contingency-fee lawsuits built around algorithmic outcomes.
• Juries “sending a message” to tech companies with punitive damages.
• Their developers don’t plan around litigation. Ours have to.

While companies like Nvidia plead to sell advanced chips to China after the H20 export ban was lifted, Beijing isn’t waiting around. It’s racing ahead, deploying AI in defense, logistics, and manufacturing without lawsuits, regulators, or legal second-guessing. We don’t envy China. But we must acknowledge that its AI teams aren’t operating with a target on their back. We’ve been here before. In 1996, Congress passed Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, shielding internet platforms from liability for user-generated content. That one provision allowed Amazon, YouTube, and countless others to thrive. We need an AI-specific shield now, a legal safe harbor that ensures developers aren’t liable for what users do with their tools, unless there’s fraud or criminal intent. Without it, legal departments will keep killing products before they launch.

Congress must also revisit a national moratorium on conflicting state AI laws. National consistency doesn’t mean more bureaucracy. It means sane, scalable innovation. This is our Apollo 13 moment. We have the best technology. We have the best talent. We have an entrepreneurial fire. But we’re losing altitude because the systems designed to protect us are choking progress. Let’s not become the bureaucracy we escaped to get to the moon. Let’s be the country that answered Apollo 13’s “Houston, we have a problem” and brought our tax-conscious astronauts safely back home. Let’s fix this the American way with clear rules, real urgency, and freedom that actually works.

Read more …

If you let a machine do all your thinking, you will lose the ability.

• Artificial Intelligence Breeds Mindless Inhumanity (RCW)

I began studying AI in the mid-1980s. Unusually for a computer scientist of that era, my interest was entirely in information, not in machines. I became obsessed with understanding what it meant to live during the transition from the late Industrial Age to the early Information Age. What I learned is that computers fundamentally alter the economics of information. We now have inexpensive access to more information, and to higher quality information, than ever before. In theory, that should help individuals reach better decisions, organizations devise improved strategies, and governments craft superior policies. But that’s just a theory. Does it? The answer is “sometimes.” Unfortunately, the “sometimes not” part of the equation is now poised to unleash devastating consequences.

Consider the altered economics of information: Scarcity creates value. That’s been true in all times, in all cultures, and for all resources. If there’s not enough of a resource to meet demand, its value increases. If demand is met and a surplus remains, value plummets. Historically, information was scarce. Spies, lawyers, doctors, priests, scientists, scholars, accountants, teachers, and others spent years acquiring knowledge, then commanded a premium for their services. Today, information is overabundant. No one need know anything because the trusty phones that never leave our sides can answer any question that might come our way. Why waste your time learning, studying, or internalizing information when you can just look it up on demand?

Having spent the past couple of years working in higher education reform and in conversation with college students, I’ve come to appreciate the power—and the danger—of this question. Today’s students have weaker general backgrounds than we’ve seen for many generations because when information ceased being scarce, it lost all value. It’s important to recall how recently this phenomenon began. In 2011, an estimated one-third of Americans, and one-quarter of American teenagers, had smartphones. From there, adoption among the young grew faster than among the general population. Current estimates are that over 90 percent of Americans, and over 95 percent of teenagers, have smartphone access. Even rules limiting classroom use cannot overcome the cultural shift.

Few of today’s college students or recent grads have ever operated without the ability to scout ahead or query a device for information on an as-needed basis. There’s thus no reason for them to have ever developed the discipline or the practices that form the basis for learning. The deeper problem, however, is that while instant lookup may work well for facts, it’s deadly for comprehension and worse for moral thinking. A quick lookup can list every battle of WWII, along with casualty statistics and outcome. It cannot reveal the strategic or ethical deliberations driving the belligerents as they entered that battle. Nor can it explain why Churchill fought for the side of good while Hitler fought for the side of evil—a question that our most popular interviewers and podcasters have recently brought to prominence.

At least, lookup couldn’t provide such answers until recently. New AI systems—still less than three years old—are rushing to fill that gap. They already offer explanations and projections, at times including the motives underlying given decisions. They are beginning to push into moral judgments. Of course, like all search and pattern-matching tools, these systems can only extrapolate from what they find. They thus tend to magnify whatever is popular. They’re also easy prey for some of the most basic cognitive biases. They tend to overweight the recent, the easily available, the widely repeated, and anything that confirms pre-conceived models. The recent reports of Grok regurgitating crude antisemitic stereotypes and slogans illustrate the technological half of the problem.

The shocking wave of terror-supporting actions wracking college campuses and drawing recent grads in many of our cities illustrate the human half. The abundance of information has destroyed its value. Because information—facts and data—are the building blocks upon which all understanding must rest, we’ve raised a generation incapable of deep understanding. Because complex moral judgments build upon comprehension, young Americans are also shorn of basic morality We are rapidly entering a world in which widespread access to voluminous information is producing worse—not better—decisions and actions at all levels. We have outsourced knowledge, comprehension, and judgment to sterile devices easily biased to magnify popular opinion. We have bred a generation of exquisitely credentialed, deeply immoral, anti-intellectuals on the brink of entering leadership.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/Kimberl59898021/status/1946007846857871636

https://twitter.com/buitengebieden/status/1945944408462893332
https://twitter.com/buitengebieden/status/1946104683568705589

https://twitter.com/itsme_urstruly/status/1945935561019281734

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle July 7 2025

Jul 072025
 
 July 7, 2025  Posted by at 9:16 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , ,  57 Responses »


Pablo Picasso Still life with fruit basket 1942

 

• Trump Calls Musk A ‘Train Wreck’ (RT)
• Some In GOP Say ‘Big, Beautiful Bill’ Will Only Cost $441 Billion By 2034 (JTN)
• Bongino Drops a Truth Bomb Destroying the New York Times (Margolis)
• Bongino Drops a Truth Bomb Destroying the New York Times (Margolis)
• EU Trade Team Accepting Baseline Tariffs (CTH)
• Zelensky’s Latest Call With Trump Was ‘Most Productive’ He’s Ever Had (ZH)
• NATO Talk Becoming Toxic – Kiev (RT)
• Moscow Outlines Why Zelensky Wants To Meet With Putin (RT)
• NATO Chief ‘On Magic Mushrooms’ – Medvedev (RT)
• Slovakia ‘Ready To Fight’ For Russian Gas – Fico (RT)
• Superintelligence Will Never Arrive (Jim Rickards)
• Fresh Obama-Biden Feud Details Are Here And They’re Delicious (Margolis)
• Trump Lawsuit Exposes Uncomfortable Truths About Pulitzer Prizes (JTN)
• When the Drones are Coming, They Turn Off the Internet (CTH)

 

 

https://twitter.com/MustangMedicX/status/1941590425879576811

Butler
https://twitter.com/TheGabriel72/status/1941925223411884368

 

 

 

 

Is this even a real feud?

• Trump Calls Musk A ‘Train Wreck’ (RT)

US President Donald Trump has lashed out at Elon Musk over the tech billionaire’s plan to launch a new political party, accusing him of promoting “disruption and chaos” and undermining the stability of the American political system. In a post on Truth Social late Sunday, Trump criticized Musk for what he described as erratic behavior in recent weeks, calling the entrepreneur a “train wreck.” He claimed that Musk’s proposal to form a third party – dubbed the “America Party” – would fail and only serve to divide voters. “I am saddened to watch Elon Musk go completely ‘off the rails,’ essentially becoming a TRAIN WRECK over the past five weeks,” Trump wrote. “He even wants to start a Third Political Party, despite the fact that they have never succeeded in the United States – the system seems not designed for them.”

“The one thing Third Parties are good for is the creation of Complete and Total DISRUPTION & CHAOS,” the president added, accusing the Democratic Party for already bringing “enough of that.” Trump also defended his recently signed multitrillion-dollar spending package, dubbed the “Big Beautiful Bill,” which has drawn sharp criticism from Musk. The president claimed that the billionaire opposed the legislation only because it eliminated federal electric vehicle mandates that had benefited Musk’s business. Trump also took issue with Musk’s alleged attempt to have one of his associates appointed to run NASA, noting that the candidate was a Democrat and that the appointment would have raised concerns over a conflict of interest, given Musk’s ties to the space industry.

“My number one charge is to protect the American public!” Trump wrote. The remarks follow Musk’s announcement on Friday that he is moving ahead with the creation of the America Party, pledging to “give freedom back to the people” and attacking both major parties for “bankrupting” the country. The billionaire did not elaborate on how much progress he had made with the plan but briefly outlined his strategy and hinted that the first move could be expected “next year,” during the US midterm elections in November 2026, when 33 of the 100 Senate seats and all 435 House seats will be up for grabs. “The way we’re going to crack the uniparty system is by using a variant of how Epaminondas shattered the myth of Spartan invincibility at Leuctra: extremely concentrated force at a precise location on the battlefield,” Musk stated.

Musk previously insisted that his criticism of Trump and his policies was not about subsidies but was triggered by a sharp budget deficit hike he had been recruited to reduce. The tech billionaire was one of the key figures in the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), a much-hyped temporary organization established to cut budget costs and excessive federal spending. Since the honeymoon ended, Musk and Trump have been locked in a recurring war of words, with the US president accusing his former close ally of receiving more US government subsidies “than any human being in history,” threatening to sic DOGE on him, and even mulling a potential deportation of the South African-born entrepreneur.

Read more …

“..which budgetary baseline is used: the current law baseline, always used to calculate tax cut impact on the deficit, or the current policy baseline, always used to calculate federal spending impact on the deficit..”

• Some In GOP Say ‘Big, Beautiful Bill’ Will Only Cost $441 Billion By 2034 (JTN)

Republicans’ “big, beautiful bill” is under fire from budget watchdogs for permanently extending the bulk of the expiring 2017 tax cuts, a move that puts the total cost of the bill at $4.5 trillion and would lead to a primary deficit increase of $3.3 trillion by 2034. But Republican congressional leaders and the White House believe that a more accurate cost-analysis would zero out the impact of codifying the tax cuts, making the net cost of the budget reconciliation bill only $441 billion over the next decade. The drastic difference depends on which budgetary baseline is used: the current law baseline, always used to calculate tax cut impact on the deficit, or the current policy baseline, always used to calculate federal spending impact on the deficit.

Using the traditional current law baseline, however, would not allow Republicans to make the tax cuts permanent without having to find trillions more savings. So they adopted the current policy baseline in their version of the “big, beautiful bill,” breaking historical precedent. The Congressional Budget Office says this pivot merely papers over the true $3.3 trillion cost. Current law baseline assumes that extending tax cuts will directly cost the federal government however much taxpayers will save. But Republicans are arguing that maintaining existing tax rates should not be treated the same as a federal spending increase. White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller noted in a social media post that “private money yet to be earned does not ‘belong’ to the government…CBO says maintaining *current* rates adds to the deficit, but by definition leaving these income tax rates unchanged cannot add one penny to the deficit.”

Miller and others also argue that the baseline disparity encourages fiscal irresponsibility by treating tax cliffs and spending cliffs differently. By using the current policy baseline for determining the cost of federal spending extensions, CBO assumes that perpetually reauthorizing expiring federal spending costs nothing, as it simply maintains the status quo. CBO also automatically accounts for inflation in appropriations spending, treating increased appropriations spending as an extension of current policy and thus having no impact on the deficit. The majority of budget analysts have countered that even if the scoring methods should be changed, it still won’t change the deficit impact of the “big, beautiful bill” and will set a dangerous precedent for future budget reconciliation bills.

The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget stated Wednesday that the Senate’s use of current policy baseline “poisons the environment for bipartisan budget and trust fund deals – by signaling that the majority party will unilaterally add to the debt by cutting taxes and pad their appropriations priorities.” House lawmakers are expected to vote on the Senate’s changes to the bill Wednesday. If they approve the Senate’s use of current policy baseline to score the tax cuts, they will open the door for any future majority party to use the same tactic.

Read more …

If so, name one reason why Ghislaine is in jail.

• FBI Epstein Memo: No Clients, No Blackmail, Definitely Killed Himself (HUSA)

Deceased financier Jeffrey Epstein and his colleague, Ghislaine Maxwell, were both charged by the Justice Department with sex trafficking—and Maxwell was convicted. But according to the DOJ, the two apparently didn’t have any clients. In a bombshell FBI memo leaked to Axios and published Sunday night, officials said they’ve reviewed more than 300 gigabytes of Epstein evidence—and haven’t found any vast human trafficking or sexual blackmail operation. “This systematic review revealed no incriminating ‘client list.’ There was also no credible evidence found that Epstein blackmailed prominent individuals as part of his actions. We did not uncover evidence that could predicate an investigation against uncharged third parties,” the unsigned memo said.

The FBI also reiterated its previous claim that Epstein did kill himself. In an attempt to demonstrate that Epstein’s cellblock was secure the night he purportedly killed himself, the FBI released footage from the once camera that was recording. However, the camera only showed a tiny sliver of a staircase leading to Epstein’s cell. According to a DOJ-OIG report released in 2023, only two cameras in Epstein’s housing unit were recording—and those cameras had numerous blind spots. The camera in Epstein’s cell block, which had at least three other inmates, wasn’t recording. Nor was the camera covering one of the elevator bays that led to Epstein’s floor. The DOJ-OIG report also revealed that prison officials actually knew about the malfunctioning cameras the day before Epstein died.

Inspector General Michael Horowitz said his staff interviewed an MCC technician, who started to repair the cameras on Aug. 8, 2019, but did not finish his work. The technician told the inspector general he had “no idea” why he did not stay at the facility to resolve the problem that day. Epstein’s death was ruled a suicide by hanging after he was found dead in his jail cell on August 10, 2019. But his lawyers contested that claim. Skeptics point to malfunctioning surveillance cameras, sleeping guards, and broken bones in Epstein’s neck as indications that his death was something other than suicide. Because of Epstein’s extensive fraternization with high-profile politicians and celebrities such as Bill Clinton, former Israeli PM Ehud Barak, Prince Andrew and Bill Gates and many more, some claim that Epstein’s death was actually a hit job to silence him. Proponents of that theory include Epstein’s former partner, Maxwell, who’s serving a 20-year prison sentence for sex trafficking.

“I believe that he was murdered. I was shocked, and I wondered, ‘How did this happen?’ Because I was sure he was going to appeal, and I was sure he was covered by the non-prosecution agreement,” Maxwell told British reporter Jeremy Kyle of TalkTV in 2023. The non-prosecution agreement referenced by Maxwell was a sweetheart deal Epstein signed with the Department of Justice in 2008, in which he pleaded guilty to a state charge of procuring for prostitution a girl below the age of 18. Epstein was housed in a private wing of the Palm Beach County Stockade, and was reportedly allowed to leave the jail on “work release” for up to 12 hours a day. After the Miami Herald published an expose on Epstein and his non-prosecution agreement in late 2018, Epstein was arrested again on July 6, 2019, on federal charges for the sex trafficking of minors in Florida and New York.

Read more …

From Bongino, whose office just released the Epstein memo: “..precisely why hard-working Americans simply do not trust the media.”

The media or the FBI?

• Bongino Drops a Truth Bomb Destroying the New York Times (Margolis)

On Saturday, the New York Times editorial board published an article claiming that Trump’s “politicized FBI” has “made Americans less safe.” That’s rich. I’m old enough to remember when the Obama administration and the Biden administration actually did weaponize the FBI against Donald Trump. And I’m pretty sure everyone on the NYT editorial board is, too. FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino wrote a scathing response to the article, calling it “precisely why hard-working Americans simply do not trust the media.” Bongino’s tweet, which quickly gained traction online, took direct aim at what he described as a “poorly thought out hit piece” that misrepresented the sweeping reforms he and Director Patel have implemented at the Bureau.

Bongino’s frustration was palpable as he laid out his case point by point, lambasting the Times for what he saw as a glaring lack of evidence to support their central claim. “The conclusion of the piece is so ridiculous that a child could debunk it,” Bongino wrote. He noted that the article’s authors “comically assert that you are ‘less safe’ because Kash and I have aggressively reformed the FBI. Yet, they produce NO evidence whatsoever to backup that claim. And the reason they don’t produced any evidence, is because the numbers tell the opposite story.”

Backing up his rebuttal with a barrage of statistics, Bongino offered a “small snippet of data points” that he says prove the effectiveness of the FBI’s new direction. Among the highlights, he touted the Bureau’s violent crime initiative, “Summer Heat,” which he notes has the murder rate “trending to be the lowest in U.S. history by a longshot.” He promised that “Summer Heat is coming to a city or town near you soon as we assist your community in removing criminal predators from the streets.” Bongino didn’t stop there. He detailed that the FBI’s renewed focus on violent crime has led to the arrest of 14,000 violent criminals—a 62% increase from the same period last year. “We rescued over one hundred children from being preyed on, while arresting over 825 violent child predators, and 140 human traffickers,” he added.

The numbers continued to pile up. Bongino reported that agents had “locked up 51 foreign intelligence operatives for spying and smuggling dangerous substances into our country.” He also highlighted the Bureau’s work with federal partners, stating, “we apprehended, imprisoned, and deported over 18,000 illegal aliens. Many of these illegal aliens had violent criminal histories. As a result, last month, again, ZERO illegals were admitted into our country. The same partners arrested nearly 800 rioters for attempting to stop enforcement operations.” Drug seizures were another point of pride: “We seized 44,000 kilos of cocaine, 3,500 kilos of meth, and 1,210 kilos of fentanyl in just the last few months. This is a 22% increase from the same time period last year.

“In addition, we locked up one of the most dangerous gang leaders in the county, and we dismantled gang operations in nearly every corner of the country, including the largest TDA gang takedown ever.” Bongino also noted progress on the FBI’s most wanted list: “We locked up 3 of the ‘Top-Ten’ most wanted FBI targets, and we’re closing in on another.” He hinted at further successes in counter-terrorism, stating, “I’d like to talk more about some of the incredible work being done by our counter-terror teams, but the information, as you would imagine, is classified. But I promise you, it’s happening.” The successes that Bongino reported are what happens when the FBI is focused on fighting crime, not settling political scores as it did under Obama and Biden. Yet the New York Times doesn’t care about facts, just their anti-Trump narrative.

Read more …

“There is no level of countervailing tariffs the EU can announce that impacts the position of Trump. Even if the EU were to end all trade with the USA, that only feeds into the goals and objectives of the Trump administration.”

• EU Trade Team Accepting Baseline Tariffs (CTH)

The intransigent European Union are hitting a dead end with immovable Trump on the issue of tariffs. The resulting dynamic is what we would expect given 75 years of the Marshall Plan (European Recovery Plan) as part of the EU’s only point of reference. In order for the EU to maintain their socialistic form of government, they need to continue the economic benefits from one-way tariffs that exploits the American consumer market. President Trump’s plan to force reciprocity is against their entire economic foundation. The EU simply cannot fathom life without the status quo. In many ways the EU is in the same position as Canada. From their perspective, economic reciprocity is not sustainable; they would have to change their social compacts. This is the core of the conflict. The EU trade delegation hit a brick wall in Washington DC, as the U.S. trade team reiterated the baseline tariffs are not something within the negotiation dynamic.

BRUSSELS — “The European Union is weighing a provisional trade deal with the United States that would maintain a 10 percent tariff on most exports, the European Commission told EU ambassadors on Friday. The EU executive reported back after a crucial round of talks in Washington on Thursday, in which Trade Commissioner Mar os Sefkovic sought to head off a threat by President Donald Trump to impose a 50 percent tariff on all European goods from July 9 if no deal is reached.

In addition to the baseline tariff, conversations would continue on providing relief to specific industry sectors such as cars, two national officials cited top Commission officials as saying. The outcome fell short of expectations in European capitals after the Commission’s trade negotiating team had previously said the possibility of “up-front” tariff relief for some industries was under consideration. The U.S. levies 25 percent tariffs on cars and 50 percent on steel and aluminum. (read more)”

As we highlighted in term-1, these ongoing negotiations with the EU on the issues of trade are extremely challenging. However, in term-2 President Trump’s position is much simpler; why keep arguing about the same problem only to end up in negotiations of intransigence? Instead, if the EU is going to continue negotiations as a collective, President Trump is now favoring just sending the EU a letter informing them of the tariff rates applied to each of their industrial sectors. This is the most direct and impactful way to end the stalemate.

The EU cannot fathom the new level of ambivalence carried by President Trump, and by extension his trade team, toward the conversation. There is no level of countervailing tariffs the EU can announce that impacts the position of Trump. Even if the EU were to end all trade with the USA, that only feeds into the goals and objectives of the Trump administration. The EU has no power in this dynamic beyond their purchasing power, and if the EU doesn’t want to level the purchasing – thereby maintaining a trade deficit, then Trump will equalize the financial imbalance with tariffs. Canada is in the same position, hence their alignment with the EU.

Read more …

“..Trump said “It just seems like he wants to go all the way and just keep killing people. It’s not good. I wasn’t happy with it”..”

• Zelensky’s Latest Call With Trump Was ‘Most Productive’ He’s Ever Had (ZH)

The White House rhetoric on Ukraine could be slowly shifting, after President Trump said he was “very unhappy” with a Thursday phone call with Russian President Vladimir Putin. After a single night’s record drone attack of some 500 UAVs sent on Ukraine, Trump said “It just seems like he wants to go all the way and just keep killing people. It’s not good. I wasn’t happy with it” – in reference to Putin. But it should be remembered that the White House just days prior halted some shipments of defense aid, which speaks louder than words. European allies are predictably upset and Kiev is now dealing very carefully with Washington, and handling Trump with kid gloves, given it is in a precarious situation on the battlefield. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, announced Saturday that his latest conversation with Trump this week was the best and “most productive” he has ever had.

“Regarding the conversation with the president of the United States, which took place a day earlier, it was probably the best conversation we have had during this whole time, the most productive,” Zelenskiy said in his nightly video address. “We discussed air defense issues and I’m grateful for the willingness to help. The Patriot system is precisely the key to protection against ballistic threats,” he added. Zelensky has also been asking Washington to slap more sanctions on Moscow, something Trump has so far resisted in order to give better space for peace negotiations to take off. Asked by reporters over whether Zelensky’s request for more Patriot missiles would be honored, Trump replied, “They’re going to need them for defense… They’re going to need something because they’re being hit pretty hard.”

Trump had further said of the Zelensky call, which happened Friday, “We talked about different things… I think it was a very, very strategic call.” This suggests that some new decision-making could be afoot regarding supplying Ukraine. There have been recent reports, however, that Trump is prioritizing defense of Israel, even diverting arms and ammo away from eastern Europe for that purpose. Trump has been expressing deep frustration at lack of momentum in US-backed peace efforts, for which he’s criticized both warring sides.

Read more …

Ukraine in NATO is a declaration of war.

• NATO Talk Becoming Toxic – Kiev (RT)

Discussions with the West about NATO membership for Kiev have become increasingly tense and unproductive, Ukrainian Foreign Ministry spokesman Georgy Tikhy has said, describing the talks as “toxic.” Western nations initially backed Kiev’s aspirations to join the US-led bloc, but Ukraine’s military struggles and shifting American policies have led to a decline in support. The dialogue with NATO partners has now reached a dead end, Tikhy lamented in an interview on the YouTube channel of journalist Aleksandr Notevsky on Friday. “All the arguments and counterarguments have already been presented, and each new round of negotiations on Ukraine’s accession to NATO goes in circles,” he stated. The discussions “have become, to put it simply, very toxic,” he added.

Ukraine formally applied for fast-track NATO membership in September 2022, months after the escalation of the conflict with Russia. Although the bloc has consistently stated that “Ukraine’s future is in NATO,” it has never set a specific time frame for accession. At the 2023 NATO summit, the requirement for Ukraine to complete the Membership Action Plan was removed, thus simplifying the path to membership. However, the final communique only stated that an invitation would be extended “when allies agree and conditions are met,” without providing concrete timelines or criteria. Ukraine’s future membership was discussed at last year’s NATO summit and the joint communique explicitly reaffirmed that Kiev’s accession was inevitable.

Since then, however, a number of leaders of NATO countries have soured on the idea, weighing the risks of further escalation with Russia and the bloc’s long-term security priorities. US President Donald Trump, meanwhile, has been more emphatic, stating that Kiev “can forget about” joining the NATO, noting that its attempts to do so were “probably the reason the whole thing started,” referring to the Ukraine conflict. At the recent NATO summit in June, Ukraine was barely mentioned in the final communique, while its leader, Vladimir Zelensky, failed to secure support for Kiev’s future membership. Russia has repeatedly characterized Ukraine’s attempt to join NATO as a red line and one of the root causes of the conflict. Moscow has demanded that Kiev legally commit to never joining any military alliance.

Read more …

It would solve his credibility issues.

• Moscow Outlines Why Zelensky Wants To Meet With Putin (RT)

Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky is seeking a personal meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin to defend his claims to legitimacy and resist Western attempts to push him out of power, Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has said. Zelensky’s presidential term expired last year, and Moscow views him as illegitimate. In an interview with First Sevastopol TV released on Saturday, Zakharova was asked why she believes the Ukrainian leader is so insistent on meeting with Putin. “Because he needs to reaffirm his legitimacy, not through legal procedures, but by any other means to prove that he is in power,” she stated. Zelensky’s five-year presidential term ended in May 2024, but he refused to hold a new election, citing martial law.

Moscow has declared him illegitimate, insisting that under Ukrainian law, legal authority now rests with the parliament. According to Zakharova, Zelensky also seeks a meeting with Putin because he is driven by “a monstrous fear of being consigned to oblivion.” “He is insanely afraid of being forgotten, of becoming unnecessary for the West. That somehow the West will sideline him. And you can see he doesn’t step away from the microphones. I think he already sleeps with a webcam,” she said. Zelensky has on numerous occasions insisted that he wants to meet with Putin, describing this as a prerequisite for peace.

In May, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov suggested that a meeting between Putin and Zelensky could be possible, but only after negotiations between Moscow and Kiev reach “specific arrangements” on various diplomatic tracks. This year, Russia and Ukraine held two rounds of direct talks, which did not result in a breakthrough with regard to ending the conflict, but led to several prisoner exchanges.

In June, Putin said he was open to meeting with Zelensky, but suggested that the Ukrainian leader lacks legitimacy for signing binding agreements. “I am ready to meet with anyone, including Zelensky. That’s not the issue – if the Ukrainian state trusts someone to conduct negotiations, by all means, let it be Zelensky. The question is different: Who will sign the documents?” In autumn 2022, Zelensky signed a presidential decree banning talks with the current Russian leadership, after the regions of Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson, and Zaporozhye voted in referendums to join Russia. Though Zelensky has not canceled the decree, he has since insisted that it only applies to other Ukrainian politicians, not to himself.

Read more …

“..these are simply attempts to create an artificial external enemy in order to justify such a militaristic line to militarize Europe.”

• NATO Chief ‘On Magic Mushrooms’ – Medvedev (RT)

Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has mocked NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte for suggesting that Beijing might ask Moscow to attack NATO territory in Europe as a diversion if China decides to make a move on Taiwan. Rutte, speaking to the New York Times on Saturday, said Chinese President Xi Jinping may tell his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin: “I’m going to do this, and I need you to keep them busy in Europe by attacking NATO territory.” He also urged stronger NATO defenses, warning that “if we don’t, we’ll have to learn Russian.” “SG Rutte has clearly gorged on too many of the magic mushrooms beloved by the Dutch,” Medvedev, who currently serves as deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council, said on X on Saturday.

“He sees collusion between China & Russia over Taiwan, and then a Russian attack on Europe. But he’s right about one thing: he should learn Russian. It might come in handy in a Siberian camp,” Medvedev joked, hinting at the harsh conditions at the region’s remote prison camps. Beijing, which considers Taiwan its own territory under its One China policy, has repeatedly demanded that the US and its allies stop interfering in China’s internal affairs. Washington, however, continues to supply weapons to Taiwan. Russia supports the Chinese position, condemning Western arms sales and diplomatic visits to the island. Moscow has also repeatedly dismissed claims that it plans to attack NATO, calling such statements baseless and part of Western scaremongering.

The Kremlin has maintained that “these are simply attempts to create an artificial external enemy in order to justify such a militaristic line to militarize Europe.” Russian officials have also argued that European NATO countries are using the supposed Russia threat to deflect from their own domestic problems. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov called the “old horror story about the Russian bear” an easy excuse in light of economic stagnation and falling standards of living in Europe. At its recent summit, NATO members discussed increasing defense spending targets to 5% of GDP, though no formal agreement was reached. Some European nations expressed concern that such a level would be a heavy financial burden, potentially straining domestic budgets and public support for defense policies.

Read more …

“..the phase-out means “fighting for our households and businesses” so they won’t bear the costs of “harmful ideological decisions” from Brussels..”

• Slovakia ‘Ready To Fight’ For Russian Gas – Fico (RT)

Slovakia is “ready to fight” for its right to import Russian gas and will continue to block Brussels’ proposals to phase out Russian energy, Prime Minister Robert Fico said on Saturday. Fico stressed that energy security is a strategic priority for Slovakia, and that EU efforts to change its supply mix threaten national sovereignty. Slovakia vetoed the EU’s 18th round of sanctions on Russia for the second time on Friday, citing concerns over the RePowerEU plan, which seeks to cut Russian energy imports by 2028. The plan is being discussed alongside sanctions targeting Russia’s energy and financial sectors. Brussels is seeking to pass the phase-out as trade legislation – requiring only a qualified majority.

Fico insists, however, that the plan amounts to sanctions and must be unanimously approved. He previously warned that the move could jeopardize energy security, raise prices, and trigger costly arbitration with Gazprom over Slovakia’s long-term energy contract. Speaking during celebrations for Slovakia’s Saints Cyril and Methodius Day, Fico called the phase-out plan a “disruption” of Slovakia’s national interests.“We refuse to support another sanctions package against the Russian Federation, unless we know who will protect us, and how, and compensate for the damage that will be caused to Slovakia by the ideological proposal of the European Commission to stop supplies of Russian gas,” he said. “Slovakia wants to be sovereign and self-determined. And we must answer whether we are ready to fight for it. I am ready to fight this difficult battle. We are going to get through it.”

Fico added that vetoing the phase-out means “fighting for our households and businesses” so they won’t bear the costs of “harmful ideological decisions” from Brussels. He went on to say that Slovakia is at a crossroads – between giving in to pressure from “bureaucratic structures” in Brussels and defending its interests. He urged the public to choose the latter and accused the EU of ignoring national interests and violating international law by forcing harmful policies onto member states. Fico argued that Slovakia must pursue cooperation “based on equality and mutual benefit,” not external political agendas.

Hungary has also blocked the Russian energy phase-out plan, with Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto warning that it would “destroy Hungary’s energy security” and cause price spikes. Moscow has condemned the Western sanctions as illegal and counterproductive, particularly those targeting energy, noting that energy prices in the EU surged after the initial sanctions on Russia were introduced in 2022. Russian officials warn that the EU’s rejection of Russian supplies will push it toward more expensive imports or rerouted Russian energy via intermediaries.

Read more …

“.. I use the HiPerGator in connection with my work for the Florida Institute of National Security, which uses AI to explore kinetic and financial war fighting scenarios. I have built extensive neural networks that will be running on the HiPerGator.”

• Superintelligence Will Never Arrive (Jim Rickards)

Readers know at least two things about artificial intelligence (AI). The first is that an AI frenzy has been driving the stock market higher for the past three years even with occasional drawdowns along the way. The second is that AI is a revolutionary technology that will change the world and potentially eliminate numerous jobs, including jobs requiring training and technical skills. Both points are correct with numerous caveats. AI has been driving the stock market to record highs, but the market has the look and feel of a super-bubble. The crash could come anytime and bring the market down by 50% or more. That’s not a reason to short the major stock indices today. The bubble can last longer than anyone expects.

If you short the indices, you can lose a lot of money being wrong. But it is advisable to lighten up on equity allocations and increase your allocation to cash in order to avoid the worst damage when the crash does come. On the second point, AI will make some jobs obsolete or easily replaceable. Of course, as with any new technology, it will create new jobs requiring different skills. Teachers will not become obsolete. They’ll shift from teaching the basics of math and reading, which AI does quite well, to teaching critical thinking and reasoning, which computers do poorly or not at all. Changes will be pervasive, but they will still be changes and not chaos.

Artificial Intelligence is a powerful force, but there’s much less there than meets the eye. AI may be confronting material constraints in terms of processing power, training sets and electricity generation. Semiconductor chips keep getting faster and new ones are on the way. But these chips consume enormous amounts of energy, especially when installed in huge arrays in new AI data centers. Advocates are turning to nuclear power plants, including small modular reactors to supply the energy needs of AI. This demand is non-linear, which means that exponentially larger energy sources are needed to make small advances in processing output. AI is fast approaching practical limits on its ability to achieve greater performance.

This near insatiable demand for energy means that the AI race is really an energy race. This could make the U.S. and Russia the two dominant players (sound familiar?) as China depends on Russia for energy and Europe depends on the U.S. and Russia. Sanctions on Russian energy exports can actually help Russia in the AI race because natural gas can be stored and used in Russia to support AI and cryptocurrency mining. It’s the law of unintended consequences applied to the short-sighted Europeans and the resource-poor Chinese.

Another limitation on AI, which is not well known, is the Law of Conservation of Information in Search. This law is backed up by rigorous mathematical proofs. What it says is that AI cannot find any new information. It can find things faster and it can make connections that humans might find almost impossible to make. That’s valuable. But AI cannot find anything new. It can only seek out and find information that is already there for the taking. New knowledge comes from humans in the form of creativity, art, writing and original work. Computers cannot perform genuinely creative tasks. That should give humans some comfort that they will never be obsolete.

A further problem in AI is dilution and degradation of training sets as more training set content consists of AI output from prior processing. AI is prone to errors, hallucinations (better called confabulations) and inferences that have no basis in fact. That’s bad enough. But when that output enters the training set (basically every page in the internet), the quality of the training set degrades, and future output degrades in sync. There’s no good solution to this except careful curation. If you have to be a subject matter expert to curate training sets and then evaluate output, this greatly diminishes the value-added role of AI.

Read more …

“That’s all Biden ever was in that ticket: window dressing for a green senator trying to look presidential.”

• Fresh Obama-Biden Feud Details Are Here And They’re Delicious (Margolis)

It’s no secret anymore that Barack Obama and Joe Biden were hardly the BFFs that the latter claimed them to be. According to reports, Obama was a key player in the coup to force Joe Biden to drop out of the 2024 election, and Biden is naturally very bitter about it. But the latest revelations about their toxic dynamic during the campaign go beyond personal bitterness. They expose a level of dysfunction within the Democratic Party that’s so raw and chaotic, it would make even veteran political insiders wince. A forthcoming book about the 2024 election has exposed what many conservatives suspected all along: Obama never really believed Biden was fit for a second term, and he wasn’t shy about letting everyone know it.

When the two met for lunch at the White House in 2023, Obama walked away “slightly incredulous” that Biden was even attempting another run, according to a report from The Guardian, which received an advance copy of the book. But here’s where it gets really good: Obama didn’t just keep his doubts to himself. After that lunch, the former president made a beeline for Biden’s senior staff, many of whom had previously worked under him, and delivered a brutal assessment that should have ended Biden’s campaign right there. “Your campaign is a mess,” Obama told them, cutting through any pretense of unity or support. This wasn’t constructive criticism from a concerned party elder—this was a public execution disguised as friendly advice.

The organizational chaos Obama identified was glaring. Biden’s team had split their operations between Washington and Wilmington, a decision that even Biden himself privately admitted was problematic. The Wilmington base was supposed to showcase Biden’s everyman appeal and Delaware roots, but Obama recognized it for what it really was: a logistical nightmare that would hamstring any serious campaign effort. The attempted fix reveals just how dysfunctional things had become. They shuffled Jen O’Malley Dillon to Wilmington as campaign manager while keeping Mike Donilon in Washington as chief strategist. This geographic split epitomized the kind of amateur-hour decision-making that Obama was calling out, and predictably, it solved nothing.

What makes this story particularly delicious is how Biden’s staff reacted to Obama’s intervention. According to the book, some of them thought Obama was being a “prick” and felt he “disrespected and mistreated Biden.” The irony is palpable—these same staffers who spent eight years watching Biden serve as Obama’s “loyal” vice president were now discovering what many had suspected: Obama’s respect for Biden was always conditional and largely performative. Let’s be honest—conservatives saw this coming back in 2008. Joe Biden was a non-factor in the Democratic primary, barely registering in the polls and flaming out after a humiliating finish in Iowa. He wasn’t chosen for his political prowess or popular appeal—he was picked because Obama needed an “elder statesman” to paper over his lack of experience. That’s all Biden ever was in that ticket: window dressing for a green senator trying to look presidential.

And that’s precisely what makes this behind-the-scenes drama so revealing. It underscores the same glaring weakness that’s followed Biden from the moment he sought the presidency. Even his own party’s most prominent figure couldn’t pretend he was up to the job—because deep down, they all knew he never was.

Read more …

The Pulitzer Prize will never be the same.

• Trump Lawsuit Exposes Uncomfortable Truths About Pulitzer Prizes (JTN)

President Donald Trump’s lawsuit against the Pulitzer Prize Board is forcing into the public eye uncomfortable revelations about how the news industry’s top prize giver handled the unraveling of Russia collusion allegations, exposing conflicts in testimony and an admission that people other than Trump complained about its 2018 awards to The New York Times and The Washington Post for their coverage of the now-discredited scandal. While the litigation in an Okeechobee County, Florida courthouse makes its way to the Florida Supreme Court, new admissions by the intelligence community have undercut the factual basis underlying some of the stories that won the two newspapers the 2018 Pulitzer Prize in National Reporting.

One of those stories was a December 2017 report by The Washington Post that accused Trump of ignoring or trying to downplay U.S. intelligence claims that Putin tried to help him win the 2016 election. “Nearly a year into his presidency, Trump continues to reject the evidence that Russia waged an assault on a pillar of American democracy and supported his run for the White House,” the Post’s award-winning story declared. While there remains widespread consensus inside U.S. spy agencies that Russia hacked Democratic National Committee emails that embarrassed Hillary Clinton, the narrative the news stories spawned — namely, that Russia’s intent was to help Trump win the election — is disputed.

The claim that Putin was specifically trying to help Trump was included in a December 2016 Obama administration intelligence community assessment (ICA), but in fact there were concerns about that claim and the way that review was done inside the intelligence community, according to new evidence made public this month. CIA Director John Ratcliffe revealed last week that the two top career CIA officials for Russia directly objected to former Director John Brennan’s inclusion of the Steele dossier in the Obama-era ICA and that its conclusion that Russia’s intent was to help Trump was not strongly supported by the evidence. Ratcliffe’s new report directly assailed the Obama-era Russia assessment that anchored the Post’s December 2017 story, concluding it suffered from significant failures of spy tradecraft and other irregularities.

“The procedural anomalies that characterized the ICA’s development had a direct impact on the tradecraft applied to its most contentious finding. With analysts operating under severe time constraints, limited information sharing, and heightened senior-level scrutiny, several aspects of tradecraft rigor were compromised—particularly in supporting the judgment that Putin ‘aspired’ to help Trump win,” the Ratcliffe report concluded. [..] The new admissions by U.S. intelligence last week aren’t the only ones undercutting entries in the Times’ and Post’s award-winning submissions. Just the News reported in April that newly released FBI interviews with former National Security Agency Director Mike Rogers, a Navy admiral, show that the former spy chief directly refuted a Post article submitted in the Pulitzer-winning package that claimed Trump had “asked intelligence chiefs to push back against the FBI collusion probe” after former FBI Director James Comey “revealed its existence.” Rogers called the article’s assertions “wrong.”

“The interviewing team read to Rogers a quote from a media source that stated ‘President Trump urged [Rogers] to publicly deny the existence of any evidence of collusion during the 2016 election’ and ADM Rogers responded that the media characterization was wrong, and the President had asked about the existence of SIGINT [signals intelligence] evidence only,” the FBI report quoted Rogers as saying. Former Special Prosecutor John Durham concluded there was never any evidence that Trump colluded with Russia or Putin to hijack the 2016 election, and that the FBI engaged in significant wrongdoing in pursuing the case, including falsifying evidence and misleading the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to get permission to spy on Trump advisers.

Despite Durham’s findings and the newly released FBI and intelligence documents, the Pulitzer Prize Board has stood by the Times’ and Post’s reporting and its decision to honor them as examples of journalistic excellence. In 2022, it issued a statement saying two separate reviews found no problems with the winning articles. “Both reviews were conducted by individuals with no connection to the institutions whose work was under examination, nor any connection to each other,” the Pulitzer Board stated. “The separate reviews converged in their conclusions: that no passages or headlines, contentions or assertions in any of the winning submissions were discredited by facts that emerged subsequent to the conferral of the prizes. The 2018 Pulitzer Prizes in National Reporting stand.”

Read more …

“Can Russia beat Europe in modern warfare? Well, turn off the electricity, turn off the internet and see what happens to social society in Prague, Rome or any region in Europe when the sirens start.”

• When the Drones are Coming, They Turn Off the Internet (CTH)

Some thoughts on what I would call ‘modern warfare’ for citizen preppers. Some of this experience may pertain to urban areas, some perhaps pertinent overall. Dimitri’s wife is grabbing her purse to go to the grocery store, when he casually says “it’s 5:45.” She just as ordinarily replies, “I’ve got cash.” Dimitri sees the slightly puzzled look on my face and flippantly notes, “they turn off the internet at six thirty now,” shrugs, and goes back to reading his paper. Perhaps similar to London life during the blitz. Various municipal govts coordinated the shut down of lights and people wait. Others got about doing what they needed to do, sirens notwithstanding. There is a familiar life amid modern drone warfare, and with the similar control of electricity comes the need to add internet. When the drones are coming they turn off the internet.

As I contemplate the contrasts in social resilience, my most familiar reference point is life after a hurricane. In Florida when we are dealing with the aftermath of a hurricane, no power, no water, no internet, etc., you adapt to life without modern technological conveniences. If you’ve ever lived amid the aftermath of natural disasters, you understand the need for a plan and quick adaptation. Do it a few times and adaption becomes ordinary. Horrible in ways, yes; awkward, certainly. But you take things in stride; overcome, figure out the optimal solution and keep moving. However, not everyone is prepared to consider a disruption an ‘inconvenience’ and many people who need consistency to retain stability end up in panic. I think long term readers well understand the reference. As Dimitri goes back to the paper my mind shifts to stuff I’ve heard in bits and pieces but never given context before.

I think about this U.S. ‘Space Force’ thing, and now realize there are people who have gamed out modern warfare more than we discuss as a western technological society. My mind also thinks about those reports I read a few years ago about various western govt offices concerned about the ability of Russia to target U.S. satellites. Suddenly I realize cell phone and telecommunication is not their concern. There’s no internet; the problem is bigger than a temporary outage of Uber. I wonder how the commercial air traffic between Kazan, Moscow and St Petersburg is not disrupted. Old school stuff applies. Meanwhile, the kids, lots of them are playing outside as kids do – apparently life amid modern drone warfare is resilient. No one is staring at the sky.

It is very odd to see how quickly a non-technology driven society can adapt to no electricity and no internet as an ordinary part of daily life. An entire nation just figures out the optimal solution, in part because their time between analog and digital has been short. Russians have a totally different context of dependency. I’m also starting to realize how the flexibility within a non-technological society is an asset in modern warfare. Turn off the internet in New York, Chicago, Los Angeles or any major metropolitan area – how would life be impacted? I can only imagine the reactions from a generation who has never known life without wi-fi. It would be a very good intellectual exercise to think carefully about what your life would be like without cell phone coverage or internet services. There are more than a few people who have never learned to read a clock with hands.

In Russia when the drones are coming they turn off the internet and sometimes the electricity. Stores stay open; people do the ordinary things people do, the trains still run, the busses stay on schedule and you can still get a hot coffee and a sandwich just about anywhere, albeit sans Starbucks. Private taxis, Uber equivalents, switch seamlessly to line up at pick-up points without issue. Try to duplicate that rapid on/off precision in Boston, Miami or St Louis… see my point? Then extend those thoughts to Paris, Frankfurt, Warsaw or Helsinki. Dimitri is thinking about ordering a pizza, while I’m starting to realize why NATO countries are going bananas. Can Russia beat Europe in modern warfare? Well, turn off the electricity, turn off the internet and see what happens to social society in Prague, Rome or any region in Europe when the sirens start. Yeah, NATO is going bananas as Putin’s best non-discussed weapon just looms quietly.

Putin’s strongest weapon is essentially a social infrastructure akin to a nation full of people who can live in the aftermath of a hurricane without needing a digital screen to provide directions to the next six hours of their life. Again, somewhere, in some office complex deep in the bowels of some agency or bureaucracy, someone has ran models of this and yet I cannot find a reference anywhere to ordinary people talking about it. In the glovebox of every taxi in Russia you will find a paper map; when was the last time you saw one in the USA? When the drones come, they always turn off the internet and sometimes the electricity. How would we deal with that… Think about it.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Never

Renz
https://twitter.com/redpilldispensr/status/1941814607493878056

dog

Angels

Henry

https://twitter.com/TheFigen_/status/1941920348775010790

https://twitter.com/LangmanVince/status/1941796955937550392

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Ratle March 23 2025

Mar 232025
 
 March 23, 2025  Posted by at 11:01 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  30 Responses »


Albrecht Dürer Praying hands 1508

 

• Russia ‘100%’ Doesn’t Want To Invade Europe – Witkoff (RT)
• Witkoff: The ‘Elephant In The Room’ Which Will Decide Peace In Ukraine (ZH)
• Witkoff Names ‘Largest Issue’ In Ukraine Conflict (RT)
• Moscow Issues Warning To Kiev (RT)
• The Americans Want Zelensky Out – Is This Woman Their Plan B? (Ryumshin)
• Ukrainian MP Claims Zelensky Tried To Kill Him (RT)
• EU ‘Stabbed Its Economy In The Heart’ With Russia Sanctions – Hungarian FM (RT)
• Explosive Growth In Federal Spending Since 2021 (DS)
• Bookmakers See 20% Chance Of Third Trump Term – Media (RT)
• John Roberts Is Responsible for the High Court’s Self-Delegitimization (DS)
• Welcome to the Krytocracy: The BorderLine (Hankinson)
• Border Czar Homan Says Border Security Will Bankrupt Cartels (JTN)
• Guess Who Wants to Rename the Department of Defense? (Margolis)
• VA Secretary Doug Collins Vows More Cuts: We’re ‘Not An Employment Agency’ (NYP)
• FBI On ‘Frenzied Mission’ To Redact Epstein Files – CNN (RT)

 

 

 

 

 

 

It’s immediately obvious why Trump selected this unknown real estate developer as his representative. Smart, affable, self-effacing. Nothing to not like.

One thing, though. Witkoff mentions the status of Crimea and the four regions as the main area of contention. They are not, They are part of Russia now. Not because Russia wanted that, but because in multiple rounds of talks (Minsk et al), Ukraine wouldn’t guarantee their protection. If they had, they would still be part of Ukraine. Putin will not change this back now. He tried all he could. Besides, the vast majority of people living there are Russians. He can’t betray them.

How long before Witkoff and Trump acknowledge this?

 

 

Broke

Sacks

Putin
https://twitter.com/MyLordBebo/status/1903530185468596608

Rosie
https://twitter.com/ImMeme0/status/1903446924289564693

 

 

 

 

 

 

What in Euope they call blasphemy.

• Russia ‘100%’ Doesn’t Want To Invade Europe – Witkoff (RT)

Russia has no desire to invade other European countries, US special envoy for the Middle East Steve Witkoff has said, dismissing such fears as “preposterous.” He made the remarks in an interview with American journalist Tucker Carlson on Friday. Asked to comment on the UK’s declaration that it is ready to send troops to Ukraine to help guarantee a potential peace deal between Moscow and Kiev, Witkoff suggested that British policymakers want to be “like Winston Churchill,” who warned that “the Russians are going to march across Europe.” Asked by Carlson if he thinks Russia wants to do this, Witkoff replied: “100% not.” “I think that’s preposterous, by the way. We have something called NATO that we did not have in World War II,” he added.

Moscow also does not want to “absorb Ukraine,” according to Witkoff. “That would be like occupying Gaza. Why do the Israelis really want to occupy Gaza for the rest of their lives? They don’t. They want stability there. They don’t want to deal with that.” Witkoff argued that Russia has already achieved its goals in the conflict. “They’ve reclaimed these five regions. They have Crimea, and they’ve gotten what they want. So why do they need more?” Crimea voted overwhelmingly in favor of joining Russia in a referendum in 2014, following a Western-backed coup in Kiev, with the regions of Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson, and Zaporozhye following suit in autumn 2022.

Witkoff’s interview came out after he held face-to-face talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin earlier this month as part of diplomacy aimed at mediating an end to the Ukraine conflict. Following the talks, he suggested that a complete ceasefire could be reached within “a couple of weeks,” adding that the US could ease the sanctions on Moscow once an agreement is reached. Amid the Ukraine conflict, a number of European leaders have claimed that Russia harbors plans to attack NATO countries within several years. Putin has dismissed the claims as “nonsense,” arguing that Russia has no interest whatsoever in doing so.

Read more …

“Will the world acknowledge that those are Russian territories?”

• Witkoff: The ‘Elephant In The Room’ Which Will Decide Peace In Ukraine (ZH)

Tucker Carlson has just released a wide-ranging new interview with Trump’s Special Envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff, who has also been deeply involved in efforts for the peaceful settlement of the Ukraine war. Witkoff has been active in the Saudi hosted talks between the US and Russia, as well as between the US and Ukraine, with more rounds of talks set for Monday. Perhaps the most interesting part of the interview came when Witkoff addressed the key, central issue to achieving the end of the war. The US top envoy described the question of the fate of the annexed territories in Ukraine’s east as “an elephant in the room” that “no one wants to talk about.”

“They’re Russian-speaking. There have been referendums where the overwhelming majority of the people have indicated that they want to be under Russian rule,” Witkoff told Carlson. Witkoff admitted that militarily and politically, Moscow now exercises full control over the bulk of these territories, as Ukraine forces continue to be steadily retreating from their remaining holdouts in Donetsk. Putin had first described in February 2022 that the people of Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson and Zaporizhia regions are “our citizens forever” – and soon after a series of referendums resulted in their absorption into the Russian Federation.

Witkoff in the interview actually struggled to identify or say the names of the territories, which he numbered at five – noting that Crimea remains hotly disputed as well.”When that gets settled… this has always been the issue” – Witkoff continued, describing that this is the question likely to finally resolve the war. He asked, “Will the world acknowledge that those are Russian territories?” But that’s when he noted that there are serious domestic issues in Ukraine which would make such a significant territorial concession very difficult. “Can Zelensky survive politically if he acknowledges this?” Witkoff questioned.

Read more …

“There are constitutional issues within Ukraine as to what they can concede to with regard to giving up territory..”

• Witkoff Names ‘Largest Issue’ In Ukraine Conflict (RT)

The status of the former Ukrainian territories that have joined Russia following referendums is key to resolving the conflict between Moscow and Kiev, Steve Witkoff, US President Donald Trump’s special envoy to the Middle East, told American journalist Tucker Carlson in an interview released on Friday. Witkoff, who has also been actively involved in the US efforts to resolve the Ukraine conflict, described the issue as “an elephant in the room” that “no one wants to talk about.” “They’re Russian-speaking. There have been referendums where the overwhelming majority of the people have indicated that they want to be under [the] Russian rule,” Witkoff told Carlson during the hour-and-a-half-long interview, adding that Moscow also exercises effective control over the territories.

Kherson and Zaporozhye Regions, as well as the two Donbass republics, officially joined Russia in autumn 2022 following a series of referendums. Kiev has never recognized the votes and continues to claim sovereignty over the territories, as well as over Crimea, which joined Russia back in 2014. The Ukrainian military still controls parts of Donetsk, Kherson and Zaporozhye regions, including the regional capitals of the latter two. According to Witkoff, the issue now is whether the world will acknowledge these territories as Russian and whether Kiev will agree to drop its claims to them. “There are constitutional issues within Ukraine as to what they can concede to with regard to giving up territory,” the envoy said, adding that it could also be particularly difficult for Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky as it could jeopardize his political career.

“Can Zelensky survive politically if he acknowledges this? This is the central issue in the conflict,” Witkoff said. The envoy still maintained that the US had “very, very positive conversation” on the issue with both sides. The interview with Witkoff came out shortly after he held face-to-face talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin as part of diplomatic efforts aimed at mediating an end to the conflict. After the talks, he suggested that a complete ceasefire between Kiev and Moscow could be reached within “a couple of weeks.”

Read more …

“Kiev is once again demonstrating its complete inability to negotiate, as well as its lack of desire to achieve peace..”

• Moscow Issues Warning To Kiev (RT)

Moscow reserves the right to retaliate in kind if Ukraine continues to strike Russian energy infrastructure in violation of the recently agreed partial ceasefire, Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has warned. On Tuesday, Russian President Vladimir Putin held phone talks with his US counterpart, Donald Trump, and agreed to a US-mediated partial ceasefire. As part of it, Moscow said it would halt strikes on Ukrainian energy sites if Kiev does the same. Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky also agreed to the terms. Despite this, Kiev struck an oil depot in Russia’s Krasnodar Region the day after the agreement and blew up a gas metering station in Sudzha on Friday. The Ukrainian army also deliberately targeted “residential buildings and social institutions,” Zakharova said in a press statement on Saturday.

“Kiev is once again demonstrating its complete inability to negotiate, as well as its lack of desire to achieve peace,” the spokeswoman said. “As in 2022, they have once again turned to provocations aimed at disrupting the negotiation process.” Moscow is free to retaliate if this continues, she warned. We clearly warn you that if the Kiev regime continues this destructive course, the Russian side reserves the right to retaliate, including symmetrically. Kiev struck an oil facility operated by the Caspian Pipeline Consortium (CPC) in southern Russia overnight on Tuesday, immediately after the US-brokered ceasefire was agreed on, the Russian Defense Ministry reported on Wednesday. The CPC’s international shareholders include US giants Chevron and Exxon Mobil.

Early Friday, Ukrainian forces destroyed a gas metering station in Sudzha as they were retreating from Russia’s Kursk Region.Moscow has condemned both attacks as violations of Ukraine’s ceasefire responsibilities, and accused Kiev of attempting to derail US peace efforts. According to the Kremlin, Putin brought up Kiev’s history of sabotaging peace processes in his phone call with Trump on Tuesday. The Russian leader stressed that Ukraine has “repeatedly sabotaged and violated the agreements reached,” the Kremlin press service said earlier this week.

Read more …

Ukraine will need new people, not the same old again.

“Should Zelensky step down, Timoshenko would become acting president by default..”

• The Americans Want Zelensky Out – Is This Woman Their Plan B? (Ryumshin)

While international attention remains focused on the high-stakes negotiations involving Vladimir Putin, Donald Trump, and Vladimir Zelensky, Ukraine’s internal political theater continues to play out in full force. Though less headline-grabbing than the drama in Jeddah or Washington, the developments in Kiev are no less consequential. Two major events have shaken the domestic landscape in recent weeks. First, former Prime Minister Yulia Timoshenko, long dormant since the launch of Russia’s military offensive in 2022, has suddenly re-emerged. Timoshenko kept a low profile during the early years of the conflict, occasionally criticizing the government from the Rada’s rostrum, traveling to hospitals, and attending international forums. Her support for Zelensky, when it suited her, was loud and clear. Yet earlier this month, she shocked observers with an emotional rebuke of German intelligence chief Bruno Kahl, who opposes a ceasefire.

Timoshenko accused him of attempting to weaken Russia at the expense of “the very existence of Ukraine and the lives of hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians.” Her social media presence has since taken a distinct turn. Timoshenko now praises Trump and openly advocates for a swift peace deal. This puts her in direct contrast with Zelensky and his administration on Bankova Street, who continue to delay settlement talks. Behind the scenes, according to media reports, it turns out that both Poroshenko and Timoshenko have been in covert communication with Donald Trump’s circle, aiming to pave the way for new elections in Ukraine. Poroshenko, it seems, is primarily angling for a role as a go-between for Washington and Kiev. Timoshenko, however, appears to be playing a longer game.

According to Politico, Timoshenko has been working behind closed doors to gather support from members of parliament, hoping to position herself as the head of a future ruling coalition. Then came a cryptic comment from Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko, who claimed that a certain Ukrainian politician had secretly reached out to Putin. Many believe the description fits Timoshenko. In a recent interview with Bild, former CIA director John Brennan – who bitterly opposes the current US president – was blunt: Timoshenko is under consideration by the Trump team as a potential replacement for Zelensky. Of course, Washington is not about to push Zelensky aside overnight. Timoshenko’s role, for now, is to serve as a pressure point – a reminder to Zelensky that his options are not unlimited. On the surface, this seems like a strange move. Timoshenko is considered a political relic, well past her prime. Her popularity is low, and her public trust ratings are among the worst in the country. So why invest in her?

Because, politically speaking, she makes sense. Consider General Valery Zaluzhny, the former head of Ukraine’s armed forces. Though still popular, his sharp criticism of Trump has caused his ratings to dip dramatically. Then there’s Poroshenko and the rest of the post-Maidan elite. Their track record – particularly the failure to implement the Minsk agreements – makes them unacceptable to Moscow. Any peace deal with these figures would be dead on arrival. A more plausible candidate is former Rada speaker Dmitry Razumkov, a moderate figure who could be palatable to all parties. Timoshenko falls into a similar category but brings with her a distinct advantage: Experience. She has spent decades in Ukrainian politics, has deep connections, and once maintained close working ties with Putin. If Ukraine is to undergo a painful but necessary peace process, Timoshenko’s political skill set could prove invaluable.

And it wouldn’t be difficult to bring her to power. As a sitting MP, she could be made Rada speaker. Should Zelensky step down, Timoshenko would become acting president by default – granting her the legal mandate to steer Ukraine through the transitional period, broker peace, and organize new elections. What happens after that? It scarcely matters. If Timoshenko performs well, she can run and potentially win the presidency. If she fails or becomes politically toxic during negotiations, she can be discarded – as Friedrich Schiller wrote, “The Moor has done his duty, the Moor may go.” Either way, it would be a manageable outcome for both Russia and the US. Timoshenko, a seasoned survivor of Ukraine’s cutthroat politics, may well be the figure who guides the country to a post-conflict reality – not because she is beloved, but because she is useful.

Read more …

“The order to commit these crimes against me was given personally by Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Andriy Yermak, and the head of the Odessa SBU..”

• Ukrainian MP Claims Zelensky Tried To Kill Him (RT)

Artyom Dmitruk, a fugitive member of the Verkhovna Rada, has claimed that Vladimir Zelensky directed the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) to kidnap and kill him. He said that SBU agents detained and severely beat him during an incident in the Black Sea port city of Odessa in 2022. Dmitruk was elected to parliament as part of Zelensky’s Servant of the People party in 2019. He was expelled from the party two years later and continued serving as an independent MP. He fled the country in August 2024, claiming that the authorities had plotted to “liquidate” him. The Prosecutor General’s Office has since placed Dmitruk on a wanted list on suspicion that he had assaulted a police officer and attempted to steal his gun. In a video posted to X on Friday, Dmitruk detailed his accusations against Zelensky and his chief of staff, Andrey Yermak, as well as shared photos of his injuries.

“I was brutally beaten, tortured in basements, and nearly killed on Zelensky’s orders for my opposition activities,” the self-exiled politician wrote in an accompanying post. He insisted that the government targeted him because of his “political activities.” Dmitruk claimed that in 2022, Viktor Dorovsky, the head of the SBU office in Odessa, had threatened him over the phone. “We’re going to kill you. We’ll cut your head off,” Dorovsky said, according to Dmitruk. The politician said that a group of SBU agents abducted him on March 4, 2022, when he was delivering aid to a military checkpoint. According to Dmitruk, the agents put a bag over his head and handcuffed him. “They beat me severely with rifle butts, feet, and hands. I lost consciousness,” he said.

Dmitruk claimed that he was taken to a basement where he was “tortured” and had his nose broken. He said that the agents wanted to force him into making incriminating statements. They then drove him to several locations, including a regional SBU office, where the threats and beatings continued, he added. The legislator said that the agents threatened him with a gun and made him promise on camera that he would stop criticizing Zelensky, Yermak, and the government. According to Dmitruk, the agents eventually dropped him off at a parking lot. “The order to commit these crimes against me was given personally by Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Andriy Yermak, and the head of the Odessa SBU Viktor Dorovsky,” Dmitruk wrote on X, using the Ukrainian spelling of the names. “There are thousands of stories like mine. There are people who have been sitting in the basements of the SBU for more than two years,” he said.

Read more …

Szijjarto said it was “becoming unserious, ridiculous, and really harmful” for Brussels to squeeze out new restrictions for the sake of anti-Russian “ideology.”

• EU ‘Stabbed Its Economy In The Heart’ With Russia Sanctions – Hungarian FM (RT)

The sanctions against Russia have greatly backfired on the EU economy and are becoming increasingly “ridiculous” and “harmful” with each new package, Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto has said. In an exclusive interview with RT released on Saturday, Szijjarto reiterated that the bloc’s measures targeting Russia have failed in both of their presumed goals – to destabilize the country’s economy and bring about an end to the Ukraine conflict. The EU has adopted 16 packages of sanctions against Russia since the escalation of hostilities in February 2022. Hungary, while critical of the approach, has ultimately backed each round, but only after carving out exemptions, including from the oil embargo and restrictions on the nuclear sector. Both Budapest and Moscow, as well as numerous international observers, have maintained that the restrictions have backfired on the nations that imposed them.

“The EU has basically stabbed the European economy in the heart by the sanctions,” Szijjarto told RT. He argued that the sanctions have eroded the EU’s competitiveness and isolated the bloc. Now, Szijjarto said, Brussels is preparing a 17th round despite the obvious failure of the strategy, which he said “made no sense.” “We are three years after the first package. Russian economy is far from being on its knees. And we are now close to peace, but not because of the sanctions,” he stated. Szijjarto said it was “becoming unserious, ridiculous, and really harmful” for Brussels to squeeze out new restrictions for the sake of anti-Russian “ideology.”

According to the minister, Budapest has “made it very clear” that it won’t support any future sanctions if Hungary’s national interests were in danger. He also expressed concern about the EU’s growing militarization and plans to continue supplying Ukraine with weapons, warning that such decisions “prolong the war” and increase the risk of escalation. “This pro-war sentiment of the European leaders is really, really dangerous,” Szijjarto warned. “Our clear expectation is that they should not put obstacles in the way of the peace process… in the way of [US President Donald] Trump and [Russian President Vladimir] Putin negotiating about how to make an agreement and how to make peace here.”

Russia and the US are currently negotiating a ceasefire in the conflict. Trump earlier indicated that sanctions on Russia might be used as leverage in the talks. Putin has dismissed any notion that Western sanctions are temporary, saying earlier this week they were a tool for applying “systemic, strategic” pressure on Russia. Moscow has repeatedly slammed the measures as illegal, but the country’s officials have often noted that the restrictions have ultimately boosted domestic industry and reduced dependence on Western technologies.

Read more …

“The Department of Commerce’s annual spending grew from roughly $13.1 million in 2021—the year former President Joe Biden took office—to an estimated $20.5 million in 2024..”

• Explosive Growth In Federal Spending Since 2021 (DS)

A host of federal government agencies have overseen massive spending for years while greatly expanding their workforces, according to an OpenTheBooks report. Annual spending across multiple federal government agencies has exploded over the past several years, often outpacing growth of staff and even inflation rates, according to a report from OpenTheBooks first obtained by the Daily Caller News Foundation. The report comes amid President Donald Trump’s ongoing efforts to crack down on wasteful spending across the federal government and reduce the federal workforce to save American taxpayers money. The Department of Commerce’s annual spending grew from roughly $13.1 million in 2021—the year former President Joe Biden took office—to an estimated $20.5 million in 2024, OpenTheBooks’ report found. Meanwhile, the department’s workforce declined from 53,939 in 2020 to 47,650 in 2024.

“Time after time, at agency after agency, we see spending skyrocketing since 2000, even when headcounts grew modestly and stayed flat,” OpenTheBooks wrote in the report. “In this most recent batch of examples, we also saw Biden administration spending priorities reveal themselves through the outlays at key agencies” The Biden-Harris administration notably oversaw massive government spending, with a large sum going toward costly COVID-19 relief funding in the aftermath of the pandemic. Biden’s administration also funneled millions of dollars into various left-wing initiatives such as programs related to diversity, equity, and inclusion and environmental justice. While federal agency funding levels are set by Congress, OpenTheBooks said that “upticks in spending since 2021 also appear to comport with key priorities of the Biden administration.” Throughout Biden’s time in office, many American consumers struggled with an ongoing cost-of-living crisis amid rampant inflation.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s employee count declined from 106,715 in 2000 to 92,072 in 2024, according to OpenTheBooks. Despite this, the report found that the USDA’s annual spending soared during the same time period, rising from $75.1 billion to $254.2 billion. Moreover, the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s estimated annual spending grew from $33.2 million in 2020 to nearly $56.4 million in 2024, OpenTheBooks reported. HUD’s workforce also increased slightly during the same period, growing from 7,845 employees in 2020 to 8,825 in 2024. The Biden administration’s hefty government spending also worsened the growing U.S. national debt and widening national deficit, which reached $36.2 trillion and $1 trillion as of Thursday, respectively. The federal workforce also greatly expanded during Biden’s term, while the private sector shed jobs and many other jobs were lost to foreign-born workers.

Additionally, while the National Endowment for the Humanities’ workforce only slightly increased over the past four years, from 173 in 2020 to 197 in 2024, the agency’s spending grew massively in the same time period, increasing from $160 million in 2020 to a whopping $305 million in 2024, according to the report. The Council on Environmental Quality, a little-known division of the Executive Office of the President, maintained between one to three members each year from 2000 through 2020, according to OpenTheBooks. But the number of council members increased greatly under the Biden administration, reaching 17 in 2024. While the Council on Environmental Quality only spent $12 million in 2020, the council’s annual spending grew during Biden’s presidency, hitting a whopping $51 million in 2024, according to the report.

Shortly after returning to the White House, Trump established the Department of Government Efficiency to target any wasteful spending in the federal government, which has thus far conducted mass layoffs at multiple federal government agencies. The Trump administration’s massive push to reduce government waste has been met with public outrage from many Democrats and corporate media outlets. DOGE reported that it has thus far saved American taxpayers an estimated $714.29 per person as of Friday. As part of his ongoing push to abolish government waste, Trump signed a Feb. 11 executive order to reform the federal workforce by “eliminating waste, bloat, and insularity” at government agencies.

“To restore accountability to the American public, this order commences a critical transformation of the Federal bureaucracy,” Trump wrote in the executive order. “By eliminating waste, bloat, and insularity, my Administration will empower American families, workers, taxpayers, and our system of Government itself.” Notably, the federal government shed an estimated 10,000 jobs in February, marking the largest downturn in jobs in the sector since June 2022. “Secretary [Brooke] Rollins fully supports the President’s directive to improve government, eliminate inefficiencies, and strengthen USDA’s many services to the American people,” a USDA spokesperson told the Daily Caller News Foundation. “We have a solemn responsibility to be good stewards of the American people’s hard-earned taxpayer dollars and to ensure that every dollar spent goes to serve the people, not the bureaucracy.”

Read more …

“The leading contender is Vice President J.D. Vance, with 5/2 odds (28.6%). Trump’s eldest son, Donald Trump Jr., is next in line with 9/1 odds (10%).”

• Bookmakers See 20% Chance Of Third Trump Term – Media (RT)

Bookmakers view US President Donald Trump as one of the top picks to win the 2028 election, despite the two-term constitutional limit, Newsweek has reported, citing the latest betting data. According to an article published on Saturday, British betting company William Hill has listed Trump as a favorite to win the next presidential race with 5/1 odds, giving him a 16.7% chance of securing what would be his third term in office. The leading contender is Vice President J.D. Vance, with 5/2 odds (28.6%). Trump’s eldest son, Donald Trump Jr., is next in line with 9/1 odds (10%). Democratic governors Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania and Gavin Newsom of California are also in the top five, with 9/1 and 10/1 odds, respectively.

Trump won the 2024 election by a wide margin against Democratic candidate and then-Vice President Kamala Harris, becoming the second president in US history to serve two non-consecutive terms. The 22nd Amendment to the US Constitution states that “no person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice.” The amendment was introduced after Franklin D. Roosevelt’s unprecedented four-term presidency. Trump has repeatedly joked that he may end up serving more than two terms. Former White House strategist Steve Bannon has claimed recently that Trump will run again in 2028. In an interview with journalist Chris Cuomo, Bannon said his team is working to find ways Trump could bypass the restrictions laid out in the Constitution.

A William Hill spokesperson told Newsweek that repealing the 22nd Amendment would be a difficult process, but Trump might attempt it due to his support in Congress. “Trump ally Steve Bannon predicted this week that the POTUS would run for a third term and win, so there’s certainly a feeling that it could be possible, and we’re not taking any chances as we’ve installed him in our next president market at 5/1, behind only favorite J.D. Vance,” the spokesperson added. Amendments to the Constitution must be approved by a 2/3 majority in both the House and Senate and then ratified by 3/4 of the states.

Read more …

“..in ham-handed and self-aggrandizing fashion—what he believes to be the judiciary’s integrity. But on this particular score, Roberts is dead wrong..”

• John Roberts Is Responsible for the High Court’s Self-Delegitimization (DS)

At his 2005 Senate confirmation hearing to be chief justice of the United States Supreme Court, John Roberts famously invoked America’s national pastime in describing his view of the judicial role in our constitutional order: “Judges are like umpires. Umpires don’t make the rules, they apply them. The role of an umpire and a judge is critical. They make sure everybody plays by the rules, but it is a limited role. Nobody ever went to a ball game to see the umpire.” If only! Unfortunately, Roberts’ actual career on the high court has been one extensive repudiation of his lofty “umpire” proclamation. In exalting above all other concerns his personal conception of the institutional integrity of the Supreme Court, and by extension the entire judiciary, Roberts has ironically done more than anyone else to delegitimize the courts.

His recent wildly out-of-line criticism of President Donald Trump’s call for impeachment of a rogue lower-court judge is just the latest example. For the court’s own sake, in these politically tense times, Roberts must change course immediately. Roberts first showed his hand in the landmark 2012 Obamacare case, National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius. As was initially reported by CBS News’ Jan Crawford in the immediate aftermath of the decision and subsequently reported in later years by other court watchers such as CNN’s Joan Biskupic, Roberts initially intended to rule against the constitutionality of the health care law’s individual mandate—its most controversial feature.

But at some point during the court’s deliberations, Roberts changed his mind. He decided that he could throw a bone to the court’s conservative bloc by ruling against the mandate on Commerce Clause grounds, which the law’s drafters and the Obama administration alike had cited as its constitutional basis. But Roberts threw an even larger bone to the court’s liberal bloc, unilaterally opting to rewrite the statute so as to construe the mandate as a “tax”—which then-President Barack Obama himself had repeatedly told a skeptical public that it was not. Obama’s signature domestic achievement was thus upheld. That is not what a judicial “umpire” calling legal “balls and strikes” looks like. Making matters worse, the timing of Roberts’ flip coincided with Obama’s spring 2012 Rose Garden speech, in which he ludicrously described the possibility that the Supreme Court could nullify his health care law as “unprecedented” or “extraordinary.”

Did the chief justice conveniently switch his vote in a historically important case so as to mistakenly attempt to maintain the high court’s “institutional integrity” in the face of an imperious president? It certainly seems so. In the years since Sebelius, there have been any number of additional examples of Roberts ruling in a high-profile case in a way that can only be construed as a clumsy attempt to make “both sides” of the court—and both sides of the broader American public—happy. In the 2022 abortion case of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which mercifully overturned the Roe v. Wade decision of 1973, Roberts notably refused to join the Justice Samuel Alito-written majority opinion, opting to write separately and merely concur in the judgment. It was a classic Roberts move: He argued the court could uphold Mississippi’s underlying 15-week abortion ban statute without overturning Roe.

Roberts’ Dobbs stunt was legally incoherent to the point of outright intellectual dishonesty, but it was politically convenient for Roberts’ idiosyncratic conception of the role of the Supreme Court chief justice—that of a jurist who should somehow attempt to “rise above the fray” and steer the ship of the court in a way that preserves the court’s public image and integrity. But once again: That is certainly not what a judicial “umpire” calling legal “balls and strikes” looks like. Roberts’ pointed criticism this week of Trump’s call for the impeachment of Judge James Boasberg, who last weekend ruled that midair flights deporting Tren de Aragua thugs had to be turned around, is in line with his history of prioritizing—in ham-handed and self-aggrandizing fashion—what he believes to be the judiciary’s integrity. But on this particular score, Roberts is dead wrong.

Read more …

“Krytocracy” is rule by judges.

“The Melian Dialogue taught that the strong do what they will, while the weak suffer what they must.”

• Welcome to the Krytocracy: The BorderLine (Hankinson)

We may think we live in a democracy, which comes from the Greek words “demos” (people) and “kratos” (rule). But with one federal district judge after another attempting to stop President Donald Trump from carrying out his policies, it’s starting to look more like a “krytocracy,” or rule by judges. Look at the litigation tracker from the organization Lawfare and you’d think it was from Trump’s first 100 months, not first 100 days. Here’s a small sample of what his administration is being challenged on: deporting criminal or terrorist-supporting aliens; freezing federal funding to avoid fraud and waste; giving federal employees a voluntary early severance package; DOGE (too many times to go into); making senior civil servants more accountable to the president; and dismantling federal agencies that no longer serve the national interest.

Some of the cases on the tracker seem to be meritless efforts to tie the Trump administration down with process and run out the clock. They should be dealt with swiftly, in the national interest, to let the president do what he was elected for. Let the people then judge for themselves and vote accordingly. But a few of the cases will decide the kinds of crucial questions that emerge from time to time as the tectonic plates of our democratic republic shift. For instance, should the president be able to manage federal agencies to carry out his constitutional duty to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed?” If not, and courts can mandate who he hires and fires, how he spends the money allocated to the agencies under his purview, and even what foreign and military decisions he makes, then we really are in a krytocracy—imposed by activist lawsuits and judicial coups.

A second vital question to the survival of our country is on immigration. One test case is Mahmoud Khalil, who arrived on a student visa around 2022 and apparently became a legal permanent resident last year. Since Oct. 7, 2023, he has been at the center of anti-Israel campus protests and disruptions at Columbia University. The Department of Homeland Security is seeking to deport Khalil for national security and foreign policy reasons. Activists who believe that noncitizens should be free to preach the destruction of Western civilization or support terrorism sued the government to let him stay. And when U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement flew a couple hundred illegal alien gang members to El Salvador where they will be held safely outside the U.S., another lawsuit by the ACLU (the “A” stands for “American,” you’d be amazed to learn) resulted in a temporary restraining order (that was too late to have effect) by a federal judge to keep them here, too.

I think most Americans agree that the president of the United States should be able to remove foreigners who hate our country or victimize our citizens. If lower-level judges don’t agree, I hope the Supreme Court sets them straight—fast.White House spokesperson Karoline Leavitt said Wednesday that “67% of all of the injunctions in this century have come against … President Donald Trump.” Sadly, if not surprisingly, 92% of these orders came from judges appointed by Democrat presidents. I say sadly because I studied history, law, and international relations and, having lived in eight countries and visited maybe 80, I know the value of the rule of law. In ancient Greek times, Thucydides told a story where the Athenians went to the tiny island of Melos and told them something like, “We outnumber you 100 to 1, and this is the way it’s going to be.” The Melian Dialogue taught that the strong do what they will, while the weak suffer what they must.

Read more …

This will take a long time, even without anti-Trump judges.

• Border Czar Homan Says Border Security Will Bankrupt Cartels (JTN)

At Thursday’s Florida Roundtable, former ICE Acting Director Tom Homan, who is Trump’s new “border czar,” defended the president’s border policies. At Thursday’s Florida Roundtable, former ICE Acting Director Tom Homan, who is Trump’s new “border czar,” defended the president’s border policies. Homan said that there were 400 individuals on the terrorist watchlist apprehended at the southern border over the past four years of the Biden administration, while there were 14 in total caught during Trump’s first term. Homan argued that overwhelming U.S. borders makes it more likely for drug trafficking and human smuggling, which is why he believes that strong enforcement essential.

Read more …

Well, it’s the original name…

• Guess Who Wants to Rename the Department of Defense? (Margolis)

In what can only be described as an unusual move, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth has sparked debate over potentially renaming the Department of Defense back to its original name: the Department of War. Hegseth took to X to conduct an informal poll that garnered roughly 170,000 votes in just 18 hours. The results show Americans narrowly prefer “Department of War” over “Department of Defense.” Elon Musk chimed in, saying that “War is more accurate.” I can’t help but notice the contradiction in this proposed change. President Trump has proudly touted his record as the only modern president who kept America out of new conflicts. Given that, reverting to “Department of War” seems oddly out of step with his peace-through-strength doctrine.

So why not call it the “Department of Peace?” That would better reflect Trump’s commitment to avoiding unnecessary wars. Then again, he has also prioritized maintaining the most powerful and lethal military in the world—making “Department of War” a fitting choice in its own right. For those interested in the history, the Department of War was one of just four original cabinet departments established under George Washington’s administration in 1789, with Secretary Henry Knox serving as its first leader. It operated under that name until 1947, when President Truman’s National Security Act reorganized our military structure.

The bureaucratic evolution went through an awkward phase as the “National Military Establishment” (NME) before settling on “Department of Defense” in 1949. The same act established several crucial institutions we still rely on today, including the National Security Council, Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the U.S. Air Force. While Trump recently referenced the “Department of War” in a Truth Social post, no official confirmation exists whether the administration is seriously considering this modification, or if it’s simply Hegseth testing the waters. It’s difficult to accept that he would post such a thing if a change wasn’t under serious consideration.

As you know, this wouldn’t be the first time the Trump administration has tackled federal nomenclature. The president has already renamed Mount Denali in Alaska back to Mount McKinley and the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America. These changes were controversial, and renaming the Department of Defense would certainly be as well. The poll remains open for another day, but regardless of the final tally, the more pressing question is why this discussion is happening now. With multiple global challenges facing our military, one has to wonder whether a departmental rebranding deserves priority attention. Probably not. I’d rather attention be focused on increasing lethality and purging woke ideology and DEI from our military. I voted in the poll and voted to keep the name Department of Defense. Perhaps Elon Musk is right, that “War” is more accurate, but is such a change necessary? I’m not convinced.

Read more …

Not the easiest department to oversee cuts.

• VA Secretary Doug Collins Vows More Cuts: We’re ‘Not An Employment Agency’ (NYP)

In his first six weeks on the job, US Department of Veterans Affairs Secretary Doug Collins has combed through less than 2% of the agency’s contracts — and is already stunned by the bloat he’s found, he told The Post this week. “The VA was paying for PowerPoint slides and meeting notes, for the watering of plants, and consulting contracts to do the work that we should be doing ourselves,” he told The Post this week. Not to mention DEI training, prosthetic private parts, gender affirming hair removal and gender affirming voice training. But that spend-happy era is over — and he’s not making any apologies for it. “I’m not going to allow the VA to be the whipping post anymore. We’re actually going to solve problems and keep doing our job, so for anybody on the Hill or in unions who wants to complain,” he said, firing back at critics across the aisle decrying cuts.

“We’ve got to make sure that we’re doing what is mandated by us and that is to take care of veterans, no matter what,” he said. “They’re all still going to have their benefits and healthcare. But we’ve got to remember we’re not an employment agency, we’re a service organization.” Collins has so far canceled hundreds of non-mission critical contracts to net $900 million in savings, and then saved another $14 million by ditching DEI employees and contracts. On Monday, he ended treatment for gender dysphoria to reallocate funds to treat severely injured veterans and amputees. The agency previously covered hormone therapy, prosthetic genitals and breasts, hair removal, voice training, and other so-called “gender-affirming care,” according to internal agency documents viewed by The Post.

Transgender people make up only about “one-tenth of one percent” of the 9.1 million veterans enrolled in VA healthcare, according to the agency. Likely the biggest savings will come from reductions in force — the department already axed 2,400 employees, and a leaked memo from the Elon Musk led Department of Government Efficiency earlier this month recommended firing 80,000 more. If implemented, that number of terminations would return the VA to its 2019 staffing levels. During former President Biden’s term, the total number of VA full time staff grew by more than 52,000 employees, said a VA spokesperson. That accounts for two-thirds of the department’s expanded workforce set to be slashed.

“The previous administration added tens of thousands of employees, and frankly we’re not sure what they were hired for because we’re not seeing the benefit,” Collins told The Post. Biden tacked on a staggering $89 billion to the VA’s budget during his term, but Collins said the last administration had nothing to show for it. An 2024 Office of Inspector General documented hundreds of millions of dollars in improper payments and questioned costs under Biden, including $325.5 million in unauthorized dental procedures and $200 million in prescription costs lacking justification. Meanwhile, average VA wait times for primary care, mental health care, and specialty care all rose significantly between 2021 and 2024, according to a VA spokesperson.

Read more …

“Get us the information we asked for instead of leaking old info to press,” she wrote on X..”

• FBI On ‘Frenzied Mission’ To Redact Epstein Files – CNN (RT)

The US Federal Bureau of Investigation is “frantically” trying to complete the redactions of the files related to the Jeffrey Epstein investigation before their public release, CNN reported on Saturday. Agents are “working around the clock” and have even suspended ongoing investigations in order to process the files, it claimed, citing sources familiar with the efforts. Every FBI division was ordered to provide agents for the task, including those working on criminal and national security issues, the US broadcaster said. Agents were told to put aside ongoing probes, including into threats allegedly posed by China and Iran, to assist the redacting work, according to CNN’s sources. The redactions have been ongoing for “much of the week” in the FBI headquarters in Washington, DC, as well as in offices in New York and Chantilly, Virginia, the report said. Agents have reportedly spent hours making redactions to both text files and videos.

According to the report, the redactions were required under federal law. The US Justice Department (DOJ) still vowed to “deliver unprecedented transparency for the American people” in a statement to CNN. US President Donald Trump signed an executive order shortly after taking office mandating the release of the Epstein files along with classified documents related to the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy, Robert F. Kennedy, and Martin Luther King Jr. The DOJ released what it called ‘The Epstein Files: Phase 1’ in late February. The documents were heavily redacted and contained mostly previously reported information. US Attorney General Pam Bondi then accused the FBI of withholding “thousands of pages” of documents related to the investigation.

The initial release was also criticized by Florida Representative Anna Paulina Luna, who leads Trump’s newly established declassification task force. “Get us the information we asked for instead of leaking old info to press,” she wrote on X at that time.The Epstein case has drawn significant attention due to the late financier’s extensive network of high-profile associates, including former US President Bill Clinton, Britain’s Prince Andrew, billionaire Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates, and numerous other celebrities and business leaders. Trump also personally knew the convicted sex trafficker but denied ever visiting his private island and maintains that he cut ties with him in the 1990s – years before Epstein’s first arrest for soliciting prostitution in 2006.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

USAID

 

 

 

 

Empires
https://twitter.com/Rainmaker1973/status/1903688161001181396

 

 

Genius
https://twitter.com/i/status/1903455578908750054

 

 

Guitar

 

 

Bees

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle March 15 2025

Mar 152025
 
 March 15, 2025  Posted by at 10:52 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , ,  36 Responses »


Pablo Picasso Rest 1932

 

• Trump Asks Russia To Spare ‘Surrounded’ Ukrainian Troops (RT)
• Putin Calls For All Ukrainians In Kursk To Surrender (ZH)
• Putin Peels Off The Masks Of The Ceasefire Kabuki (Pepe Escobar)
• Monday A Big Day For Ukraine Conflict – Trump (RT)
• NATO Countries Should Restore Ties With Russia – Rutte (RT)
• No Election In Ukraine Even If Truce With Russia Achieved – Podoliak (RT)
• The EU’s Plan For ‘Peace’ Is To Buy More Weapons With Taxpayer Money (RT)
• EU Aiming To Revive Military Industry – Politico (RT)
• Secretary Lutnick Outlines Stupidity of Canada and EU (CTH)
• AFK: Former CIA Agent Tasked With Reining In Intel’s ‘Black Budgets’ (RCW)
• The Minsk Agreements and Why They Failed (Proud)
• Trump Invented The Shutdown Vaccine: It Turns Out To Be DOGE (JTN)
• DOJ Asks SCOTUS For Help Against ‘Activist’ And ‘Overreaching’ Judges (JTN)
• FBI Assures Congress It Is Investigating Leakers Inside The Bureau (JTN)
• Vance Assesses Poland’s Nuke Request (RT)
• Trump Reacts to Biden Autopen Controversy: ‘Who Was Signing All This Stuff?’ (DS)
• Spring’s Frightful Awakening (Kunstler)

 

 

 

 

Darien

Jennings

Homan
https://twitter.com/TulsiGabbardrep/status/1900680065970528502

1850

Bessent

Paper ballots
https://twitter.com/TRUMP_ARMY_/status/1899869063343665284

 

 

 

 

Not so easy. Kiev would have to order their surrender. Then where does Russia take them, and their weapons? Forget the 30-day truce, not going to work.

Ukraine should surrender. Period. This is step 1.

• Trump Asks Russia To Spare ‘Surrounded’ Ukrainian Troops (RT)

US President Donald Trump has asked his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, to spare the lives of the Ukrainian troops that have been encircled in Kursk Region as part of a ceasefire agreement. Following a meeting in Saudi Arabia earlier this week, Washington and Kiev put forward a 30-day ceasefire proposal, and US special envoy Steve Witkoff delivered the details of the initiative to Putin on Thursday. In a press conference on Thursday, the Russian president stated that he is open to the idea of a truce, but stressed that certain issues have to be addressed beforehand, including the fate of Ukraine’s incursion forces, which are currently surrounded in Russia’s Kursk Region.

“If we stop fighting for 30 days, what does it mean? That everyone who is there will leave without a fight? Should we let them go after they committed mass crimes against civilians?” Putin said. In a post on Truth Social on Friday, Trump acknowledged that “thousands of Ukrainian troops are completely surrounded by the Russian military and in a very bad and vulnerable position.” He went on to say that he “strongly requested to President Putin that their lives be spared. This would be a horrible massacre, one not seen since World War II.” Trump also stated that Washington’s latest discussions with Putin have been “very good and productive,” and suggested that there is now “a very good chance that this horrible, bloody war can finally come to an end.”

Trump’s national security adviser, Mike Waltz, has also recently stated that Washington has “some cautious optimism” that a truce can soon be reached following contacts with Moscow. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has confirmed that there are “certainly reasons to be cautiously optimistic,” but reiterated that the issues outlined by Putin still have to be addressed. Apart from the fate of Ukraine’s incursion forces, Putin also raised the question of establishing a monitoring system to oversee a ceasefire along the entire front line, as well as guarantees that Kiev will not use the pause to rearm itself and replenish its ranks.

Read more …

“..a first top-level US acknowledgement that Ukraine is rapidly losing in its cross-border Kursk operation..”

• Putin Calls For All Ukrainians In Kursk To Surrender (ZH)

Update(1358ET): The Kremlin has responded to President Donald Trump’s request that the lives of the Ukrainian troops encircled in Russia’s Kursk Region be spared, which was conveyed in a Friday Truth Social post by the president. Moscow says it is “sympathetic” to this request, and the pattern in the battle to retake Kursk has been to take POWs if weapons are laid down. At the same time President Putin has called immediate surrender of all Ukrainian troops remaining on Russian soil. Trump had acknowledged that “thousands of Ukrainian troops” are “completely surrounded by the Russian military” in the southwest Kursk region. Putin said during a National Security Council meeting on Friday that Russian forces guarantee their lives if they lay down their arms, according to state media translation:

Putin responded that he was aware of Trump’s request, adding that Russia was willing to consider it. “If they lay down their arms and surrender, [we] will guarantee them their lives and dignified treatment in accordance with international law and Russian legal norms,” the president said. But Putin also emphasized the “numerous crimes against civilians” in the region, also has hundreds of thousands of citizens have fled over the last six months of the Kursk occupation on risky operation ordered by Zelensky. The Ukrainian leader has meanwhile rejected that he will cede territory in Ukraine for the sake of peace, and is demanding a ‘strong response’ from the US. But clearly Trump’s own words suggest he’s not ready to order some kind of greater intervention on Kiev’s behalf.

* * *
President Trump has revealed Friday that he has held the second phone call of his current administration with Russian President Vladimir Putin on the prospect of ending the Ukraine war. The call, held Thursday, included a plea by Trump for Russia to spare the lives of Ukrainian soldiers currently surrounded in the Kursk region. Such a direct appeal like this by Trump is unprecedented. “We had very good and productive discussions with President Vladimir Putin of Russia yesterday” – Trump began a statement on Truth Social, before continuing, “and there is a very good chance that this horrible, bloody war can finally come to an end…” That’s when he stated in all caps, “But, at this very moment, thousands of Ukrainian troops are completely surrounded by the Russian military, and in a very bad and vulnerable position.”

“I have strongly requested to President Putin that their lives be spared. This would be a horrible massacre, one not seen since World War II. God bless them all!!!” – Trump ended with. Aside from the rare or even unprecedented nature of such a direct appeal from a sitting US President for Putin to spare the lives of Ukrainian soldiers, this is a first top-level US acknowledgement that Ukraine is rapidly losing in its cross-border Kursk operation. Already as of Wednesday there were widespread reports that a Ukrainian withdrawal from Kursk is underway, and it’s been confirmed that the key town of Sudzha has been taken back by Russian forces, along with well over a dozen towns and settlements in rapid fashion. The amount of Russian territory the Ukrainians still hold there has suddenly shrunk at least four-fold, and by many accounts Russian operatives continue closing in. Even the Financial Times has admitted that the writing is on the wall:

Kyiv’s forces managed at one point to seize some 1,300 sq km of Russian territory. But over the first few weeks the area they were able to hold became a narrow wedge. “It is no secret that the zone of our incursion, it should have been wider,” Kariakin said. “A wide area along the border would have been much more comfortable.” Instead, Russian troops surrounded Ukraine’s occupying forces on three sides. It was a precarious position and became increasingly difficult to hold. War analysts consider it highly debatable and uncertain whether the risky cross-border gambit which started in August actually translated to any strategic advantage across the broader war theater:

For Andriy Zagorodnyuk, a former defense minister of Ukraine, the Kursk operation “served its purpose”: it diverted elite Russian forces and prevented them from opening up another front, he said. Others question whether the benefits outweighed costs to Ukraine’s defense effort on the eastern front. The tragic ‘cost’ has been tens of thousands of Ukrainian troops lost to an operation which had little to no chance of success in the first place.

“High chance” of peace, Trump said…

Read more …

“After all, it’s Russia that’s winning the war in the battlefield, not the U.S., the – already fragmented – NATO, and much less Ukraine.”

“Zelensky already gave away to the Brits all sorts of control over minerals, nuclear power plants, underground gas storage facilities, key ports (including Odessa), and hydroelectric power plants.”

• Putin Peels Off The Masks Of The Ceasefire Kabuki (Pepe Escobar)

The “ceasefire” announced with trademark bombast by Team Trump 2.0 should be seen as a tawdry kabuki inside a cheap matryoshka. As we peel off the successive masks, the last one standing inside the matryoshka is a woke transvestite tiny dancer: a Minsk 3 in drag. Now cue to a “ceasefire” redux: President Putin in uniform only for the second time since the start of the SMO, dead serious, visiting the frontline in Kursk. Finally, cue to the actual peel off operation: Putin’s press conference after his meeting with Lukashenko in Moscow. Ceasefire? Of course. We support it. And then, methodically, diplomatically, the Russian President pulled a Caravaggio, and went all-out chiaroscuro on every geopolitical and military detail of the American gambit. A consumate artful deconstruction.

End result: the ball is now back in Donald Trump’s court. Incidentally the leader of the revamping-in-progress Empire of Chaos who does not (italics mine) have the cards. That’s how diplomacy at the highest level works – something out of reach of American bumpkins of the Rubio variety. Putin was gracious enough to thank “the President of the United States, Mr. Trump, for paying so much attention to resolving the conflict.” After all the Americans also seem to be involved in “achieving a noble mission, a mission to stop hostilities and the loss of human lives.” Then he went for the kill: “This ceasefire should lead to a long-term peace and eliminate the initial causes of this crisis.” As in all Russian key imperatives – widely known since at least June 2024 – will have to be satisfied. After all, it’s Russia that’s winning the war in the battlefield, not the U.S., the – already fragmented – NATO, and much less Ukraine.

Putin was adamant on the ceasefire: “We are for it.” But there are nuances; once again, it’s called diplomacy. Starting with verification – arguably the crux of Putin’s reasoning: “These 30 days — how will they be used? To continue forced mobilization in Ukraine? To receive more arms supplies? To train newly mobilized units? Or will none of this happen? How will the issues of control and verification be resolved? How can we be guaranteed that nothing like this will happen? How will the control be organized? I hope that everyone understands this at the level of common sense. These are all serious issues.” No: the collective EUrocracy, mired in demented Russophobia, does not understand “common sense”.

Once again Putin deferred, diplomatically, to the “need to work with our American partners. Maybe I will speak to President Trump.” So there will be another phone call soon. Trump, for his part, perennially floating on the clouds of bombast, already applied “leverage” on the negotiations – even before Putin’s detailed answer to the ceasefire kabuki. He ramped up sanctions on Russia’s oil, gas and banking, allowing the waiver on Russian oil sales to expire this week. That means in practice that the EUro-vassals and other assorted “allies” cannot buy Russian oil anymore without evading U.S. sanctions. Even before that elements from Kiev criminal gang were begging for more sanctions on Russia as part of a “peace” plan. Trump obviously agreed by bypassing basic diplomacy once again. Only those with an IQ of less than zero can possibly believe that Moscow will support a ceasefire/’peace process” where it is sanctioned for attempting to end a war that it is actually winning in the battlefield – from Donbass to Kursk.

Sanctions will have to be at the heart of the possible U.S.-Russia negotiations. At least some of those thousands will have to go right from the start. Same for the $300 billion or so in Russian assets “seized” – as in stolen –, most of it parked in Brussels. Putin’s Caravaggio ceasefire painting reveals that he has absolutely no interest in antagonizing the notoriously volcanic Trump, or to put in peril the possibility of a U.S.-Russia détente in the making. As for Kiev and the EUro-chihuahuas, they remain on the menu, and not on the table. Predictably, Western MSM, as a wave of toxic detritus hitting a pristine shore, is spinning that Putin said “Nyet” to the ceasefire gambit as a prelude to scotching any negotiations about it. These specimens would not understand the meaning of “diplomacy” even if it was a comet piercing the skies.

As for the spin on the Brits “helping” the Americans and the Ukrainians to concoct the ceasefire gambit, that does not even qualify as a crappy Monty Python sketch. The Brit ruling classes, MI6, their media and think tanks, simply abhor any negotiations. They are at direct, frontal war with Russia, and their plan A – no plan B – remains the same: inflict a “strategic defeat” on Moscow, as the SVR knows inside out. The heart of the matter is the Black Sea. Vladimir Karasev’s analysis, as explained to TASS, is spot on: “The British have already entered the city of Odessa, which they view as a key location. Their special services are heavily involved there. The British do not conceal their desire to establish a naval base in Odessa.”

Odessa is part of the extensive menu of Ukraine’s resources already, in thesis, handed over to the Brits under the shady – and completely illegal – 100-year agreement signed between Starmer and the sweaty sweatshirt in Kiev. According to the dodgy deal and its made in the shade footnotes, Zelensky already gave away to the Brits all sorts of control over minerals, nuclear power plants, underground gas storage facilities, key ports (including Odessa), and hydroelectric power plants. On the ongoing minerals/rare earth saga in 404 – or what will be left of it – the Brits are in vicious, direct competition with the Americans. The CIA is obviously in the know. This whole thing will turn very ugly in no time.

Read more …

Too much to do first.

• Monday A Big Day For Ukraine Conflict – Trump (RT)

US President Donald Trump has said that Washington’s negotiations with Moscow over a US-proposed temporary ceasefire in the Ukraine conflict have been going “okay” so far, and that he expects good news soon. Earlier this week, Washington and Kiev put forward a 30-day truce proposal, with US special envoy Steve Witkoff delivering the details of the initiative to Russian President Vladimir Putin on Thursday. Putin said Moscow is open to the idea but stressed that many issues need to be addressed beforehand, including the fate of the Ukrainian incursion forces currently surrounded in Russia’s Kursk Region. In a sit-down interview with Sharyl Attkisson for Full Measure published on Friday, Trump neither confirmed nor denied having direct communication with Putin regarding the initiative, calling it a “very complex situation.”

“Well, I don’t want to say it, but we are dealing with him, and I think it’s going reasonably well,” Trump said. “As you know, we have a ceasefire agreement with the Ukrainians. And we are trying to get that with Russia, too.” And I think thus far, it’s gone okay. We’ll know a little bit more on Monday, and that’ll be, hopefully, good. Trump admitted that he was being “a little bit sarcastic” when he previously claimed he could resolve the Ukraine conflict within 24 hours. He clarified that he meant he wanted to “get it settled” and expected Putin to support his initiative. “I think I know him pretty well, and I think he’s going to agree,” the US president said.

Earlier in the day, Trump asked Putin to spare the lives of the “thousands of Ukrainian troops” who are “completely surrounded” in Kursk Region. Putin said he is “sympathetic” to Trump’s plea but argued that it is up to Kiev to order its troops to surrender. “If they lay down their arms and surrender, [we] will guarantee them their lives and dignified treatment in accordance with international law and Russian legal norms,” Putin said. He stressed, however, that the Ukrainian forces committed “numerous crimes against civilians” during their incursion and that Russian law enforcement is treating their actions as “terrorism.”

Read more …

“..normal relations with Russia..” What tf is that? They’re all buying armss and building facilities.

• NATO Countries Should Restore Ties With Russia – Rutte (RT)

Europe and the United States should gradually normalize relations with Russia once the Ukraine conflict is over, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte has said. The statement comes a day after the head of the US-led military bloc met President Donald Trump at the White House and amid ongoing efforts by Washington to establish a ceasefire between Moscow and Kiev. Trump has also expressed interest in restoring economic ties with Russia, an idea that was supported by Russian President Vladimir Putin. Speaking to Bloomberg TV on Friday, Rutte recalled that he had “many dealings” and “many negotiations” with Putin while prime minister of the Netherlands. “Long-term, Russia is there, Russia will not go away,” he said. “It’s normal if the war would have stopped for Europe somehow, step by step, and also for the US, step by step, to restore normal relations with Russia,” he argued.

Ukraine’s possible membership of the bloc is off the table in the current peace process, Rutte confirmed, a point Moscow has insisted upon. Most EU leaders, with the notable exceptions of Hungary’s Viktor Orban and Slovakia’s Robert Fico, have advocated for continued confrontation with Russia, despite the ongoing peace process. European NATO countries have been supplying weapons to Kiev since the escalation of the conflict in 2022. Some bloc members, such as France, have floated the idea of deploying troops in Ukraine to monitor a truce. Russia has denounced the idea and insisted that any NATO contingent in Ukraine deployed without a UN mandate will be considered a legitimate target.

Moscow has accused the EU of militarizing against Russia, after the bloc’s leaders backed €800 billion ($860 bn) in debt and tax-breaks for its military industrial complex. As NATO’s biggest financial contributor, Trump has consistently criticized the bloc’s European members for not meeting the defense expenditure targets. NATO has maintained a hostile position towards Moscow since Crimea joined the Russian Federation in 2014 and the subsequent escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022. The developments led to the suspension of practical cooperation and a significant military buildup in NATO countries on Russia’s borders.

Read more …

“Ukraine will maintain martial law..”

• No Election In Ukraine Even If Truce With Russia Achieved – Podoliak (RT)

Ukraine will maintain martial law and will not hold a presidential election even if a ceasefire with Russia is established, Mikhail Podoliak, adviser to Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky, told the Italian newspaper la Repubblica on Friday. Martial law has been in place in Ukraine since the conflict with Russia escalated in February 2022. Zelensky’s presidential term officially expired in May 2024, and he has refused to hold a new election, leading to debates about the legitimacy of his administration. Since US President Donald Trump assumed office in January, the US has been attempting to mediate peace in the conflict. Earlier this week, it proposed a 30-day ceasefire, which Ukraine claimed it was ready to implement, contingent upon Russia’s agreement.

Russian President Vladimir Putin called the idea of a ceasefire “a good one” but pointed to a number of issues that would have to be addressed beforehand. Presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Friday that the issues would likely be discussed with Washington during future contacts. According to Podoliak, however, a temporary ceasefire does not equate to the end of the conflict. “We must maintain the ability to fight until the situation is regulated,” Zelensky’s aide said in an interview with la Repubblica. “The 30-day ceasefire will not unblock the elections,” he added.

In January, Putin stated that Zelensky is illegitimate, a circumstance that could invalidate any agreements that are reached with his involvement. Zelensky had previously enacted legislation prohibiting negotiations with Russia’s current leadership. The Trump administration has begun reestablishing contacts with Russia and has attempted to push Kiev toward seeking a resolution to the hostilities. In February, the Kremlin said that Putin was ready to negotiate with Zelensky, but pointed out the need to address the legal aspects related to the latter’s legitimacy as head of state.

Read more …

“The Ukrainians want peace. We all want peace. And as defense ministers, we have been discussing and we are working to strengthen the push for peace..”

• The EU’s Plan For ‘Peace’ Is To Buy More Weapons With Taxpayer Money (RT)

European defense is basically a teenaged-grade fantasy war gaming league at this point – minus the generous sponsorships. On Wednesday, defense ministers from five European heavyweights – France, Germany, Italy, Poland, and Britain (yes, Britain, because apparently Brexit only applied to sensible EU decisions) – gathered in Paris to figure out how to elbow their way back into the Ukraine game. With US President Donald Trump running the show himself, Europe’s big players are scrambling for relevance. And they’re doing such a stellar job of it that the German defense minister is now relegated to sounding like every annoying dude sitting courtside at a French Open tennis match who thinks he’s offering stellar insight into the state of play.

“We welcome the one-month ceasefire,” Boris Pistorius said, referring to the deal that the Trump administration made with Ukraine. “But now the ball is in Vladimir Putin’s court. It is now Vladimir Putin’s turn to demonstrate his repeated stated readiness for a ceasefire or peace,” he added. Because nothing screams “gimme peace” like the EU meeting about throwing money into the purchase of new weapons. But all this war prepping talk is great for Europe’s latest PR push: convincing taxpayers that draining their wrung-out wallets to the point of even potentially leveraging their private savings for an arms race, as suggested by the French defense mall minister, is actually a genius economic plan. Keynesianism, but with a military vibe.

The British defense secretary claims that the need for a weapons shopping spree actually comes from a place of deep, inner hippie-ness. “The Ukrainians want peace. We all want peace. And as defense ministers, we have been discussing and we are working to strengthen the push for peace,” John Healey said, probably itching to get back home to squeeze into some bell bottoms and smash the bongo drums. Poland’s defense minister also appears to have just stumbled out of a flower-painted VW bus straight from Woodstock. “500 million Europeans deserve a force that will defend peace. 500 million Europeans deserve the opportunity to bring peace,” said Wladyslaw Kosinski-Kamysz in explaining why more weapons spending is needed, and sounding like the type who would also suggest that sobriety comes through an overextended happy hour sip n’ giggle.

Earlier this week, the French and British defense ministers huddled with their army chiefs of staff, still riding high on their leaders’ idea of a “coalition of the willing” for Ukraine. That was British Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s braindropping, repurposed from the Iraq War – perhaps because he couldn’t think of an appropriate catchphrase to reference loss of 60,000 British troops in World War II’s Battle of the Somme. All because Trump had the audacity to suggest a grand bargain with Russia, with the risk of peace breaking out in Ukraine.

None of these European countries actually want any troops on the front line at this point, by the way. Not that they aren’t one screwup away from them ending up there anyway. Maybe the French president and armchair general, Emmanuel Macroleon, can train all these contingents like they did that €900-million Ukrainian ‘Anne of Kyiv’ Brigade, with 1,700 of them going AWOL before the first shot was even fired. Interesting that the Trump administration reportedly just wants private contractors on the ground around the resource exploitation deals that they’ve envisioned in Ukraine and elsewhere, and in which Putin has also expressed interest in partnering. But insiders have told France’s Le Figaro that the Europeans don’t believe that will work, and that NATO troops are needed. Apparently, they believe that Russia would attack its own joint ventures with the Americans in Ukraine.

Read more …

White Paper.

• EU Aiming To Revive Military Industry – Politico (RT)

The European Union has laid out plans to revitalize its military industry, citing an alleged “existential threat” from Russia and concerns over the future of NATO, according to a White Paper obtained by Politico. Moscow has repeatedly denied having any intention of attacking Western states, dismissing such claims as “nonsense” meant to justify increased military spending. The initiative comes in light of European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen’s proposal to mobilize up to €800 billion for defense. The so-called ReArm Europe plan includes financial incentives for EU member states to expand their military budgets, as well as a proposed €150 billion in loans for joint defense projects.

The White Paper, one of the authors of which is the EU’s top diplomat, Kaja Kallas, outlines measures to “rebuild European defense” by increasing military spending, prioritizing the procurement of defense items within the EU, and streamlining financing for arms production. Kallas, a vocal critic of Moscow, has long advocated for a more aggressive military posture toward Russia. The document justifies its proposals by citing what it describes as the “existential threat” posed by Russia and Moscow’s “expansionist policies.” It states that the EU must prepare for a long-term confrontation and that investing more in defense is necessary to ensure security. The White Paper additionally highlights growing concerns over the US’ role in European security. It warns that Washington’s shifting policies under President Donald Trump could weaken NATO’s capabilities, meaning that the EU would have to take greater responsibility for its own defense.

The document refers to NATO as “the cornerstone of collective security” and argues that Europe must do more to ensure the military bloc remains intact. Another key aspect of the proposal is increasing assistance to Ukraine. The White Paper calls for additional military aid, including the supply of 1.5 million artillery shells, expanded training programs for Ukrainian forces, and continued integration of Ukraine into EU military initiatives. Moscow has repeatedly denied any intention of attacking NATO or EU member states. Russian President Vladimir Putin has dismissed such claims as “nonsense” meant to scare the European population and increase military budgets. Russian officials have also vehemently condemned the EU’s recent militarization efforts and vilification of Moscow, arguing that it is a path that only leads to more confrontation and undermines peace efforts in the Ukraine conflict.

Read more …

Lutnick is better at short soundbites.

• Secretary Lutnick Outlines Stupidity of Canada and EU (CTH)

Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick appears on Bloomberg to discuss the tariff approach of President Trump toward national security. Economic security is national security. Lutnick correctly points out the crazy mindset of the Canadians and Europeans not understanding and respecting the big picture objective of President Trump. Ex. President Trump says we need steel and aluminum made in the USA, Canada responds with a tax on soccer balls. As Lutnick says, “really, I mean, REALLY?” This interview is must watch television that cuts directly through the pretending and silliness.

https://twitter.com/MarcNixon24/status/1900226170261774454

Read more …

Amaryllis Fox Kennedy. Interesting woman.

• AFK: Former CIA Agent Tasked With Reining In Intel’s ‘Black Budgets’ (RCW)

A glamorous woman in an unglamorous job, Amaryllis Fox Kennedy sits in a cavernous office that is entirely empty other than the leftover computers and keyboards still scattered about from when the last administration vacated the premises, leaving old copies of federal budgets bound in blue, red, and grey, stretching back decades and stacked nearly from floor to ceiling. It is not exotic like a dusty cafe in Karachi. It isn’t as chic as an art gallery in Shanghai. All the same, Amaryllis Fox Kennedy, or AFK as aides now abbreviate her name, is happy with her new post. “I like to be in the plumbing,” says the daughter-in-law of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Once the youngest female CIA officer at 22 and whose memoir of a life spent undercover was optioned to Hollywood, she adds, this place “is where you can have the most impact.”

She is speaking from the Office of Management and Budget across the alleyway from the White House where, during her first interview since joining the new administration, the ventilation system can be heard kicking on and off. The onetime spy is now the associate director for Intelligence and International Affairs at OMB, a first-of-its-kind position and an assignment that is as influential as her path to it is ironic. President Trump had considered Fox Kennedy for CIA deputy director. Arkansas Sen. Tom Cotton, chairman of the powerful Senate Intelligence Committee, intervened. Lawmakers worried that if given that role, AFK might shatter America’s premier espionage agency. Their fears were not entirely unfounded. Since leaving the agency in 2010, she has become a prominent CIA skeptic. She has made the declassification of the JFK assassination files a personal mission. She managed the campaign of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. last year as he promised to renew the work of his late uncle, President John F. Kennedy, who once vowed to “splinter the CIA into a thousand pieces and scatter it to the winds.”

Any attempts to assuage concerns failed. Her call, and a subsequent call from the White House to set up a meeting with Cotton, went unanswered. She was torpedoed behind the congressional curtain. Enter Russ Vought. Rather than working inside just one three-letter agency to reform it, the director of the Office of Management and Budget asked, why not bring the entire espionage apparatus to the president’s heel? Fox Kennedy accepted. Passed over for a job at CIA, she now oversees the entire CIA budget as well as the budgets for the 17 other agencies that collectively make up the intelligence community.

This makes her the tip of the fiduciary spear, so to speak, in the ongoing White House war against what they see as a “woke and weaponized” government security establishment. The budgets, like the ones collecting dust next to her desk, and other bureaucratic authorities known only to the nerdiest of wonks, Fox Kennedy insists, are the very best tools “to put the Leviathan on the chain.” All of this delights Vought, who calls her addition to OMB “a huge deal,” a step toward policing the shadowy corners of the federal government he described as “nearly untouchable.” No clandestine budget or compartmentalized program will be beyond her purview. Instead, AFK will be free to follow the money. “The federal government has been weaponized against the American people, including our president, in ways most Americans have yet to realize,” the budget chief told RCP before likening the enterprise to “our own Church Committee within OMB to end the weaponization for good.”

But what would you say you do here exactly? “My job is to arm Tulsi and John,” AFK replies, referring to Tulsi Gabbard, director of National Intelligence, and John Ratcliffe, director of the CIA, like old friends, “and all the amazing men and women in the intelligence community with everything they need to do their job – to do it safely and efficiently, protect this country, and execute the president’s agenda.” She continues with standard boilerplate about ensuring that “not a penny of taxpayer dollars is wasted.” A wonk would talk about the efficiency of government systems, while a spook would say something about an attempt at omniscience. She talks that way, too, to be sure, but AFK is unusual in that she attempts to humanize budgetary questions of national security. Every taxpayer dollar that comes through the door, says the mother of three, is a dollar that will not go to “a family’s vacation” or “someone’s kid’s ballet lessons.” Misuse of those funds, she has concluded, is nothing short of “a sin.”

Read more …

Sabotage from the start.

• The Minsk Agreements and Why They Failed (Proud)

The Minsk agreements fell apart because delivering special status for the Donbas was politically too difficult in Ukraine. And because sanctions policy against Russia both disincentivized their compliance, and actively incentivised Ukrainian non-compliance. Claiming that Russia reneged on the Minsk agreements is wilfully inaccurate. The Minsk agreements refers collectively to three sets of peace proposals between June 2014 and February 2015, which culminated in the signature of the second Minsk agreement, commonly known as Minsk 2. They had several aims, including the end the fighting, the limitation on the use of heavy weapons by both sides and to seal Ukraine’s border. Critically, all three proposals sought to maintain the territorial integrity of Ukraine by offering some form of devolution or special status to the separatist oblasts of Lugansk and Donetsk.

It’s important to state up front that the basis for the Minsk agreements was initiated by the Ukrainian side. After violence in the Donbas erupted in February 2014 following the deposal of former President Yanukovych, the separatist leaders in Lugansk and Donetsk orchestrated referenda on 11 May, which ruled in favour of self-rule. These referenda voted in favour of separation from Kiev but were roundly criticised as illegitimate. However, on 21 June, then President Petro Poroshenko advanced a peace plan that included creation of a military buffer zone on either side of the line of contact, the restoration of public services in Donetsk and Lugansk, an amnesty for separatists who had taken up arms. Critically, it advanced the notion that the two oblasts comprising the Donbas would be offered some form of special status.

This offer was welcomed by the Russian side, but the Ukrainian military then intensified their so-called Anti-Terrorist operation to seize towns that had been occupied by the separatists in both Lugansk and Donetsk. By the start of July, the OSCE monitoring mission was reporting on an intensified Ukrainian military operation against the separatists. 5 July is the first time the OSCE reports on the deaths of civilians caused by the military operations, including the death of a five year old girl. By 6 July, Ukrainian forces have recaptured the towns of Sloviansk and Kramatorsk. They approach Donetsk city and a fierce battle erupts around the airport which is destroyed. Fighting then breaks out on the outskirts of Lugansk city. By mid-July heavy military equipment is being moved into the Donbas from Russia, to resupply the separatists. On 17 July amid heavy fighting, flight MH17 is downed with the deaths of all 298 persons on board.

Throughout this period, the Ukrainian military operation continues with barely any let up in intensity. Doctors in Lugansk report 250 deaths and 850 injuries, including civilians during June and July 2014. The OSCE mission moves out of Lugansk on 21 July because of heavy Ukrainian shelling of the city. Severodonetsk falls to the Ukrainian military advance on 22 July. On 29 July, Ukrainian troops at a checkpoint fire warning shots at an OSCE vehicle in Lugansk. That day, Poroshenko announces a 20km ceasefire to allow access to the MH17 site which has been inaccessible because of ongoing military operations. In early august, Lugansk authorities report that citizens in the affected area are no longer receiving Ukrainian state salaries and pensions. Ukraine is now using military aircraft for strikes on targets in urban areas destroying electricity supply in Lugansk. On 10 August the head of the so-called Donetsk People’s Republic proposes a ceasefire to avoid a humanitarian catastrophe. Shelling of urban areas continues from the Ukrainian side with reports of deaths and injuries to civilians.

On 16 August OSCE is trying to corroborate reports of Russian military convoys moving into the Donbas. Donetsk’s water supply is affected by Ukrainian shelling and further civilian casualties are reported. Towards late August, human rights abuses by ultra-nationalist Ukrainian Aidar battalion are being reported by the OSCE. Amnesty international later reports that Aidar has committed widespread abuses, including abductions, unlawful detention, ill-treatment, theft, extortion, and possible executions, some of which allegedly amount to war crimes. On 26 Augst there are reports that Ukrainian personnel are abusing members of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church under the Moscow Patriarchy.

By late August, almost daily shelling of urban areas in Lugansk and Donetsk is taking place, basic services are disrupted and access to food is restricted. On 29 August, the Ukrainian army surrounds a town of Ilovaisk, with the order – according to the BBC – to ‘wipe out’ the separatists within. However, what are believed to have been Russian army formations have encircled the Ukrainian troops encircling the town. Up to 400 Ukrainian soldiers are killed in the ensuing firefight as they struggle to escape. Amidst signs that the Russian army is playing a more direct role in the conflict, the first Minsk agreement is signed on 5 September. It contains similar provisions to Poroshenko’s earlier peace plan, including the decentralisation of power, an amnesty for separatists and an inclusive ‘national dialogue’.

The line of contact between the Ukrainian armed forces and the separatist controlled parts of the Donbas largely stays firms over the coming months. However, there are repeated violations of the ceasefire and casualties on both sides, including civilian casualties in the separatist areas. At the start of 2015, Wagner troops from Russia assist in closing a pocket along the frontline at Debaltseve, a small transport hub, in a bloody battle that lasts for several weeks. This prompts German Chancellor Angela Merkel and President of France, Francois Hollande to become directly involved in mediation. They meet with Presidents Poroshenko and Putin in Minsk on 14/15 February 2015, leading to the signature of the second Minsk Agreement, which people often refer to as Minsk 2. Two days later, the UN Security Council unanimously endorses the Minsk 2 agreement.

This second Minsk agreement is similar to previous agreements but, at Russian insistence, contains more extensive language on the need for devolution in the Donbass, including through the creation of a new Ukrainian constitution. Clauses 4, 8, 9, 11 and 12 all contain detailed provision about sequencing in devolution and resealing the border between Ukraine and Russia. From British Embassy contacts with Russian officials, it is clear that there is no desire on the Russian side to annex the Donbas. Throughout the seven-year period to the start of war in Ukraine in February 2022, President Putin talks often about the need for the Ukrainian side to meets its obligations on devolution under the Minsk II agreement.

But the Ukrainians do not fulfil their obligations. A law on special status was initially passed in Ukraine on 16 September 2014 after the first Minsk agreement was signed. This passed with a narrow majority of four votes. Promised elections in the Donbas were not held and the laws faced immediate resistance. It is quickly clear that there is little political appetite in Ukraine to push forward with special status in the Donbas and this becomes a constant theme. The reading of the special status law in the Verkhovna Rada in 2017 causes scuffles to break out and street protests in Kiev. When newly elected President Zelensky proposes adoption of a devolution law in 2019 he faced public protests by nationalist elements in Kiev and elsewhere. Just three weeks before war breaks out, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba says in a press interview there will never be special status for the Donbas.

Read more …

Their own trap. With the government shut down, DOGE could keep on working.

“..I believe allowing Donald Trump to take even much more power via a government shutdown is a far worse option.”

“This is the first time you’ve had an administration, a president, you know, take a deep, deep dive and audit these agencies..”

• Trump Invented The Shutdown Vaccine: It Turns Out To Be DOGE (JTN)

President Donald Trump appears to have found his leverage against congressional Democrats for the upcoming budget battles in the form of the Elon Musk-led Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Senate Democrats made an about face this week and supported a continuing resolution to keep the government funded at current levels until Sept. 30, despite its inclusion of $10 billion in Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) funding and a $6 billion hike in defense spending. After the House passed the provision earlier this week, Democrats initially refused to agree to anything proposed by Trump or the razor-thin GOP House majority, but Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., on Thursday told the conference that he would support the measure. That led to 10 Democrats joining with Republicans to overcome the 60-vote filibuster threshold.

The turnaround came as Democrats voiced concerns over handing Trump too much power through a shutdown and as Elon Musk stoked fears that the government would simply permit a shutdown indefinitely to accomplish the goal of dramatically reducing the size of the government. “For sure, the Republican bill is a terrible option. It is not a clean CR [continuing resolution],” Schumer said. “It is deeply partisan. It doesn’t address far too many of this country’s needs. But I believe allowing Donald Trump to take even much more power via a government shutdown is a far worse option.” “They’re concerned that if they do block that plan, there could be a prolonged government shutdown with disastrous consequences, giving Donald Trump even more power to shutter federal agencies,” CNN’s Manu Raju said.

Musk appeared to lend credence to some of Schumer’s concerns with his social media posting about how to manage a shutdown. “If the government shuts down, what if we just never brought most furloughed workers back?” asked White House correspondent Natalie Winters on X. Her rhetorical question went viral, with Musk himself responding with a contemplative emoji that appeared to signal his openness to the concept. Though Democrats agreed to the CR, DOGE’s presence will be a “sword of Damocles” hovering over the leftward side of the congressional aisle as negotiations gear up for the full-term budget bill. Republicans have expressed their plans to draft and pass all 12 yearly appropriations bills by Memorial Day, which should set the budget for fiscal year 2026.

DOGE has said it wants to cut as much as $2 trillion in wasteful spending to help balance the budget, though its efforts have faced legal hurdles, including from judges who have ordered their access to key data barred. This week, a federal district court judge ordered the reinstatement of thousands of fired federal probationary employees, though that ruling will likely face an appeal. At present, it claims an estimated $115 billion in savings. On the Republican side, some lawmakers see DOGE as crucial for justifying steep cuts that are expected to appear in the next budget. “There are some people expressing concerns about Elon Musk and what he’s doing with these agencies, but I applaud him, and I say, keep digging,” Rep. Troy Nehls, R-Texas, said on the “Just the News, No Noise” television show this week. “This is the first time you’ve had an administration, a president, you know, take a deep, deep dive and audit these agencies, many of these agencies, defense and everything, they can’t even pass an audit.”

Republicans in the House and Senate have already passed initial budget blueprints for the following year, though they remain divided on planning. The House favors the Trump-preferred approach of “one big, beautiful bill” whereas the Senate has opted to include all of Trump’s border funding requests before addressing taxes. Rep. Andy Biggs, R-Ariz., put the timeline for a final version at mid-May. “All the indications are, the Senate is going to take up their, version of the reconciliation and finish that package off, completing it a week or so after the reconciliation comes out next week,” he said. “So we’re talking two, three weeks out, and then you’re going to have the conference committee on it. There’s some resolution, and probably mid-May, maybe, if we’re lucky, you get that reconciliation package completely done and out.” With the new deadline coming on Sept. 30, it’s possible that Republicans will have their final version ready well ahead of time, giving Democrats plenty of time to mull the prospect of another shutdown. DOGE is expected to remain active well through that timeframe, moreover, and is sure to present a similar problem for Democrats mulling continued opposition.

Read more …

“Does a single district-court judge who likely lacks jurisdiction have the unchecked power to compel the Government of the United States to pay out (and probably lose forever) 2 billion taxpayer dollars?”

• DOJ Asks SCOTUS For Help Against ‘Activist’ And ‘Overreaching’ Judges (JTN)

The Trump administration on Thursday filed an emergency appeal to the Supreme Court, asking it to narrow the scope of injunctions against its immigrations policies and to thwart the emerging use of local District Court judges to issue nationwide blocks on its policies. “[Broad injunctions] compromise the executive branch’s ability to carry out its functions,” Acting Solicitor General Sarah Harris wrote. “This court should declare that enough is enough before district courts’ burgeoning reliance on universal injunctions becomes further entrenched.” The Solicitor General files or defends cases on behalf of the U.S., and answers directly to the Attorney General. It is under the Department of Justice’s remit. Harris has so far filed three appeals in three separate cases involving Trump’s birthright citizenship order, which directs federal agencies to not interpret the 14th Amendment as granting citizenship to the children of foreigners born within the U.S. interior.

Four federal district court judges have temporarily blocked the policy, purportedly nationwide. The courts issuing temporary injunctions are located in Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Washington. The administration specifically asked that the courts narrow the orders to apply only to the plaintiff parties in each case, rather than block the order at a national level. Harris’s argument, moreover, comes as district judges have increasingly blocked Trump’s myriad policies on their own authority. Harris wrote in her briefs (identical in all three of the cases still in district court) that “District courts have issued more universal injunctions and TROs during February 2025 alone than through the first three years of the Biden Administration. That sharp rise in universal injunctions stops the Executive Branch from performing its constitutional functions before any courts fully examine the merits of those actions, and threatens to swamp this Court’s emergency docket.”

Throughout Trump’s 53 days back in office, he has faced a flurry of nationwide injunctions against his executive orders. This week alone, Judge Beryl Howell blocked the administration’s revocation of security clearances for the Perkins Coie law firm, which helped the Clinton campaign fund the Steele Dossier, and Judge Ana Reyes demanded that Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth retract a public statement suggesting that the Defense Department would not permit any transgender persons to serve as part of a suit challenging the department’s new trans policy. The same week, U.S. District Judge William Alsup ordered the reinstatement of thousands of probationary employees from the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Defense, the Department of Energy, the Department of the Interior and the Treasury Department, whom the administration fired as part of a broad effort to shrink the federal government.

Will the Supreme Court step in this time? The most straightforward remedy to the issue would be for the Supreme Court to intervene in one of these cases by defining the scope of their authority, as the Trump administration has requested. “Obama & Biden put leftwing saboteurs (even foreign citizens) on the bench (especially in DC) who are doing everything they can to destroy the presidency—thus, our country,” Attorney Mike Davis, the former Chief Counsel for Nominations to Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, posted on Thursday. “Activist judges now control foreign aid and military readiness? Dangerous. Will Supreme Court stop them?” The justices had exactly that opportunity earlier this month, but declined to take it.

The Supreme Court recently sided against the administration on the matter of a lower court order demanding that the executive branch release U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) funds. The 5-4 ruling did, however, permit the case to continue through the lower courts. Supreme Court Associate Justice Samuel Alito, however, raised the constitutional question of a district judge’s authority in a scathing dissent. “Does a single district-court judge who likely lacks jurisdiction have the unchecked power to compel the Government of the United States to pay out (and probably lose forever) 2 billion taxpayer dollars?” he wrote. “The answer to that question should be an emphatic ‘No,’ but a majority of this Court apparently thinks otherwise. I am stunned.”

One of — if not the — central issue is the constitutional separation of powers. The legislative, executive and judicial branches are officially co-equal, but Congress is responsible for the establishment of lower courts below the Supreme Court. The scope of those courts’ authority stands as the primary question. “If a judge tried to tell a general how to conduct a military operation, that would be illegal. If a judge tried to command the attorney general in how to use her discretion as a prosecutor, that’s also illegal. Judges aren’t allowed to control the executive’s legitimate power,” Vice President JD Vance said in February. “In addition to running the White House, federal judges are now in charge of the military—or think they are. James Madison, where are you?” Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, quipped in March over the Reyes order.

Read more …

“Border Czar Tom Homan has confirmed that planned ICE operations have been leaked to targets of criminal deportation, including the Venezuelan Tren de Aragua gang..”

• FBI Assures Congress It Is Investigating Leakers Inside The Bureau (JTN)

FBI leadership has informed a key House leader in a letter dated Tuesday and sent Wednesday that the bureau is investigating leaks within the FBI, vowing that “there will be consequences” if the bureau unearths any misconduct. Just the News has learned that a senior FBI official assured Congressman Clay Higgins, R-La., in the letter that FBI Director Kash Patel has made it clear that “leaks will not be tolerated.” This comes after Just the News reported early this week that the FBI has launched an investigation into “dishonest leakers” inside the bureau who have recently pushed “false information” to the media. Higgins is the chairman of the Oversight Subcommittee on Federal Law Enforcement, and urged the FBI and other federal agencies in late February to hold “deep-state leakers” accountable.

Just the News was allowed to read the letter, but at the source’s request they remain unnamed and the letter itself will remain out of public view. The FBI letter to Higgins informed the congressman that “the FBI shares your concern about the risk associated with any leaks of law enforcement sensitive information” and that “the FBI has launched an investigation into ‘leakers’ inside the Bureau” because “leaks undermine the FBI’s mission as the nation’s premiere law enforcement institution in the nation and put our brave agents at risk.” FBI spokesman Ben Williamson declined to elaborate further on investigative details, but told Just the News that “we will continue to hold individuals spreading false information and undermining the FBI’s mission accountable, and we will work with Congress on these efforts.”

Higgins had sent a letter to Patel in late February informing him that his subcommittee “is investigating leaks of law enforcement sensitive information about complex targeted immigration enforcement actions” conducted by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) with assistance from the FBI and other agencies. Higgins added that “the leaked plans tipped off dangerous criminals about imminent law enforcement actions, enabling them to evade apprehension and perpetuate the threat they pose to national security and the American public.” Border Czar Tom Homan has confirmed that planned ICE operations have been leaked to targets of criminal deportation, including the Venezuelan Tren de Aragua gang, which was designated a terrorist organization by the Trump administration.

Homan said on Fox News that he believes some of the leaks came from within the FBI. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem recently announced that the Department of Homeland Security has identified staffers who leaked information about ICE raids. The FBI’s latest letter to Higgins promised that “we will continue to aggressively pursue allegations of misconduct regarding FBI employees” and that “whenever the FBI uncovers any evidence of employee misconduct, there will be consequences.” “The FBI is working with the Department of Justice to determine if there is any information relevant to the subject of your letter,” the senior FBI official assured Higgins. “The FBI will continue to comply with any requests for further information from the Department of Justice on this subject.”

Read more …

Oh sure, nukes at Russia’s border.

• Vance Assesses Poland’s Nuke Request (RT)

US Vice President J.D. Vance has said he would be “shocked” if President Donald Trump supported the idea of American nuclear weapons being based in Poland. In an interview with Fox News on Thursday, Vance was asked about Warsaw’s proposal to host US strategic missiles on its territory as a “deterrent against future Russian aggression.” “I haven’t talked to the president about that particular issue, but I would be shocked if he was supportive of nuclear weapons extending further east into Europe,” Vance said. Polish President Andrzej Duda has called on Washington to move some of its nuclear arsenal stored in Western Europe or the US to Poland, claiming on Thursday that he had discussed the idea with Keith Kellogg, the US special envoy for Ukraine and Russia, according to the Financial Times.

The Polish president reportedly made a similar request to the Joe Biden administration in 2022, but it was never approved. Vance argued that while “people like Joe Biden” are “sleepily walking us into the nuclear conflict,” allowing Russians and Ukrainians to “bleed out,” Trump has engaged in “tough diplomacy,” enlisting his entire administration to settle the Ukraine conflict. Polish officials are reportedly calling for militarization to address the alleged threat posed by Moscow. Prime Minister Donald Tusk claimed earlier this month that Russia could launch a “full-scale operation” against a “larger” target than Ukraine within three to four years – which Moscow has repeatedly dismissed. Tusk argued that Poland must serve as a “bastion” to protect NATO’s eastern flank and should expand its military capabilities and double the size of its army to 500,000.

Russia has consistently denied allegations that it poses a military threat to European NATO nations. President Vladimir Putin has dismissed such claims as “nonsense,” accusing EU leaders of using them to instill fear among their populations and justify increased military spending. Calls for higher defense budgets within the EU, however, align with Trump’s push for European NATO members to take greater responsibility for their own security. At the same time, the US president has criticized the idea of an arms race and suggested that nuclear powers should get rid of their atomic arsenals.

Read more …

An autopen is for Hunter’s birthday card. Not for his pardon.

• Trump Reacts to Biden Autopen Controversy: ‘Who Was Signing All This Stuff?’ (DS)

Former President Joe Biden’s consistent use of an autopen e-signature during his presidency has become the talk of Washington, after a Heritage Oversight Project report called into question the validity and legal standing of Biden’s actions. An autopen, or signing machine, is a device that reproduces a signature without the signatory having to be present. “He signs by autopen,” said President Donald Trump in the Oval Office on Thursday. “Who was signing all this stuff by autopen? Who would think you’d sign important documents by autopen? You know, these are major documents … . Nobody’s ever heard of such a thing. So, it should have never happened.”

The Heritage Foundation’s report found that the vast majority of documents signed by Biden while in office employed an autopen. That includes Biden’s last-minute pardons of his family members, Anthony Fauci, Gen. Mark Milley, and the members of the Jan. 6 Committee.

https://twitter.com/OversightPR/status/1899185791269810512?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1899185791269810512%7Ctwgr%5Ee79aed3e8a9579214ef0152671c691dbf40c7350%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailysignal.com%2F2025%2F03%2F13%2Fwashington-reacts-biden-autopen-controversy-signing%2F

The report also found that some of the autopen-signed documents “pardoned six criminals (with the exact same autopen signature) while Joe Biden was vacationing and golfing in the U.S. Virgin Islands.” These documents all say that they were signed “at the city of Washington.” Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, took to X, humorously writing, “Autopen autocrat … Delaware Despot … Rehoboth Robot.” Asked by The Daily Signal whether he found the report’s findings significant, Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., replied, “I think it is. I don’t have all the information on it, but it’s—we all use autopens for different things, but to sign legislation, presidential executive orders, that type of thing, that’s troubling.”

Sen. Pete Ricketts, R-Neb., however, rejected the significance of the study. “That’s a pretty standard process in a lot of offices,” he said. But Mike Howell, executive director of Heritage’s Oversight Project, says that Biden’s consistent use of an autopen is far different than a senator using it. “No president has ever used the autopen so prolifically as President Biden,” Howell said. “We’re trying to figure out who was actually exercising the authority of the president. And it appears that the autopen was used as a device to hide the responsibility from the American people,” he said.

“It’s functionally and categorically different for a senator to use an autopen to send a thank-you note to the Girl Scouts than it is for a staffer at the White House to use the autopen instead of the president’s authority to sign a pardon.” Howell added: “Only the President of the United States can sign a pardon. And the question remains whether Biden even had the cognitive ability to delegate his signature authority. Additionally, whether it’s even legal to do that for documents that only the presidents can sign.” When asked, Howell said he’s hoping that this question is litigated in the courts. “Absolutely I am,” he said. “I think that the January 6th committee members and staff and Gen. Milley and others, they have some funky pardons that are about as valid as a three-dollar bill. And Congress and others … need to figure out who is actually the president over the last four years.”

Read more …

“Nothing will be as it was. A most wicked spell has been broken. What does it feel like to be able to think again?..”

• Spring’s Frightful Awakening (Kunstler)

In my quiet backwater of the Hudson Valley, an early spring drives all creation violently. The peaceful sleep of winter ends in twitches and spasms. The ground breaks open like one big egg and all living things emerge: green shafts of the crocus, scuttling sowbugs, slithering snakes, sleek garlic shoots, ‘possums in the compost bucket, ticks are back on the cat’s face, the ice in the river cracks in frightening booms, hungry songbirds infest the bare roadside lilacs, tiny voices trill darkly in the woods, a lone early moth in its first rapture of flight meets the pitiless windshield. You can feel it. The northern hemisphere of this planet shudders, rattles, and rolls into the most tumultuous spring in memory.

Everything is in play, turning, turning, while forgotten consequence rises on vengeful wings like an aggrieved god of yore. Nothing will be as it was. A most wicked spell has been broken. What does it feel like to be able to think again? Messrs Trump and Putin sincerely seek to end the age’s stupidest war in Europe’s dumbest country, while the European Union and its outlier Great Britain go ostentatiously more insane every week. They bethink themselves storybook conquerors out of some retrograde history written by gibbering globalists. Macron and Friedrich Merz propose a grand invasion of Russia, as if Napoleon and Hitler had never existed, and they aim to get it done on about three days’ worth of ammunition. You first, Emmanuel, Merz insists. Non, non, pas de tout, Macron demurs with a deep bow.

Keir Starmer, Knight Commander of the Order of the Bath, and PM of an empire in late-stage sclerosis, does jumping jacks with pom-poms across the channel to cheer on France and Germany in their quixotic quest to conquer of Russia. “Go get’um lads!” he cries. Think of Sir Keir as a Monty Python archbishop as written by George Orwell under the direction of Franz Kafka — there’s what’s left of your jolly old England!

Meanwhile Ursula von der Leyen rehearses her part as the wannabe Joan of Arc in this political psychodrama. Her sweet grandmother’s face will smile placidly as the flames tickle her penitent’s robe. She was born for this. A million deracinated Congolese perform the twerk mazurka around her flaming pyre while the muezzins sing out the call to prayer from every minaret around Brussels. Her Hanoverian ancestors weep for Ursula through the mists of the centuries. Was Satan himself behind the contract she signed with Pfizer for as much as 4.6 billion doses of Covid-19 vaccine at a cost of €71-billion? Where did the money come from and where exactly did it go, and what did Ursula finally have to show for it? The European Court of Auditors had a look at this tangled web and blew their lunches all over the rue Alcide De Gasperi in Luxembourg City. Snails, champignon, and shards of puff pastry on the ancient stone steps. A disgrace.

You are not compelled to understand all these occult machinations roiling Europe at the moment, except to see that the continent wants to turn itself into the world’s premiere slaughterhouse once again after a seventy-year hiatus from the exciting frolics of World War Two. Almost everyone who lived through that episode is dead now. The cultural memory has faded. Europe is sick of lollygagging in the café, nibbling effete palmier and tartelette. They apparently want to wade across the chilly Vistula River and race to the east, like berserkers, hacking off Slavic limbs and heads along the way.

No, it is not true that Donald Trump’s ancestors invented the trumpet, but shrill brassy notes resound all over America these days as his enemies ululate and rend their garments. Liz Warren is yelling from streetcorners like her head’s going to blow plumb off her shoulders. Randi Weingarten was keening on MSNBC like an oboe with a broken reed. The entire two month-long spectacle has been a musical extravaganza. The President and his sidekick, Elon, keep coming at the country’s resident blob-of-evil like pit-bulls on a pack of wild hogs. Shreds of bacon have been flying all over the Beltway. I could have told you years ago that the blob was mostly lard and little meat. Now you know. It’s a sight to behold for the ages.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

RFK

Snow deer

Multiply

Sunset

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle February 28 2025

Feb 282025
 
 February 28, 2025  Posted by at 10:51 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , ,  65 Responses »


Giovanni Bellini Pietà 1505

 

• FBI Withheld ‘Thousands’ Of Epstein Docs – US AG Pam Bondi (RT)
• DOJ Releases ‘The Epstein Files: Phase 1’ (RT)
• Macron Persuaded Trump To Receive Zelensky In Washington (TASS)
• Trump Refuses To Guarantee Backup For British Military (RT)
• Kiev Facing Pressure To Intensify Conscription – Economist (RT)
• UN Showed ‘Common Sense’ On Ukraine Conflict Resolution – Moscow (RT)
• Putin Says 6+ Hour Talks With US “Inspire Certain Hopes” (ZH)
• USAID Blew Millions On Literal ‘Pet Projects’ In Ukraine (RT)
• Border Protection Feds Warned Of Possible Unrest Over USAID Firings (JTN)
• Polls Highlight Disconnect Between Media And Public On DOGE (JTN)
• Is the End of the Democrats’ Lawfare Strategy In Sight? (PJM)
• Leavitt Slams NY Times Reporter As ‘Left-Wing Stenographer’ (NYP)
• Prosecuted Romanian Presidential Candidate Asks Trump For Help (RT)
• Elon Musk Floats Pay Hikes For Congress, Top Gov’t Workers To Fight Corruption (NYP)
• Musk’s Father Says Son ‘Not Cut Out For Politics’ (RT)
• Bezos Calls for WaPo to Champion Individual Freedom and Free Markets (Turley)
• HHS Pauses Multi-Million Dollar Contract to Develop New COVID-19 Vaccine (ET)

 

 

 

 

DOGE
https://twitter.com/i/status/1894843925635940585

Lutnick

Malone

 

 

 

 

Bondi sort of walked into her own trap. Big promises, lot of hoopla, photo-ops, all of which affect not just her, but also Kash Patel and Trump, and then there’s nothing there. Ugly. She should have checked what she DID have. She called for a “new round” Friday 8am, but what if it’s still not there?

• FBI Withheld ‘Thousands’ Of Epstein Docs – US AG Pam Bondi (RT)

US Attorney General Pam Bondi has accused the Federal Bureau of Investigation of withholding “thousands of pages” of documents related to the investigation of convicted sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein. In a letter addressed to the newly appointed FBI director, Kash Patel, Bondi demanded the immediate release of all pertinent files. Earlier that day, the Department of Justice released a set of documents titled ‘The Epstein Files: Phase 1’ to a select group of conservative influencers. Notable figures such as Libs of TikTok’s Chaya Raichik, journalist Jack Posobiec, pundit Liz Wheeler, and conservative commentator Mike Cernovich were seen exiting the White House with binders labeled with the project’s title. However, these documents were heavily redacted and contained mostly previously reported information.

“We got the binder at noon… AG Bondi wanted to get out what they had, which wasn’t anything material,” Cernovich wrote in a post on X, adding that the FBI “held back the real information and AG Bondi directed Kash Patel to start kicking ass.” Bondi’s letter to Patel on Thursday alleges that despite assurances by his predecessors at the FBI that her office had received the complete set of Epstein-related documents, a tip from an insider revealed the existence of additional undisclosed files. The initial batch provided to Bondi’s office reportedly comprised approximately 200 pages, including flight logs, contact information, and victim identities, which according to the AG was already enough to “make you sick.”

Conservative influencers leaving the White House with ‘The Epstein Files: Phase 1’, February 27, 2025. © AP / Evan Vucci

“By 8:00am tomorrow, February 28, the FBI will deliver the full and complete Epstein files to my office, including all records, documents, audio and video recordings, and materials related to Jeffrey Epstein and his clients, regardless of how such information was obtained,” Bondi wrote in her letter to Patel. “There will be no withholdings or limitations to my or your access.” The limited release of the Epstein files has drawn criticism from Florida Representative Anna Paulina Luna, who leads President Donald Trump’s newly established declassification task force. “This is not what we or the American people asked for. Get us the information we asked for instead of leaking old info to press,” Luna wrote on X in all caps.

Trump signed an executive order shortly after taking office, mandating the release of the Epstein files along with classified documents related to the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy, Robert F. Kennedy, and Martin Luther King Jr. The Epstein case has drawn significant attention due to his extensive network of high-profile associates, including former US President Bill Clinton, Britain’s Prince Andrew, billionaire Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates, and numerous other celebrities and business leaders. Trump also personally knew Epstein but has denied ever visiting his private island, maintaining that he cut ties with him in the 1990s – years before the financier’s first arrest for soliciting prostitution in 2006 – and has vowed to declassify all files.

Raising concerns about the potential destruction of these sensitive documents, Tennessee Representative Andy Ogles has proposed legislation aimed at preserving all non-public records related to Epstein. In a letter to Bondi on Wednesday, Ogles announced his intent to introduce the Preventing Epstein Documentation Obliteration Act, or PEDO Act, following “reports that certain FBI agents are allegedly attempting to destroy critical records.”

Read more …

“..tasked FBI Director Kash Patel with investigating why the request for all documents was not followed.”

• DOJ Releases ‘The Epstein Files: Phase 1’ (RT)

The Department of Justice (DOJ) has released the first phase of declassified documents related to Jeffrey Epstein, which includes mostly previously known flight logs, phone records, and other materials linked to the convicted sex trafficker’s network of associates. Labeled ‘The Epstein Files: Phase 1’, the documents were first made available to a select group of conservative influencers before being broadly released to the public on Thursday evening. The DOJ has not yet confirmed whether additional phases will follow or provided a timeline for further disclosures. “The first phase of files released today sheds light on Epstein’s extensive network and begins to provide the public with long-overdue accountability,” said Attorney General Pam Bondi.

“This Department of Justice is following through on President Trump’s commitment to transparency and lifting the veil on the disgusting actions of Jeffrey Epstein and his co-conspirators.” According to the DOJ statement, the release is part of a broader initiative to increase transparency regarding Epstein’s criminal activities and the people connected to him. However, some critics have expressed disappointment. Representative Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.), who leads President Donald Trump’s declassification task force, stated that the release did not contain the substantive information the public had been expecting. The DOJ has yet to comment on whether more names of high-profile individuals linked to Epstein will be revealed in future releases. The FBI, which has been accused of withholding documents, is also under pressure to release additional materials following Bondi’s demand for full disclosure.

Bondi has requested that the FBI hand over the remaining documents by 8:00am Friday and has “tasked FBI Director Kash Patel with investigating why the request for all documents was not followed.” “There will be no cover-ups, no missing documents, and no stone left unturned – and anyone from the prior or current Bureau who undermines this will be swiftly pursued,” said Patel after Bondi wrote him a letter earlier in the day demanding the immediate release of all pertinent files. “The FBI is entering a new era – one that will be defined by integrity, accountability, and the unwavering pursuit of justice.”

Read more …

He just wanted to get rid of Macron?!

• Macron Persuaded Trump To Receive Zelensky In Washington (TASS)

US President Donald Trump did not want to host Vladimir Zelensky in Washington, but changed his decision after French President Emmanuel Macron convinced him to do so, BFMTV reported. “Zelensky was supposed to come to Washington yesterday, but someone from the Trump administration told him, ‘Listen, Vladimir, there’s no point in chartering a plane, don’t come, all meetings have been canceled, President Trump won’t receive you.’ This caused panic in Kiev,” BFMTV reporter Patrick Sauce said. After that, Zelensky began calling Macron, asking him to convince Trump to reconsider, as he hoped to sign an agreement on Ukrainian minerals in Washington. Additionally, he mentioned that the visit “would have had strong symbolic significance.”

According to a French diplomatic source cited by the journalist, the French president then called the White House and successfully persuaded Trump to meet with Zelensky, offering his personal endorsement. On February 26, Trump confirmed that Zelensky would arrive in Washington this Friday to sign a deal on Ukraine’s minerals, among other matters. Prior to that, he had mentioned February 28 as a possible meeting date. However, on February 26, an unnamed White House official told Reuters that Washington saw no point in Zelensky’s visit without the signing of the minerals deal. Zelensky announced at a press conference on February 23 that he “does not want” to sign the agreement with the US because, in his view, future generations of Ukrainians would bear the financial burden.

Read more …

Starmer and Macron want war. Trump does not.

• Trump Refuses To Guarantee Backup For British Military (RT)

US President Donald Trump has said British troops “can take care of themselves” when asked whether the US military would support them if the UK deploys forces to Ukraine as part of a potential peace agreement with Russia. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer met with Trump at the White House on Thursday, where they discussed a plan to reach what he called a “peace that is tough and fair.” “I’m working closely with other European leaders on this, and I’m clear that the UK is ready to put boots on the ground and planes in the air to support a deal, working together with our allies, because that is the only way that peace will last,” Starmer told reporters after the meeting.

Trump, however, sidestepped a question about whether the US would provide backup if the deployment led to clashes with Russian forces, telling journalists that the British “don’t need much help.” “They can take care of themselves very well… It sounds like it’s evasive, but it’s not evasive. You know, the British have been incredible soldiers, incredible military, and they can take care of themselves,” Trump said at a photo op before the meeting. “If they need help, I’ll always be with the British, OK? I’ll always be with them – but they don’t need help.”

Starmer then hailed the US-UK relationship as the world’s “greatest alliance for prosperity and security,” adding that “whenever necessary, we’ve absolutely backed each other up.” “Could you take on Russia by yourselves?” Trump interrupted, turning to Starmer with a smile. “Well…” the prime minister responded to a burst of laughter from the audience before Trump moved on to other questions. The meeting came just days after French President Emmanuel Macron also reportedly failed to secure concrete US security guarantees for Ukraine during talks with Trump in Washington. Trump previously said he discussed “some form of peacekeeping” with his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, and claimed that Putin had “no problem” with the idea. However, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov stated that Moscow had not been consulted on the matter.

Lavrov said the idea of deploying foreign troops to Ukraine is being pushed by “the Europeans, primarily France and also the British,” suggesting that this is meant to “further heat up the conflict and stop any attempts to calm it down.” Moscow has opposed the deployment of unauthorized peacekeepers to Ukraine, warning that without a UN mandate, they would be considered legitimate targets. Lavrov has said that any discussions about a peacekeeping force in Ukraine are “empty” and that the priority should be resolving the conflict’s underlying issues – including efforts to bring Kiev into NATO and the potential deployment of Western military infrastructure near Russia’s borders.

Read more …

“..increased mandatory conscription may be inevitable..”

• Kiev Facing Pressure To Intensify Conscription – Economist (RT)

Kiev is under pressure to escalate its mobilization drive to sustain the conflict with Russia, according to The Economist. While Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky strives to motivate younger men to volunteer, his officials acknowledge that increased mandatory conscription may be inevitable. Last year, Kiev revamped its military service system, lowering the conscription age to 25 and imposing stricter penalties for draft avoidance. However, these measures have reportedly fallen short of the recruitment goals. The Economist reported on Wednesday that Western advisers are urging Kiev to draft younger individuals, viewing this as the quickest path to strengthening the army. Publicly, Zelensky has resisted lowering the draft age – privately, however, his officials have reportedly acknowledged that it will likely be necessary.

A senior official told the British magazine that the “tightening will continue because no one has come up with a better solution.” With frontline casualties increasing, many eligible men have been evading draft officers or have even resisted. The Economist noted a recent incident in Poltava, where a military official was fatally shot during a recruitment raid. While Ukraine’s security services attribute the blame to ‘Russian infiltrators’, soldiers suspect the violence may be “homegrown,” foreshadowing a potential increase in domestic discord. The Ukrainian government has initiated a program to attract younger volunteers into the military. Officials told The Economist that their aim is to recruit 4,000 people per month by offering generous compensation and a promise of demobilization after one year, though many have reportedly expressed skepticism.

”The army does not honor the terms of the contracts anyway – recently we got some guys who were transferred from an engineering brigade. They signed up to be pontoon builders, now they’re infantry,” a Ukrainian marine officer told The Times last week. Meanwhile, US President Donald Trump is advocating for a rapid resolution to the Ukraine conflict, pointing to the death toll and destruction incurred on both sides. Officials in Washington view the conflict as an obstacle to improving relations with Moscow. Trump has also pushed for a rare-earth minerals deal with Ukraine, which he believes would offset the US expenditures on the conflict over the years. In contrast, the EU and a number of European NATO members have pledged to continue pouring resources into the conflict. Zelensky has insisted that peace negotiations will only be possible from a “position of strength.”

Read more …

“..Western countries that have sought to isolate Russia are “themselves are becoming more isolated..”

• UN Showed ‘Common Sense’ On Ukraine Conflict Resolution – Moscow (RT)

“Common sense” has finally prevailed in the UN Security Council after it approved a US-drafted resolution on Ukraine without anti-Russian rhetoric, Moscow’s deputy envoy to the UN, Dmitry Polyansky, has told RT. Two competing resolutions on Ukraine were submitted to the UN on Monday, one of which was initiated by Kiev and its EU backers and condemned Russia. The other text, backed by the US, avoided branding Russia as an aggressor and called for a “swift end” to the conflict. The US text was later tabled at the UNSC, where it passed with ten votes in favor, with backing from Moscow and Washington and five abstentions from European members. Speaking to RT on Wednesday, Polyansky said it was the first time in a long while that the UNSC was able to speak with one voice on the Ukraine conflict after the US resolution was adopted with the support of Russia, China, and others.

“We owe this to common sense because I think now more and more people realize the true colors of the Zelensky regime and the true colors of Ukraine that was created under him,” the diplomat said. According to Polyansky, the new US administration under President Donald Trump has taken a more pragmatic approach on the crisis, which “really sets the framework for our future deliberations and work on this issue in the Security Council and in the UN.” Washington’s voting against a Ukrainian draft resolution condemning Russia “clearly” shows that the US approach to the conflict has changed, and that there is now a clash between a “militaristic” mindset in the EU and a “realistic” one in Washington, the diplomat said. Some members of the bloc stepped up their aggressive rhetoric this month after Moscow and Washington announced plans to restore ties and work on resolving the Ukraine conflict.

The EU was caught off guard by the US change of tone, Polyansky argued, as Brussels has spent years in a rigid position regarding any Ukraine resolutions. However, the attitude of Western countries over the past three years has shifted from “Ukraine must win” to “Ukraine must have very strong negotiating position,” and finally “nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine,” Polyansky added. The recent vote in the UNSC showed that Western countries that have sought to isolate Russia are “themselves are becoming more isolated,” the diplomat claimed. Polyansky stressed that a sustainable solution to the Ukraine conflict can only be achieved by addressing the root cause of the crisis, such as Ukraine’s NATO ambitions. Kiev also must remove its troops from all Russian territories, including the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics, and Kherson and Zaporozhye regions, he added.

Read more …

The talks will continue. Without EU and Ukraine.

• Putin Says 6+ Hour Talks With US “Inspire Certain Hopes” (ZH)

TASS is confirming that Russian and US delegations have concluded their meeting after more than six hours of talks in Istanbul on Thursday, the second round of such in-person talks after last week’s bilateral Riyadh meeting. Like the prior high-level dialogue, the Istanbul talks cut out Ukrainian and European representation. These talks have been focused on restoring full staffing at the two sides’ respective embassies and the improving of relations – with an eye toward preparations for achieving a lasting peace settlement in Ukraine. Importantly, on the same day President Vladimir Putin spoke of positive developments on these fronts in a meeting of the Federal Security Service. “We all see how rapidly the world is changing, the situation in the world. In this regard, I would like to note that the first contacts with the new US administration inspire certain hopes,” he said.

“There is a mutual dedication to work towards restoring interstate relations and gradually resolving the enormous volume of accumulated systemic and strategic problems in the global architecture.” He emphasized that “it was precisely these problems that provoked both the Ukrainian and other regional crises at the time,” as cited in TASS. However, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov separately took the opportunity to reaffirm what will remain a key Russian sticking point in any negotiations – that the four annexed territories in the east are not up for discussion.

“The territories which have become subjects of the Russian Federation, which are inscribed in our country’s constitution, are an inseparable part of our country,” Peskov told reporters. This after Ukraine’s President Zelensky recently tried to push the possibility of an “exchange” of territory with Moscow – Kursk for the four annexed regions. But Moscow has issued a firm no to this possibility. Peskov additionally said that Moscow doesn’t see any immediate breakthroughs happening in these ongoing talks with the Trump administration. “No one expects easy or quick solutions – the problem is too complex and has been neglected for too long. However, if both countries maintain their political will and willingness to listen to each other, I believe we will be able to navigate this working process,” he said.

“There is no need to jump ahead. Information on the outcome of the negotiations will be provided in due course,” he added. Meanwhile, Moon of Alabama says that the US side risks getting further entangled in Ukraine via the controversial rare earths minerals deal being sought by the Trump White House… By pressing for the agreement, instead of taking the Russian offer for access to minerals, Trump has committed himself to continue the war in Ukraine. This “will lead to the failure of his peace initiative,” the geopolitical blog continues. “The war Ukraine is now destined to become Trump’s Vietnam.” Let’s hope this doesn’t become the case.

Read more …

“The officials were “clearing significant waste stemming from decades of institutional drift..”

• Trump Administration Cutting USAID Contracts By 90% – AP (RT)

The administration of US President Donald Trump plans to cut more than 90% of US Agency for International Development (USAID) contracts and a total of $60 billion in overall foreign aid worldwide, the AP reported on Thursday. The outlet cited an internal White House memo and filings in one of the federal lawsuits challenging the administration’s plan. Immediately upon assuming office, Trump suspended most US foreign assistance pending a three-month review to determine whether to continue or cease programs depending on their alignment with the new administration’s “America first” goals. USAID, Washington’s primary mechanism for funding political projects abroad, has found tens of billions dollars’ worth of approved grants frozen as a result.

NGOs and nonprofits formerly receiving grants and contracts from the agency have lodged multiple lawsuits against Trump and his administration, demanding the disbursement of already allocated funds. Late on Wednesday, the US Supreme Court intervened in one of the cases, and temporarily blocked a ruling that demanded that the government release billions of dollars in grants and contracts by midnight, according to AP. The administration plans to eliminate 90% of USAID contracts to the tune of $54 billion, AP reported, citing the memo and court filings. Nearly half of the State Department’s foreign aid grants also face the axe, to the tune of another $4.4 billion, according to the outlet. The officials were “clearing significant waste stemming from decades of institutional drift,” the memo reportedly states.

A further shakeup in how USAID and the State Department disbursed foreign aid was forthcoming “to use taxpayer dollars wisely to advance American interests,” it reportedly adds. Trump and his newly appointed government efficiency czar Elon Musk have repeatedly accused USAID of misappropriating taxpayer money and rampant corruption. The cuts are part of broader measures by the administration, and Musk’s recently formed Department of Government Efficiency, to cut down on ballooning government spending. On Wednesday, the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) confirmed that it also had its government funding frozen. Officially a US State Department-funded nonprofit for distributing grants to pro-democracy causes abroad, the NED has faced numerous allegations over the years of acting as a CIA cut-out for toppling foreign governments.

USAID

Read more …

Pure corruption. “Literal pet projects” such as a “dog collar manufacturer” company and a “pet tracking app” firm were handed $300,000 each..” These things were never done. It’s just money.

• USAID Blew Millions On Literal ‘Pet Projects’ In Ukraine (RT)

The US Agency for International Development (USAID) funneled millions in American taxpayer dollars into Ukrainian fashion and pet companies, then attempted to hide the funding from Congress, American conservative newspaper the Federalist reported on Wednesday. USAID, Washington’s primary mechanism for funding political projects abroad, had its multi-billion dollar budget frozen by President Donald Trump last month, pending a review for alignment with his “America first” policy. The president cited uncontrolled spending and massive corruption in the agency, calling for it to be shut down entirely. Seeking accountability for the agency’s allocation of taxpayer dollars, Senator Joni Ernst arranged for her team to visit USAID headquarters for an “in-camera review” of Ukraine aid data in October last year.

Despite multiple attempts to gain some clarity on the agency’s books, USAID had stonewalled both her direct communication and Congressional action for years. While they were restricted in what they were allowed to see, Ernst’s staff found that millions of dollars of taxpayer-funded grants were funneled into Ukrainian confectionery, fashion and pet companies, the Federalist wrote. The agency allocated Ukrainian luxury fashion businesses a total of roughly $733,000, a “custom carpet manufacturer” a $2 million grant, and a “specialty biscuit and confectionery company” around $678,000, the outlet said. “Literal pet projects” such as a “dog collar manufacturer” company and a “pet tracking app” firm were handed $300,000 each, the newspaper said.

Beyond the “in-camera review,” USAID “failed to provide any of these documents” to her staff, Ernst said. The agency often cites national security as a reason for keeping “controversial charges” in its books obscure, the Federalist wrote. While USAID claimed the grants were to “enhance Ukraine’s wartime posture” by boosting its economy, in effect, “the American people have funded extravagant trade missions and vacations for Ukrainian business owners to film festivals and fashion weeks across the glamorous capitols of Europe and beyond,” Ernst wrote in a letter to US Secretary of State Marco Rubio earlier this month.

Trump has repeatedly stated that he will put an end to funding Ukraine in its conflict with Russia, claiming that his predecessor Joe Biden spent $350 billion on assisting Kiev. The US president has announced that the US will “get back” the money through an upcoming deal to tap Ukraine’s mineral resources. With USAID funding suspended by Trump, the vast majority of Ukrainian media companies have been put at risk of shutting down, multiple NGOs have reported. According to French NGO Reporters Without Borders, 9 out of 10 media outlets in Ukraine were dependent on USAID as their primary donor.

Read more …

“There is a high probability of public gathering and First Amendment activities..”

• Border Protection Feds Warned Of Possible Unrest Over USAID Firings (JTN)

U.S. Customs and Border Protection officials were warned Wednesday evening to take special security caution and keep “situational awareness” around their Washington headquarters in anticipation of protests as USAID workers fired by the Trump administration return to their offices to retrieve personal belongings the next two days. In memos sent from their “Operations Watch” alert system and obtained by Just the News, CBP employees in Washington were told that on Thursday and Friday “USAID staff, who previously vacated their workspace, will be on site to retrieve their belongings” in the vicinity around the Ronald Reagan federal building in downtown Washington D.C. near the White House. “There is a high probability of public gathering and First Amendment activities,” one of the alerts said. “Please maintain situational awareness throughout the building.

“CBP employees should be aware of these activities and uniformed employees should use good tactics and consider the use of cover shirts during transit portions in one out of controlled CBP spaces.” Another alert stated: “Be aware of your surroundings tomorrow, especially in uniform … we anticipate a significant amount of media as well as the possibility of nefarious actors.” Tensions have been high since President Donald Trump ordered thousands of USAID workers terminated as part of Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) reorganization of the federal bureaucracy. Workers and their allies challenged their firings as well as the suspension of billions of dollars in foreign aid payments by the agency.

Late Wednesday, Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts blocked a lower court’s order requiring Trump to resume the foreign aid payments. The Reagan building has been as the center of some of the tensions in part because CBP immediately took over some of the office space vacated in it by USAID. Officials told Just the News the CBP Operations Watch alert was based on intelligence that liberal and pro-government protesters might show up Thursday and Friday near the building.

Read more …

“I believe firmly that the story of 2024, one of the big story lines, is that the legacy media has finally been proven irrelevant,” pollster Scott Rasmussen said Wednesday..”

• Polls Highlight Disconnect Between Media And Public On DOGE (JTN)

Despite a string of headlines suggesting that the Elon Musk-led Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and its efforts to slash federal waste is hurting President Trump in the polls, the public appears at odds with the media over its perception of the department and on Trump’s first month more broadly. Legacy media has vilified Musk in recent weeks, zeroing in on his oversight of USAID and the Treasury Department’s payment systems to pronounce the imminent end of major entitlements. Others have pointed to the price of eggs and inflation as the administration works to improve the economy. “Trump pledged to bring down food prices on Day One. Instead, eggs are getting more expensive,” read a CNN headline. “Will the backlash to Elon Musk hurt Republicans?” asked Vox. “Musk and DOGE underwater with some voters in recent polling,” Axios reported.

Despite the gloomy headlines, polling from legacy polling outlets and upstarts alike seems to show the public more supportive of Musk’s effort, and Trump’s policies, than a cursory view of the latest headlines would lead one to believe. A recent Harvard CAPS/Harris poll found Trump is enjoying a 50% approval rating, with just 43% disapproving of his performance. This week, a Napolitan News survey, moreover, found him with a 53% approval rating and 44% disapproval rating. Overall, he remains above water with a 49.1% approval rating in the RealClearPolitics polling average and a 47.5% disapproval rating. “I believe firmly that the story of 2024, one of the big story lines, is that the legacy media has finally been proven irrelevant,” pollster Scott Rasmussen said Wednesday on the “John Solomon Reports” podcast. “They could not control the narrative. They were out of touch talking to each other. YouGov actually ran a survey a couple weeks ago and found that more voters trust Donald Trump for information about what’s going on than trust the traditional media.”

“They don’t seem to understand even where the electorate is,” he said of legacy outlets. “I think last year, when the narrative was ‘economy is improving,’ and people say, ‘not in my checkbook, not at my kitchen table it’s not’ and I think that that now has spun out to they don’t understand that people are okay with deporting illegal aliens, particularly illegal criminal aliens who’ve committed crimes. The gap of just not understanding where America is, is because reporters don’t get out and talk to real people anymore.” Harvard/Harris’s latest survey found broad support for DOGE-related efforts. Eighty-three percent supported cutting government spending over raising taxes and a further 77% backed a broad review of federal spending.

Of DOGE, in particular, 60% expressed the belief that the department was actively helping the government to make substantial cuts. Seventy percent agreed that government spending was plagued by waste and fraud, while 69% favored a $1 trillion cut. Napolitan found comparable figures, with 62% of registered voters expressing the view that DOGE would help Trump to significantly reduce the deficit within the first year. Fifty-nine percent backed the idea of a “DOGE dividend” in which 20% of the savings created by DOGE cuts would be sent back to taxpayers while 80% goes to reduce the deficit. Only 22% opposed the idea. A separate Napolitan survey, moreover, found the public reasonably divided on Musk, with 44% holding a favorable view of him, 47% holding an unfavorable view, and 7% unsure.

Asked whether DOGE had gone far enough thus far, 36% said it had gone too far, while 19% said the agency had been “about right” and 25% said it had not gone far enough. Nineteen percent were unsure, but the sum of “about right” and “not far enough” suggested clear support for the Musk-led department’s work. Prophecies of doom for the administration based on economic moves, however, appear somewhat more in step with public opinion as polling shows Trump with relatively low numbers on inflation and facing a strong demand for immediate action on price increases. Trump is currently underwater on the economy in most surveys, albeit narrowly. He currently boasts a 46.0% average approval on the issue, according to RealClearPolitics, which reported that 49.8% disapproved of his handling of the matter. He was in worse shape on inflation, with 39.7% approving of his handling of the issue and 52.7% disapproving.

During Trump’s first month, Democrats often criticized his policies on unrelated issues by questioning how they related to lowering the price of eggs, referencing Trump’s promise to combat inflation. Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins announced a $1 billion investment on Wednesday to address egg prices, though most polling data previewed her announcement. A considerable part of Democrats’ and legacy media’s objections to DOGE plans is the claim that, according to PBS, “Data published on DOGE’s ‘Wall of Receipts’ are expected to yield no savings.” Journalist and blogger Kevin Drum argued last week that DOGE has only “saved taxpayers about 0.33% of the federal budget.” Nevertheless, the nation’s mood more broadly appears to be improving, with 42.5% saying the nation is headed in the right direction, a significant uptick from the mere 27.7% recorded on Jan. 17, just before Trump took office.

Recent Napolitan data, meanwhile, found broad support for the president’s immigration and deportation agenda. In 2024, 25% of registered voters believed the government was serious about securing the border, compared to 69% who said the same in the latest Napolitan survey. Another 61% expressed support for arresting people who leak information about Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids. Eighty-two percent of registered voters, moreover, expressed the belief that illegal immigration is bad for the country. On deportations, a clear majority of 57% expressed the belief that the administration’s deportation efforts had been either “about right” or that they had not gone “far enough.” Only 33% said they had gone too far while 10% were unsure.

Read more …

“The Chief Justice issued an administrative stay on Feb. 27, preserving the status quo while the Supreme Court considers the matter more thoroughly..”

• Is the End of the Democrats’ Lawfare Strategy In Sight? (PJM)

In a major blow to the Democrats’ lawfare strategy to prevent the Trump administration from governing, Chief Justice John Roberts responded to the White House’s request for emergency intervention. Roberts blocked a Biden-appointed federal judge’s order that around $2 billion in frozen foreign aid funds be released immediately. The Chief Justice issued an administrative stay on Feb. 27, preserving the status quo while the Supreme Court considers the matter more thoroughly. This temporary action overrides U.S. District Judge Amir Ali’s midnight deadline, which would have forced the State Department and USAID to release billions in taxpayer dollars for already completed foreign aid work. Roberts, who oversees requests for emergency relief arising from cases in the District of Columbia, acted alone in halting the decision from a federal district judge issued Tuesday.

The judge, U.S. District Judge Amir Ali, gave the State Department and USAID until 11:59 p.m. Wednesday to pay its bills to contractors for work that had been completed before Feb. 13. The Trump administration had earlier in the night asked the Supreme Court to intervene in the dispute involving frozen foreign assistance funds. Roberts gave the State Department and USAID contractors until noon Friday to respond to the Trump administration’s request. This is just the latest example of how Democrats’ lawfare strategy against Trump might ultimately backfire spectacularly. Judicial rulings temporarily halting Trump’s actions may ultimately serve to advance his broader objectives as they make their way to the Supreme Court.

The Trump administration filed the emergency appeal hours before the deadline, arguing that Judge Ali had overstepped his authority and interfered with the president’s obligations to “make appropriate judgments about foreign aid.” The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals panel had declined to stay Judge Ali’s order, absurdly claiming his orders “could not be appealed.” Excuse me? When did District Court judges get the final say in such matters? During a particularly revealing telephone hearing on Feb. 25, Judge Ali couldn’t hide his bias against the Trump administration. “I don’t know why I can’t get a straight answer from you,” he complained after Justice Department attorney Indraneel Sur repeatedly avoided his leading questions about fund releases. “I guess I’m not understanding where there is any confusion here. It’s clear as day,” Ali further insisted, regarding his original order.

Chief Justice Roberts has ordered the challengers to file a response by Friday, with the Supreme Court likely to act soon after — a sign that the Court is poised to nip these endless legal challenges in the bud. Meanwhile, the Trump administration is moving forward with its promised America First agenda, “eliminating more than 90% of the U.S. Agency for International Development’s foreign aid contracts and $60 billion in overall U.S. assistance around the world, putting numbers on its plans to eliminate the majority of U.S. development and humanitarian help abroad,” according to the Associated Press.

Read more …

Legacy media insist they have God-given rights. As their attention numbers are down the drain. Times change, guys.

• Leavitt Slams NY Times Reporter As ‘Left-Wing Stenographer’ (NYP)

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt blasted a New York Times reporter as a “left-wing stenographer” after he compared President Trump to Russian leader Vladimir Putin’s crackdown on press freedoms. The heated exchange with Peter Baker was sparked by him questioning the administration’s decision to seize control of the press pool and to bar Associated Press reporters from the Oval Office and Air Force One. Baker, a veteran journalist and former Moscow correspondent, compared the White House’s move to Kremlin tactics in a post on X Tuesday. “Having served as a Moscow correspondent in the early days of Putin’s reign, this reminds me of how the Kremlin took over its own press pool and made sure that only compliant journalists were given access,” Baker wrote.

“Give me a break, Peter,” she wrote. “Moments after you tweeted this, the President invited journalists into the Oval and took questions for nearly an hour. Your hysterical reaction to our long overdue and much-needed change to an outdated organization is precisely why we made it.” She then took a personal jab at Baker, criticizing what she described as a biased media landscape. “Gone are the days where left-wing stenographers posing as journalists, such as yourself, dictate who gets to ask what,” she added. When reached by The Post, Baker referred to an article he wrote on Wednesday which recalled the story of Yelena Tregubova, a former Kremlin pool reporter who was forced into exile from her native Russia after publishing a book detailing corruption and media censorship by the Putin regime.

Tregubova, who was kicked out of the Kremlin press pool, fled Russia after a bomb went off outside her apartment. “There are worse penalties, as Ms. Tregubova would later discover, but in Moscow, at least, her eviction was an early step down a very slippery slope,” Baker wrote. “The United States is not Russia by any means, and any comparisons risk going too far…But for those of us who reported there a quarter century ago, Mr. Trump’s Washington is bringing back memories of Mr. Putin’s Moscow in the early days.” A Times spokesperson who was reached by The Post referenced a statement from the newspaper which read: “The White House’s move to handpick favored reporters to observe the president — and exclude anyone whose coverage the administration may not like — is an effort to undermine the public’s access to independent, trustworthy information about the most powerful person in America.”

Since the early 1900s, the White House Correspondents’ Association — comprising journalists from major news organizations — has been responsible for determining which media outlets gain access to cover the president. Members elect representatives who make decisions about seating arrangements and press pool coverage. However, that system changed on Tuesday when Leavitt declared that the administration would take charge of deciding which reporters could cover the president most closely. “A group of DC-based journalists, the White House Correspondents’ Association, has long dictated which journalists get to ask questions of the President of the United States,” Leavitt said, adding: “Not anymore.” She framed the move as a shift toward democratizing press access.

“Today, I was proud to announce that we are giving the power back to the people. Moving forward, the ‘White House Press Pool’ will be determined by the White House Press Team,” she said, emphasizing that legacy outlets would not be excluded but that decisions on access would now rest with the administration. Baker responded with another sharp critique, warning that the move was meant to deter tough questioning. “Every president of both parties going back generations subscribed to the principle that a president doesn’t pick the press corps that is allowed in the room to ask him questions,” he wrote. “Trump has just declared that he will.” Despite the shift, Baker insisted that journalists would continue to hold the administration accountable. “None of this will stop professional news outlets from covering this president in the same full, fair, tough and unflinching way that we always have,” he said.

“Government efforts to punish disfavored organizations will not stop independent journalism.” Traditionally, the White House press pool has included reporters from wire services such as the Associated Press, Reuters and Bloomberg — along with representatives from television, print and radio as well as photographers. The shake-up followed a recent controversy in which the Trump administration removed an AP reporter and photographer from the president’s trip to Mar-a-Lago and Miami over the news agency’s refusal to use the administration’s preferred term, the “Gulf of America,” instead of the Gulf of Mexico. Despite the open seats, no replacements were assigned, highlighting the escalating tensions between the administration and the press.

Read more …

“The politician claimed that Romania had been thrown back to the 1950s..”

“..If democracy is defeated “in one country” in a “coup d’etat” that would mean a failure for the US as well..”

• Prosecuted Romanian Presidential Candidate Asks Trump For Help (RT)

Calin Georgescu, the winner of the first round of last year’s annulled presidential election in Romania, has asked US President Donald Trump for help. The politician is facing criminal charges at home, which he has called part of a political persecution campaign against him. “I definitely ask President Trump to take care about the situation,” Georgescu told an American blogger, Mario Nawfal, in an interview published on X on Thursday. On Wednesday, Georgescu was arrested by the police as he was about to file to run for the presidency again. He was released later the same day. According to the Romanian authorities, Georgescu faces a total of six charges, including “anti-constitutional acts” and misreporting his finances. He was barred by a court order from leaving the country, appearing on TV, or posting anything on social media.

Speaking to Nawfal on Thursday, the politician denounced the criminal case against him as an assault on democracy that runs counter to the will of the Romanian people. Georgescu came out ahead in the first round of the presidential election in November in a surprise victory. The Constitutional Court then annulled the results shortly before the second round of voting, citing “irregularities” in the politician’s campaign amid unproven claims of Russian interference in the electoral process. According to Georgescu, the persecution campaign against him had “exposed” the Romanian “deep state” and its “corruption.” The politician claimed that Romania had been thrown back to the 1950s when it was ruled by a Communist regime.

“The deep state is so strong in this particular [kind] of activity,” Georgescu said, referring to his arrest on Wednesday. He also vowed to “fight for our freedom and for our democracy” and called on the US to support him in this fight. According to Georgescu, the US should support him in order to preserve its own image as a beacon of democracy. If democracy is defeated “in one country” in a “coup d’etat” that would mean a failure for the US as well, the politician stated. Washington has so far not commented on Georgescu’s appeal. US officials have previously criticized the actions of Bucharest for annulling the results of the November election. Speaking at the Munich Security Conference earlier this month, Vice President J.D. Vance suggested that some “old entrenched interests” in Romania were using “ugly, Soviet-era words like misinformation and disinformation” to secure their own interests and prevent a politician with “an alternative viewpoint” from coming to power.

Elon Musk slammed the politician’s arrest on Wednesday by calling the move “messed up.” Georgescu is known for his skepticism towards Western influence over the country’s policies and criticizing both NATO and the EU. During his campaign, he also vowed to halt Romania’s military aid to Kiev if elected.

Read more …

“..hasn’t been increased since 2009..”

• Elon Musk Floats Pay Hikes For Congress, Top Gov’t Workers To Fight Corruption (NYP)

“Special government employee” Elon Musk has floated a pay raise for members of Congress and senior government employees as a means of rooting out corruption at the federal level. “It might make sense to increase compensation for Congress and senior government employees to reduce the forcing function for corruption, as the latter might be as much as 1000 [sic] times more expensive to the public,” Musk, 53, wrote on X Thursday morning. Back in December, the billionaire helped torpedo a government funding measure that would have given lawmakers in Congress a 3.8% pay hike — worth approximately $6,600 per year in extra cash to rank-and-file members. Most federal legislators receive an annual paycheck of $174,000, which hasn’t been increased since 2009.

The proposed pay hike had been nestled into a continuing resolution, a stopgap measure that Congress needed at the time to avert a partial government shutdown. But Musk whipped up public opposition against both the resolution and the pay hike, grousing at the time while overstating the increase amount: “How can this be called a ‘continuing resolution’ if it includes a … pay increase for Congress?” The concept of high pay for government workers to discourage corruption has been used in other countries. Late Singapore Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew, for example, was famous for championing exorbitant pay with ministers raking in millions a year. Lee argued that paying government workers well would help reduce perverse incentives for them to pad their pockets through illicit means.

Some good-government advocates in the US have also suggested pay raises for lawmakers to attract a higher caliber of candidates or job applicants. Musk has been on a crusade to trim federal spending via the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which has advised the Trump administration on mass layoffs and spending reductions while setting a target of $1 trillion in savings. Last week, Musk directed an email be sent out to government workers instructing them to list their top five accomplishments from the prior week. That email whipped up a frenzy and the Office of Personnel Management clarified Monday that a response was voluntary. Musk also clarified that the emails were intended to be a “pulse check” rather than a performance review.

Amid backlash from liberals over the cost-cutting crusade, Musk insisted Thursday that DOGE has also been elevating outstanding government employees — not just reducing headcount. “Hundreds of federal workers are being promoted daily every time we encounter excellence,” he wrote on X. “The @DOGE team will be more clear about this. The goal is to make the federal government a meritocracy as much as possible.”

Read more …

“ALL CABINET MEMBERS ARE EXTREMELY HAPPY WITH ELON,” Trump wrote on TruthSocial ahead of the meeting.”

• Musk’s Father Says Son ‘Not Cut Out For Politics’ (RT)

Elon Musk is “not cut out for politics,” according to his father, Errol Musk, who has said the billionaire’s personality would make it difficult for him to engage with the broad range of people required in public office. The richest man on the planet and owner of Tesla, SpaceX, and X, Elon Musk has played an influential role in US President Donald Trump’s administration, particularly through his advisory position in the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). His critics have raised concerns that he wields too much power and have accused him of trying to dismantle significant parts of the federal government. In an interview with Al Arabiya News published on Monday, Errol Musk, a retired South African engineer, dismissed the idea of his son entering politics.

“Elon is not cut out for politics,” he said. “Politics is where you have to deal with everyone, from the very incredibly clever to the very somewhat not clever, the highly sophisticated to the very unsophisticated. If you can’t do that, don’t get into politics.” He went on to compare his son’s potential political journey to Trump’s, arguing that the US president’s brash personality made it harder for him to connect with ordinary voters, and that Elon would face similar challenges. During Trump’s inauguration rally last month, Elon Musk sparked a wave of backlash after he made a gesture that some compared to a “Nazi salute.” Errol Musk dismissed the allegations that his son is secretly a Nazi as “nonsense,” and claimed that the billionaire’s actions are often misunderstood.

“Elon is a terrible public speaker. He has a lot to learn. We all do… Knowing him as well as I do, I mean, I know him very well, that he was struggling to get through his little speech as fast as possible and to try and look as charming as possible as he could,” Musk said. He also suggested that his son’s gesture was an “international salute,” saying it had been around “for the last 10,000 years or more.” While Musk has received pushback over his attempts to streamline the operations of federal agencies, Trump has repeatedly expressed support for his efforts. Despite not holding a formal cabinet position, the White House has described him as a “special government employee” and “senior adviser” to Trump. On Wednesday, Musk attended Trump’s first cabinet meeting, where the president praised his contributions. “ALL CABINET MEMBERS ARE EXTREMELY HAPPY WITH ELON,” Trump wrote on TruthSocial ahead of the meeting.

Read more …

“..many on the left expect Bezos to run the newspaper like a vanity project, losing millions of dollars to bankroll a far-left agenda..”

• Bezos Calls for WaPo to Champion Individual Freedom and Free Markets (Turley)

There was another meltdown at the Washington Post after owner Jeff Bezos moved again to moderate the newspaper’s message, which has plummeted in readership. Bezos told the editors that he wanted the newspaper to advocate for individual liberties and the free market. The message sent the left into vapors and led to the resignation of Washington Post opinion editor David Shipley. Outside the paper, another round of calls for boycotts and subscription cancellations followed. In the announcement below, Bezos declared, “I’m confident that free markets and personal liberties are right for America. I also believe these viewpoints are underserved in the current market of ideas and news opinion. I’m excited for us together to fill that void.” He added that a newspaper should be a voice for freedom — “is ethical — it minimizes coercion — and practical — it drives creativity, invention, and prosperity.” He noted that:

“There was a time when a newspaper, especially one that was a local monopoly, might have seen it as a service to bring to the reader’s doorstep every morning a broad-based opinion section that sought to cover all views. Today, the internet does that job.” For those of us in the free speech community, the return of the Post as a champion of free speech and other individual rights would be a welcomed change. Notably, staff did not object when prior owners aligned with their views on editorial priorities. Obviously, we will need to see how this new directive is carried out. I would be equally opposed to the Post purging liberal views in the way it moved against conservative and libertarian views for the last decade. I do not see such a directive in this announcement. Bezos wants his newspaper to be a voice for individual freedom and free market principles. That should not mean that the newspaper will not run dissenting views on policies and programs.

What is striking is that many on the left expect Bezos to run the newspaper like a vanity project, losing millions of dollars to bankroll a far-left agenda. This is an announcement that goes to the position of the newspaper, not any intrusion into reporting. It also does not bar a diversity of opinion on the op-ed pages which still have a vast majority of liberal writers. The thought that the Post would now focus on advocating for individual rights and the free market led Jeffrey Evan Gold, who posts as a legal analyst for CNN and other networks, to declare that it was the “last straw” and post his cancellation.

Jeff Stein, the publisher’s chief economics reporter, denounced Bezos as carrying out a “massive encroachment” that makes it clear “dissenting views will not be published or tolerated there.” For many moderates and conservatives, it was a crushingly ironic objection given the virtual purging of conservative and libertarian voices at the newspaper. Amanda Katz, who resigned from the Post’s opinion team at the end of 2024, offered a vivid example of the culture that Bezos is trying to change at the Post. Katz said the change was “an absolute abandonment of the principles of accountability of the powerful, justice, democracy, human rights, and accurate information that previously animated the section in favor of a white male billionaire’s self-interested agenda.”

Read more …

“..four years of the Biden administration’s failed oversight have made it necessary to review agreements for vaccine production..”

• HHS Pauses Multi-Million Dollar Contract to Develop New COVID-19 Vaccine (ET)

Clinical trials for a new COVID-19 vaccine were halted after a multi-million contract authorized by the Biden administration to develop the inoculation was paused by Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Kennedy implemented a 90-day stop-work order on Feb. 21 regarding the HHS contract with Vaxart Inc., according to the announcement, which was first reported by Fox News Digital on Feb. 25. Vaxart, an American biotech company, is creating a new COVID-19 inoculation for oral use. Before the stop-work order, 10,000 individuals were scheduled to start clinical trials on Feb. 24, an HHS spokesperson confirmed with The Epoch Times. Kennedy noted in comments to Fox News Digital that “it is crucial” that the HHS support pandemic preparedness, “four years of the Biden administration’s failed oversight have made it necessary to review agreements for vaccine production, including Vaxart’s.” The trial is not terminated, according to the HHS.

Kennedy and other health officials will determine the next steps after reviewing their findings over the next 90 days. As part of the Biden administration’s $4.7 billion Project NextGen program launched in 2023, the Vaxart vaccine was funded through an agreement with the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA). That panel is part of the Administration for Strategic Preparedness and Response, which is managed by HHS. BARDA allocated around $460 million for Vaxart to develop the new vaccine, including $240 million that has already been approved. The announcement to pause Vaxart’s contract was followed by a report that an Food and Drug Administration (FDA) vaccine advisory committee meeting slated for March has been canceled, according to committee member Dr. Paul Offit, who is the director of the Vaccine Education Center at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and a vocal critic of Kennedy.

Offit told multiple media outlets on Feb. 26 that members of the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee received an email from the FDA letting them know the meeting would not take place. The meeting had been set to choose the strains for next season’s flu shot. The FDA is one of 13 agencies under the HHS umbrella. On Feb. 28, a World Health Organization (WHO) advisory committee is scheduled to gather and discuss which strains should be included in the next flu vaccines across the Northern Hemisphere. The FDA often adheres that that committee’s recommendations. Trump issued an executive order in January to start the process of withdrawing the United States from the WHO.

Two weeks ago, Kennedy gained Senate confirmation to become HHS secretary. He was sworn in that day, and moments later Trump signed an executive order establishing the president’s Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) Commission. Kennedy serves as chairman of the commission, which directs executive departments and federal agencies to primarily advise the president on how to “address the childhood chronic disease crisis.” The MAHA Commission is tasked to explore possible causes of such diseases, including “the American diet, absorption of toxic material, medical treatments, lifestyle, environmental factors, government policies, food production techniques, electromagnetic radiation, and corporate influence or cronyism.” For years, critics have called Kennedy an “anti-vaxxer,” a claim he has denied. During his presidential campaign and the Senate confirmation process, he repeatedly said he is an advocate for vaccine safety, informed consent, and “gold standard science” behind vaccine efficacy studies.

“I’ve never been anti-vaccine,” Kennedy told The Epoch Times in September 2024. “People should have a choice, and that choice should be informed by the best information possible. “I’m going to ensure that there are science-based safety studies available, and people can make their own assessments about whether a vaccine is good for them.” Under the Biden administration, COVID-19 vaccines were mandated throughout the federal government. Multiple private sector businesses, and public and private universities, also required the inoculation. Since Trump took office last month, he has signed several executive orders related to COVID-19 mandates implemented by the Biden administration. On Feb. 14, Trump signed an executive order barring funding to universities and schools with COVID-19 vaccine mandates. In his first week back in office, Trump reinstated service members dismissed for refusing the COVID vaccine, giving them full back pay and benefits.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Baby

 

 

Nose

 

 

Bull dog

 

 

Wait

 

 

Dog baby

 

 

Ladder

 

 

Suspicious
https://twitter.com/i/status/1895071755078689199

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle February 24 2025

Feb 242025
 
 February 24, 2025  Posted by at 11:08 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,  44 Responses »


Pablo Picasso Crucifixion 1930

 

• FBI Freak Out As Dan Bongino Named Deputy Director (ZH)
• FBI Director Patel To Take Over ATF Too – Will He Burn It To The Ground? (ZH)
• Kash Patel Banishes 1,500 FBI Agents from Washington (Paul Craig Roberts)
• FBI, DoD, State Dept. Push Back On Musk’s Monday Email Deadline (ZH)
• Zelensky Says He Is Ready To Resign (RT)
• Zelensky Warns Ukraine Won’t Pay Debt To US (RT)
• Ukraine Will Be A ‘Buffer’ State – Orban (RT)
• No Peace Without A Price: The Story Behind Trump’s Ukraine Demands (Poletaev)
• Trump Admin Goes To War With Zelensky & Europe In UN (ZH)
• Ex-Zelensky Aide Threatens To Jail Him For Life (RT)
• The Collapse Of The Zelensky Cult (Carlson/Mahncke)
• Ukraine, Russia, and the West’s Fatal Miscalculation (Lukyanov)
• EU “Leaders” Want To Save The Multi-Million Dollar Military Jackpot (Dionísio)
• Loathsome Heirs of Fascism Will Face Inevitable Retribution (Medvedev)
• Starmer Tells Trump To Fight Russia The British Way (Helmer)
• Democrats Reject Decades of Policy As They Fight Hegseth’s Pentagon Cuts (JTN)
• Donald Trump Could Pull the Funniest, Most Evil Prank EVER on Canada! (Pinsker)

 

 

 

 

Forbes
https://twitter.com/i/status/1893581562882748910

O’Leary

Stephen Miller

Orban

Badass
https://twitter.com/i/status/1893469653617324371

Luongo

 

 

 

 

Even more than Patel, Bongino signals Trump is serious about gutting the FBI.

• FBI Freak Out As Dan Bongino Named Deputy Director (ZH)

On Sunday evening, President Donald Trump announced that former Secret Service agent and conservative talk show host Dan Bongino will become the new deputy director of the FBI – the agency that helped Obama and Hillary Clinton set Donald Trump us with the Russia Collusion hoax – which included leaks to the press, fabricating evidence, and die-hard deep state servants who vowed to destroy our president. And now – Bongino and newly minted FBI Director Kash Patel are in charge…

…which is not sitting well with current and former agency officials – or deep state journalists like NBC’s Ken Dilanian, who reports that the FBI Agents Association struck out against Bongino’s selection. Without naming Bongino directly, the Association lashed out over the fact that the Deputy Director has typically been an active Special Agent. “The FBI Deputy Director should continue to be an on-board, active Special Agent—as has been the case for 117 years for many compelling reasons, including operational expertise and experience, as well as the trust of our Special Agent population,” reads a memo obtained by WNBC’s Jonathan Dienst.

As the WSJ notes, The announcement sent shock waves through the FBI, whose new director Kash Patel had offered Republican senators private assurances that he would name a special agent with bureau experience to be his deputy, rather than a political outsider. Patel was sworn in at the White House on Friday. Leaders of the FBI Agents Association, who met with Patel in January, said the new director had agreed that the deputy should be a current special agent… Ken Dilanian echoed this sentiment, complaining on X that Bongino “has never spent a day working at the FBI, but he has spent many hours spouting baseless falsehoods about the bureau.”

https://twitter.com/i/status/1893854114708156551

Read more …

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). Bad rep.

• FBI Director Patel To Take Over ATF Too – Will He Burn It To The Ground? (ZH)

Leftists were already apoplectic that Donald Trump managed to install firebrand Kash Patel as FBI director. Now, upping the ante, Trump is about to turn the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) over to Patel too, according to sources cited by multiple news outlets on Saturday evening. The extraordinary move has some wondering if Trump might move to dissolve the ATF altogether. Gun Owners of America has lauded Patel as being “fiercely pro-gun.” However, during his confirmation hearings, Patel skirted direct questioning about whether civilians should be allowed to own machine guns, or whether background checks are constitutional, saying, “Whatever the courts rule in regards to the Second Amendment is what is protected by the Second Amendment.”

The ATF is already the focus of a Trump II overhaul. Last week, Attorney General Pam Bondi fired the ATF’s top lawyer, Pamela Hicks. “These people were targeting gun owners. Not gonna happen under this administration,” Bondi told Fox News. The FBI and ATF both reside within the Department of Justice. Patel may be sworn in as acting director of the ATF this week, a Justice official told AP. The agency has roughly 5,500 employees — today, at least. With Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency looking to slash the federal employment rolls, the ATF should be a prime target for headcount reduction. The 1993 federal government massacre of innocents at Waco started with an ATF raid over dubious suspicions that the Branch Davidians were stockpiling prohibited weapons.


The 1993 federal government massacre of innocents at Waco started with an ATF raid over dubious suspicions that the Branch Davidians were stockpiling prohibited weapons.

Better yet, many are hoping — and others fearing — that putting the ATF in Patel’s portfolio could signal that the ultimate objective is to dismantle it. That would be a bold move for a president who comes into his second term with a decidedly spotty record where the right to armed self-defense is concerned. Trump embraced “red flag” laws that empower police to seize firearms from people they deem dangerous, without due process. In 2018, Trump infamously told reporters, “Take the firearms first, and then go to court…I like taking the guns early…Take the guns first, go through due process second.” Exceeding its authority, his first-term ATF imaginatively reinterpreted the definition of an automatic weapon to include bump stocks, banned their sale, and demanded that civilians turn them in the ones they already owned. Trump promised to push for increasing the legal age for purchasing firearms to 18.

That said, Trump’s second term is off to a strong start on the gun rights front. On Feb 7, Trump signed an executive order that sought to curtail federal infringements on rights guaranteed by the Second Amendment. Among other things, the multifaceted order directed Bondi to:

• Catalogue and address all actions of the Biden administration that infringed on gun rights
• Reverse the heavy-handed “zero tolerance” or “enhanced regulatory enforcement policy” by which enforcement actions against Federal Firearms Licensees (FFL’s) — many of them small businesses –skyrocketed nearly six-fold.
• Review how firearms and ammunition are categorized and thus regulated

Rightly resented by liberty-minded Americans, the ATF has played central roles in some of the most ghastly crimes committed by the federal government in recent decades, from the ATF entrapment of Randy Weaver that led to the killing of his 14-year-old son and his wife as she held their 10-month-old daughter, to the standoff in Waco that ended in the mass slaughter of 76 Branch Davidians, including 25 children. Like the vast majority of the federal government, there’s no constitutional authority for the ATF to exist in the first place. As the old joke goes, “Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should be a convenience store, not a government agency.” Here’s hoping that wry aspiration become reality.

Read more …

“Keep them locked up in Washington shuffling papers in bureaucratic tasks that go nowhere. When they retire or die, don’t replace them. Let the FBI dwindle away. We don’t need it.”

• Kash Patel Banishes 1,500 FBI Agents from Washington (Paul Craig Roberts)

Dear Kash,

I read that you are sending 1,500 FBI bad apples from DC into the states. Please keep them out of red states. Perhaps you are hoping they will resign. Otherwise it is a bad idea. The FBI are the Democrats’ secret police. They frame red state politicians, sheriffs, and attorneys general in order to advance Democrat power. The FBI even tried to frame President Trump and it seems to assassinate him. FBI agents have no integrity, Kash. If the FBI had any integrity, how could we have had eight years of the FBI’s efforts to destroy Donald Trump? Please don’t send any to Florida. If you have any in Florida, please take them out. We would prefer you keep them all in DC where you can keep an eye on them. Their presence in states and localities will pollute sheriff departments and local police with FBI corrupt practices.

Do you remember some years ago when it came to light that the FBI crime lab concocted whatever “evidence” prosecutors needed to convict defendants regardless of innocence or guilt? Have you forgot all the fake “Muslim terrorist” cases the FBI created as proof that Muslim terrorism was loose in America? The FBI would seek out demented individuals and groups and entice them to participate in a FBI concocted terrorist act and then arrest them prior to committing the act. Some of these victims are still in prison. The orchestrated arrests produced the headlines that kept the “war on terror” — actually a war for Greater Israel — going in the Middle East. Please Kash, spare MAGA America from FBI agents. Keep them locked up in Washington shuffling papers in bureaucratic tasks that go nowhere. When they retire or die, don’t replace them. Let the FBI dwindle away. We don’t need it.

Read more …

Update to “What Did You Do Last Week?” in yesterday’s Debt Rattle. I think Musk welcomes all reactions. Plus, heads of agencies that say they will evaluate their own people, wlll be called upon to do just that.

• FBI, DoD, State Dept. Push Back On Musk’s Monday Email Deadline (ZH)

Following Elon Musk’s Saturday tweet instructing federal workers to list at least five accomplishments over the past week by Monday at midnight, or face termination – which was followed up by an actual email from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), several agencies issued statements telling their employees to pump the brakes. So far the Pentagon, FBI, State Department, and various parts of the Intelligence Community have told their employees to hold off.”When and if required, the Department will coordinate responses to the email you have received from OPM. For now, please pause any response to the OPM email titled ‘What did you do last week,” said DoD Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness Darin Selnick in a statement.That followed a similar statement by FBI Director Kash Patel, who told the bureau that they would conduct their own employee reviews that align with the agency’s procedures. The State Department told its employees; “The State Department will respond on behalf of the Department. No employee is obligated to report their activities outside of their Department chain of command.”

While National Intelligence Director Tulsi Gabbard told employees of agencies she oversees in the Intelligence Community (IC): “Given the inherently sensitive and classified nature of our work, I.C. employees should not respond to the OPM email,” according to The Hill. Meanwhile, Everett Kelley, the national president of the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), wrote a letter to Musk and OPM acting director Charles Ezell, directing its 800,000 members to defy the demand. “Federal employees report to their respective agencies through their established chains of command; they do not report to OPM,” said Kelly, adding that the demand was “irresponsible” and a “sophomoric attempt” to cause confusion and intimidate federal workers. “I am also requesting that OPM rescind the email and apologize to all federal employees,” he said.

Musk has defended the ‘accomplishments’ email, saying that it was designed to weed out “non-existent people or the identities of dead people” who are collecting government checks. He also agreed with commentator and author Mike Cernovich that this also helps to identify high-performing employees.

Read more …

Empty gestures.

“I can exchange this for NATO..” No, you can’t, Trump says no NATO for Ukraine.

“If peace for Ukraine..” C’mon, you blocked peace for three years.

• Zelensky Says He Is Ready To Resign (RT)

Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky has expressed his readiness to “exchange” his position for NATO membership and step down if it is necessary to achieve peace in Ukraine.Speaking at the ‘Ukraine. Year 2025’ forum in Kiev on Saturday, Zelensky claimed he didn’t intend to remain in power for many years. “If peace for Ukraine, if you really need me to leave my post, then I’m ready. I can exchange this for NATO, if there are such conditions. I am focusing on the security of Ukraine today, not in 20 years, and I do not intend to be in power for decades,” Zelensky asserted. The Ukrainian leader also touched upon the ongoing row with the US regarding the proposed rare earths deal, in which Washington is seeking reimbursement for the military aid it has provided with earnings from Ukraine’s natural resources.

Zelensky confirmed having received the proposed deal, introduced by Washington after the first draft was shot down by Kiev, involves a sum of $500 billion. “It became clear that we are talking about a debt, that this is not an investment… If this money goes to the fund, and nothing comes from abroad, then we are paying off the debt,” Zelensky stated.“We had 100 [billion]. I am not ready to pay off 500 [billion]. And I am not even ready to fix it at the 100 [billion mark], because I will not recognize grants as debts. We should not pay off the debt,” he added. Paying off such sums would have put some 10 generations of Ukrainians in debt, thus indicating that such a deal was completely unacceptable, Zelensky stressed.

Zelensky’s presidential term expired in May 2024; critics have accused the Ukrainian leader of seeking to prolong the hostility in order to cling on power. Moscow has repeatedly signaled it does not regard him as a legitimate representative of the country and that he lacks the power to sign any comprehensive peace deal. This week, Trump pointed to Zelensky’s shaky legal position as well, branding him a “dictator without elections” and claiming that he currently has an extremely low approval rating in his country.

Read more …

Why does he seek so hard to antagonize Trump? Who tells him to?

• Zelensky Warns Ukraine Won’t Pay Debt To US (RT)

Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky has said his country will not repay the assistance it has received from the US since the start of the conflict with Russia. He also suggested that US President Donald Trump’s estimate that Kiev owes $350 billion is grossly exaggerated. In recent weeks, the US president has ramped up his demands that Kiev reimburse Washington for all the aid provided since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022. Trump has argued that if the country is short on cash, it should sign over the rights to its natural resources as a form of compensation. Zelensky however, has refused, apparently deeming the terms too unfavorable.

Speaking at the ‘Ukraine. Year – 2025’ forum in Kiev on Sunday, Zelensky stated that “Ukraine received $100 billion [in aid] from the US, not $350, not $500, not $700,” stressing that he was “not ready to recognize even $100 billion” as debt. He claimed that he had reached an agreement with former US President Joe Biden that the money was being provided as a grant, and that no repayment had been expected. Zelensky stressed that if the Trump administration is not ready to give Ukraine a blank check, Kiev is prepared to enter into a “new agreement,” and that it should be considered carefully, in order for the parties to “remain friends and partners.” “I think I’m justified in my desire for dialogue [with the US],” the Ukrainian leader said, emphasizing that “I do not sign something which ten generations of Ukrainians would have to repay.”

Read more …

The real voice of Europe.

• Ukraine Will Be A ‘Buffer’ State – Orban (RT)

Ukraine will not be granted NATO membership, but rather will serve as a “buffer” between the US-led military bloc and Russia, once the conflict with Moscow is over, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has predicted. Since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022, Budapest has consistently criticized the EU’s weapons deliveries to Ukraine. The Hungarian government has long advocated engaging Moscow in dialogue instead, with Orban repeatedly calling for sanctions imposed on Russia to be lifted. Delivering his annual state of the nation address in Budapest on Saturday, the prime minister said that the conflict, which “is on its way to its end,” is about “bringing the territory called Ukraine, which until then was a buffer zone, a buffer state between NATO and Russia, under NATO control.”

“Ukraine, or what remains of it, will once again be a buffer zone. It will not be a NATO member,” Orban predicted. “Why European and American liberals thought that the Russians would stand idly by is still a mystery,” the official remarked, claiming that the “experiment has failed.” Admitting Kiev into the EU will hinge on Budapest’s acquiescence, he added, hinting that Hungary would block Ukraine’s accession, should it deem it to be in its own national interests. Speaking in late December, Orban claimed that EU leaders “are living in a self-created bubble, refusing to acknowledge that this war cannot be won in the way they imagine.”

The official reiterated that the bloc’s sanctions, “instead of crippling Russia… have weakened Europe.” “Ukraine’s defeat is not just possible but increasingly likely,” the Hungarian prime minister warned at the time. Earlier that month, Orban pointed the finger at former US President Joe Biden for the escalation of hostilities in 2022. Russia has consistently cited Ukraine’s aspirations of joining NATO and the prospect of the bloc’s military infrastructure appearing in the neighboring nation as one of the main reasons behind the conflict. Moscow has also repeatedly described the conflict as a “proxy war” against Russia being waged by the West via Ukraine. US President Donald Trump has recently ruled out Kiev’s accession to NATO, acknowledging that Washington ignoring Moscow’s objections on the issue was among the things that caused the conflict to flare up.

Read more …

Why is it so hard to determine if Ukraine has rare earths? Bloomberg energy and commodities opinion columnist Javier Blas on Feb 19: “Surprisingly, many people — not least, US President Donald Trump — seem convinced the country has a rich mineral endowment. It’s a folly..”[..] “The US Geological Survey, an authority on the matter, doesn’t list the country as holding any [rare earth] reserves. Neither does any other database commonly used in the mining business.”

• No Peace Without A Price: The Story Behind Trump’s Ukraine Demands (Poletaev)

As Washington’s push to secure Ukraine’s mineral wealth intensifies, the latest tensions between Donald Trump and Vladimir Zelensky highlight a growing rift. The US president and his team are actively pressing Kiev to sign off on a deal that would grant America access to Ukraine’s rare-earth metals in exchange for continued military aid. But is such an agreement feasible? And how did Ukraine’s underground riches suddenly become a focal point in US-Ukrainian relations? Ukraine possesses significant reserves of valuable minerals, including lithium (2% of global reserves), graphite (4%), nickel (0.4%), manganese, uranium, and rare-earth metals. Of particular note is titanium, with estimates suggesting Ukraine holds up to 20% of the world’s reserves. However, nearly 40% of these deposits are either under Russian control or located in frontline areas, significantly complicating any Western attempts to exploit them.

Since gaining independence, Ukraine has struggled to attract foreign investment into its mining sector. The only notable success was ArcelorMittal’s privatization of the Krivoy Rog Metallurgical Plant in the mid-2000s. Beyond that, Western companies have largely refrained from new projects, partly due to Article 13 of Ukraine’s constitution, which explicitly prohibits the privatization of natural resources. The idea of leveraging Ukraine’s mineral wealth to secure US military support was first floated by Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, a longtime advocate of deeper US-Ukraine ties. Graham has frequently traveled to Kiev during the war, delivering fiery speeches that, in essence, boil down to: You’re doing everything right, but Washington’s politicians are letting you down. With Trump looming on the horizon, Graham remarked that Trump isn’t particularly interested in values – he’s a businessman who thinks in terms of deals.

He suggested that Ukraine should propose something to Trump to convince him to invest in Ukraine’s defense. For example, why not offer him the country’s mineral resources? Zelensky’s inner circle latched onto this idea and eagerly pitched it to Trump when he took office. According to Ukrainian publications, Kiev believed that in return it would get weapons, investments, new mineral extraction technologies, a significant share of the mined resources, and perhaps even US troops in Ukraine. In essence, they imagined a scenario where everything would happen automatically, and they wouldn’t have to do anything. Trump, however, acted more like a mob boss from a Hollywood film. He dispatched an “accountant” to Kiev, who presented a document for Zelensky to sign and bluntly explained: what’s ours is ours; and what’s yours is also ours. Oh, and you owe us a kidney and an eye, while we owe you nothing at all. Here’s a pen — sign here.

According to Western media reports, Trump’s proposal stipulated that Ukraine would effectively hand over its mineral wealth as retroactive payment for the billions in US military aid already provided. In return, there would be no promise of future weapons shipments or security guarantees. Zelensky, who has spent the past three years desperately seeking such guarantees, was reportedly furious and refused to sign. The dispute came to a head at the Munich Security Conference, where Zelensky met with US Vice President J.D. Vance. The minerals issue dominated their discussion, and after Zelensky’s continued refusal to sign, the American side was openly frustrated. No surprises that it caused harsh reactions from US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who said he “was personally very upset” with the conversation top American officials had with Zelensky over the minerals deal, and suggesting that the Ukrainian leader had flip-flopped.

Read more …

“The clash pits the U.S. and Russia on one side against Ukraine and Europe on the other..”

• Trump Admin Goes To War With Zelensky & Europe In UN (ZH)

As the war of words between the Trump and Zelensky administrations has grown, so has a diplomatic war and rift at the United Nations in New York. It has resulted in a crisis which may result in deadlock over a planned statement commemorating the Ukraine war’s three-year mark. The United States is seeking to stymie a draft resolution Ukraine prepared to bring before the UN Security Council and General Assembly. The Ukraine resolution has support from European nations, which is intended to call out three years since the Russian invasion, and condemn Moscow. The Ukrainian proposed text blames Russia for starting the war and calls for its swift end. “In a note to capitals, seen by The Wall Street Journal, U.S. diplomats told European counterparts over the past day that Washington would oppose the Ukrainian resolution if it advances and pressed the Europeans to persuade Kyiv to withdraw its text,” WSJ writes.

A Saturday statement on X by Ukraine’s Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha blasted efforts to alter any resolution in a way that deflects blame from Russia. “The root causes of this war are Putin’s denial of Ukraine’s right to exist and his wish to destroy our nation,” he posted. “This is why Russia started this war, commits atrocities, and tries to change borders by force.” The chief complaint is that the US version makes no reference to who started it. The Trump administration is reportedly mulling a change proposed by Russia, which is a permanent member of the security council, and this has set off fierce diplomatic conflict, per Reuters: “The U.S. text mourns the loss of life during the “Russia-Ukraine conflict” and reiterates “that the principal purpose of the United Nations is to maintain international peace and security and to peacefully settle disputes.” It also “implores a swift end to the conflict and further urges a lasting peace between Ukraine and Russia.”

Russia has proposed an amendment to that line – to be voted on by the General Assembly – so it reads “implores a swift end to the conflict, including by addressing its root causes, and further urges a lasting peace between Ukraine and Russia.” For Russia, key among the root causes is NATO expansion and Western efforts to militarize Ukraine, as well as Kiev’s anti-Russia actions in the predominantly speaking Donbass region. The WSJ underscores that in Trump playing nice with Russia, “The clash pits the U.S. and Russia on one side against Ukraine and Europe on the other, in the most dramatic display of trans-Atlantic tensions in years.” Apparently the US side isn’t budging even if the face of strong European push-back and pressure: The diplomats said the U.S. on Friday asked Ukrainian officials to withdraw their resolution. Ukraine refused. Meanwhile, British and French officials asked Washington to amend its draft. The U.S. said it wouldn’t, the diplomats said.

And the Trump administration is not going to back down, to be sure, as has been evident within only the first month of the Republican president returning to office. In siding with the Moscow-proposed change to the resolution, the US side is being accused by Europe and Ukraine as essentially caving to Russian demands. “We urge all U.N. member states to join the United States in this solemn pursuit,” Rubio has said of efforts to quickly negotiate peace. Ukraine’s FM Sybiha has meanwhile stated that in conversions with Rubio and American diplomats, “I stressed that Russian responsibility for the war cannot be put into question.”

* * *
Below is a full statement from Secretary of State Marco Rubio stating that The UN Must Act to Bring Peace to Europe:

“President Trump is committed to ending the Russia-Ukraine war and to a resolution that leads to a lasting peace, not just a temporary pause. This Monday, February 24, will mark three years of the Russia-Ukraine war. This war has now dragged on for far too long, and at far too terrible a cost to Ukraine and Russia.The United States has proposed a simple, historic resolution in the United Nations that we urge all member states to support in order to chart a path to peace. This resolution is consistent with President Trump’s view that the UN must return to its founding purpose, as enshrined in the UN Charter, to maintain international peace and security, including through the peaceful settlement of disputes.

If the United Nations is truly committed to its original purpose, we must acknowledge that while challenges may arise, the goal of lasting peace remains achievable. Through support of this resolution, we affirm that this conflict is awful, that the UN can help end it, and that peace is possible. We strongly believe that this is the moment to commit to ending the war. This is our opportunity to build real momentum toward peace. We urge all UN member states to join the United States in this solemn pursuit.”

Read more …

“Arestovich said Ukraine has already “lost the war due to our own stupidity, pride, and stubbornness,” warning that Kiev’s denial of reality would ultimately exclude it from having a say in the conflict’s outcome altogether..”

• Ex-Zelensky Aide Threatens To Jail Him For Life (RT)

Former aide to Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky Aleksey Arestovich has pledged to jail the incumbent Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky and the entirety of his “gang” in case he becomes the country’s new president. Arestovich, once Ukraine’s top spin doctor, made the remarks on Friday while speaking to journalist Aleksandr Shelest. Asked whether he would arrest Zelensky should he get elected, Arestovich pledged to detain the country’s incumbent leader and his whole “gang,” adding that it was up to a court to ultimately decide their fate.

“I will give the order to detain him. And no foreign power will save him and his gang. We will catch everyone, no matter where they are hiding, we will get them out from under the ground, bring them in and we will deliver the verdict live on air. No, not even a hair will fall from his head. He will get jailed – and I believe – for life,” Arestovich stated. The ex-aide accused his former boss of killing off Ukrainians “by the tens of thousands” just for the sake of keeping his “beloved” power, which he has been ultimately using to “kill and rob.” Arestovich also pledged to reshape the Ukrainian governing model and make the state “face the people,” adding he will use force if necessary to reach the goal.Arestovich was a long-time associate of Zelensky, with the ties between the two going back to their time in show business.

During Zelensky’s presidency, Arestovich became his informal adviser and a top propagandist, heralding a purportedly imminent victory in the Russia-Ukraine conflict. He left the role in early 2023 after contradicting the official narrative around a deadly missile incident. Arestovich has grown increasingly critical of his former boss and has since moved to the US, claiming that Kiev wants him jailed on politically-motivated charges. Earlier this month, Arestovich said Ukraine has already “lost the war due to our own stupidity, pride, and stubbornness,” warning that Kiev’s denial of reality would ultimately exclude it from having a say in the conflict’s outcome altogether. “We have created a society of mutual hatred and intolerance, in which every individual is right and everyone collectively is to blame,” he said.

Read more …

“The charade is over. And unless Zelensky undergoes a complete and immediate transformation, the war will end without him. One way or another, it is coming to a close. The show is over.”

• The Collapse Of The Zelensky Cult (Carlson/Mahncke)

At long last, someone has said it. Trump has finally called it like it is—Zelensky is the emperor with no clothes. In fact, he’s the dictator with no clothes, propped up by Western elites who refused to see what was in plain sight. But the illusion is shattered. Trump didn’t just call him a dictator, he shut him out of peace talks and made it clear that if Zelensky wants to be taken seriously, he needs to hold elections, abandon his defiant posturing, and start behaving like a statesman rather than a petulant client. For years, wherever Zelensky went, Western elites and their media lapdogs treated him as untouchable—questioning him was practically a crime. The adulation didn’t even begin in 2022 when full-scale war erupted.

It started back in 2019, when Zelensky became the vehicle for Trump’s first impeachment, cast as the poor, beleaguered leader whom Trump had supposedly tried to extort. It was all a lie, but that didn’t matter. The media and political class needed him propped up, so they did—shielding him from scrutiny no matter how absurd his behavior became. The arrogance and defiance Zelensky has displayed didn’t emerge in a vacuum—it was merely the latest chapter in a pattern of reckless entitlement that defined Ukraine’s political class long before he took office. To understand it, we have to go back to 2016, when Ukrainian officials blatantly interfered in the U.S. election, attacking Trump in a way that was not just unprecedented but completely beyond the norms of international relations. It’s one thing for a foreign power to quietly prefer one candidate over another—but for a small, dependent country to openly wage political warfare against the leading contender in a U.S. presidential race was madness.

Their prime minister publicly denounced Trump, claiming he “challenged the very values of the free world.” Ukraine’s Interior Minister went even further, calling Trump a “dangerous misfit” who was “dangerous both for Ukraine and for the United States to the same extent.” Their ambassador to Washington launched a blistering op-ed—something virtually unheard of in international diplomacy—and Ukraine’s intelligence services leaked a fabricated ledger to sabotage Trump’s campaign manager, Paul Manafort, in an operation that led directly to Manafort’s ouster. Even Ukraine’s equivalent of a CIA director, Valentin Nalyvaichenko, later all but admitted to the interference, stating, “Of course, they all recognize that our [anti-corruption bureau] intervened in the presidential campaign.”

When Trump won anyway in 2016, he let it slide. He wasn’t going to punish Ukraine for backing the wrong horse. Instead, he sought peace—because, as the media and establishment so often overlook, the war in Ukraine didn’t begin in 2022 but in 2014, and it had long been Trump’s ambition to end it. But his hands were tied by the Russia collusion hoax, which effectively criminalized diplomacy with Moscow. Anytime he wanted to do anything, he was met by loud and hysterical screaming from the media, the establishment and Democrats. When the Russian ambassador visited the White House, as is totally customary, the media went apoplectic, accusing Trump of treason. When Trump met Putin in Helsinki in 2018, the hysteria reached off-the-charts proportions. Putin had given Trump a soccer ball from that year’s World Cup for Trump’s 12-year-old son, and the media claimed it may have been a listening device.

Trump was given no room to maneuver. Instead of pursuing peace, he was forced to arm Ukraine—a step even Obama had refused to take. Then came the impeachment hoax, with Zelensky at its center, making matters infinitely worse. Any attempt at serious negotiations—any engagement with Russia, any acknowledgment that peace requires concessions—would have been seized upon as proof that Trump was a traitor. The very idea of compromise was framed as “selling out” Ukraine, the same false charge leveled against Trump in the first place. Wounded by the impeachment hoax, Trump was hobbled, and then came Biden. With him, Zelensky got everything he wanted—billions in weapons and reckless escalations that led directly to war.

For years we were told that NATO entry had nothing to do with the outbreak of the wider war in 2022, but now even the NATO chief admits NATO expansion was key to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. In fact, Biden and his team of inept and corrupt comrades had all but promised Ukraine NATO entry in the lead-up to the 2022 war. Biden held out NATO membership to Ukraine in December 2021, as did his secretary of state, Antony Blinken. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin went even further, saying the door was open to Ukraine for NATO membership during an October 2021 trip to Ukraine. And let’s not forget that Biden’s national security advisor, Jake Sullivan, was one of the chief architects of the Russia collusion hoax, which directly impeded Trump from being able to do anything during his first term.

Yet even as Biden and his team recklessly escalated tensions, Zelensky remained oblivious to the risks, convinced that the West’s blank check would never bounce. When the war exploded into a full-scale conflict in 2022, the U.S. poured hundreds of billions into Ukraine, fueling the fight with no clear strategy or exit plan. Zelensky had one job: to prevent the war or, failing that, to end it as quickly as possible. Instead, he sold his country off—to Western cold warriors who saw Ukraine as a pawn, to proxy war zealots determined to prolong the fight, and to domestic grifters gorging on American largesse. When a real chance for peace emerged early in the war, he didn’t seize it. He threw it away at the command of Boris Johnson and Joe Biden, dragging Ukraine even deeper into a war that should never have happened.

As former German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder—one of the last of the old-guard Western leaders—later revealed, he had been mediating the Istanbul peace talks in April 2022. Ukraine and Russia had largely reached an agreement—until Johnson and Biden stepped in and told Zelensky to walk away. He obeyed, choosing war over peace at the command of those who had their own agendas—agendas that had nothing to do with the lives or deaths of hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians. Yet even as public support waned and the global political landscape shifted, Zelensky refused to adapt—convinced that the money, weapons, and political backing would never stop flowing.

In September 2024, Zelensky came to the United States, and campaigned in Pennsylvania for Kamala Harris, completely oblivious to the possibility that she might lose. While in the United States, he also gave an interview to The New Yorker, making his feelings about Trump and JD Vance clear. Dismissing Trump outright, he claimed, “My feeling is that Trump doesn’t really know how to stop the war, even if he might think he knows how.” He was just as condescending toward Vance, calling him “too radical” and adding, “I don’t take Vance’s words seriously.” He even suggested that Vance needed to be educated by Jewish Americans, claiming they were “a strong power base in the United States.”

Those are hardly the words of a leader capable of navigating peace talks, adapting to shifting political winds, or showing even a trace of gratitude toward the American taxpayers who bankrolled his war. Instead of adjusting, Zelensky doubled down on his arrogance, blind to the fact that the very people he mocked might soon be the ones calling the shots. Despite his endless missteps, poor political acumen, and habit of backing the wrong horse, Zelensky kept getting last chances.

Shortly after Trump’s inauguration, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent visited Kiev to discuss financial matters. Zelensky’s response was more arrogance, refusing to agree to an arrangement to at least partly repay America’s colossal expenditures on Ukraine. And let’s not forget: U.S. taxpayers weren’t just funding the war effort. They were covering 90% of Ukraine’s media, paying Ukrainian pensions, and subsidizing their civil service. It wasn’t just about weapons—it was about propping up an entire state. Zelensky had yet another chance to reset when he met Vance in Munich last week. He failed again. No humility, no recalibration—just the same tired routine. Munich was likely the moment Trump and Vance concluded that as long as Zelensky remained in power, a peace deal was impossible. And how did he respond? By lashing out. Within a day of Munich, he was claiming that Trump “lives in a disinformation space,” only further cementing his own irrelevance.

For years, Zelensky behaved like a spoiled child indulged by weak-willed caretakers. Under Biden, no demand was too excessive, no tantrum too outrageous. When Trump arrived, he never adjusted and never recalibrated. And now the indulgence is over. The adults are back. Trump made that unmistakable in a post yesterday on Truth Social, calling Zelensky what he is: a dictator. The media, Democrats, and European elites are in hysterics—but the truth is finally out. That which was once unsayable has now been said. For years, Zelensky wrapped himself in the language of democracy while shutting down opposition parties, silencing independent media, and, worst of all, canceling elections outright. That isn’t democracy—it’s dictatorship. The charade is over. And unless Zelensky undergoes a complete and immediate transformation, the war will end without him. One way or another, it is coming to a close. The show is over.

Read more …

“The land that is now Ukraine has always been a space where competing national myths collided. And historically, these clashes ended in bloodshed..”

• Ukraine, Russia, and the West’s Fatal Miscalculation (Lukyanov)

It’s always easy to feel prescient in hindsight. I recall conversations from 15 or 20 years ago with Western interlocutors – who are now from unfriendly nations – on NATO expansion. The discussions always began in a relatively solemn manner. From our side, we politely asked, why are you doing this? The bloc was creeping ever closer to Russia’s borders, despite assurances that it was not an anti-Russian project. Their response was equally polite: What are you talking about? This is not directed against Russia. You should welcome having stable, democratic neighbors under NATO’s watchful eye. After an hour, especially in informal settings, the real opinions began to surface. We warned, if you keep pushing, you’ll eventually reach Ukraine – and that is impossible. That is the red line. The response? Come on! You objected to Poland and Hungary, and then you accepted it.

You were angry about the Baltics, and nothing happened. What’s the difference with Ukraine? You’ll get used to it just like before. Our objections – “No, you don’t understand! Ukraine is entirely different! This will not be the same; this will end badly!” – were met with amused smiles and condescending nods. We understand your concerns, but don’t worry, we’ll handle it, their expressions seemed to say.We were right. They were wrong. But that fact does not make today’s reality any easier. The drive to pull Ukraine into NATO – an irresistible prize for the Atlantic bloc – was not some last-minute maneuver. US State Department documents from the 1990s show that Ukraine’s future membership in NATO was discussed even as the Soviet Union collapsed. It was not an immediate goal, but it was a logical consequence of the West’s Cold War victory. Any objections that contradicted this logic were dismissed outright.

The geostrategic miscalculations and arrogance that defined the so-called liberal world order are one thing. But what is more interesting is why Ukraine actually turned out to be very different. Why did those for whom Ukraine was just another chess piece in a grand geopolitical game fail to understand its unique position? Or did they understand but simply not care? One interpretation is that the Ukrainian question is inseparable from the Russian question. The two are intertwined in a web of history, geography, religion, culture, and mythology. The struggle between inextricable symbiosis and desperate separation is not a contradiction – it is a dialectic. Every attempt to define one without the other results in instability. And each time outsiders tried to manipulate this balance for their own ends, the result was disastrous.

Western strategists have long obsessed over the Russian question, always looking for ways to minimize Moscow’s influence. The collapse of the USSR presented a unique opportunity to contain Russia’s resurgence. What followed was an attempt to reshape Eastern Europe to the West’s advantage, with no regard for the consequences. All nation-building is a kind of fantasy – a process of self-invention. The land that is now Ukraine has always been a space where competing national myths collided. And historically, these clashes ended in bloodshed. Each time, the conflict resulted in a temporary balance, which lasted for a historical cycle before collapsing again.

What we are witnessing today is simply history repeating itself, but at an accelerated pace. Three decades after the emergence of modern Russia and Ukraine, we are reliving a condensed version of centuries of rivalry and realignment. For years after 2014, Russia tried to convince the West that its perception of Ukraine was not a product of propaganda but rather a fundamentally different cultural and historical experience. Ukraine was not just another country that could be absorbed into NATO without consequence. But those arguments were brushed aside. Western officials would nod sympathetically, but their expressions made it clear: this is just another case of Russian imperial nostalgia. You’ll get over it.

The real tragedy is that this conflict was always going to be fought in Ukraine. Many had hoped to avoid direct military confrontation. Perhaps that would have been possible if the entire global system had not fallen into disorder. This war is not simply about Ukraine or even about Russia – it is the result of the broader collapse of the liberal world order.

Read more …

“..huge increases in defense funding, reaching 326 billion in 2024, after a 31% increase compared to 2023, it is expected that by 2026, through the European defense coordination system, the annual amount will reach 614 billion euros, with a tendency to rise..”

• EU “Leaders” Want To Save The Multi-Million Dollar Military Jackpot (Dionísio)

It’s really like this: the children went to Eurodisney in Paris, and the adults went to Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. The comparison may seem exaggerated, but it’s not, because the big question that arises from this European “leaders’” attitude is this: to what extent is the resistance to the diplomatic process initiated between the U.S. and the Russian Federation merely a diversion, a circus, aimed at once again justifying the massive military investments announced, freezing the conflict situation and the underlying tension, as well as saving face for the European “leaders”? In the first meeting, Macron summoned the most important EU heavyweights. France, Germany, the United Kingdom, Italy, Spain, Poland, the Netherlands, Denmark (because of Greenland?), and the two appendages António Costa and Von Der Leyen.

The results, as we know, were classified in the national press as “disappointing,” as these people failed to reach a consensus. Not convinced, Macron, in a second meeting, summoned more secondary states, but, except Belgium, states with some proximity to the Russian Federation, whether geographical, cultural, or economic. The chosen ones were Norway, Canada, the Baltic States, the Czech Republic, Greece, Finland, Romania, Sweden, and Belgium. Portugal was left out and placed at the same level as Malta, Cyprus, Ireland, Slovenia, and Croatia. Slovakia and Hungary don’t count for these things. Macron would have returned with a third wave of third-tier “European” states if he had been successful. In my opinion, this was not an outright attempt to sabotage the peace process or the negotiations between two direct competitors, one of them a declared enemy, the other still the commander of this great Western ship.

It’s much more than that, in a web of objectives ranging from personal salvation to political salvation, as instruments to save an entire dynamic of interests associated with the Ukrainian conflict, which did not disappear with Trump’s election. For three years, these “leaders” sold the idea that everything was about a “brutal, large-scale, and unprovoked invasion” of Ukraine by the Russian Federation; the West, led by the U.S., had no responsibility or provocation in this “invasion”; the “invasion” was solely the responsibility of a “terrible dictator” named Vladimir Putin; an “isolated” and “cornered” Putin, who found a decisive, united, and determined response from the West. Even today, against all evidence, Zelensky says that Trump wants to remove Russia from “international isolation,” not realizing that, with such discourse, he himself alienates the international relations of the country he tyrannizes.

The Russian threat perpetuation logic, coupled with the inability to provide Ukraine with the weapons it needed, built, in the media space, the guillotine placed over our heads, justifying the increase in military spending, reflected, for example, in the European proposal to use Multiannual European funds to establish a true military-industrial complex, contradicting rules that were once considered stable and based on the idea that EU structural funds were intended for cohesion, development, and European construction. The jackpot resulting from this process of psychological escalation is in the trillions of euros and represents the largest increase in military investment since World War II, in an economic space in deep crisis, politically, culturally, and in terms of identity.

If a few months ago Von Der Leyen had already predicted huge increases in defense funding, reaching 326 billion in 2024, after a 31% increase compared to 2023, it is expected that by 2026, through the European defense coordination system, the annual amount will reach 614 billion euros, with a tendency to rise. We are only talking about the European Union, which allocates about one trillion euros to structural funds, that is, just over 30% of the amount expected to be spent annually on defense, but for 7 years. The EU intends to spend, each year, just on defense, almost the same as it spends on development and cohesion in 7 years, or 3 or 4 times more than it spends on the European Social Fund, which deals with inequality and combating poverty. This happens in the context of growing economic austerity, declining living conditions for people, and a drop in European development standards.

Having been pushed aside, Von Der Leyen, after the meeting with Peter Hegseth in Brussels, now appears to give proof of life by announcing a “massive increase in defense spending“, foreseeing changes in bureaucratic rules to facilitate blatant waste. As if shouting, “Mr. Trump, look at me, I’ll buy you lots of weapons.” No wonder the WSJ reports an increase in the value of shares linked to the European defense sector, following talks on increasing military spending within NATO. It is, therefore, easy to see what is behind all this emergency from Macron.

To understand the gravity of the situation, the madness that guides the thoughts and perceptions of these people, and the miserable role they play, Annalena Baerbock gave us a glimpse of what goes on in their sick minds by announcing “an unprecedented aid package” to Ukraine, worth 700 billion euros! To kill and die, they apply the same amount that these people approved for the entire European Union as a Covid-19 recovery instrument for 5 years!

Read more …

The west may have rewritten (WWII) history, Russia has not.

• Loathsome Heirs of Fascism Will Face Inevitable Retribution (Medvedev)

February 23 isn’t just another day – it symbolizes our collective memory, glory, and pride, and stands as a testament to our unwavering belief in ultimate victory. This year, its meaning deepens as we honor it during the Year of the Defender of the Fatherland. We will never forget the heroes of past generations. Their legacy guides us, inspiring us to live by their example. The stirring words of the great commander Alexander Suvorov – ”We will forever serve Russia with faith and truth, shaming our enemies” – beat in every heart. Our nation has learned the hard art of winning through trials that tested us beyond measure. As new challenges arise, our duty is clear: to confront every threat head-on, channeling all our strength in defense of our homeland.

Tomorrow marks three years since our special military operation began – a bold step taken after crossing a point of no return against what we now call the “collective West.” It was our only way to safeguard our country and its citizens, pushing our adversaries back from our borders. History has proven this tough decision was not only necessary, but the only path forward. The Russian people have united to stand against a ruthless enemy fueled by foreign weapons and money. Although the battle against neo-Nazism and its allies is not yet over, its end is near. The enemy will be defeated, and truth will prevail.

Eighty years ago, our nation triumphed over fascism. Today, its loathsome heirs will face inevitable retribution – not in a modern-day Nuremberg, but on the battlefield, where justice is swift, uncompromising, and true. Our foes, gripped by fear and panic, know this all too well. In their desperate rage, they are capable of anything. We cannot allow a global catastrophe. We must crush any revival of Nazism at its roots, preserve our historical legacy, and leave a worthy inheritance for future generations. Above all, our mission is to protect our boundless homeland and do everything possible to secure its prosperity – for our children, our grandchildren, and the brilliant future of Russia!

Read more …

“..Trump is publicly signalling that he is re-evaluating the evidence of Russian culpability in the run-up to the start of the Special Military Operation in the Ukraine..”

• Starmer Tells Trump To Fight Russia The British Way (Helmer)

When the British Government announced the fabrication that Russia had attacked on British soil with a chemical weapon called Novichok, Keir Starmer, then a Labour Party shadow minister, announced he was sure of the government’s evidence. The attack, Starmer said, “deserves to be condemned by all of us without reservation – without reservation”. The evidence presented in the House of Commons by then-Prime Minister Theresa May was — Starmer told the BBC on March 16, 2018 — “the right conclusion, and for that reason, I think it is very important that we support the action the Prime Minister laid out on Wednesday [March 14, 2018].” May had told parliament “there is no alternative conclusion other than that the Russian State was culpable for the attempted murder of Mr Skripal and his daughter – and for threatening the lives of other British citizens in Salisbury, including Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey.

This represents an unlawful use of force by the Russian State against the United Kingdom. And as I set out on Monday it has taken place against the backdrop of a well-established pattern of Russian State aggression across Europe and beyond. It must therefore be met with a full and robust response – beyond the actions we have already taken since the murder of Mr Litvinenko and to counter this pattern of Russian aggression elsewhere.” Starmer repeated what May said, word for word. The Russian attack on the Skripals, according to Starmer, was “not for the first time. As a lawyer I represented Marina Litvinenko and it was my privilege to bring a case on her behalf against Russia for that atrocious murder ten, eleven years ago now. This is not the first time. It needs to be called out with no ifs, no buts. And we need strong action as set out by the Prime Minister on Wednesday.”

The Marina Litvineko case in the High Court in 2014 had been to press May’s government to go beyond a coroner’s inquest into the cause of the polonium poisoning death of her husband, Alexander Litvinenko, in London in November 2006. Instead, the widow Litvinenko and British officials wanted to close the inquest and instead open a public inquiry so that the case against Russia could be fully publicized, but the MI6 evidence that Litvinenko had planned to buy the polonium from Moscow kept secret.* In fact, Starmer was not one of the lawyers representing Marina Litvinenko in the High Court review of January 21-22, 2014; the judgement was reported on February 11, 2014, here. Starmer’s name is also missing from the list of lawyers representing Mrs Litvinenko in the High Court proceeding six months earlier.

Starmer was more than big-noting himself on the BBC. The docket of Marina Litvinenko’s cases in the High Court reveals Starmer was a liar. Slight reservation! Two ifs!Donald Trump — in March 2018 president for the first time — was more reserved than Starmer. On March 14, Trump told reporters at the White House: “Well, it seems to me – I’m speaking to Theresa May today — it sounds to me like it would be Russia, based on all the evidence they have. I don’t know if they have come to a conclusion…But she’s calling me today…but Theresa May is going to be speaking to me today. It sounds to me like they believe it was Russia, and I would certainly take that finding as fact. As soon as we get the facts straight, if we agree with them, we will condemn Russia or whoever it may be.”

Now prime minister, Starmer will be meeting Trump at the White House later this week, as Trump is publicly signalling that he is re-evaluating the evidence of Russian culpability in the run-up to the start of the Special Military Operation in the Ukraine. The American ifs and buts have begun to count against the unreserved warfighting propaganda by the British. There is also a hint from Secretary of State Marco Rubio, following his talks with Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in Riyadh on February 18, that the British evidence of Novichok is also being reopened behind closed doors. Rubio was asked by a reporter whether his agreement to restore diplomatic operations with the Russians meant “that you consider the Skripal case or the Crimea annexation to be closed or no longer issues? Because I think – you mentioned Keir Starmer is going to be in Washington next week. I can imagine that the Brits won’t be particularly pleased by that.”

Rubio hesitated over how to answer. “Yeah, again, I’m not – yeah, I’m not going to negotiate or talk through every element of the disruptions that exists – or have existed in our diplomatic relations and the mechanics of it. Suffice to say that President Trump has pledged and intends to keep his promise to do everything he can to bring an end to this conflict. We cannot do that unless we have at least some normalcy in the way our diplomatic missions operate in Moscow and in Washington, D.C…we’re going to work with them to see what’s possible within that context.”

Read more …

The fact that I have to commit to an audit being done in four years is bad enough. The Pentagon should be able to pass a budget right now..”

• Democrats Reject Decades of Policy As They Fight Hegseth’s Pentagon Cuts (JTN)

Amid the war on terror and the many military conflicts of the past two decades, Democrats were often critics of foreign adventurism and military spending, pointing to the bloated Pentagon budget as an obvious target for cuts to balance the budget. Now that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has ordered a sweeping budget review and the implementation of those cuts, Democrats — determined to obstruct the Trump agenda — are suddenly livid and sound like Bush-era Republicans warning of national security failures should the Defense Department lose funding.The fiscal year 2025 National Defense Authorization Act approved $883.7 billion in funding for discretionary defense purposes. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, however, has reportedly ordered the Pentagon to plan for an 8% budget cut every year for five years, according to The Washington Post, which cited an internal memo and “officials familiar with the matter.”

“To achieve our mandate from President Trump, we are guided by his priorities including securing our borders, building the Iron Dome for America, and ending radical and wasteful government DEI programs and preferencing,” acting Deputy Secretary of Defense Robert Salesses said Wednesday. Attempting to combat media narratives, Hegseth has insisted that he is merely moving money in the Pentagon’s budget to other internal priorities and that such a move did not constitute a cut at all. As the Pentagon plans to allocate funding to other projects, it is unlikely that the shifts would directly impact the national budget. In a public video statement, Hegseth on Thursday urged the public to take media stories with a “grain of salt,” insisting that the media has a “different agenda.”

Hegseth has sought to free up funds in the budget this year to instead invest in Trump-favored projects like an American Iron Dome. That money comes from the already-approved FY2026 budget and totals around $50 billion, roughly 8% of that budget. He did not directly address the reports of an 8% cut each year for five years, but merely the reallocation of the $50 billion within the existing budget. Hegseth confirmed that the Department of Government Efficiency was working with the Pentagon and that he had afforded their staff “broad access” to review the department, with a focus on “headquarters, and fat, and redundancies, and topline stuff.”“The media wants to call these exclusive cuts, but it’s completely the opposite,” he said. “It’s not a cut, it’s refocusing and reinvesting” existing funds toward Trump’s priorities and away from Biden-era social programs.

Prior to the announcement, Hegseth highlighted the Pentagon’s inability to pass an audit and its history of financial vagueness. “The fact that I have to commit to an audit being done in four years is bad enough. The Pentagon should be able to pass a budget right now,” he told Fox News earlier this month. “When we spend dollars, we need to know where they’re going and why. That’s simple accounting. Mainline Democrats did an about face from their decades long opposition to military spending, and were quick to criticize the prospect of a reduced defense budget and now warn of national security failures as they wage war against DOGE and its sweeping cuts to the federal headcount.

“These types of hasty, indiscriminate budget cuts would betray our military forces and their families and make America less safe. I’m all for cutting programs that don’t work, but this proposal is deeply misguided. Secretary Hegseth’s rushed, arbitrary strategy would have negative impacts on our security, economy, and industrial base,” said Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I. The cuts “will have a dramatic, deleterious & damaging effect on our readiness & preparedness for the threats that are only increasing around the world,” Sen. Dick Blumenthal, D-Conn., said on CNN. Blumenthal is notorious for having been accused of “stolen valor”: repeatedly claiming to have served in Vietnam. That story fell apart and in 2010 Blumenthal apologized for “misspeaking.” Retired Lt. Gen. and CNN analyst Mark Hertling fumed over the plans, calling them “exponentially worse than sequestration that crippled the military in 2011.”

Read more …

“If Trump wants to change the name of Canada in the U.S. Geographic Names System, Google will have NO CHOICE but to run with it!”

• Donald Trump Could Pull the Funniest, Most Evil Prank EVER on Canada! (Pinsker)

“What’s in a name? That which we call a rose, by any other name would smell as sweet.” —William “Billy Boy” Shakespeare With all due respect to the Bard, Juliet was absolutely, completely wrong with the aforementioned quote. (But then again, she was a stupid 13-year-old child, which kind of ruins that “romantic” love story.) Turns out, names are incredibly important! Been that way since the Biblical age, when names and titles were Divinely bestowed: Jacob became Israel; Abram became Abraham. Last year, my home in Tampa Bay was flooded by hurricanes Helene and Milton, causing lots of damage (and ruining three of our cars). We would’ve evacuated WAY earlier if the hurricanes had been renamed Satan and Lucifer. I’m not afraid of a Helene or a Milton, but I ain’t sticking around for Hurricane Lucifer.

That’s the power of names. Donald Trump is probably the most adept politician in history at naming things. (Close runner-up is Alexander the Great, but he only named stuff after himself, which got repetitive. Although, one time, he named a city after his horse.) Trump named his movement “MAGA.” He renamed Hillary Clinton “Crooked Hillary.” Joe Biden became “Sleepy Joe.” Nikki Haley became “Birdbrain.” Adam Schiff is “Shifty Schiff.” And Elizabeth Warren, of course, will forever be known as “Pocahontas.” At first, the political press excoriated Trump for “lowering the public discourse” with his “unpresidential” name-calling. (And then they called him “literally Hitler” for the next eight years straight, demonstrating that their objection to name-calling was highly selective.)

But Trump was right. Names are part and parcel of a person’s brand identity, so if you can redefine their name, you can redefine their brand. It’s a clever PR tactic. And it’s worth noting that it took a non-politician like Trump — someone from outside the political establishment — to recognize its utility. As the old expression goes, “Whoever discovered water wasn’t a fish.” Disruptive new ideas almost always come from the outside. And the disruptions keep on coming: The Gulf of Mexico is now the Gulf of America. The Panama Canal may become the American Canal. (Which is an idea I think Trump stole from me, but that’s okay, because I stole the idea from Father Guido Sarducci.) The Gaza Strip will be the new French Riviera.

Then we come to Canada. You know the dealio: “Governor” Trudeau. Our 51st state. Not a real country. Well, a few days ago, the soon-to-be state of Canada beat the United States of America in a little-known sport called “hockey.” (It’s a weird, niche game with sticks, skates, and a puck. Apparently, people play it when it’s too damn icy to try a REAL sport, like football or baseball.) Flushed with a glorious Canuck victory, Governor Trudeau puffed out his chest and whipped out the ol’ Tweeting Machine:

I don’t know what that means. Kudos to Canada for winning one (exhibition?) game, but a Canadian team hasn’t won the Stanley Cup since 1993! That’s so long ago, I’m mocking you — and I’m a freaking Dallas Cowboys fan! (Hey, we last won the Super Bowl in 1996. We’re at least 2.5 years better than Canada.) Along with his knack at naming, the other thing we know (and love) about Donald Trump is that he’s one helluva counterpuncher. You come at him with a jab, and Trump will respond with an uppercut, a rabbit punch, brass knuckles, an eyeball gouge, and a swift kick to the family jewels. Trump doesn’t do “proportionate responses.” So we know he’ll be responding to Trudeau. We know he won’t let our northernmost governor get in the last word. The question, then, is how.

And I think I’ve got another really good idea for Trump to steal: In the aftermath of the “Gulf of America,” we’ve learned the official policy of Google Maps: Whenever the U.S. government changes a name in its U.S. Geographic Names System, Google’s policy is to immediately use that name within that country. That’s why Google Maps complied so quickly, adopting the new name of “Gulf of America” for all U.S.-based users. You know what this means, right? If Trump wants to change the name of Canada in the U.S. Geographic Names System, Google will have NO CHOICE but to run with it! This is a target-rich opportunity for mischief! Trump could rename Canada “The 51st State.” Or “The No Stanley Cup Place.” Or “Where America Stores Our Zamboni Equipment.” But I’m kind of partial to Homer Simpson’s name for Canada:

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Kory
https://twitter.com/i/status/1893550581215883431

 

 

Trust

 

 

Paddy

 

 

Condor

 

 

Eagles

 

 

Tiger

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle February 5 2025

Feb 052025
 
 February 5, 2025  Posted by at 11:06 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , ,  123 Responses »


Pablo Picasso Girl with a Mandolin (Fanny Tellier) 1910

 

• US Will ‘Take Over’ Gaza – Trump (RT)
• Zelensky Says He’s Ready For Talks With Putin (RT)
• The Dynamic Duo Have the Dems on the Run (Green)
• Elon Musk Is ‘Special Government Employee,’ White House Confirms (ET)
• Audit USAID…Then Shut It Down! (Ron Paul)
• “Rank Insubordination”: Rubio Says USAID Full Of Rogue Employees (ZH)
• RFK Jr. Moves Closer To Becoming US Health Chief (RT)
• DOJ Seeks Information on FBI Employees Who Investigated Jan. 6 (ET)
• Dept. of Ed on the Chopping Block as Trump Readies Executive Order (Moran)
• House Panel Asks PBS, NPR Chiefs to Testify on Alleged ‘Biased Content’ (ET)
• NY AG Letitia James Defies Trump’s EO On “Gender Affirming Care” (AmG)
• 20,000 Government Workers Take Trump Buyout Offer As Mass Layoffs Loom (ZH)
• Trump Attack On The Deep State Spectacular And Almost Certainly Legal (Widburg)
• Biden Spent Billions Promoting Illegal Immigration – Musk (RT)
• Merkel To Blame For The Rise Of The AfD: Former Austrian Chancellor Kurz (RMX)
• UK Hoping To Buy Its Way Out Of Trump Tariffs (RT)
• El Salvador Abandons Bitcoin Legal Tender Experiment (RT)
• Trump’s Withdrawal From the Paris Agreement Won’t Hurt the Climate (RCW)

 

 

 

 

Benz Glenn

SEN. JOHN KENNEDY

Leavitt

Raskin

 

 

 

 

McCain

McCabe

80%

Vivek

 

 

“Ukraine is not losing, but the front is moving in the wrong direction”
Mark Rutte

 

 

 

 

Force 2 million people from their homeland and turn it into a playground for the rich. As Tacitus said: “they make a desert and call it peace”. Not Trump’s finest idea. “Jordan and Egypt should take them”. “But they don’t want to..” “Oh well, we’ll give them money”. “It’s not about money, it’s about homeland”.

• US Will ‘Take Over’ Gaza – Trump (RT)

US President Donald Trump has announced that the United States will assume control over the Gaza Strip, vowing to rebuild the war-torn enclave and create economic opportunities for its future residents. When asked whether US troops would be deployed to Gaza, Trump vowed to “do what is necessary.” Trump made the remarks on Tuesday following his meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House. The US president reiterated his view that Palestinians should be permanently resettled elsewhere, adding that the US would “take over” Gaza and lead efforts to clear the destruction left by 15 months of war between Israel and Hamas.“The US will take over the Gaza Strip. And we will do a job with it, too. We’ll own it and be responsible for dismantling all of the dangerous unexploded bombs and other weapons on the site,” Trump said, promising to “level the site and get rid of the destroyed buildings.”

Asked to clarify what exactly he meant by a “takeover,” the US leader said he envisions a “long-term ownership position” that would supposedly bring “great stability” to the entire Middle East. “Everybody I’ve spoken to loves the idea of the United States owning that piece of land, developing it, and creating thousands of jobs,” Trump claimed. Trump also said he is not ruling out deploying US troops to support his Gaza development plan. “We’ll do what is necessary. If it’s necessary, we’ll do that. We’re going to take over that place,” he said. Approximately 92% of homes in the Gaza Strip have been destroyed or severely damaged, and around 1.9 million people – more than 90% of Gaza’s population – have been displaced since the war broke out in October 2023, according to the UN. Trump, a former real estate mogul, has repeatedly referred to Gaza as a “demolition site” in recent weeks.

When asked who would populate Gaza once the US “takes over” and redevelops it, and whether the Palestinian people would be able to return, Trump responded: “I envision… the world’s people living there. I think the potential in the Gaza Strip is unbelievable. And I think the entire world, representatives from all over the world, will be there and they’ll live there… Palestinians also,” he said. “I don’t want to be a wise guy. But the Riviera of the Middle East – this could be so magnificent.”

Bibi

Read more …

Trump appears to do better at home than abroad. Gaza is a mess, and so is Kiev. Putin will not talk to Zelensky: “..when the current head of the regime – that’s the only way to call [Zelensky] today – signed this decree, he was a somewhat legitimate president. But now he can’t cancel it because he is illegitimate. That’s the trick, the catch, the trap..”

Trump also wants Ukraine to pay the US in rare earths. But those are all in the Lugansk and Donetsk areas, i.e. parts of Russia.

• Zelensky Says He’s Ready For Talks With Putin (RT)

Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky has expressed his willingness to negotiate with Russian President Vladimir Putin if it is the only way to bring the Ukraine conflict to an end. He made the remarks during an interview with British journalist Piers Morgan, with excerpts published on Tuesday. Asked if he is prepared to meet with the Russian president, Zelensky indicated that he is.“If that is the only setup in which we can bring peace to the citizens of Ukraine and not lose people, definitely we will go for this setup, for this meeting,” he said. “What is my attitude to him [Putin]? I will not be kind to him and I… consider him an enemy. And to be honest, I believe he considers me an enemy as well,” he said.

The remarks appear to reflect a shift in Zelensky’s stance. He has refused to negotiate with Putin in the past and even signed a decree banning any negotiations with Moscow, and Putin specifically. Last month, Zelensky said the ban applies to all Ukrainian officials except himself, while the original 2022 decree only stated that negotiations are “impossible” without specifying any individuals or entities prohibited from engaging in them. Last week, Putin reiterated Moscow’s position that Zelensky lacks the legitimacy to sign agreements, given that his presidential term expired in May 2024 and no constitutional mechanism exists to extend it. However, the Russian president said he is willing to send negotiators to talk to Zelensky if he is open to discussions.

“It’s possible to negotiate with anyone. However, due to his illegitimacy, [Zelensky] has no right to sign anything. If he wishes to participate in talks, I will deploy people who will conduct such negotiations,” Putin stated.The Ukrainian decree banning negotiations with Russia remains an obstacle to meaningful talks between Kiev and Moscow, Putin said. He pledged to deploy a team of legal experts to assess the authority of any Ukrainian negotiating team and determine whether they have the proper legal standing to sign an agreement. “If we start negotiations now, they will be illegitimate… Because when the current head of the regime – that’s the only way to call [Zelensky] today – signed this decree, he was a somewhat legitimate president. But now he can’t cancel it because he is illegitimate. That’s the trick, the catch, the trap,” Putin explained.

Read more …

“This is the one shot the American people have to defeat BUREAUcracy, rule of the bureaucrats, and restore DEMOcracy, rule of the people. We’re never going to get another chance like this.”

• The Dynamic Duo Have the Dems on the Run (Green)

“Get ’em skeered and keep the skeer on ’em,” was Confederate General Nathan Bedford Forrest’s timeless advice about combat. President Donald Trump is a Yankee and Elon Musk is an awkward super-genius immigrant but I swear those two have been reading up on their Confederate history. No, I’m not suggesting they’re going to “put y’all back in chains.” What do you think I am, a Democrat? [shudder] When your enemy is scared, don’t give him a moment to recover his wits. When he’s on the ground, don’t let him up. When he flees, pursue him. Because sometimes a simple win isn’t enough. Trump and Musk have the Democrats scared, and every indication is they mean to keep them scared. And Another Thing: I used to refer to Democrats as opponents. But after years of being treated like their enemy, it’s time to return the favor.

The panic set in over the weekend when Musk and his DOGE boys — more on them momentarily — showed up at the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) like they owned the place. Correction: they showed up like we, the taxpayers, own the place. Which we do, by the way. It’s just been a long time since our civil servants had a good reminder of the “servant” half of their positions. By Monday, they were desperately flailing.

“Congress must take action to restore the rule of law,” he whined. You just want to grab Schumer by the lapels and give him a good shake while reminding him, “You ARE in Congress, you ninny. Take it up with your coworkers, assuming they’ll listen to your pathetic excuse for a United States senator.” Musk responded to Schumer, “This is the one shot the American people have to defeat BUREAUcracy, rule of the bureaucrats, and restore DEMOcracy, rule of the people. We’re never going to get another chance like this.” And I’ve just got to know which 22-year-old know-nothing intern posted this face-palmer on behalf of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee yesterday.

It’s like the Dems are so all-in on their illegal alien invasion that they no longer know the difference between a naturalized citizen and a foreigner. There are a great many examples of waste with which I’ve already amused you these last few days but I think Stephen Miller summed up best what’s wrong with USAID.

THIS is what they’re panicked about losing. Not because anybody gives a damn about condoms for Gaza or establishing DEI in Serbian elementary schools, but because of the skim they’ll miss out on. Think of Democrats as mobsters who get their beaks wet on every transaction. Intelligencer’s Ed Kilgore collected his wits enough to very calmly shriek about “Trump and his underlings” doing things “that rely on exotic and dangerous theories of imperial presidential powers that Richard Nixon could have only dreamed of possessing.” Refusing to release grants (that were never explicitly authorized by Congress) to Deep State cronies is imperial, you see. Anyway, Kilgore’s genius #Resist plan goes thusly: There is a steadily increasing possibility that the Trump offensive could go so far and so fast that congressional Democrats are tempted essentially to go on strike when it comes to actions where they do actually have some leverage.

These include an upcoming effort to keep the federal government operating when the stopgap spending authority enacted in December runs out on March 14. So they’re going to stop us from shutting down wasteful government by shutting down even more wasteful government? Oh, please don’t throw me in that briar patch! More seriously, Kilgore writes that “the emerging idea may be for congressional Democrats to insist that before they provide a single vote that Republicans need, Elon Musk and Russell Vought (the OMB director nominee widely thought to be behind the funding freeze) must be put on a leash.”There are the chains again. It always comes down to those for Dems, doesn’t it?

Wait until the news sinks in that Trump is serious about radically downsizing the Department of Education. That’s another one of the Left’s Holiest of Holies that exists for the sacred purposes of funneling money to favored Democrat constituencies while indoctrinating children. It isn’t all fun and games, sadly. The Left doxxed at least one of the young computer geniuses Musk brought with him to OPM to untangle the spilled spaghetti mess of slush-fund spending at USAID and other agencies. There were two assassination attempts on Trump last year, so there’s no doubt in my mind the Left won’t happily trigger some other nut into taking a shot or two at one of Musk’s whiz kids. “In a mature society,” Robert Heinlein’s (literally) timeless character Lazarus Long observed, “’civil servant’ is semantically equal to ‘civil master.'” Well, I’m not feeling all that mature right now. How about you?

Read more …

“Special government employees are appointed for no more than 130 days.”

• Elon Musk Is ‘Special Government Employee,’ White House Confirms (ET)

The White House on Monday confirmed that Space X and Tesla founder and CEO Elon Musk is considered a “special government employee” under the Trump administration amid questions about his work with the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Speaking to reporters at the White House, press secretary Karoline Leavitt confirmed Musk’s federal status and added, “I can also confirm that he has abided by all applicable federal laws.” Leavitt was also asked about Musk’s security clearance. She said she didn’t know but would check on it. The designation allows Musk, the world’s richest person, to work for the federal government and potentially avoid disclosure rules regarding possible conflicts of interest and finances that generally apply to other government staff.

Special government employees are appointed for no more than 130 days. President Donald Trump said that Musk “can’t do and won’t do anything without our approval, and we’ll give him the approval where appropriate; where not appropriate, we won’t.” “He reports in … but he does have a good natural instinct,” Trump told reporters at the White House on Monday. The Republican president also downplayed complaints about Musk’s alleged conflict of interests, saying, “Where we think there’s a conflict or there’s a problem, we won’t let him go near it, but he has some very good ideas.” One of the most significant steps was DOGE gaining access to the U.S. Treasury payment system, which is responsible for 1 billion payments per year totaling $5 trillion. It includes sensitive information involving bank accounts and Social Security payments.

It’s unclear what Musk wants to do with the payment system. He has said that he could trim $1 trillion from the federal deficit “just by addressing waste, fraud and abuse.” Democratic lawmakers have decried what they characterize as an unelected billionaire amassing too much power over the federal government. “That’s the biggest data hack ever in the world,” Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) told reporters in Madison, Wisconsin. “I am outraged about it,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said on Capitol Hill, adding that Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent must revoke Musk’s access to the payment system. “We must halt this unlawful and dangerous power grab.” In a post on the Musk-owned social media platform X, Schumer said that DOGE isn’t “a real government agency” and lacks authority to make spending decisions or to shut down programs.

In response, Musk wrote on X on Tuesday morning that Schumer’s reaction is “hysterical” and that DOGE “is doing work that really matters.” He framed DOGE’s mission in existential terms. “This is the one shot the American people have to defeat BUREAUcracy, rule of the bureaucrats, and restore DEMOcracy, rule of the people,” Musk wrote. “We’re never going to get another chance like this.” Meanwhile, a group representing retirees and union workers sued Bessent and the U.S. Treasury Department on Monday in a bid to get them to stop sharing personal and financial information with DOGE.

“The scale of the intrusion into individuals’ privacy is massive and unprecedented,” the groups wrote in their complaint, filed in the District of Columbia federal court. Aside from the Treasury Department, Musk and Trump have set their sights on the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), with both saying that the organization has been led by radicals and needs to be dissolved. On Monday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio confirmed that he is now the acting director of USAID. He said the agency lacked accountability and that its staff did not follow orders.

Read more …

“..the “news” from Ukraine is being written by US government-backed media outlets and then picked up by US and other western media.”

• Audit USAID…Then Shut It Down! (Ron Paul)

As of this writing, when you attempt to access the US Agency for International Development (USAID) website or social media pages you are informed that, “This site can’t be reached.” The media reports that the new Trump Administration has not only frozen USAID activities but may be planning on bringing it back under control of the US State Department. Other reports, including statements by Elon Musk, suggest If true, the closing of USAID may be one of the most significant changes President Trump has made among many dramatic actions in his first couple of weeks in office. Many Americans may still have the idea that USAID is a government agency delivering relief at disaster sites overseas. They may still remember the bags of rice or grain with the USAID logo on them. But that is not USAID.

USAID is a key component of the US government’s “regime change” operations worldwide. USAID spends billions of dollars every year propping up “NGOs” overseas that function as shadow governments, eating away at elected governments that the US interventionists want to overthrow. Behind most US foreign policy disasters overseas you will see the fingerprints of USAID. From Ukraine to Georgia and far beyond, USAID is meddling in the internal affairs of foreign countries – something that would infuriate Americans if it was happening to us. When President Trump ordered a 90 day pause in USAID activities, we quickly learned just how pernicious the agency really is. The US media reported that Ukrainian press outlets were scrambling to keep their doors open when the US dollars stopped flowing. It is reported that 90 percent of the media outlets are funded by the US government!

This means that there is virtually no independent media in Ukraine, only fake news outlets willing to toe the US Administration’s propaganda line. Does anyone think these wholly US-funded “news” outlets would ever publish a story that the US government did not want published? This is plainly immoral, but it is also dangerous. Most US mainstream media stories about Ukraine have their origins in the “reporting” of the local media. From battlefield news to casualties to the state of the Ukrainian military, the “news” from Ukraine is being written by US government-backed media outlets and then picked up by US and other western media. It is a closed propaganda loop that not only propagandizes the US citizen but also feeds false information into US government outlets – such as Congress – that rely on mainstream US media reporting for their news on Ukraine.

No wonder so many in Washington continue to support this hopeless war! But USAID is not just in the business of disinformation. Elon Musk recently re-posted a New York Post article on X reporting that USAID funneled $53 million to EcoHealth Alliance to support gain-of-function research on coronaviruses at the Wuhan lab! Did USAID help fund COVID? Americans have a right to know. In natural catastrophes overseas Americans have shown themselves to be extremely generous. Private volunteer assistance organizations can more effectively assist victims of disasters worldwide. USAID needs a full and transparent audit. Americans deserve to know exactly what is being done in their name overseas. Then the agency needs to be shuttered completely, and its employees sent home. That would go a long way toward making America great again.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1886575073911333323

Read more …

“..their basic attitude is, ‘We don’t work for anyone, we work for ourselves, no agency of government can tell us what to do.”

• “Rank Insubordination”: Rubio Says USAID Full Of Rogue Employees (ZH)

Secretary of State Marco Rubio slammed the US Agency for International Development (USAID) for what he called “rank insubordination,” and is full of rogue employees who do whatever the hell they want. “Well, that was always the goal was to reform it, but now we have rank insubordination,” Rubio told Fox News, in comments just one day after President Trump announced that Rubio would serve as the acting head of USAID – which itself came after Elon Musk’s DOGE team descended upon the agency and revealed that “USAID is a ball of worms. There is no apple. And when there is no apple you just need to get rid of the whole thing. That’s why it’s got to go. It’s beyond repair.” According to Rubio, “Now we have basically an active effort — their basic attitude is, ‘We don’t work for anyone, we work for ourselves, no agency of government can tell us what to do.”

“So the president made me the acting administrator,” he added. “I’ve delegated that power to someone who is there full-time, and we’re going to go through the same process at USAID as we’re going through now at the State Department.” According to Rubio, USAID has lost its focus and abandoned the “national interest” – telling Fox: “They have basically evolved into an agency that believes that they’re not even a U.S. government agency, that they are out — they’re a global charity, that they take the taxpayer money, and they spend it as a global charity irrespective of whether it is in the national interest or not in the national interest.”

“One of the most common complaints you will get if you go to embassies around the world from State Department officials and ambassadors and the like is USAID is not only not cooperative — they undermine the work that we’re doing in that country, they are supporting programs that upset the host government for whom we’re trying to work with on a broader scale, and so forth,” Rubio added. On Monday, deep state crusaders Ilhan Omar (D-MN) and Jamie Raskin (D-MD) staged a dramatic protest outside the USAID headquarters, with Omar suggesting that Trump’s move to fold the agency into the State Department was “what the beginning of dictatorship looks like!” – and Raskin suggesting that Elon Musk had “illegally seized power over the financial payment systems of the United States Department of Treasury,” adding “Elon Musk, you didn’t create USAID,” and that Musk “doesn’t have the power to destroy it.”

Read more …

Tulsi, too, is one final round of votes away from being confirmed.

• RFK Jr. Moves Closer To Becoming US Health Chief (RT)

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has moved closer to becoming the US secretary of health and human services after the Senate Finance Committee voted 14-13 to approve his nomination, with all Republicans in favor and all Democrats opposed. Kennedy, 71, an environmental lawyer and well-known vaccine skeptic, faced rigorous questioning during his confirmation hearings. Republican Senator Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, a physician and chairman of the Senate Health Committee, had initially expressed reservations about Kennedy’s stance on vaccines. However, Cassidy ultimately voted in favor after receiving assurances from Kennedy and the administration of their “commitment to protecting the public health benefit of vaccination.”

Democrats, led by Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon, strongly opposed the nomination, citing concerns over Kennedy’s views. Wyden warned that Kennedy’s leadership could erode public trust in vaccines and public health initiatives. “Mr. Kennedy has given us no reason to believe he will be anything other than a rubber stamp for plans to cut Medicaid and rip health care away from the American people,” Wyden stated. The full Senate, where Republicans currently hold a majority, is expected to vote on Kennedy’s nomination in the coming days or next week. A simple majority is required for confirmation.

US President Donald Trump nominated Kennedy shortly after winning reelection in November last year. If confirmed, Kennedy will oversee a vast budget and key agencies, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and other sub-agencies.Shortly before the committee’s vote, Trump endorsed his nominee in a post on Truth Social. “Twenty years ago, autism in children was 1 in 10,000. NOW IT’S 1 in 34. WOW! Something’s really wrong. We need BOBBY!!! Thank You! DJT,” the president wrote. Kennedy is the son of former US Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy and the nephew of President John F. Kennedy. He was a vocal critic of the Covid-19 response measures recommended by the World Health Organization, including the strict lockdowns and rapid rollout of vaccines.

Read more …

Zerohedge: “Update (1615ET): DOGE is at it again – kicking down the doors of FBI headquarters to obtain the names of roughly 5,000 agents who worked on Jan. 6 cases. This comes after the agency withheld specifics on those involved, such as their names. Officials working for Elon Musk’s DOGE were spotted by CNN entering FBI headquarters on Tuesday to collect the information.

• DOJ Seeks Information on FBI Employees Who Investigated Jan. 6 (ET)

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has asked for the names of thousands of FBI employees who worked on investigations into the Jan. 6, 2021, breach of the U.S. Capitol. Acting Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove in a Jan. 31 missive to Acting FBI Director Brian Driscoll directed the FBI to provide the names of all bureau personnel who investigated Jan. 6 and an unrelated terrorism case, Senate Democrats said in a Feb. 3 letter. Driscoll told FBI workers in a separate message to the FBI workforce that the request encompasses thousands of employees across the country, including himself, “who have supported these investigative efforts.” Bove warned that “additional personnel actions” could follow, Senate Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said. [..] An FBI spokesperson confirmed that Bove has requested information about FBI personnel.

“The FBI is currently working to respond to a request for information from the Acting Deputy Attorney General about current and former FBI personnel assigned to certain investigations or prosecutions, including the events that occurred at or near the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021,” the spokesperson told The Epoch Times in an email. “The FBI will work within the law and policy to respond to official requests for information from the Department of Justice. To be clear, the FBI does not view anyone’s identification on one of these lists as an indicator of misconduct,” the bureau added. Ed Martin, interim U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, previously launched an investigation into why federal prosecutors brought a felony obstruction charge against hundreds of Jan. 6 defendants. Trump, after taking office, pardoned many people who had been charged over Jan. 6.

The new request for information comes after acting Department of Justice leadership terminated officials, including prosecutors involved in prosecuting Trump before he was elected, and six FBI executive assistant directors. “I do not believe the current leadership of the Justice Department can trust these FBI employees to assist in implementing the President’s agenda faithfully,” Bove stated in his letter to Driscoll, Senate Democrats said. Durbin and the other senators told Acting Attorney General James McHenry and Driscoll that the terminations, and reassignments that have also taken place, “deprive DOJ and the FBI of experienced, senior leadership and decades of experience fighting violent crime, espionage, and terrorism.” They asked for details about the actions.

Leaders of the Federal Bureau of Investigation Agents Association told members of Congress on Feb. 3 that the Department of Justice’s actions are threatening the jobs of thousands of FBI agents and “risk disrupting the bureau’s essential work.” “Any review of Special Agents should follow established disciplinary procedures that provide the necessary due process and transparency to our nation’s law enforcement officers,” the group said. McHenry and Driscoll are serving in acting positions as the Senate considers the nominations of Pam Bondi and Kash Patel to become, respectively, the attorney general and FBI director. Patel said during his confirmation hearing that he would not act against FBI employees solely due to their work on probes into Trump. “All FBI employees will be protected against political retribution,” he said. “I will not politicize that office,“ Bondi said during her confirmation hearing. ”I will not target people simply because of their political affiliation.”

Read more …

“Congress isn’t going to get rid of the Education Department. There simply aren’t the votes, as many Republicans have shown in the past that shuttering the Education Department is a bridge too far.”

• Dept. of Ed on the Chopping Block as Trump Readies Executive Order (Moran)

Donald Trump has ordered a plan to shutter the U.S. Department of Education and transfer its programs to the states, giving Congress a roadmap on how to accomplish that. This is a long-term project with no certainty of success. While the Education Department has many enemies, it also has many friends in both parties. With an FY 2025 budget of $82.5 billion, there’s plenty of cash to spread around. That $82.5 billion is in addition to the $276 billion spent to help K-12 students “catch up” after the pandemic. The government called that program “The Education Stabilization Fund.” The truth is, it didn’t stabilize anything. The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) is often called “The Nation’s Report Card” because it’s administered to so many students.

The results from the 2024 NAEP test reveal the total failure of our Education Department. “The percentage of eighth graders who have ‘below basic’ reading skills according to NAEP was the largest it has been in the exam’s three-decade history — 33 percent,” reports the New York Times. “The percentage of fourth graders at “below basic” was the largest in 20 years, at 40 percent.” The teachers won’t take responsibility for that disaster. The Education Department isn’t either, despite creating programs they claimed would help kids “catch up.”

ABC News: “Closing down the department would be an extraordinary move that would help Trump inch closer to fulfilling the promise that he made for months on the campaign trail: dismantling it and sending education policy back to the states. But any executive action is likely to ask for a plan to shut down the department, but not an immediate directive to shut down the department, sources told ABC News. It’s also unclear how the next education secretary would handle plans to close the department and reallocate its functions. Trump’s education secretary choice Linda McMahon has not yet had a Senate confirmation hearing. A bill in the Senate to shutter the department would likely fail without a two-thirds majority vote.”

Without a semi-orderly transfer of responsibilities from federal to state agencies, chaos will ensue. That’s why the Trump administration will begin the process by moving carefully. The planned executive order would “shut down all functions of the agency that aren’t written explicitly into statute or move certain functions to other departments,” according to the Wall Street Journal.” “Fully abolishing the department would require an act of Congress, and lawmakers have for years shown little interest in doing so. Trump unsuccessfully tried to merge the education and labor departments in his first term. Last week, Rep. Thomas Massie (R., Ky.) introduced a bill to abolish the Education Department by the end of 2026. “Unelected bureaucrats in Washington, D.C., should not be in charge of our children’s intellectual and moral development,” Massie said. “States and local communities are best positioned to shape curricula that meet the needs of their students.”

I liken attempts to get rid of the Education Department to trying to get rid of Obamacare. Both of those huge entities have embedded themselves into every nook and cranny of American life. It’s not just a question of declaring them dead or repealed. Both Obamacare and federal education programs are a part of the DNA of many communities, and the chaos that would ensue by getting rid of either of those programs would cause enormous pain to some of the most vulnerable citizens. Congress isn’t going to get rid of the Education Department. There simply aren’t the votes, as many Republicans have shown in the past that shuttering the Education Department is a bridge too far. But if Trump and Elon Musk are able to shrink the Department of Education, curtailing many of its programs, the administration should consider it a victory.

Read more …

“Greene pointed to NPR’s refusal to cover the Hunter Biden laptop story because “we don’t want to waste the listeners’ and readers’ time on stories that are just pure distractions..”

• House Panel Asks PBS, NPR Chiefs to Testify on Alleged ‘Biased Content’ (ET)

The heads of the taxpayer-funded Public Broadcasting System (PBS) and National Public Radio (NPR) are being asked to testify at a congressional hearing on allegations of “blatantly ideological and partisan” coverage. In a Feb. 3 letter to PBS President and CEO Paula Kerger, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), chairwoman of the House Oversight and Accountability Committee’s (HOAC) Subcommittee on Delivering on Government Efficiency (DOGE), cited as an example of such coverage PBS reporting that characterized a recent gesture by Elon Musk as a “Nazi salute.” Musk vigorously denied the allegation and Greene pointed to the Anti-Defamation League’s statement that said Musk “made an awkward gesture in a moment of enthusiasm, not a Nazi salute.”

Greene told Kerger that “this sort of bias betrays the principles of objective reporting and undermines public trust. As an organization that receives federal funds through its member stations, PBS should provide reporting that serves the entire public, not just a narrow slice of like-minded individuals and ideological interest groups.” In response, a PBS spokesman released a statement to The Epoch Times saying the outlet is “grateful to have bipartisan support in Congress, and our country. We’ve earned this support from decades of noncommercial and nonpartisan work in local communities: providing all Americans with content they trust.” The statement continued, saying PBS is committed to offering “a broad range of stories and programs that help citizens understand our past and shape our future; and helping children and families open up worlds of possibilities through educational programming.”

In a similar Feb. 3 letter to NPR President and Chief Executive Officer Katherine Maher, Greene pointed to NPR’s refusal to cover the Hunter Biden laptop story because “we don’t want to waste the listeners’ and readers’ time on stories that are just pure distractions” as evidence of unacceptable bias in federally funded news coverage. An NPR spokesman released the following statement to The Epoch Times concerning the hearing: “Since its inception, NPR has collaborated with local nonprofit public media organizations to fill critical needs for news and information in America’s communities. We constantly strive to hold ourselves to the highest standards of journalism. … We welcome the opportunity to discuss the critical role of public media in delivering impartial, fact-based news and reporting to the American public.”

Greene offered the two media executives two alternative dates in March for the hearing. A subcommittee spokesman told The Epoch Times the date has not been set. In addition to the Musk and Hunter Biden laptop incidents, Greene said the forthcoming hearing was prompted in great part by the publication in 2024 of an exposé by former NPR senior editor Uri Berliner. Berliner criticized the organization for “only serving a liberal leaning audience and for failing to properly report major news stories—including Hunter Biden’s laptop, COVID-19 origins, and the Russian collusion hoax,” Greene said in a separate statement announcing the hearing.

Read more …

“..pausing so-called “gender-affirming care” for gender-confused minors violates state law.”

• NY AG Letitia James Defies Trump’s EO On “Gender Affirming Care” (AmG)

In open defiance of President Trump’s January 28 executive order to “protect children from chemical and surgical mutilation,” New York Attorney General Letitia James on Monday warned hospitals that pausing so-called “gender-affirming care” for gender-confused minors violates state law.

Trump specified in his executive order that the term “child” or “children” referred to individuals under 19 years of age, and the phrase “chemical and surgical mutilation” meant “the use of puberty blockers, including GnRH agonists and other interventions, to delay the onset or progression of normally timed puberty in an individual who does not identify as his or her sex; the use of sex hormones, such as androgen blockers, estrogen, progesterone, or testosterone, to align an individual’s physical appearance with an identity that differs from his or her sex; and surgical procedures that attempt to transform an individual’s physical appearance to align with an identity that differs from his or her sex or that attempt to alter or remove an individual’s sexual organs to minimize or destroy their natural biological functions.”

The EO notes that the above procedures are often referred to as “gender affirming care.”“Countless children soon regret that they have been mutilated and begin to grasp the horrifying tragedy that they will never be able to conceive children of their own or nurture their children through breastfeeding,” the EO states. “Moreover, these vulnerable youths’ medical bills may rise throughout their lifetimes, as they are often trapped with lifelong medical complications, a losing war with their own bodies, and, tragically, sterilization.” The EO continues: “Accordingly, it is the policy of the United States that it will not fund, sponsor, promote, assist, or support the so-called “transition” of a child from one sex to another, and it will rigorously enforce all laws that prohibit or limit these destructive and life-altering procedures.”

James stated in a letter to health care providers and organizations that receive federal funds that denying such “care” to children in New York violates state laws that protect against discrimination based on sex and gender identity. “Regardless of the availability of federal funding, we write to further remind you of your obligations to comply with New York State laws,” the letter states. “Electing to refuse services to a class of individuals based on their protected status, such as withholding the availability of services from transgender individuals based on their gender identity or their diagnosis of gender dysphoria, while offering such services to cisgender individuals, is discrimination under New York law.”

Read more …

1%. Not the same as Twitter yet..

• 20,000 Government Workers Take Trump Buyout Offer As Mass Layoffs Loom (ZH)

Approximately 20,000 federal workers, or around 1% of the federal workforce, have accepted the Trump administration’s “buyout” offer before Thursday’s deadline, Axios reports, citing a senior administration official. The offer allows federal employees to stop working immediately and continue to be paid through Sept. 30. And with the door open for another 48 hours, the White House expects more to take the offer. “We expect more to come. If you see what’s happening at USAID, it’s just one piece of the puzzle,” said the official, referring to the federal agency which oversees foreign aid programs full of rogue employees that were funding all sorts of woke, anti-American projects around the world.

The buyout offer has faced heavy opposition from unions and other organizations, which argue that the offer is illegal, there’s no guarantee people will actually get paid (lol), and it’s something that Congress would need to authorize. The Trump admin rejects those assertions, and says it’s following through on its promise to restructure the federal government. Last week, the administration sent out a memo offering to pay all federal workers an 8-month severance through Sept. 30.The official further stated that the administration is still trying to implement a hiring freeze, which has proven more difficult than expected as some agencies continue to hire new workers. According to the report, the normal attrition rate within the federal workforce is around 6% per year, suggesting that some of those who have taken the buyout offer were planning to leave government service anyway.

According to the Washington Post, the assistant commissioner of a division of the General Services Administration told staff early this week that mass layoffs across the federal government are “likely” after the ‘buyout’ offer expires Thursday. “Please know that I empathize with the tough decisions you each are having to make,” wrote Erv Koehler, assistant commissioner of general supplies and services at GSA, in an email obtained by the Post. “Please focus on making the best decision for you and your particular situation.” According to Koehler’s email, GSA’s Federal Acquisition Service “is being asked” to cut its program by 50%, which reflects the agency’s goal to half the size of its staff.

Read more …

“President Trump has appointed DOGE and Elon Musk to act as his agents when it comes to reasserting executive control over government agencies. Agents acting within the scope of their assigned agency have the same authority as the principal.”

• Trump Attack On The Deep State Spectacular And Almost Certainly Legal (Widburg)

In the last few days, Donald Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency (“DOGE”) has effectively put an end to USAID, gelded the General Services Administration (GSA) tech division, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), and the Treasury, and fired corrupt people in the FBI—and that’s just the short list. With the war on USAID, GSA, OPM, and the Treasury alone, DOGE is saving taxpayers at a rate of one billion per day. All of this has driven the Democrats into a frenzy as they insist that an elected president managing the government is a coup. Unfortunately for them (but not for us), they don’t have a legal leg to stand on.

President Kennedy founded USAID via Executive Order 10973 in November 1961: “Administration of Foreign Assistance and Related Functions.” It was meant to be a permanent clearing house that would work with the State Department to distribute money intended to help advance technology and financial competence in low-income countries. It reflected the fact that, in 1961, the U.S. was still the last country standing after WWII. The vision was to benefit America by fortifying poor countries against Soviet depredation. USAID has strayed far from that mandate. [..]Elon Musk revealed that the Treasury Department was cutting checks to terrorist organizations and known fraudsters. And, of course, Trump fired all the FBI agents involved in the war against those of Trump’s supporters who showed up at the Capitol on January 6. The Acting FBI Director fought back, which leads to the point of this article: It’s almost certain that none of these people has a legal leg to stand on, whether it comes to the way Trump has stopped the money flow or the firings.

First, Trump’s refusal to fund corrupt agencies: Since 1801, under the aegis of Thomas Jefferson, presidents have had a power known as impoundment. This means the president gets to decide how to spend—or not spend—money that Congress has allocated. In other words, the generation that ratified the Constitution believed that this was an appropriate exercise of executive power. However, in 1974, in yet another piece of Watergate fallout, Congress enacted the “Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974,” which says that the president must submit to Congress his plans not to spend money. Given the history of impoundment (the ratifying generation approved of it), it’s highly unlikely that this act is constitutional. The fact that no president has yet challenged it doesn’t change this reality.

Additionally, because Trump has a majority in Congress, if he were to submit his impoundment plan, the greater likelihood is that it would give him a pass. (RINOs would have a hard time explaining to voters why they want America to pay for “trans” comic books in Peru.) Second, Trump’s ability to fire employees: [..] In 1789, the First Congress debated whether the Constitution gives the president the unilateral power to remove Executive Branch officers. Ultimately, Congress simply said that when the president fires someone (a tacit acknowledgment that he has that unilateral power), a lower-level employee must take custody of records until a new officer is appointed. That debate has led the Supreme Court to hold several times that Congress has no direct role in firing officials. [..]

There was a fight over this power when Andrew Johnson attempted to fire an Executive Branch officer whom Lincoln had appointed, violating the Tenure of Office Act, and leading to Johnson’s impeachment. However, the Senate did not convict Johnson, and by 1887, Congress repealed any requirement that the Senate approve firings. When the 19th century ended, the president’s unilateral power to fire officers was unquestioned. This makes sense because if the Founders had wanted to extend the “advice and consent” power to firings, they could have done so. This standard continued through the 1920s. Things changed in the 1930s when an activist Supreme Court created a new standard, which has affected (or infected) the government to this day: It held that if Congress designates an agency as “independent,” Congress, not the president, has the power over dismissal, with the president as its agent.

This was the go-ahead to create a fourth branch of government that is neither legislative, executive, nor judicial, although, as we’ve repeatedly seen, these “independent” agencies all claim those powers. The big issue of our day is whether these “independent” agencies are constitutional—I say they’re not because they are not one of the three branches of government established under the Constitution. Thankfully, the Supreme Court has, of late, been pulling back from the 1930s template. Here’s another legal concept: “The greater includes the lesser.” In this case, it means that if the president has the power to fire officials, he has the power to fire lesser employees working under those officials.

And one last legal concept: President Trump has appointed DOGE and Elon Musk to act as his agents when it comes to reasserting executive control over government agencies. Agents acting within the scope of their assigned agency have the same authority as the principal. I’m confident that President Trump is acting entirely within the authority the Founding Fathers and ratifiers of our Constitution intended him to have. However, we know that these issues will end up before the Court and, perhaps, before Congress. I’m hopeful that, as President Trump and DOGE expose an escalating amount of government fraud, abuse, and waste, despite the escalating Democrat pushback, Congress and the Courts will understand that they will not have the American people at their backs if they strike down his legitimate use of constitutional power.

Read more …

“..billions of dollars were shifted from helping Americans in need to facilitating illegal immigration. Super messed up!”

• Biden Spent Billions Promoting Illegal Immigration – Musk (RT)

Elon Musk has accused the administration of former US President Joe Biden of redirecting billions of dollars in taxpayer funds away from assisting Americans in need and instead using them to support undocumented migrants. The entrepreneur is a close ally of current US President Donald Trump and leads the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), an organization responsible for reducing wasteful government spending. Musk has been vocal about the economic impact of illegal immigration, often criticizing government spending on social services for people in the country illegally. He has claimed that federal policies have incentivized unlawful border crossings while placing a significant financial burden on US citizens.

“Under the Biden administration, billions of dollars were shifted from helping Americans in need to facilitating illegal immigration. Super messed up!” Musk stated in a post on X on Tuesday. He previously estimated that illegal immigration cost US taxpayers over $150 billion in 2023 alone, citing data from the Federation for American Immigration Reform. This figure includes expenditures on healthcare, education, and law enforcement. The Biden administration had defended its approach to immigration, asserting that it was balancing border enforcement with humanitarian obligations. The previous administration claimed having expanded legal pathways for migrants while deporting those who failed to meet asylum requirements.

However, critics such as Musk and many Republican leaders maintain that Biden’s policies have weakened border security, incentivized illegal crossings, and strained government resources. Musk has shown a growing interest in political and social issues, particularly immigration. In 2023, he personally visited Eagle Pass, Texas, to witness the conditions at the US-Mexico border and spoke with officials about the challenges posed by the migrant surge. Since then, he has advocated for stronger border controls and policy reforms to curb illegal immigration.

Read more …

Staying in power for 16 years is far too long. You kill off the next generation of leadership.

• Merkel To Blame For The Rise Of The AfD: Former Austrian Chancellor Kurz (RMX)

Former Austrian Chancellor Sebastian Kurz has openly blamed his former German counterpart Angela Merkel for the rise of right-wing populism in Germany, arguing that her 2015 open-border migration policy directly fueled the Alternative for Germany (AfD). Kurz stated that without Merkel’s migration stance, the AfD would never have gained the support it currently enjoys. Speaking to Bild, Kurz defended the asylum policies advocated by CDU leader Friedrich Merz, particularly his call to reject all illegal migrants at Germany’s borders. “I don’t just think that is correct, but it is absolutely necessary,” Kurz said. “If you look at how large parts of Europe — including Germany and Austria — have changed due to uncontrolled migration, it is obvious that this development is not good.”

Kurz, who was Austria’s foreign minister during the 2015 migrant crisis, emphasized that migration policies require not just words but concrete actions. He expressed hope that a policy shift in Germany would serve as a model for the rest of Europe. “In 2015, I saw firsthand how the Welkomkultur — or ‘welcome culture’ — triggered a negative domino effect, encouraging more migrants to come to Europe,” he explained. “When we shut down the Balkan route, other countries followed, and we saw a reversal of the migration wave. The same is possible today. If Germany takes the lead, other European nations will follow.”

Earlier this week, the CDU sought in the German parliament to implement a stricter immigration and asylum policy, legislation that could only pass with support from the Alternative for Germany (AfD). The move led to violent protests from left-wing activists at the CDU party headquarters in Berlin, but Kurz dismissed controversy surrounding the AfD’s support, arguing that leaders should focus on implementing the right policy irrespective of political alliances. “A politician should do what is right and not constantly worry about who supports or opposes it,” Kurz stated. “That is what leadership means.”

The Austrian politician criticized conservative politicians who shy away from necessary policies out of fear of aligning with right-wing populists on certain issues. “In Germany, there is a fear that a policy could be supported by the AfD,” he said. “But you cannot intentionally do something wrong just to avoid being on the same voting side as the AfD.” He pushed back against criticism that his own coalition with the right-wing FPÖ from 2017-2019 helped legitimize populist movements, emphasizing that he had won two elections against the FPÖ as leader of the Christian-democratic Austrian People’s Party (ÖVP), proving that the center-right can defeat right-wing populists by pursuing strong policies. “The right-wing parties are always strongest when conservative parties fail to implement their policies consistently,” Kurz warned.

After the left-wing parties took control of Austria, the FPÖ rallied to win last September’s elections as the largest party, and its leader Herbert Kickl is now in talks with the ÖVP to form a coalition. He is expected to become the FPÖ’s first-ever chancellor.Kurz argued that Merkel’s migration policies since 2015 were the main factor behind the AfD’s rise, saying: “Without the wrong migration policy since 2015, there would not be such a strong AfD in Germany. The failed migration policy is the guarantee that the AfD will continue to grow.” Kurz concluded with a stark warning to Germany’s political leadership, urging them to address citizens’ legitimate concerns about migration before they drive more voters to right-wing populist parties. “If you really want right-wing parties to grow without limits, then you should continue ignoring the legitimate concerns of a large part of the population,” Kurz said. “Otherwise, you will only push more people into the arms of these parties.”

Read more …

“..more liquefied natural gas (LNG) as well as F-35 fighter jets..”

• UK Hoping To Buy Its Way Out Of Trump Tariffs (RT)

The UK government is considering purchasing more liquefied natural gas (LNG) as well as F-35 fighter jets from the US in the hope of averting punitive tariffs on British goods, Politico has reported. Tariffs were a prominent tool in US President Donald Trump’s repertoire during his first term in office, with the Republican using the same tactics after returning to the White House last month. In an article on Tuesday, Politico quoted an anonymous former UK Energy Department figure as predicting that London and Washington could seal a deal that grants the US an even bigger share of the British market. According to the media outlet, American LNG currently accounts for 26% of the UK’s energy imports.

Former UK Energy Secretary and Chancellor of the Exchequer Kwasi Kwarteng told Politico that with dwindling North Sea offshore gas production, London would inevitably have to turn to foreign suppliers. “The US is the natural place to go,” the official said, adding that the “only other options are Qatar or Russia – and we’re not going to get it from there.” Citing an unnamed “defense industry figure,” the report claimed that the UK could also place more orders for US-made F-35 warplanes. The media outlet noted that the prospect of further purchases had been uncertain given London’s participation in the multinational Global Combat Air Program (GCAP) aimed at building a new fighter-jet. However, with Trump back in office, “everything [is] on the table,” another anonymous senior UK government figure told Politico.

Speaking to the BBC earlier this week, Trump claimed that while the “UK is out of line,” trade issues “can be worked out.” Last Saturday, Trump slapped 25% tariffs on imports from Mexico and Canada, and 10% tariffs on goods from China, suggesting that the European Union could soon face similar measures. On Tuesday, however, Trump placed the decisions on hold for a month after Canada and Mexico agreed to beef up security along their respective borders with the US. Trump argued that the agreements with both neighbors would help “stop the flow of fentanyl and illegal migrants into our country.”

Read more …

It’s not over. The IMF, in exchange for a $1.4 billion loan, insisted bitcoin acceptance should not be mandatory everywhere. We have questions.

• El Salvador Abandons Bitcoin Legal Tender Experiment (RT)

El Salvador’s Congress has approved a reform revoking Bitcoin’s status as legal tender, in a reversal of the country’s landmark 2021 decision, according to media reports. The amendments to its Bitcoin law come after a loan deal with the International Monetary Fund, which requires that the acceptance of the cryptocurrency be made voluntary in the country. In 2021, El Salvador became the first country to adopt cryptocurrency as legal tender, officially recognizing Bitcoin alongside the US dollar, which had been the nation’s primary currency for two decades. The legislative changes passed on January 30 removed Bitcoin’s mandatory acceptance in El Salvador, making its use entirely voluntary. The reform was approved with 55 votes in favor and two against.

The amendments reportedly come after nearly two years of pressure from the IMF, which urged the country to mitigate Bitcoin-related financial risks in exchange for a $1.4 billion loan, which was agreed to in December, to stabilize the country’s struggling economy. The IMF specifically pushed for Bitcoin acceptance to be voluntary in the private sector, according to Reuters. The move marks a significant policy reversal for El Salvador, as President Nayib Bukele championed Bitcoin’s legal tender status as a way to boost financial inclusion, particularly for the unbanked population.

However, recent surveys show that 92% of Salvadorans have refrained from using Bitcoin since its official adoption, highlighting public skepticism toward the digital currency, despite government efforts. Although Bitcoin has lost its legal tender status, the government has recently indicated that it will continue buying the cryptocurrency to add to its reserves. Last year, Bukele slammed the US dollar, claiming it is backed by nothing, and that the US economy is based on the “farce” of printing unlimited amounts of money. He went on to predict that Western civilization will collapse when this bubble “inevitably bursts.”

Read more …

“Talk is cheap. What matters is success. On that metric, the Trump administration is set to actually achieve what Paris Agreement signatories only write on paper.”

• Trump’s Withdrawal From the Paris Agreement Won’t Hurt the Climate (RCW)

President Donald Trump withdrew from the Paris Agreement. Cue the leftwing meltdown. Though everyone knew the withdrawal was coming, the left and the “international community” are still decrying America’s alleged abdication of leadership on climate. But toothless agreements window dressed with international summits and photo ops are not the same as leadership. The truth is America has led the world in reducing emissions for years not because of the Paris Agreement, but because innovation and the free market facilitate the deployment of cheaper and cleaner energy. Let’s review the record. In recent decades, America has achieved unprecedented — and unexpected — energy production thanks to fracking and horizontal drilling. Since the early 2000s when these twin technologies began to be deployed much more expansively, U.S. natural gas production has more than doubled.

By 2016, hydraulically fractured gas wells accessed through horizontal drilling accounted for nearly 70% of all oil and natural gas wells. While the left may clutch its pearls at the increased production of a fossil fuel like natural gas, this clean energy source has been a main driver of U.S. emissions reductions. Over the past 15 years when America has massively increased natural gas output, the U.S. reduced carbon emissions more than any other country. We can see this year by year. For example, from 2022 to 2023, America offset dirtier coal energy generation with natural gas. As coal declined by 121.9 terawatt hours of electric generation over that time, natural gas increased by 118.9 terawatt hours. At the same time, U.S. greenhouse gas emissions declined 1.9%. Notably, 80% of the U.S. carbon emissions reductions were driven by the electric power sector — precisely where natural gas has an outsized impact.

Notice what didn’t cause those emissions reductions? The Paris Agreement. The American energy sector — powered by innovation and good-old-fashioned free market economics — has been driving down carbon emissions cheaply and effectively before the Paris Agreement was a twinkle in climate activists’ eyes. And it will continue to reduce carbon emissions long after President Trump’s decision to withdraw. The Paris Agreement is far from the panacea some activists claim it is. It isn’t even a particularly effective tool to rally nations toward greater climate success. In the middle of the allegedly climate-conscious Biden administration, none of the world’s biggest emitters — America included — had reduced their emissions in accordance with the Paris goals. Apparently, the $1 trillion regulatory and subsidy regime erected by President Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act had little bang for the buck.

What Agreement supporters forget is that no number of high-profile international accords can make command-control tactics work — or instill other nations with the ambition to fulfill their empty promises. The Paris Agreement is the definition of bureaucratic failure, conflating meetings, busyness, and lofty goals as success. Its only achievement is to make climate ideologues and green jetsetters feel good about themselves as they fly to international conferences. It’s no wonder President Trump withdrew. Talk is cheap. What matters is success. On that metric, the Trump administration is set to actually achieve what Paris Agreement signatories only write on paper.

Trump entered office promising to deregulate the fossil fuel industry, increase permitting for natural gas extraction, approve the construction of energy facilities like natural gas export terminals, and re-establish American energy dominance. By leaning into America’s carbon advantage and exporting clean American energy abroad, he will boost the U.S. economy, supplant dirty energy from nations like Russia and Venezuela with a clean American alternative, and lower emissions both at home and abroad, all without the jaw-dropping price tag of the failed Biden-era green agenda. We should combine these steps with efforts to actually hold the biggest polluters accountable (which are being discussed by President Trump’s cabinet). This approach would be the antithesis of the Paris Accords’ America-last strategy.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Netflix
https://twitter.com/i/status/1886570424105927139

 

 

Salesman

 

 

Babysit

 

 

Bond
https://twitter.com/i/status/1886672286507270440

 

 

88 pounds

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle January 15 2025

Jan 152025
 
 January 15, 2025  Posted by at 10:19 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , ,  80 Responses »


Marcel Duchamp The chess game 1910

 

• America Is Winning – Biden (RT)
• Biden Trying To Spoil Everything Before Trump Arrives – Lavrov (RT)
• Ukraine Not Yet In Strong Enough Position For Negotiations: NATO Chief (ZH)
• Trump ‘Not Invested’ In Ukraine – Bloomberg (RT)
• UK Monitoring of Musk Online Reveals “Pathetic” Priorities (Curzon)
• California Governor Newsom Calls Musk A Liar (RT)
• TikTok Dismisses Bloomberg’s Report Of Potential Sale To Musk (ZH)
• Musk Hits Back At US Market Watchdog After Lawsuit (RT)
• LA Fires Worse Than Nuclear Strike – Trump (RT)
• The Real Heroes And Villains Of The California Wildfires (Tara Reade)
• DOJ Releases Jack Smith’s Report on Trump (ET)
• FBI Director Wray On Why He’s Resigning, Defends Search of Mar-a-Lago (ET)
• Special Prosecutor Cements Biden Family Corruption For History (JTN)
• I’m Gonna MAGA You, Baby (Pepe Escobar)
• Judge Threatens To Break UK Wall Of Secrecy In Assange Persecution (Cook)
• New Book Published Today – LONG LIVE NOVICHOK! (Helmer)

 

 

 

 

Trump Ad
https://twitter.com/i/status/1878992707286421868

Carr
https://twitter.com/i/status/1879154235830600004

Doocy

Hegseth
https://twitter.com/i/status/1879201147887706441

 

 

 

 

 

 

5 days before Inauguration Day, the news feels like a bunch of bits and snippets and loose ends. Guess there’s no other way. We’re getting ready.

 

 

Here’s why Biden lost the elections in a landslide. It’s because he’s winning. Or rather, he’s lost but America’s winning. Does that also mean that if he were winning, America would lose?

• America Is Winning – Biden (RT)

Outgoing US President Joe Biden has claimed that his four years of leadership have made America stronger and its enemies weaker. In remarks about the foreign policy achievements of his administration at the Department of State on Monday, Biden hailed his time in office as a boon to America’s global standing. “The United States is winning the worldwide competition compared to four years ago. America is stronger. Our alliances are stronger. Our adversaries and competitors are weaker. We have not gone to war to make these things happen,” he said. He described his handling of the Ukraine conflict as a success. Biden urged people to “think about” the fact that he “stood in the center of Kiev” since the tensions with Russia escalated into open hostilities. “I’m the only commander-in-chief to visit a war zone not controlled by US forces,” he said of his visit to Ukraine in February 2023.

“I had two jobs. One, to rally the world to defend Ukraine, and the other is to avoid war between two nuclear powers. We did both those things,” the US leader said. The remarks confirm that Washington was intentionally engaging in nuclear brinkmanship in Ukraine, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has said, commenting on Biden’s speech. His administration “knew it was pushing the world towards the abyss and escalated the conflict nevertheless,” she said. Biden has claimed credit for undermining other rivals of the US, particularly Iran and Syria in the Middle East, while giving Israel credit for doing “plenty of damage to Iran and its proxies.” He also said the US was now in a stronger position to compete with China militarily and economically.

“On China’s current course, they will never surpass us. Period,” he declared. America has been forging new alliances all around the world, Biden said. Nations like Russia, China, Iran and North Korea have been growing closer together too, he acknowledged, but “that’s more out of weakness than out of strength,” according to Biden. The president also claimed credit for “not leaving a war in Afghanistan to his successor,” referring to the chaotic withdrawal of the US-led coalition from the nation in the early years of his term.

Read more …

“..Obama “banished 120 [Russian] diplomats from the US and arrested five sites of [Russian] diplomatic property” just three weeks before his successor’s inauguration.”

• Biden Trying To Spoil Everything Before Trump Arrives – Lavrov (RT)

The outgoing administration of US President Joe Biden is working hard to create problems for President-elect Donald Trump before he arrives at the White House, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said. Lavrov made the statement during a press conference on Tuesday when asked about the sweeping new sanctions against the Russian energy industry, which Washington announced last week. The curbs target two major petroleum producers – Gazprom Neft and Surgutneftegaz – as well as their subsidiaries, including Naftna industrija Srbije (NIS), which handles deliveries of Russian oil to Serbia and neighboring European nations. Related insurance providers, as well as more than 30 oilfield service companies and over 180 vessels used to deliver Russian oil, have also been slapped with restrictions.

According to the foreign minister, the move made by the Biden administration simultaneously targets Serbia, Russia and Trump, who expressed a readiness to resume dialogue with Moscow in order to try to find a diplomatic solution to the Ukraine conflict. “The Democrats have such a manner in American politics to spoil the whole thing for the next administration before the end of their mandate,” he said. Lavrov reminded that the same thing had happened before Trump’s first term when outgoing Democratic President Barack Obama “banished 120 [Russian] diplomats from the US and arrested five sites of [Russian] diplomatic property” just three weeks before his successor’s inauguration.

“This whole case did not help Russian-American relations” back in 2017, he stressed. Regarding the Biden administration, the minister suggested that after not winning reelection “from the moral point of view, you should just wait before the inauguration [of Trump on January 20]; you should understand that your people want a different kind of policy.” “No, they are unwilling to do so. They want to spoil the whole thing,” he stressed.

Read more …

How about in ten years?

• Ukraine Not Yet In Strong Enough Position For Negotiations: NATO Chief (ZH)

The head of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization has just made an admission which surely won’t help Ukraine at the negotiating table in any potential future talks. The fresh words might also be by designed aimed at sabotaging expected Trump efforts to quickly end the war. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte on Monday described that Ukraine is not yet in a strong position to begin peace talks, now with less than a week before President-elect Donald Trump enters the White House. “At this moment, clearly, Ukraine is not there,” Rutte told the European parliament’s foreign affairs and defense committees. “Because they cannot, at this moment, negotiate from a position of strength. And we have to do more to make sure, by changing the trajectory of the conflict, that they can get to the position of strength.”

He went on to say that the hope is to obtain security guarantees so that Ukraine can never be attacked by Russia again. He said that this involves mapping out Ukraine’s future relations with NATO. “But it’s too early now to exactly sketch out what that exactly will mean, also something we have to discuss with the incoming U.S. administration,” he stated. “But let’s hope that we will get to that point as soon as possible.” White House National Security Council spokesman John Kirby said last Friday that the latest energy sanctions placed on Russia were not intended to be a “bargaining chip” that can be taken off the table when Ukraine is ready to negotiate. “There’s no expectation right now that either side is ready to negotiate,” he stated, also emphasizing that timing is up to the Ukrainian government.

Another Biden official has been quoted as saying, “It’s entirely up to [the next administration] to determine whether, when, and on what terms they might lift any sanctions we put in place.” The Kremlin has described this as a “sanctions trap” left by the Biden administration to make things harder for Trump to negotiate and maneuver: “Of course, we are aware that the administration will try to leave the most difficult legacy possible in bilateral relations to Trump and his associates,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said ahead of the sanctions announcement. Biden officials have framed the sanctions as a long-term strategy. “We believe our actions are leaving a solid foundation upon which the next administration can build,” one official said, predicting the measures would cost Russia billions in monthly revenue and force “hard decisions” between sustaining its economy.

The Washington Post had also observed of the comments, “Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov, speaking before the widely anticipated sanctions were announced, said Friday that the Biden administration was trying to make things difficult for the incoming Trump team.” Continued defense and economic aid to the Ukraine has also been something that Europe and the Biden administration have long been trying to ‘Trump-proof’. So far, the president-elect has said he doesn’t immediately plan to cut or end aid, but this could be him telegraphing negotiations or an attempt to maintain leverage in this regard over the Russian side. As for the battlefield, there’s near universal consensus at this point that Russian forces are winning. Steady gains have persisted in the Donetsk region, while Ukraine tries to make life difficult for Russian leadership in Kursk region.

Read more …

“I just don’t think it’s realistic to say we’re going to expel every Russian from every inch of Ukrainian soil.”

• Trump ‘Not Invested’ In Ukraine – Bloomberg (RT)

US President-elect Donald Trump does not consider the Ukraine conflict a key priority for America’s national interests, according to Bloomberg, which cited several anonymous EU officials. The media outlet alleged on Tuesday that the Republican had given his European counterparts the “impression that he wasn’t strongly invested in Ukraine’s destiny or didn’t recognize a strategic significance of the war to US interests.” Nevertheless, the latest signals coming out of Trump’s team gave European governments grounds for cautious optimism, suggesting that the US president-elect would not push Ukraine into “premature negotiations with Russia,” the publication wrote, citing a “series of private talks” with his entourage. According to Bloomberg, Trump may continue supporting Ukraine to ensure it occupies a “position of strength before any talks take place.”

The incoming president is supposedly anxious to avoid a humiliating debacle in Ukraine like the chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan overseen by President Joe Biden in 2021. The article alleged that Trump is also wary that an outright Russian victory in Ukraine could embolden China to make more aggressive moves. Bloomberg also quoted Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, who said after her recent meeting with Trump at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida that she did not expect Washington to disengage from Kiev. Sources told the media outlet, however, that Trump’s unpredictability means that no one can reliably say what course of action he might take after assuming office on January 20. During an interview with Newsmax on Monday, Trump insisted that Russian President Vladimir Putin “wants to meet, and I’m going to meet very quickly.”

The Kremlin has responded positively to Trump’s declared intention to engage with Russia. However, it said the Ukraine conflict needed to be resolved in a way that addresses its core causes, including NATO’s eastward expansion. Speaking to ABC News on Sunday, incoming US National Security Advisor Michael Waltz stated: “I just don’t think it’s realistic to say we’re going to expel every Russian from every inch of Ukrainian soil.” “President Trump has acknowledged that reality, and I think it has been a huge step forward that the entire world is acknowledging that reality,” he added, suggesting that this realization could pave the way to ending the bloodshed. Shortly before the US election on November 5, Vice President-elect J.D. Vance similarly suggested that Kiev might have to cede some territory to Moscow in the end.

Read more …

“..the idea the taxpayer needs to fund a government unit to ‘monitor’ Elon Musk’s tweets is ridiculous” since “it costs nothing to open an account on X and once you’ve done that Elon’s tweets are completely unavoidable.”

• UK Monitoring of Musk Online Reveals “Pathetic” Priorities (Curzon)

The British establishment will not hold a national inquiry into gangs of mostly Pakistani men who raped girls across the UK, but it will expend its resources on monitoring tweets shared by Elon Musk. A government counter-extremism unit has been assessing the risk posed by Musk’s often outlandish claims, The Mirror has revealed. Last week, the Twitter/X boss labelled Labour’s Jess Phillips, the safeguarding minister, a “rape genocide apologist” after it emerged that she rejected a request for the government to commission a public inquiry into child sexual exploitation in Oldham, Greater Manchester, in October. The monitoring unit is part of the Homeland Security Group, which claims to focus on “the highest harm risks to the homeland, whether from terrorists, state actors, or cyber and economic criminals.”

However, it will now devote some of its time to Musk’s free-to-access ramblings, even while experts share concerns of the potential return of Islamic State terrorism. Reform MP Rupert Lowe said this “spying” is “pathetic,” given that there is to be “no inquiry into thousands of foreign rapists.” (Musk later shared Lowe’s post.) And even before news of the monitoring came to light, Allison Pearson—the journalist who was visited by the police in November over a year-old tweet—pointed to one hideous incident in the rape gang scandal to suggest that the PM “genuinely seems more outraged” about Musk’s posts “than he is about the 12-year-old who was driven at night to a Yorkshire wood where she was forced to give oral sex to at least 10 men … before being left alone in the dark.”

Priority concerns aside, Free Speech Union director Toby Young told europeanconservative.com that “the idea the taxpayer needs to fund a government unit to ‘monitor’ Elon Musk’s tweets is ridiculous” since “it costs nothing to open an account on X and once you’ve done that Elon’s tweets are completely unavoidable.” What, asked Young, is the government’s ‘report’ going to consist of? “A compendium of those tweets? You can see all of them by clicking on Elon’s avatar and it’s completely free.” What piece of world class detective work is this spy unit going to produce next? The revelation that the person responsible for these ‘dangerous’ tweets is a close friend of the President of the United States?

Meanwhile, fresh calls for an inquiry into the grooming gangs scandal continue to proliferate, including from survivors and, with potentially more influence, leading Labour figures. There is also talk of Starmer “appearing to soften his opposition to a new probe,” just days after he used a three-line whip to order Labour MPs to block one in Parliament—but skipped the vote himself. The Mirror’s report has since come under fire after a government spokesman “denied” that Musk was being monitored, although—as veteran press officer Gawain Towler pointed out —it is more likely that he was being snooped but no longer is “because of the Mirror scoop.”

Read more …

Newsom seems to claim there’s plenty water.

• California Governor Newsom Calls Musk A Liar (RT)

California Governor Gavin Newsom has lashed out at Tesla and SpaceX founder Elon Musk over his “lies” after the billionaire businessman blasted the state’s response to raging wildfires in Los Angeles. In a series of posts on X, Musk – a longtime critic of the Democrat politician – blamed the scale of damage in LA on “bad governance at a state and local level that resulted in a shortage of water” and retweeted a post calling on the governor to resign. Musk’s claim comes as LA mayor Karen Bass admitted that around 20% of the city’s fire hydrants ran dry last week, with Newsom calling for an independent investigation into the issue on Friday. Responding to Musk on Monday, however, Newsom posted a video clip showing the business mogul asking a firefighter if water availability was an issue.

The firefighter explained that there was water in “several reservoirs,” but the problem is that they are “flowing an amount of water that the system couldn’t bear,” which is why water trucks are being brought in to compensate as “mobile hydrants.” “(Musk) exposed by firefighters for his own lies,” Newsom wrote. According to former chief engineer at the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power Marty Adams, the scale of the wildfires has created a situation that is “just completely not part of any domestic water system design.” There needs to be “some new thinking about how systems are designed,” he told the New York Times. Wildfire and water expert Faith Kearns told National Geographic that the current situation “was like a worst-case scenario.” “But I think we should be planning for those worst-case scenarios…I do think this is where we’re headed,” she said.

Musk and Newsom have also sparred on X over the issue of looting amid reports that criminals were raiding areas where people had been forced to evacuate their homes. Newsom accused Musk of “encouraging looting by lying” after the tech CEO claimed that California Democrats had “decriminalized looting.” “It’s illegal – as it always has been,” Newsom wrote, adding that “bad actors will be arrested and prosecuted.” US President-elect Donald Trump has also taken aim at Newsom, with Trump accusing the governor of refusing to sign a “water restoration declaration” which Newsom said does not exist. Musk, a close Trump ally, has been appointed to co-lead the president-elect’s new Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) advisory board. The devastating LA wildfires have killed at least 24 people so far and displaced thousands more. Fierce winds are expected to pick up this week, making the blazes more difficult to control.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1879176991657595177

Read more …

“We can’t be expected to comment on pure fiction..”

• TikTok Dismisses Bloomberg’s Report Of Potential Sale To Musk (ZH)

Bloomberg is relying upon unnamed sources “familiar with the matter” as anchor sources in an overnight report about Elon Musk potentially acquiring the US operations of Chinese video-sharing platform TikTok. The company faces a Sunday deadline to find a US buyer or risk a ban. The report said: “Senior Chinese officials had already begun to debate contingency plans for TikTok as part of an expansive discussion on how to work with Donald Trump’s administration, one of which involves Musk, said the people, asking not to be identified revealing confidential discussions. Under one scenario that’s been discussed by the Chinese government, Musk’s X would take control of TikTok US and run the businesses together, the people said. With more than 170 million users in the US, TikTok could bolster X’s efforts to attract advertisers. Musk also founded a separate artificial intelligence company, xAI, that could benefit from the huge amounts of data generated from TikTok.”

Following Bloomberg’s report citing anonymous sources, a TikTok spokesperson told BBC News the whole story about China considering to sell the video-sharing platform to Musk as “pure fiction.” “We can’t be expected to comment on pure fiction,” the spokesperson told the British media outlet. BBC noted, “TikTok has repeatedly said that it will not sell its US operation.” On X, Musk responded with laughing emojis to Autism Capital’s video of angry white liberals melting down in a forest, referring to them as the potential response of TikTok’s audience if Musk bought the Chinese video-sharing platform.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1878970370335928670

In April of 2024, Musk wrote on X, “In my opinion, TikTok should not be banned in the USA, even though such a ban may benefit the 5yO› platform,” adding, “Doing so would be contrary to freedom of speech and expression. It is not what America stands for.” Bloomberg Intelligence analysts Mandeep Singh and Damian Reimertz recently estimated that TikTok’s US operations could be valued between $40 and $50 billion. Recall that Musk paid $44 billion for Twitter in 2022. President-elect Trump, who takes office next Monday, one day after TikTok’s deadline to sell or risk a ban, has sought to delay the ban on the video-sharing platform to allow time for negotiations. Trump has previously stated that he wants to “save” the app. Also, the Supreme Court is set to rule on the constitutionality of a law that would ban the platform from the US if the TikTok’s owner ByteDance does not find a buyer by Sunday.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1878985530588750049

Read more …

“The action by the agency “is an admission… that they cannot bring an actual case”..

• Musk Hits Back At US Market Watchdog After Lawsuit (RT)

SpaceX and Tesla CEO Elon Musk has labeled the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) “a totally broken organization” after it filed a lawsuit against him, linked to his purchase of Twitter (later re-branded as X). The SEC, which is tasked with enforcing laws against market manipulation, sued Musk in a federal court in Washington on Tuesday, claiming that he had failed to disclose his ownership of more than 5% of Twitter stock in a timely fashion in early 2022, several months before buying the social media platform. The agency alleged that this allowed the tech billionaire to “underpay by at least $150 million for shares he purchased after his beneficial ownership report was due.”

On Wednesday, the tycoon responded to a post on X by an account under the name Satoshi Nakamoto – a reference to the unidentified creator of Bitcoin – who expressed surprise that “the SEC is suing Elon Musk for buying Twitter at ‘artificially low prices’ even though he bought it for $44 billion and industry analysts said it was worth more like $30 billion.” The Securities and Exchange Commission is “a totally broken organization,” Musk, who has been tapped by US President-elect Donald Trump to head DOGE, a special advisory body tasked with identifying government inefficiency, wrote. “They spend their time on sh*t like this when there are so many actual crimes that go unpunished,” he said.

Musk’s lawyer, Alex Spiro, insisted that his client has “done nothing wrong” and called the SEC’s lawsuit a “sham.” The action by the agency “is an admission… that they cannot bring an actual case” against the billionaire, he said in a statement. The SEC’s “multi-year campaign of harassment” targeting Musk resulted “in the filing of a single-count ticky tack complaint… for an alleged administrative failure to file a single form – an offense that, even if proven, carries a nominal penalty,” Spiro stressed. The head of the Securities and Exchange Commission, Gary Gensler, has said that he will step down from his post on January 20 when Trump is inaugurated. Last month, the president-elect nominated Paul Atkins, a cryptocurrency advocate and CEO of the Patomak Partners consultancy firm, to become the new chair of the SEC.

Read more …

Sounds crazy. Until, like him, you see the aerial footage.

• LA Fires Worse Than Nuclear Strike – Trump (RT)

US President-elect Donald Trump has compared the devastation of the Los Angeles wildfires to a nuclear attack, warning that the death toll may rise in the coming days. He criticized California’s leadership, particularly Governor Gavin Newsom, suggesting that mismanagement has exacerbated the crisis. The wildfires that began last week in southern California have claimed at least 24 lives, burned more than 40,000 acres, and destroyed over 12,000 structures, leveling entire neighborhoods. Los Angeles Sheriff Robert Luna has reported 16 deaths from the Eaton fire and eight from the Palisades fire, with 16 individuals still missing. Authorities expect the death toll to rise as search teams with cadaver-sniffing dogs continue to comb through the rubble.


Aerial view of homes destroyed in wildfires in Pacific Palisades, California © Getty Images / Mario Tama

In an interview with Newsmax, Trump predicted that rescuers would find “many more dead” and expressed bewilderment at the scale of destruction. “I believe it’s greater damage than if they got hit by a nuclear weapon. I’ve never seen anything like it. Vast miles and miles of houses just burned to a crisp. There’s nothing standing,” Trump told the outlet. He added that he had seen “very guarded pictures” of the destruction, claiming that the catastrophe is “far worse than you even see on television, if that’s believable.” The president-elect went on to blame the Californian leadership for the scale of the tragedy, insisting that the crisis could have been prevented if water from Canada was allowed to flow to the state and its forests were properly maintained. Trump specifically accused California Governor Newsom of prioritizing environmental policies over human lives and called for his resignation.

Trump is considering paying a personal visit to southern California to survey the damage caused by the fires, the Wall Street Journal reported, citing people familiar with his plans. In his interview with Newsmax, the president-elect also expressed interest in taking part in the rebuilding of the area, stating that “we’re gonna do things with Los Angeles. You know, I’m already putting my developer cap on.” Newsom has declared a state of emergency in the affected areas and has called on federal agencies for additional support in dealing with the fires. Outgoing President Joe Biden has also approved a Major Disaster Declaration, which enables federal resources to be directed toward response and recovery operations. According to the latest estimates by the AccuWeather forecasting service, the wildfires have caused losses of between $250 billion and $275 billion, accounting for property destruction, firefighting expenses, and economic disruption.

Read more …

” While Southern California’s fires have exposed the resilience of its residents and the bravery of its first responders, they have also laid bare the failures of leadership.”

• The Real Heroes And Villains Of The California Wildfires (Tara Reade)

The catastrophic wildfires raging across Southern California have brought widespread devastation, but also incredible stories of heroism. As human and animal rescues showcase the bravery of citizens and the resilience of communities, questions arise about the roles of California Governor Gavin Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass in wildfire prevention and response. The Palisades and Eaton fires have ravaged over 27,000 acres combined, destroying more than 10,000 structures, displacing over 180,000 people, and claiming at least 42 lives, according to updated reports. These numbers highlight the immense human and environmental toll. However, amidst the chaos, tales of heroism have emerged.

In Pacific Palisades, 83-year-old Parkinson’s patient Aaron Samson narrowly escaped the flames thanks to the quick thinking and bravery of his son-in-law and neighbors. In Altadena, volunteers and emergency responders evacuated 90 elderly residents from a senior care facility, saving lives as the flames closed in. Animals have also been gravely impacted. In Altadena, residents risked their own safety to rescue horses, with dramatic footage showing people running through embers with the animals. Veterinarian Annie Harvilicz transformed her clinic into a sanctuary for over 40 displaced pets, demonstrating selflessness and dedication.

While these acts of bravery unfolded, critics point to systemic failures at the leadership level. Governor Gavin Newsom and Mayor Karen Bass have faced mounting criticism for decisions that may have exacerbated the wildfire crisis. In 2020, Governor Newsom reduced the state’s wildfire prevention budget by $150 million, and reports revealed that actual fire prevention efforts were significantly below publicly stated targets. Mayor Bass has also come under scrutiny for a $17.6 million budget cut to the Los Angeles Fire Department (LAFD), impacting the department’s emergency response capabilities. During the fires, Mayor Bass was on a diplomatic trip to Ghana as part of a Biden delegation, sparking public outrage over her absence despite days of warnings about unprecedented winds increasing fire risk.

Accountability and allegations. Critics argue that a combination of budget cuts, resource mismanagement, and misleading public statements about wildfire preparedness could amount to gross negligence. Advocacy groups have called for investigations into whether these leaders violated their duty to protect the public. Some legal experts suggest that proven negligence could lead to lawsuits or even criminal charges. Additionally, speculation about potential “land grabs” following the destruction of valuable property has fueled public mistrust. Some residents have accused officials of using the crisis to advance agendas favoring developers and special interests.

Insurance crisis. The crisis has been compounded by insurance companies dropping fire coverage for residents in high-risk areas. Months before the fires, many Los Angeles homeowners received notices that their fire insurance policies were being canceled or not renewed. Insurers cited the increasing frequency and severity of wildfires as reasons for deeming many areas uninsurable. In the mid-1990s I worked for a California Stare Senator, another Willie Brown protegee like Newsom. Fraudulent practices with fire and earthquake insurance were a problem back then, and they are worse now, having been left unchecked. The insurance groups have lobbied both political parties very hard to not hold them accountable for fraudulent practices. And they succeeded.

Without fire coverage, families face the prospect of financial ruin, unable to rebuild their homes and communities. This has left thousands of Californians vulnerable to not only the immediate dangers of the flames but also long-term economic hardship. The Palisades and Eaton fires will eventually be contained, but the damage to communities may be irreversible due to restrictive rebuilding permits and the lack of insurance options. Residents and advocacy groups are demanding accountability from state and local officials, though skepticism remains about whether meaningful investigations will occur.

I was in my late teens and early twenties when I lived around many of the iconic places which are now on fire or gone. Generations of families lived in some of these communities and it is heartbreaking to see the direct result of mismanaged fire policies, with millions in funding, having been squandered by corrupt officials. Los Angeles, once a beautiful dream for many, has now become a hellscape of ruin. Governor Gavin Newsom’s rumored ambitions for higher office, including a potential presidential bid, have drawn attention to his track record. Critics warn that his leadership during California’s wildfire crises reveals systemic corruption and mismanagement, which could have broader implications if he ascends to national leadership. While Southern California’s fires have exposed the resilience of its residents and the bravery of its first responders, they have also laid bare the failures of leadership that allowed this devastation to occur.

Read more …

When impotence doubles down.

• DOJ Releases Jack Smith’s Report on Trump (ET)

U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) officials have released part of former special counsel Jack Smith’s report about President-elect Donald Trump. Part one of Smith’s report was made public early on Jan. 14 (1am), after U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon allowed its release. In the report, Smith – who recently resigned – said that he believes the evidence against Trump was strong enough to yield a conviction, even though the DOJ dropped its prosecutions of the president-elect. “As alleged in the original and superseding indictments, substantial evidence demonstrates that Mr. Trump then engaged in an unprecedented criminal effort to overturn the legitimate results of the election in order to retain power,” Smith wrote. An indictment against Trump charged him with multiple federal crimes, including conspiring to obstruct the certification of the 2020 presidential election.

After the charges were brought, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that presidents are immune from prosecution for official conduct. Smith’s team subsequently reanalyzed the evidence it had gathered. “Given the Supreme Court’s ruling, the Office reevaluated the evidence and assessed whether Mr. Trump’s non-immune conduct—either his private conduct as a candidate or official conduct for which the Office could rebut the presumption of immunity—violated federal law,” Smith wrote in the newly released report. “The Office concluded that it did. After doing so, the Office sought, and a new grand jury issued, a superseding indictment with identical charges but based only on conduct that was not immune because it was either unofficial or any presumptive immunity could be rebutted.” Part two of the report is being kept back, at least for now, as Trump’s co-defendants in the case fight its release on grounds such as Smith being found to be unconstitutionally appointed.

Smith said in the report that Trump sought to defraud the United States and obstruct the certification of electoral votes in part by conspiring with others to send alternate slates of electors to Washington. After Trump won the 2024 election, consistent with the DOJ’s interpretation that the U.S. Constitution prohibits prosecution of a sitting president, the DOJ dropped the charges against Trump. “The Department’s view that the Constitution prohibits the continued indictment and prosecution of a President is categorical and does not turn on the gravity of the crimes charged, the strength of the Government’s proof, or the merits of the prosecution, which the Office stands fully behind,” Smith said in the report. “Indeed, but for Mr. Trump’s election and imminent return to the Presidency, the Office assessed that the admissible evidence was sufficient to obtain and sustain a conviction at trial.”

Trump’s lawyers said in a recent letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland that the DOJ’s actions represented a “complete exoneration” of their client. Trump wrote on his Truth Social website early Tuesday that Smith “was unable to successfully prosecute the Political Opponent of his ‘boss’ … so he ends up writing yet another ’Report.’” “THE VOTERS HAVE SPOKEN!!!” Trump added later. Smith, who was appointed by Garland, said in the report that the decision to prosecute Trump was solely his and refuted any allegations to the contrary. “Nobody within the Department of Justice ever sought to interfere with, or improperly influence, my prosecutorial decision making. The regulations under which I was appointed provided you with the authority to countermand my decisions, 28 C.F.R. § 600.7, but you did not do so,” Smith said.

“Nor did you, the Deputy Attorney General, or members of your staff ever attempt to improperly influence my decision as to whether to bring charges against Mr. Trump. And to all who know me well, the claim from Mr. Trump that my decisions as a prosecutor were influenced or directed by the Biden administration or other political actors is, in a word, laughable.” Smith also defended prosecuting Trump, arguing that doing so served federal interests, including the interest in applying the law equally with regards to the breach of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. “There is a substantial federal interest in ensuring the evenhanded administration of the law with respect to accountability for the events of January 6, 2021, and the Office determined that interest would not be satisfied absent Mr. Trump’s prosecution for his role,” Smith said.

Read more …

I believe every word he says.

• FBI Director Wray On Why He’s Resigning, Defends Search of Mar-a-Lago (ET)

FBI Director Christopher Wray on Sunday explained why he is stepping down as head of the law enforcement bureau as President-elect Donald Trump prepares to take office in one week. “My decision to retire from the FBI, I have to tell you, it was one of the hardest decisions I’ve ever had to make,” Wray told CBS’s “60 Minutes” in what is likely his last interview as FBI chief. “I care deeply, deeply about the FBI, about our mission, and in particular, about our people. However, he said, the “president-elect had made clear that he intended to make a change and the law is that that is something he’s able to do for any reason or no reason at all.” In December 2024, Wray announced he would be leaving his post at the end of President Joe Biden’s term amid comments made by Trump signaling he would replace him. Trump has since named Kash Patel, a former intelligence official, to be in charge of the FBI, a position that needs Senate confirmation.

Trump in his first term nominated Wray to lead the FBI in 2017 for a 10-year term ending in 2027. However, the president-elect has often expressed his displeasure with the federal law enforcement bureau, particularly after its agents searched his Mar-a-Lago residence in Florida in August 2022 for classified documents. Trump was later charged by special counsel Jack Smith for what prosecutors say was the illegal retention of classified materials and for obstructing attempts to get them back. Last month, Smith opted to drop an appeal of a federal judge’s earlier order that had dissolved the case, and late last week, Smith resigned as special counsel. When Wray announced last month that he would leave, Trump responded in a Truth Social post that it is a “great day for America” because, according to him, “it will end the Weaponization of” the Department of Justice.

“I just don’t know what happened to him. We will now restore the Rule of Law for all Americans,” Trump wrote. The president-elect then praised Patel, saying he would be “committed” to bringing “law, order, and justice” to the United States. In Sunday’s interview with “60 Minutes,” Wray elaborated on why he would leave the law enforcement bureau. “My conclusion was that the thing that was best for the Bureau was to try to do this in an orderly way, to not thrust the FBI deeper into the fray,” he said before praising FBI officials and agents. “They tackle the job with a level of rigor and tenacity and professionalism and objectivity that I think is unparalleled, and I will tell you, it’s been the honor of a lifetime to serve with them,” he said of the agents. Regarding the Mar-a-Lago search, Wray backed his agents’ decision, saying it is the FBI’s responsibility to “follow the facts wherever they lead, no matter who likes it.”

He also said that searching Trump’s Palm Beach property and resort was seen as a last resort. “And when we learn that information, classified material, is not being properly stored, we have a duty to act. And I can tell you that in investigations like this one, a search warrant is not and here was not anybody’s first choice,” he told the outlet. When he was asked about Patel and other Cabinet nominees, Wray said he would not weigh in on Trump’s selections. “Facts and the law drive investigations, not politics or partisan preferences,” he said, referring to the FBI. Aside from speaking on his tenure as FBI director, Wray again warned that the greatest threat that the United States faces is the Chinese communist regime as state-backed malign actors have repeatedly targeted and hacked into U.S. infrastructure and companies.

Read more …

Pardon Joe! He will need it!

• Special Prosecutor Cements Biden Family Corruption For History (JTN)

An epic political scandal derailed for years from the public attention it deserved by false Democrat and news media claims of “conspiracy theories” and “Russian misinformation” came to an abrupt and harsh conclusion Monday. And that repudiation was delivered by an unlikely source: the prosecutor who originally tried to give Hunter Biden a sweetheart deal that would have spared the first son prison time. Special Counsel David Weiss’ report was not a manifesto of new disclosures dug up by the FBI or a grand jury. It barely filled 27 pages and failed to answer several questions submitted by Congress, and thus it was blasted by lawmakers for being “incomplete.”

But in simple terms it affirmed for history some simple conclusions: 1.) Hunter Biden broke the law. 2.) The Biden family engaged in a political grift that sucked millions from foreign interests by trading on its powerful name. And 3.) the family patriarch, Joe Biden, misled the public by suggesting his family was a victim of politics that warranted a pardon that erased his son’s dual convictions in tax and gun cases. “The Constitution provides the President with broad authority to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, but nowhere does the Constitution give the President the authority to rewrite history,” Weiss wrote in one of several poignant repudiations of the sitting president.

Rep. Harriet Hageman, R-Wyoming, a member of the House Judiciary Committee that investigated a large part of the Biden scandal, told Just the News on Monday evening that Weiss’ report left much to be still investigated by Congress, including the potential national security implications of Joe Biden’s decisions for countries where his son collected millions. “To what extent has our national security been compromised because of the activities and actions of Hunter Biden?” she asked during an appearance on the Just the News, No Noise television show. “I constantly have to question the position that this administration has taken with regard to China, what we’re seeing with the with the drones on the East Coast and even in Wyoming, the Chinese spy balloon that was allowed to traverse the entirety of the entire United States, the situation in Ukraine, with spending another $500 million there in the last week that he is in office.

“All of these are countries that had contact with and were paying Hunter Biden massive amounts of money, and that’s why this is an important issue for the American people, because we cannot allow family members of elected officials to be able to sell our country to the highest bidder of foreign countries,” she added. House Oversight and Accountability Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., who led an impeachment inquiry of Joe Biden, said the report was “incomplete” but that its most important contribution was to confirm for history that the Biden family engaged in corruption and tried to cover it up as his committee had shown. “Joe Biden will be remembered for using his last few weeks in office to shield his son from the law and protect himself. The president’s legacy is the same as his family’s business dealings: corrupt,” he said.

Most of Weiss’ grievances dealt with Joe Biden’s attacks on the FBI and IRS agents and federal prosecutors who brought charges against his son, a proverbial defense of institutions by a career prosecutor who eventually was appointed U.S. Attorney by President Donald Trump, then special counsel by Biden Attorney General Merrick Garland. “Politicians who attack the decisions of career prosecutors as politically motivated when they disagree with the outcome of a case undermine the public’s confidence in our criminal justice system,” he wrote. “The President’s statements unfairly impugn the integrity not only of Department of Justice personnel, but all of the public servants making these difficult decisions in good faith.”

Weiss himself faced questions about the judgement of his staff after his team tried to give Hunter Biden a prison-sparing deal that was scuttled by a federal judge only when two IRS whistleblowers, Gary Shapley and Joseph Ziegler, came forward to Congress with evidence of political interference in the case. Weiss then doubled back and sought more serious cases against Hunter Biden after the embarrassment, securing a jury conviction in his home state of Delaware on gun charges and a guilty plea on sweeping tax charges in California.

The dual convictions placed the first son in jeopardy of facing prison time, but President Biden intervened before sentencing and issued a pardon in December that he earlier had vowed to avoid. His office’s wobbly performance left just one final unknown: How would the special prosecutor define Hunter Biden’s conduct for history in the final report. The first few paragraphs gave a succinct answer. “I prosecuted the two cases against Mr. Biden because he broke the law,” Weiss wrote in a passage that refuted years of claims by the family and its defenders that Joe Biden’s son had done nothing wrong. “Eight judges across numerous courts have rejected claims that they were the result of selective or vindictive motives,” he added for emphasis.

Weiss then proceeded to describe the scheme that led to the charges: Hunter Biden traded on his politically powerful family name to collect millions from foreigners seeking influence, performed little work, then failed to pay taxes on some of the income. Some of that money came from Burisma Holdings, the Ukrainian energy firm deemed corrupt by the State Department that prompted the scandal back in 2019 in a series of columns written by this author in The Hill newspaper. “Mr. Biden made this money by using his last name and connections to secure lucrative business opportunities, such as a board seat at a Ukrainian industrial conglomerate, Burisma Holdings Limited, and a joint venture with individuals associated with a Chinese energy conglomerate,” the prosecutor wrote. Weiss added for emphasis: “He negotiated and executed contracts and agreements that paid him millions of dollars for limited work.”

Read more …

“Trump 2.0 is gearing up to be an extended exercise in the capacity to hurt The Other. Any Other. Hostile takeovers – and blood on the tracks. That’s how we “negotiate”.

• I’m Gonna MAGA You, Baby (Pepe Escobar)

It’s the greatest show on earth – unleashing a double bill of New Paradigm and Manifest Destiny on crack. We are the greatest. We will rock you – in every sense. We will crush you. We will take whatever we want because we can. And if you wanna walk away from the U.S. dollar, we will destroy you. BRICS, we’re coming to get ya. Trump 2.0 – a mix of professional wrestling and MMA played in a giant planetary cage – is in da house starting next Monday. Trump 2.0 aims to be on the driving seat on the global financial system; on control of the world’s oil trade and LNG supply; and on strategic media platforms. Trump 2.0 is gearing up to be an extended exercise in the capacity to hurt The Other. Any Other. Hostile takeovers – and blood on the tracks. That’s how we “negotiate”.

Under Trump 2.0, global tech infrastructure must run on U.S. software, not just on the profit front but also on the spy front. AI data chips must be American only. AI data centers must be controlled by America only. “Free trade” and “globalization”? That’s for losers. Welcome to neo-imperial, techno-feudal mercantilism – powered by U.S. tech supremacy. Trump’s National Security Advisor Mike Waltz has named a few of the targets ahead: Greenland; Canada; assorted cartels; the Arctic; the Gulf of “America”; oil and gas; rare earth minerals. All in the name of strengthening “national security”. A key plank: total control of the “Western Hemisphere”. Monroe Doctrine 2.0 – actually the Donroe Doctrine. America First, Last and Always.

Well, let’s delve a bit on pesky material imperatives. The Empire of Chaos faces a humongous debt, owed to usual suspect loan sharks, that may only be – partially – repaid by selected export surpluses. That would imply re-industrialization – a long, costly affair – and securing smooth military supply chains. Where the resource base will be for this Sisyphean task? Washington simply cannot rely on Chinese exports and rare earths. The chessboard needs to be rejigged – with trade and tech unified under U.S. unilateral, monopoly control. Plan A, so far, was to simultaneously confront Russia and China: the two top BRICS, and key vectors of Eurasia integration. China’s strategy, since the start of the millennium, has been to trade resources for infrastructure, developing Global South markets as China itself keeps developing.

Russia’s strategy has been to help nations recover their sovereignty; actually helping nations to help themselves on the sustainable development front. Plan A against the concerted geoeconomic and geostrategic strategies of the Russia-China strategic partnership miserably failed. What has been attempted by the ghastly, exiting U.S. administration generated serial, massive blowbacks. So it’s time for Plan B: Looting the allies. They are already dominated chihuahuas anyway. The – exploitation – show must go on. And there are plenty of chihuahuas available to be exploited. Canada has loads of fresh water plus oil and mining wealth. The Canadian business class in fact has always dreamed of deep integration with the Empire of Chaos. Trump 2.0 and his team have been careful not to name names. When it comes to the Arctic as a crucial, evolving battlefield, there may be a vague allusion to the Northwest Passage.

But never a mention of what really matters; the Northern Sea Route – the Russian denomination; the Chinese call it the Arctic Silk Road. That’s one of the key connectivity corridors of the future. The Northern Sea Route encompasses at least 15% of the world’s unexplored oil and 30% of the world’s unexplored natural gas. Greenland is smack in the middle of this New Great Game – capable of supplying years of uranium, as much oil as Alaska (bought from Russia in 1867), plus rare earths – not to mention providing useful real state for missile defense and offense. Washington has been trying to grab Greenland from Denmark since 1946. There’s a deal with Copenhagen in place guaranteeing military control – mostly naval. Now Greenland is being revamped as the ideal U.S. entry point into the Arctic Great Game against Russia.

At the St. Petersburg forum last June, I had the privilege to follow an exceptional round table on the Northern Sea Route: that’s an integral part of Russia’s 21st century development project, focused on commercial navigation – “We need more icebreakers!” – and bound to surpass Suez and Gibraltar in the near future. Slightly over 50,000 Greenland residents – which already enjoy autonomy, especially vis a vis the EU – would more than accept a full Danish exit; Copenhagen actually abandoned them since 1951. Greenlanders will love to profit from vast U.S. investments. Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov went straight to the point: “The first step is to listen to the Greenlanders” – comparing it to how Russia listened to the residents of Crimea, Donbass and Novorossiya vis a vis Kiev.

What Trump 2.0 actually wants from Greenland is crystal clear: total militarization; privileged access to rare earths; and commercially excluding Russia and Chinese companies. Chinese military expert Yu Chun noted that “soon, the long-desired ‘golden waterway’ of the Arctic Ocean is expected to open, allowing ships to traverse the Pacific Ocean and sail along the northern coasts of North America and Eurasia into the Atlantic Ocean.” As the Northern Sea Route is “a key element of Sino-Russian cooperation”, it’s inevitable that the U.S.’s “strategic vision is to prevent the establishment of a ‘golden waterway’ between China, Russia, and Europe by controlling Greenland.”

Read more …

It’s Starmer again..

• Judge Threatens To Break UK Wall Of Secrecy In Assange Persecution (Cook)

Judge Foss, sitting at the London First-Tier Tribunal, has ruled that the Crown Prosecution Service must explain how it came to destroy key files that would have shed light on why it pursued Assange for 14 years. The CPS appears to have done so in breach of its own procedures. Assange was finally released from Belmarsh high-security prison last year in a plea deal after Washington had spent years seeking his extradition for publishing documents revealing US and UK war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan. The CPS files relate to lengthy correspondence between the UK and Sweden over a preliminary investigation into rape allegations in Sweden that predate the US extradition case. A few CPS emails from that time were not destroyed and have been released under Freedom of Information rules. They show that it was the UK authorities pushing reluctant Swedish prosecutors to pursue the case against Assange.

Eventually, Swedish prosecutors dropped the case after running it into the ground. In other words, the few documents that have come to light show that it was the CPS — led at that time by Keir Starmer, later knighted and now Britain’s prime minister — that waged what appears to have been a campaign of political persecution against Assange, rather than one based on proper legal considerations. It is not just Britain concealing documents relating to Assange. The US, Swedish and Australian authorities have also put up what Stefania Maurizi, an Italian journalist who has been doggedly pursuing the FoI requests, has called “a wall of darkness”. There are good grounds for believing that all four governments have co-ordinated their moves to cover up what would amount to legal abuses in the Assange case.

Starmer headed the CPS when many highly suspect decisions regarding Assange were made. If the documents truly have been destroyed, it will be difficult, if not impossible, to ever know how directly he was involved in those decisions. Extraordinarily, and conveniently for both the UK and Sweden, it emerged during legal hearings in early 2023 that prosecutors in Stockholm claim to have destroyed the very same correspondence deleted by the CPS.

The new ruling by Judge Foss will require the CPS to explain how and why it destroyed the documents, and provide them unless it can demonstrate that there is no way they can ever be retrieved. Failure to do so by 21 February will be treated as contempt of court. The UK and the US have similarly sought to stonewall separate FoI requests from Maurizi concerning their lengthy correspondence while Washington sought to extradite Assange on “espionage” charges for revealing their war crimes. The British judiciary approved locking Assange up for years while the extradition case dragged on, despite United Nations legal experts ruling that Assange was being “arbitrarily detained” and the UN’s expert on torture, Nils Melzer, finding that Assange was being subjected to prolonged psychological torture that posed a threat to his life.

Read more …

Never ending.

• New Book Published Today – LONG LIVE NOVICHOK! (Helmer)

From the beginning, the Russian Embassy in London issued formal requests for consular access to the Skripals and protest notes when this was denied by the Foreign Office. In reply to British stonewalling on access and propagandizing the allegations against the Russian government, the Embassy issued a detailed summary of every action Russian officials had taken and the statements they made. The one option the Embassy in London did not take was to engage British lawyers to obtain a hearing and an order of habeas corpus in the High Court to compel the appearance of the Skripals to testify for themselves. This option was obvious to the Embassy and lawyers in London between March 21, 2018, when the Home Office went to the court for legal authority to allow blood testing of the Skripals, and April 9, when Salisbury District Hospital announced that Yulia Skripal had been released; and then on May 18 when Sergei Skripal was also discharged from hospital.

During this period it was reported that Yulia was able to telephone her cousin Viktoria in Russia. Years later, as Chapters 67, 71, and 73 reveal, it became clear in retrospect that Yulia had recovered consciousness in hospital much earlier than the hospital allowed to be known, and that doctors had then forcibly sedated her. At the time the Russian Embassy was announcing it “questioned the authenticity” of the statements issued by the London police and media on Yulia’s behalf. The Embassy was right; it was not believed. It is possible the Embassy did attempt to engage barristers to go to court for a habeas corpus hearing for the Skripals, but learned that no one would take the case. At the time I made an independent request for this engagement to the well-known human rights barristers in London; the outcome was that none agreed to represent the Skripals. The refusals were point-blank – no one would give a reason.

British officials anticipated that an effort might succeed in forcing a High Court hearing, however. So, on May 24, 2018, a one minute fifty-five second speech by Yulia Skripal was presented on video in which she spoke from a script and appeared to sign a statement. Referring to “offers of assistance from the Russian Embassy,” she claimed “at the moment I do not wish to avail myself of their services.” Skripal’s Russian text spoke of “help” from the Russian Embassy: “now I don’t want and [I am] not ready to use it.” “Obviously, Yulia was reading a pre-written text,” the Russian Embassy responded publicly. “[This] was a translation from English and had been initially written by a native English-speaker…With all respect for Yulia’s privacy and security, this video does not discharge the UK authorities from their obligations under Consular Conventions.”

At first, Putin seemed unprepared on the facts of the case – the Russian facts – and unprepared for the British government’s propaganda blitz. The president cannot have been unprepared. On March 15, 2018, the Kremlin revealed that at a Security Council meeting on that day Putin was briefed by the Foreign and Defense Ministers and the intelligence chiefs. “While talking about international affairs,” the official communiqué said, “the Council members held an in-depth discussion on Russia-UK relations against the backdrop of Sergei Skripal’s case. They expressed grave concern over the destructive and provocative position of the British side.”

The line which Putin and his advisers decided at that meeting they planned to follow in public was revealed by Putin three days later at a press conference. He tried to feign ignorance himself, and then dissimulated on the weapon, the motive, and the opportunity. “Regarding the tragedy you have mentioned,” Putin told reporters, “I learned about it from the media. The first thing that comes to mind is that, had it been a warfare agent, the victims would have died immediately. It is an obvious fact which must be taken into account. This is first.”

“The second is that Russia does not have such chemical agents. We destroyed all our chemical weapons, and international observers monitored the destruction process. Moreover, we were the first to do this, unlike some of our partners who promised to destroy their chemical weapons but have not done so to this day, regrettably. Therefore, we are ready for cooperation, as we said immediately. We are ready to take part in any investigations necessary, provided the other side wants this too. We do not see their interest so far, but we have not removed the possibility of cooperation on this matter from the agenda.” “As for the overall situation, I believe that any reasonable person can see that this is total nonsense. It is unthinkable that anyone on Russia would do such a thing ahead of the presidential election and the FIFA World Cup. Absolutely unthinkable. However, we are ready for cooperation despite the above things. We are ready to discuss any issues and to deal with any problems.”

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Badger

 

 

Peacock
https://twitter.com/i/status/1879213811472941088

 

 

Shark

 

 

Sound

 

 

San Carlo
https://twitter.com/i/status/1879181689328480729

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle December 21 2024

Dec 212024
 
 December 21, 2024  Posted by at 10:41 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,  56 Responses »


René Magritte L’éternité 1935

 

• Shutdown Odds Tumble As House Passes Latest GOP Spending Package (ZH)
• US Democrats Want Government Shutdown To Strip Trump Of Leverage – Vance (RT)
• Advisers Had to Babysit “Diminished” Biden From the Very First Day (Sp.)
• “He has Good Days and Bad Days” (Turley)
• Musk Far More ‘Influential’ Than Trump Online – WaPo (RT)
• Trump’s Economic Plans (Jim Rickards)
• Trump Wins—and the Censorship Begins (AmG)
• Yet Another Christmas Carol (James Howard Kunstler)
• The FBI Deserves Kash Patel (John Kiriakou)
• West Has Pumped Over $300 Billion Into Ukraine – Orban
• Kiev’s Western Backers Wary About Training Soldiers Close To Front – Media (RT)
• EU Deletes ‘Ukraine Must Win’ Mantra (RT)
• Could European Peacekeepers Really be Deployed to Ukraine? (Sp.)
• Putin’s Q&A and the Forever Wars Riddle (Pepe Escobar)
• The Russian Line On Syria (Helmer)

 

 

 

 

Watters

Elon severance

MuskTrump

MuskTurley

 

 

 

 

Through this whole circus, I get the impression that what really counts is the words used to phrase the bill. You need words that allow both sides to declare victory, no matter what the bill actually says.

• Shutdown Odds Tumble As House Passes Latest GOP Spending Package (ZH)

Update: With the support of Democrats, the House just passed Speaker Johnson’s latest spending package bill. Lawmakers voted 366 to 34 to approve the proposal, well above the two-thirds threshold needed under special fast-track procedures. One lawmaker voted present. It now heads to the Senate, while the White House said in a statement that President Biden won’t stand in the way. “President Biden supports moving this legislation forward and ensuring that the vital services the government provides for hardworking Americans—from issuing Social Security checks to processing benefits for veterans—can continue as well as to grant assistance for communities that were impacted by devastating hurricanes,” White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said in a statement. Polymarket’s odds of a government shutdown are tumbling.

As the Epoch Times notes further, moments after the House of Representatives passed a new package to keep the federal government funded through March 14, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and other congressional lawmakers discussed the process that brought the bill over the finish line. “In bipartisan fashion, with an overwhelming majority of votes, we passed the American Relief Act of 2025,” Johnson said, adding that funding the government through March 2025 was “a big priority for us.” The House Speaker described the package as “America First” legislation that allows his GOP coalition to deliver the nation a “sea change in Washington” after Inauguration Day next month. “President Trump will return to D.C. and to the White House, and we will have Republican control of the Senate and the House,” Johnson said.

“Things are going to be very different around here.” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) took credit for the bill passing Friday evening. “House Democrats have successfully funded the government at levels requested by President [Joe] Biden in order to meet the needs of the American people in terms of their health, safety, and economic well-being,” Jeffries told reporters after the vote. “We have successfully advanced the needs of everyday Americans, but there are still things to be worked on, and we look forward to that fight in the new year.”

The package also included requested disaster relief funds after an active hurricane season that included multiple destructive storms in multiple states throughout the southeast. Rep. Buddy Carter (R-Ga.), was relieved that portion was included in the final package. “Thank God we got disaster,” Carter told The Epoch Times. Regarding the debt ceiling consideration, Rep. Tom Emmer (R-Minn.) said that the public would have to wait and see what would “be done early in the next administration.” President-elect Donald Trump suggested he was pleased with the outcome of the vote, Rep. Rich McCormick (R-Ga.) told The Epoch Times.

Read more …

Things move fast, but it’s still useful to see what is said before the finish line.

• US Democrats Want Government Shutdown To Strip Trump Of Leverage – Vance (RT)

US Vice President-elect J.D. Vance has blasted the Democrats for rejecting a spending plan supported by Donald Trump, claiming they are trying to prevent the incoming president from “negotiating leverage” in the first year of his new term in the White House. The current federal funding is due to expire at midnight on Friday, leaving the government on the brink of a shutdown. The Democrats on Thursday rejected the new spending plan, known as a continuing resolution (CR). Thirty-eight Republicans also voted against it. The bill failed by a vote of 174-235. “The Democrats just voted to shut down the government even though we had a clean CR because they didn’t want to give the president negotiating leverage during the first year of his new term,” Vance told reporters straight after the vote.

On Wednesday, US President-elect Trump dismissed a previous bipartisan funding deal, which had been struck to prevent a shutdown just days before the Christmas break. Republicans balked at the proposed package, claiming it was bloated and full of Democratic policy priorities. Tech billionaire Elon Musk slammed the measure in dozens of posts on X, describing it as “criminal.” Instead, Trump urged lawmakers to pass a new package that included an extension of government funding until March and a two-year suspension of the debt limit into January 2027, adding trillions more to the federal government’s $36 trillion debt. The Trump-backed bill failed just hours after it was assembled, with Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson pledging to come up with another solution before government funding lapses at midnight on Friday.

Republicans have voiced opposition to increases in government spending, while Democrats voted against the bill because they argued the extra borrowing would be used to pass tax cuts for the wealthy. “They’ve asked for a shutdown and I think that’s exactly what they’re going to get,” Vance claimed. If lawmakers fail to approve a spending bill or extend the deadline, the US government will begin a partial shutdown that would affect millions of federal employees and the services they provide. While essential services such as border protection, in-hospital medical care, law enforcement and air-traffic control continue to operate, the shutdown would affect a vast number of operations, from court proceedings to travel and food safety inspections. Federal workers could go without pay, expecting they would be paid back in full once the government reopens. The last US government shutdown took place in December 2018 and January 2019 during Trump’s first White House term and was the longest in the country’s history.

Read more …

“..all US presidents have gatekeepers, the walls around Biden “were higher and the controls greater.”

• Advisers Had to Babysit “Diminished” Biden From the Very First Day (Sp.)

Joe Biden, the oldest president in US history, has repeatedly been criticized for his cognitive decline and a tendency to fall. Outgoing US President Joe Biden’s entourage has covered up the extent of his mental decline since he entered office in 2021, the Wall Street Journal reported in its bombshell investigation. The newspaper cited numerous unnamed Democratic lawmakers, donors, and presidential aides as saying that despite the fact that all US presidents have gatekeepers, the walls around Biden “were higher and the controls greater.” “There were limits over who Biden spoke with, limits on what they said to him, and limits around the sources of information he consumed,” the sources argued. “They body him to such a high degree,” one insider claimed, adding that there has been more “hand-holding” as compared to other presidents.

Biden’s “tightknit inner circle of advisers” also worked out a strategy to prevent POTUS from making gaffes or missteps that could tarnish his image, according to the sources. The advisers did their best to keep Biden’s meeting short as his public interactions became more scripted. The strategy, however, collapsed during Biden’s June 27 debate with Donald Trump, which saw the former being unable to complete his thoughts. US media reported at the time that the disastrous debate became an eye-opener and a turning point in discussions of Biden’s mental state and his suitability to serve as the next president. The 82-year-old finally dropped out of the presidential race and endorsed Kamala Harris as his replacement in late July.

VDH

Doocy
https://twitter.com/i/status/1870109006779359467

Read more …

The Dems and their media play dangerous games.

“Suddenly, everyone is shocked to learn that Biden was mentally diminished..”

• “He has Good Days and Bad Days” (Turley)

In an explosive exposé, the Wall Street Journal has revealed how the mental decline of President Joe Biden was pronounced from the start of his term. However, cabinet members and other Democrats lied to the public about his declining levels of acuity and engagement. That effort succeeded largely with the help of an alliance with the media, which showed little interest in whether the President was actually running the government. After President Joe Biden’s disastrous debate performance, the solid wall of media and staff shielding his declining mental state collapsed. Even after Special Counsel Robert Hur declined criminal charges against Biden due to his diminished state, Democratic pundits and the press covered for him, claiming that he was sharp and effective. With the debate, the public was able to see what many in the media and the White House had been hiding for years.

After interviewing roughly 50 insiders, the Journal found evidence of a knowing effort to hide Biden’s mental state. For many, Biden’s refusal to leave his home for much of the 2020 campaign was evidence of the insecurity of staff about his ability to engage with reporters. It only got worse during the term as staff virtually tackled anyone trying to ask him a question. Biden was routinely shuffled off stage after reading briefly from a teleprompter. Behind the scenes, cabinet members reportedly stopped asking for meetings with Biden after staff conveyed that such requests were not welcomed. He held far fewer cabinet meetings and was often considered “down” for any discussions. That included a period during the calamity of the Afghan withdrawal.

One official is quoted as admitting on one occasion in 2021 that Biden “has good days and bad days, and today was a bad day so we’re going to address this tomorrow.” That was just after he was elected. Yet, Biden was kept within the protective cocoon of media that did not press the issue and was infamous for ignoring scandals while asking Biden about his choice of ice cream on a given day. Now, some media outlets are re-positioning on the issue as they prepare to resume hard questioning and investigations in the new Trump Administration . . . after a four-year hiatus. Suddenly, everyone is shocked to learn that Biden was mentally diminished and blaming nameless staff for misleading them.

One exception this week was Chris Cillizza, who served as CNN’s editor-at-large before leaving the network in 2022. On YouTube, Cillizza stated, “As a reporter, I have a confession to make” and admitted “I should have pushed harder earlier for more information about Joe Biden’s mental and physical well-being and any signs of decline.” Now, everyone likes a redemptive sinner and I give Cillizza credit for admitting his own failure to pursue the story despite many critics objecting for years over the lack of such inquiries. However, Cillizza only confessed to failing to pursue the story due to a fear of being accused of “age shaming” Biden. The suggestion is that identity politics chilled journalism, not the overwhelming media support for the President and countervailing opposition to Trump.

The “age shaming” excuse is difficult to square with the failure to pursue an array of other scandals during the term from influence peddling to policy debacles. Nevertheless, Cillizza was remarkably frank that he was only able to push on the story after leaving CNN: “I didn’t really push on it, if I’m being honest. Now, once I left CNN and once it became a little bit more clear to me about Biden’s age, I think I did write pretty regularly and talk pretty regularly about how I wasn’t sure that this guy was up to it. And then obviously, after the June 27 debate, everybody, including me, was writing and talking about it.”

https://twitter.com/i/status/1869843347629641841

Read more …

X is most influential. That’s where Musk is. Trump, on Truth Social, has far less reach. They are very aware of this, and use it to their advantage.

Trying to drive a wedge between them is a fool’s game.

• Musk Far More ‘Influential’ Than Trump Online – WaPo (RT)

Messages that Elon Musk posts on X, the platform he purchased for $44 billion in 2022, have received far more viewership than those of any other politically-involved users, including President-elect Donald Trump, the Washington Post reported this week. The newspaper, which generally favors the Democratic Party, has tracked engagements since July, the month when the billionaire endorsed Trump for president. It said it has been monitoring posts hourly for 48 hours after publication to assess the “influence” that X users have on their audience. According to its analysis, Musk’s messages have received a total of 133 billion views during the monitoring period, which is 15 times more than Trump’s posts on the platform and more than 16 times more than the combined reach of all accounts belonging to members of the incoming Congress.

In short, the entrepreneur “eclipses” all others in terms of influence, the Post suggested. Trump was suspended from Twitter in the wake of the January 6, 2021 Capitol Hill riot, before Musk bought the company and changed its name to X. The president-elect has since moved the bulk of his political messaging to his own platform, Truth Social. Musk reinstated Trump’s X account after purchasing the microblogging network. WaPo has suggested that Trump’s presence elsewhere doesn’t significantly affect its analysis. He has “only 8.4 million followers there compared to his 96 million on X,” it said. Critics of Trump have been sounding the alarm over what they perceive as the undue influence that Musk has on the Republican politician and the future policies of his administration.

The billionaire has been closely involved with the transition process and has publicly weighed in on electoral politics with his online commentary on appointments. Nancy Pelosi, the former House speaker and a key figure in the Democratic establishment, described Trump as the billionaire’s “puppet” on Thursday, while reacting to the failure of Congress to pass a stop-gap funding bill this week. Musk has led the online charge against the 1,547-page proposal, released on Tuesday, branding it “criminal,” “outrageous,” “unconscionable,” and ultimately “one of the worst bills ever written.” Democratic lawmakers opposed an alternative bill pitched by Trump. Friday is the deadline for allocating more money to keep the federal government running.

Read more …

“..nominal growth is higher than the nominal deficit and the debt-to-GDP ratio is declining. That’s the key to sustainability.”

• Trump’s Economic Plans (Jim Rickards)

Trump will begin his first 100 days with an emphasis on his economic plans. His core economic team is already announced including Russell Vought as Director of the Office of Management and Budget, Jamieson Greer as U.S. Trade Representative, Kevin Hassett as Director of the National Economic Council, Scott Bessent as U.S. Treasury Secretary, and Howard Lutnick as Secretary of Commerce. Hassett and Bessent will form the core of this team with Greer taking the lead on tariffs and Vought taking the lead on budget deficits and fiscal policy. Trump’s economic policy will be built around what are called the Three Arrows. That’s a name adopted by the new Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent. He took the name from the Three Arrows policy of Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, who announced them in 2012. Abe’s arrows were monetary easing, fiscal stimulus and structural reforms to make Japan more competitive. Bessent’s arrows are different, but the basic idea of using government to help grow the economy in productive ways is the same.

Bessent’s plan is also called the “3–3–3” plan for reasons that are made clear below. Bessent’s first arrow is to achieve 3% annual real growth in the U.S. economy. This may not sound like much, but it is. From 2009 to 2019 (basically the period from the end of the last financial crisis to the beginning of COVID), the U.S. grew at a rate of only 2.2% per year. Economists estimate that the potential growth of a mature developed economy such as the U.S. is about 3.2%. That gap between 3.2% potential growth and 2.2% actual growth means trillions of dollars of lost wealth over time. From 1983 to 1986 during the Reagan years, the economy actually did grow at just over 5% per year. Real growth during that three-year stretch was 16%. (Although this followed the severe recession of 1981-1982.

Growth higher than potential is possible when labor and industrial slack from a prior recession is available). So, Bessent’s goal of 3% real growth is realistic given potential performance, past performance, and recent lagging growth. The emphasis here is on “real” growth. This means growth without taking into account any inflation. If real growth is 3% and inflation is 2%, then nominal growth will be 5% (3% real + 2% inflation = 5% nominal). Everyday Americans are properly focused on real growth because they don’t want to see their wage gains eaten up by inflation. Still, nominal growth is important when considering debt service since debt is nominal — you owe what you owe whether the real value is preserved or not. Bessent’s second arrow is to keep annual deficits below 3% of GDP. When discussing debt, we are dealing with nominal amounts rather than real amounts. For example, if U.S. GDP is projected at $28 trillion for a given fiscal year, then the deficit for that year cannot exceed $840 billion under Bessent’s plan.

Note that this does not involve “paying off the national debt” or even running a small surplus. A deficit of $840 billion is huge. But the limitation of 3% of GDP is highly significant in terms of making the debt sustainable and maintaining confidence in the U.S. dollar and U.S. Treasury securities. Before deciding that this is an easy target, it’s helpful to know that the U.S. deficit for fiscal year 2024 is $1.83 trillion. The deficit in fiscal year 2023 was $1.69 trillion. In short, Bessent’s goal of an $840 billion deficit represents a 54% reduction in the deficit from 2024 levels and a 50% reduction from 2023 levels. That’s a huge reduction in the deficit in one fiscal year. Not all of this deficit reduction would have to come from spending cuts, although some of it could, especially if Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy identify enough government waste through their new Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).

It’s likely that Musk and Ramaswamy will easily identify wasteful spending. The hard part is getting it to stop. The other way to cut the deficit is to grow the economy in such a way that government revenues grow with it. This does not mean tax rate increases. It does mean tax revenue increases from current or even reduced tax rates. One ace-in-the-hole for Trump and Bessent will be tariffs. Those are not part of the Internal Revenue Code, but they do generate government revenues. The U.S. began tariffs in 1790, but the Internal Revenue Code did not come into being until 1913. For 123 years, the U.S. government-funded itself mostly with tariffs, excise taxes, and borrowing without the benefit of income taxes.

The U.S. currently imports over $3.5 trillion of goods per year. If only half were subject to tariffs of 10%, that would generate $175 billion of new revenue, which goes a long way to reaching Bessent’s deficit reduction goals. Now the genius of the Three Arrows plan becomes clear. If nominal GDP growth is 5% (3% real + 2% inflation), and nominal deficits are kept to 3% of GDP, that means nominal growth is higher than the nominal deficit and the debt-to-GDP ratio is declining. That’s the key to sustainability.

Read more …

“..the alphabet news outlets, which provided Kamala Harris with “78 percent positive coverage, while these same networks have pummeled former President Donald Trump with 85 percent negative coverage..”

• Trump Wins—and the Censorship Begins (AmG)

As was proven during the 2024 election cycle, we are well beyond the scope of mere bias in the legacy media. Given the shrinking audience influence coupled with massively declining income from severe loss of cable subscriptions and advertising revenue, American media outlets have chosen a different course: straight-up propaganda intended for consumption by a niche audience, half of which don’t know they’re being lied to and the other half not caring. Broadcasting has been replaced with “wish casting.” How else can we explain the completely lopsided coverage from the alphabet news outlets, which provided Kamala Harris with “78 percent positive coverage, while these same networks have pummeled former President Donald Trump with 85 percent negative coverage?” And it was even more biased on CNN and MSNBC.

Major media outlets broadcast opinion-centric journalism that push narratives, ranging from “extinction-grade climate crisis” pronouncements to the “existential threat to democracy” dangers of a second Donald Trump presidency. There are no “two sides” reporting here; it is commentary passed off as “journalism” that wraps news stories around pre-packaged and carefully circulated talking points that favor the establishment bureaucracy and big-moneyed interests over American citizens. Simultaneously, Trump is a threat to democracy and will jail or even execute his opponents, is in service to Vladimir Putin, and will wreck the economy with his extremist MAGA agenda that is tied directly to Project 2025.

Trump will launch World War III, he’ll outlaw homosexuality and transgenderism, and he’ll cancel all future elections and become dictator for life. It will be the end of America, and a vote for Kamala Harris will be our “new way forward.” The American legacy media always had a tenuous relationship with its viewers and readers, losing its credibility every time the public finds that what is reported turns out to be completely untrue. Exhausted from the lies of omission and outright fabrications, the legacy media found itself without much of an audience and surprisingly little influence on the 2024 presidential election. But a ridiculous narrative is shaping up, one plainly untrue on its face, that the reason for Trump’s victory was not inflation, illegal immigration, or the economy, or that Harris-Walz was an outrageously insulting offering by the Democrats.

No, the reason Trump sailed to victory was “the massive influence of right-wing media.” Let that last statement sink in for a moment. That’s right, you can blame One America News, X, Newsmax, Fox News (still considered “right-wing” by many, especially on the left), assorted podcasts, and especially Joe Rogan, for putting Trump back into the White House. And the legacy media, who provided hideously lopsided coverage against Trump for years and conducted the presidential and vice-presidential debates in a grossly biased fashion, whines that their massive investment in Kamala Harris was thwarted by a relatively tiny segment of alternative media and citizen journalism. You have delusional, far-left, Democrat operatives like Julie Roginsky being taken to the woodshed by Scott Jennings, saying that the media and social media, especially, are now controlled by conservatives

[..] Need more evidence? Watch compressed election night coverage on ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, and, worst of all, MSNBC to see how optimism at 8 PM EST morphed to concern by midnight and outright despair around 3 AM when Trump declared victory. Both left-leaning cable channels, CNN and MSNBC, didn’t call the race until shortly after 5 AM on Wednesday. The Associated Press, the New York Times, CBS, and ABC all called the race around 5:30 AM. This was hours after the result was no longer in doubt. Well, it actually was. But it’s not because of the outsized influence of conservative media; it was because of the decimated influence of the legacy media. Most Americans no longer need solid evidence to conclude that they are being lied to by legacy outlets; thus, they turn to alternative media for truthful content and credible opinion.

This obvious shift in content consumption should be solid proof that the left can no longer control, frame, or even influence public opinion. The growth of alternative media and Elon Musk’s refusal to censor conservative thoughts and opinions on X/Twitter have loosened the multi-generational grip legacy media has had over journalism and have brought new voices into the mix, offering a mere balance in information. But the American Left cannot tolerate informational balance.

Read more …

“The nation appears to be having a kind of moment involving a gross, naked emperor and a bunch of people noticing this isn’t a nudist-friendly zone.” — Jeff Childers

• Yet Another Christmas Carol (James Howard Kunstler)

Hitler was dead, to begin with. As dead as ein Türnagel. At least no one had heard him squawk since the Russkies cracked bottles of Dunkelbrau at the Brandenburg Gate, April, 1945. Nobody ever called Joe Biden “Hitler,” but around his gloomy place-of-business, known as the “White House, they sometimes called him “Joe Biden,” with a titter and a smirk, as they called “a lid” on his bewildered day and stuffed him into the nearest broom closet. “Joe Biden” was a mere babe in pram when old Adolf bid farewell to his smoldering Reich. But, eight decades later, after being jammed into the Oval Office by his chauffeur, one Barack Obama, the grasping, scraping, flinty, clutching, covetous old bird, sometimes known as “the Big Guy,” from whom no match had ever struck the fire of an original idea, or a good idea, or even a sound, workable idea, shuffled to his bed-chamber in the lonely compartment known as the White House “residence” on Christmas eve.

“Humbug!” he maundered to himself as he struggled aboard the cold presidential bed, absent lately of the doctor who once claimed to be his wedded wife. “Humbug,” was the new flavor that Ben and Jerry had concocted just for the holiday, a “green” ice-cream featuring pureed mealworms and cocoa bean husks for a satisfyingly punitive crunch. Was Dr. Jill dead, too, now, old “JB” wondered, like his old pals Senator Byrd, and feisty Strom Thurmond and other members of “the firm?” (Or was she in the arms of that scoundrel, Emhoff?) “Humbug,” he mumbled as he fell off into a cruel, blank slumber. He awakened — he knew not how many minutes longer — to a snorting noise, as of pigs rooting in a forest, followed by a thin, sonorous wailing that might have been the revenant of some once-mighty bombast in the Nuremburg Zeppelinfeld.

And then resolved out of a mist the very figure of Hitler, his once-smart, gray Führeruniform tattered and threadbare, and the whole of his body wreathed in rotting sausages, the reek of which might have driven a rank of the stoutest, blondest SS leutnants to their knees in abject surrender. “What do you want of me?” Scrooge cried, but this ghost of Hitler only wailed again and beckoned with gnarled finger. Suddenly, “Joe Biden” seemed to be flying out in the night air across a great swamp, and then north over the Beltway, to Scranton, Pennsylvania. The scene: a slagheap behind the Lackawanna Iron and Steel Company, 1949. “JB” is a boy again — oh, to be a boy, with loose joints and a clear mind! — playing with his chums, Bob McGee and Sonny Donahoe. They are reenacting the last days of World War Two.

“I’ll be Ike,” says Bob, always a leader whom “Joe” liked to please. “Sonny, you be Omar Bradley. And “Joey,” you can be Hitler.” “Joey” loved playing Hitler: a few minutes of fulminating histrionics! Then, his hand mimicking a Walther P-38 with the muzzle pointed behind the ear, and the plosive pow! And then, writhing upon the heap of cinders acting out the Führer’s last moments. “You were so good at it!” the ghost wailed. “What happened to you?” “I wish I knew. Everything’s a blur now. But tell me, spirit: was I a good you?” “One of the best!” the ghost of Hitler moaned and dissolved into vapor.

“Joe Biden” wakes again in his bedchamber. It is flooded with bright light and trappings of the holiday: a tree festooned with what appear to be gleaming glass ornaments shaped like dildoes. And before it, enrobed in scarlet and muskrat fur, the cheerful figure of Senator-elect Adam Schiff, grinning from ear to ear, with a wreath of holly about his lightbulb-shaped head. The light is blinding. “What are you doing here?” the president asks. “And remind me what your name is, if it’s not too much to ask. “I am the ghost of Christmas Present,” Mr. Schiff intones, as though dispensing yet another rumor of Russian collusion. “Come, take my hand.”

Read more …

Kiriakou appears to suggest that Patel would go after people who have immunity. He won’t.

• The FBI Deserves Kash Patel (John Kiriakou)

On the surface of things, Kash Patel is the kind of person most of us would want to keep out of government. A MAGA true believer, and Donald Trump’s choice to head the F.B.I., he’s the tip of the spear of Trump’s apparent effort to use the courts to go after his perceived enemies in the media and on Capitol Hill. The mainstream Democratic-oriented press is apoplectic about the appointment. The Christian Science Monitor said it most clearly when it wrote that, “Democrats invoke (the notorious late F.B.I. Director J. Edgar Hoover) as they warn about Mr. Patel, suggesting he will target political enemies. Republicans, though, compare Hoover’s tenure to what they say is a modern ‘deep state” resisting and harassing Mr. Trump.” That’s the bottom line. Democrats compare him to Hoover while Republicans argue that he’s the anti-Hoover.

I’m here to argue that Kash Patel is exactly what Americans need right now at the F.B.I. We need somebody with the guts and the political authority to burn the F.B.I. down, at least figuratively. First, I’m under no illusions that Kash Patel is a good guy. According to former Fox News host Bill O’Reilly, Patel is “salivating” at the opportunity to investigate and, apparently, charge former Rep. Liz Cheney with some sort of crime because of her work on the Jan. 6 Committee. This is not only wrong, it also ignores the fact that Cheney had congressional immunity for her work because she was serving in an official capacity for the committee. Nothing will come of any investigation.

The press also has opined that Patel will target police officers who arrested protestors at the Jan. 6 riots at the Capitol for investigation. Again, the police have qualified immunity, and nothing will come of the idea. He has also called for the prosecution of a wide range of political figures, including President Joe Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and outgoing F.B.I. Director Christopher Wray. Again, they have immunity, and nothing will come of Patel’s rhetoric.

[..] The bureau also investigated candidate Trump and participated in the Russiagate fiasco in Operation Hurricane Crossfire. I’ve had my own negative experience with the F.B.I. In 2009, the bureau secretly opened a criminal case against me in response to my having blown the whistle on the C.I.A.’s torture program. In the end, I was charged with five felonies, including three counts of espionage. I hadn’t committed espionage, of course, and those charges were dropped, but not until I had declared bankruptcy.

To make the case go away, I pleaded guilty to a lesser charge and served 23 months in a federal prison. I had been facing 45 years. In the intervening years, three F.B.I. agents have reached out to me to apologize for their role in the case, saying that it was political in nature and that they were ordered to target me. That’s the F.B.I. That’s what it does. And that is why we need Kash Patel at the helm of the F.B.I. right now. We need somebody who is willing to tear this organization down to its bare studs. The F.B.I. is a criminal organization. It should be dealt with like a criminal organization. There should be a price to pay for its crimes against the American people.

Read more …

And what’s the return on that investment?

“This “enormous” amount of money could have been given to Europeans to make people’s lives much better..”

• West Has Pumped Over $300 Billion Into Ukraine – Orban

The US and the EU have provided over $300 billion in financial aid and military assistance to Kiev since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has said. Such a huge amount of money “could have done wonders” had it been spent to improve the lives of people within the EU, he said in an interview with Kossuth radio on Friday. Orban highlighted the evolving military situation, noting that “the balance of power on the frontlines is shifting day by day” in Russia’s favor. He also pointed to the political changes expected in the US when Donald Trump returns to the White House next month. The developments call for leaders in EU capitals to embrace a more pragmatic approach to ensuring stability and economic resilience within the bloc, Orban believes.

However, the prime minister argued that Brussels remains out of touch with global realities, pointing to a recent European Parliament decision to continue sending substantial funds to Kiev – a move he described as a clear example of misplaced priorities. “During the negotiation with the Americans, I received the figure that Europe and America together have spent €310 billion so far. Those are huge numbers!” the Hungarian prime minister stressed. He argued that the hundreds of billions of euros already spent to fund the conflict could have been used to bolster European infrastructure, to develop countries in the Western Balkans to the level of the EU, or beef up military capabilities. This “enormous” amount of money could have been given to Europeans to make people’s lives much better, the Hungarian leader concluded.

Russia has repeatedly warned that no amount of Western aid will stop its troops from achieving the goals of the military operation or change the ultimate outcome of the conflict. By backing Kiev, they only prolong the conflict, Moscow has argued. Earlier this month, Orban proposed a Christmas ceasefire between Ukraine and Russia, describing it as a last-ditch attempt to mediate a diplomatic resolution of the conflict. He floated the idea to Kiev and Moscow, as well as to Trump, who he personally met at his residence in Florida. The Kremlin spokesperson, Dmitry Peskov said that Moscow “fully supports Orban’s efforts aimed at finding a peaceful settlement and resolving humanitarian issues related to the exchange of prisoners.” However, Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky rejected Budapest’s offer.

Read more …

Sitting ducks.

• Kiev’s Western Backers Wary About Training Soldiers Close To Front – Media (RT)

Western officials are concerned about British plans to potentially resume the training of Kiev’s troops inside Ukraine, The Times reported on Friday, citing sources familiar with the matter. The UK is among the nations that have trained the Ukrainian military on their soil. Valery Zaluzhny, Kiev’s former top general who has been appointed ambassador to London, toured a boot camp in southern England last month to tell these recruits that they should not be afraid to die for their country. This week, British Defense Secretary John Healey said the UK could send military personnel to Ukraine. Such a move would help the Ukrainians “motivate and mobilize more recruits,” he suggested during a visit to Kiev. “The closer to the front, the more efficient the training is,” a Western official told The Times, discussing the merits and drawbacks of such a deployment.

“But it’s fair to say the Russians would target any kind of Western assistance inside Ukraine.” The UK had sent several dozen instructors into Ukraine in January 2022 to teach Kiev’s forces how to operate British-donated anti-tank missiles, the report added. They were pulled out shortly before direct hostilities with Russia broke out the following month. Yavorov military base in Western Ukraine, where the training took place, was hit by Russian long-range missiles within weeks, in March 2022. The Ukrainian military is struggling to replenish manpower, despite a major overhaul of its mobilization system this year, which introduced harsher punishments for draft avoidance and lowered the conscription age to 25 years. Mandatory conscription makes recruits prone to desertion, according to the media.

Kiev’s Western backers claim that moving their training programs closer to the front would bolster the confidence of Ukrainian citizens that they would be properly trained and equipped before being sent into combat. The Times claimed that Tony Radakin, the chief of the defense staff, overruled Army chief Patrick Sanders, when he was pushing in September 2023 for the UK to train Ukrainian troops inside the country. Russia considers foreign fighters in Ukraine fair military targets. It claims that some Western service members are secretly on the ground, preparing the launches of donated long-range missiles, including Britain’s Storm Shadows. This makes the donors de facto participants in the fighting, Russian officials have said. Moscow has condemned the conflict as a Western proxy war against Russia, in which Ukrainians are used as ‘cannon fodder’.

Read more …

Replaced by “Russia must not prevail”.

• EU Deletes ‘Ukraine Must Win’ Mantra (RT)

The European Union has reportedly dialed back its stance on the Ukraine conflict, replacing the phrase “Ukraine must win this war” with “Russia must not prevail” in a European Council statement on new sanctions against Russia, first released on Monday. The revision apparently came after questions from Politico about its alignment with Brussels’ latest diplomatic messaging. An EU official said the original statement was a mistake, according to Politico’s Brussels Playbook newsletter. A separate statement released by the European Council on Thursday also used the phrase “Russia must not prevail” when discussing the Ukraine conflict. Council President Antonio Costa, who had a joint press conference with Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky the same day, stated that “international law must prevail.”

Politico’s Eddy Wax said the change in EU messaging highlights a broader shift in the West, as US President-elect Donald Trump intends to seek a swift end to the hostilities upon taking office in late January. Some senior figures in the EU, including the bloc’s top diplomat, Kaja Kallas, have continued to insist that “Ukraine will win” in their public statements. However, there is a growing acknowledgement in Brussels that it cannot prop up Kiev without Washington’s backing, the Politico report suggested. “The EU’s strategy appears to be flattering Trump, wishfully projecting onto him, and turning a blind eye to some of his more alarming statements,” the outlet said.

Kiev, meanwhile, has not toned down its rhetoric on the conflict. On Thursday, both Zelensky and his chief of staff, Andrey Yermak, publicly insulted Russian President Vladimir Putin following his annual marathon Q&A event earlier in the day. Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, who serves as deputy chair of the national Security Council, suggested on Friday that Kiev was trying to derail Trump’s peace efforts by antagonizing Moscow further. Zelensky is “showing the middle finger” to the incoming American leader, Medvedev claimed.

Read more …

Only if Russia gives permission. Which means no weapons.

• Could European Peacekeepers Really be Deployed to Ukraine? (Sp.)

Few European countries would risk sending their soldiers to Ukraine as part of some kind of a peacekeeping force, former Swedish military officer and politician Mikael Valtersson told Sputnik. He outlined two potential scenarios of peacekeeper deployment in the Ukrainian conflict zone, with the basis for both being “a ceasefire along the current front lines and no Ukrainian NATO membership in the foreseeable future.” The first scenario involves an international peacekeeping force comprised of troops from countries or regions unaffiliated with the participants of the Ukrainian conflict, such as “Türkiye, India, Latin America, Africa, ASEAN and maybe European countries like Hungary and Slovakia.”

The second scenario, where EU troops would be sent as peacekeepers, would likely result in Russia perceiving it as a breach of any ceasefire and would restart the fighting “long before the Western forces reached the front lines.” As a result, Europe would be left with a conflict “involving several European countries, but without the backing of NATO or the US,” so it is small wonder that, as Valtersson put it, “it would be impossible to get unity within Europe about such a mission.”

“Instead, the fighting probably will continue during 2025, without US support, until Ukraine realises that they must accept the situation on the ground. But then the conditions might be even more severe for Ukraine,” Valtersson mused. “They lost a great opportunity to get a good deal during the Istanbul negotiations and risk gambling away even more now.” “A much more plausible scenario for European military involvement on the ground in Ukraine is that some of the more hawkish nations send support units and ‘instructors’ to Ukraine,” Valtersson warned. These European troops would become prime targets for Russia, he added, without actually having “much impact” on the outcome of the conflict.

Read more …

“Christianity was born in Damascus (remember St. Paul) – not in Jerusalem. When Putin went to Damascus, he was on an Orthodox Christian pilgrimage: coming from the Third Rome (Moscow) to pay his respects to the precursor of the first Rome, the cradle of Christianity.”

• Putin’s Q&A and the Forever Wars Riddle (Pepe Escobar)

He spoke for four and a half hours, virtually non-stop, reviewing the results of 2024, mastering all the facts. His Direct Line received over 2 million questions, from Russia and around the world. And he had to crown the performance with a flourish, in an “I did it, my way” vein: “I believe that not only did I simply save [Russia], we moved away from the edge of the abyss.” The record would confirm it, compared to the appalling state of the Russia he inherited when first elected president in March 2000. President Putin’s end of the year Q&A contains enough substance to be unpacked for weeks, if not months. Let’s focus here on our current geopolitical crossroads: the Forever Wars in West Asia and Ukraine, two vectors of the standard imperial drive, now united in an Omni-War. Putin stated that, “we have come to Syria in order to prevent a terrorists’ enclave (…) In general, our goal has been achieved.”

Whether Syria remains “terrorist free” remains to be seen: the new, “inclusive”, rebranded as woke Emir of Damascus, al-Jolani, a Saudi national, is a certified Salafi-jihadi still with a $10 million American bounty on his head. The “enclave” now encompasses most of former Syrian sovereign territory, otherwise illegally occupied by jihadi gangs and Zionist lebensraum practitioners. It’s important to remember that Russia first intervened in Syria in 2015 not so much to keep access to the warm waters of the Eastern Mediterranean: but mostly to protect holy Christian Orthodox sites in Damascus. Christianity was born in Damascus (remember St. Paul) – not in Jerusalem. When Putin went to Damascus, he was on an Orthodox Christian pilgrimage: coming from the Third Rome (Moscow) to pay his respects to the precursor of the first Rome, the cradle of Christianity.

On the larger Levantine geopolitical picture, Putin is correct. The CIA invented Operation Timber Sycamore way back in 2012 to train and weaponize “moderate rebels” to overthrow Assad – spending over $1 billion a year: the most extensive CIA covert op since the jihad in Afghanistan in the 1980s. The UK, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Jordan were Sycamore partners. Over the final years, the Pentagon jumped in to “prepare” Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), the “soft” ISIS splinter group. Ultimately it was nearly 14 years of toxic US sanctions and relentless siege warfare that led to the final act, complete with Ukrainian drone instructors, mountains of Qatari cash and the Turk-assembled crypto-al Qaeda infantry (no more than 350 fighters, according to Putin himself). Now it’s a matter of adapting. Putin said that, “we have established relations with all those that control the situation on the ground (…)

Most countries expect the Russian bases to remain (…) Our interests should coincide, a question that requires painstaking examination.” He also reminded everyone that politics is the art of compromise – and Russia’s strategic priority is to keep the bases in Tartus and Hmeimim. Putin brushed aside the notion that Russia has been weakened by Assad’s downfall in Syria, quoting Mark Twain: “Rumors about my death have been greatly exaggerated.” Instead, he practically proposed that the Russian bases could provide humanitarian aid: one can imagine the population of a deeply polarized, fragmented Syria arguing with the Salafi-jihadis to get their share. Were that to happen, Russia would be in direct aid competition with the collective West. The EU, via its new, deranged Estonian ultra-Russophobic foreign policy chief, has already ordered that there will be no sanctions relief if the Russian bases stay.

Read more …

“If earlier, let’s say, the same Iranian friends asked [us] to help them move their units into the territory of Syria, now they asked us to withdraw them from there.”

• The Russian Line On Syria (Helmer)

Quoting Mark Twain, President Vladimir Putin has made his first public statement on Syria during his Direct Line broadcast on Thursday. “Whoever wants to imagine Russia weakened…I want to recall the famous man and writer, who once said: ‘The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated.’” During four and a half hours of question-and-answer, Putin responded to questions on the Syrian conflict from a US and later a Turkish reporter. He said the future of the Russian bases at Khmeimim and Tartus is undecided. “The vast majority of [Syrian groups] tell us that they would want our military bases to remain in Syria. I don’t know — we should think about it, because we have to decide for ourselves how we relate to the political forces that are now in control and will control the situation in this country in the future. Our interests ought to coincide. If we stay there, then we have to do something in the interests of the country where we are.

”Putin endorsed the Turkish military movements into Syria over the Israeli ones. “Israel is also solving security issues for itself…We hope that Israel someday will leave the territory of Syria, but right now it is bringing in there additional troops. I think there are already thousands of troops. And I have such an impression, that they are not only not going to leave, but they are going to reinforce there…Turkey needs to ensure its security somehow. We understand that all. This is not for today’s meeting, so as not to waste time.” To Keir Simmons of NBC, Putin said: “You and those who, I repeat, pay your wages, want to present everything that happens in Syria like some kind of failure, the defeat of Russia…We came to Syria ten years ago so that it would not become a terrorist enclave like the fact we observed in some other countries, say, in Afghanistan.

In general, we have achieved our goals… And even those groups that fought against the Assad regime, with government troops, also undergo internal changes. No wonder today many European countries and the United States want to establish a relationship with them. If they are terrorist organizations, what are you doing there? So, they’ve changed, have they? This means that to a certain extent, the [Russian] goal has been achieved. “Furthermore, we did not have ground troops in Syria. They just weren’t there. There are our two bases — air and naval. The ground component consisted of the armed forces of Syria itself and some, as we all know — there is no secret here – the so-called pro-Iranian combat formations. In our time we even took out of there [Russian] special forces. We didn’t just fight there.

“What has been happening there? When armed opposition groups approached Aleppo, Aleppo was protected by about thirty thousand people. 350 militants entered the city. Government forces, and with them the so-called pro-Iranian units, retreated without a fight, blew up their positions, and left. And also with some small exceptions, where there were some clashes, that was what happened throughout Syria. If earlier, let’s say, the same Iranian friends asked [us] to help them move their units into the territory of Syria, now they asked us to withdraw them from there. We took out four thousand Iranian fighters from the Khmeimim base to Teheran. Part of the so-called pro-Iranian units went without a fight to Lebanon, some to Iraq.

“Today the situation in the Syrian Arab Republic is not easy, of course. We very much hope that there will be peace, tranquility. We support relations with all the groups that control the situation there, with all countries of the region. The vast majority of them tell us that they would want our military bases to remain in Syria. I don’t know — we should think about it, because we have to decide for ourselves how we relate to the political forces that are now in control and will control the situation in this country in the future. Our interests ought to coincide. If we stay there, then we have to do something in the interests of the country where we are.

“What will be our interests there? What can we do for them? This is a question that is waiting for painstaking research on both sides. Already now we can do something, including using these bases – we have already offered it to our partners, including those located in Syria, and neighboring countries. [We] offered the use of, say, the Khmeimim airbase to deliver humanitarian aid in Syria. And this is accepted with understanding and desire to organize this work together. The same applies to the naval base in Tartus. Therefore, whoever wants to imagine Russia weakened, since you are an American, I want to recall the famous man and writer [Mark Twain], who once said: ‘The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated.’”

Later in the broadcast, Putin was asked a question by Ali Jura of the Turkish state news agency Anadolu: “Mr. President, Israel violates international rights by killing tens of thousands of people, including children in Palestine and Lebanon. Israel now takes advantage of the situation in the region to occupy Syria and violates its sovereignty. How do you comment on the actions of Israel? Did you have a conversation with President Erdogan about the region as a whole? Thank you.”

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Brian Cox

 

 

Gervais

 

 

Pesticides
https://twitter.com/i/status/1869550241424543808

 

 

Wind
https://twitter.com/i/status/1870062259013071095

 

 

Shelter toys
https://twitter.com/i/status/1870094847211700470

 

 

Vibes
https://twitter.com/i/status/1870187674583060962

 

 

Husky

 

 

Bump
https://twitter.com/i/status/1870169812581974133

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle December 4 2024

Dec 042024
 
 December 4, 2024  Posted by at 10:05 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , ,  66 Responses »


Johannes Vermeer The geographer 1668-69

 

• FBI Agents Back Kash Patel As Next Director: ‘He’s the right fix’ (JTN)
• The Government Gangsters (Glenn Beck)
• Tucker Carlson Claims US Embassy Has Muted Zelensky (RT)
• Trump Offers Canada Chance To Join US (RT)
• Joe Biden Cloaks His Legacy in Infamy With the Hunter Biden Pardon (Turley)
• In Pardoning His Own Son, Biden Argues That US Justice Sucks (Marsden)
• “Trump-Proofing” California Could Be a Costly Option for Californians (Turley)
• Ukraine Will Reject Any Alternative To NATO Membership – Foreign Ministry (RT)
• Kiev Should ‘Disregard Everything And Everyone’, Become Nuclear Power – MP (RT)
• Georgia: A Second Front for Putin (Paul Craig Roberts)
• The Second Front Has Been Activated In Syria (Sonja van den Ende)
• EU Reports Dramatic Fall In Birth Rate (RT)
• EU Has Weakened ‘A Lot’ Amid Ukraine Conflict – Hungarian FM (RT)
• The End Of Fake News? MSNBC Hits New Low In Ratings (ZH)
• Ryanair CEO O’Leary: Germany Is Run By ‘Idiots’ (RMX)
• Fani Full Release Ordered After Fulton DA Sat On RICO Records (ZH)
• House Oversight Report Supports Lab-Leak Theory for COVID-19 Origin (ET)
• The Skripals Are As Good As Dead – The Judge Has Buried Them (Helmer)

 

 

 

 

YMCA

Article III

In a blanket pardon, you lose the 5th

Georgia
https://twitter.com/i/status/1863938810196955257

Gaetz

Benz


https://twitter.com/i/status/1864152269153063050

Biden AI

 

 

 

 

“..an influential retired bureau supervisor says a large number of agents support Kash Patel for the job..”

• FBI Agents Back Kash Patel As Next Director: ‘He’s the right fix’ (JTN)

As Democrats try to stymie President-elect Donald Trump’s pick for FBI Director, an influential retired bureau supervisor says a large number of agents support Kash Patel for the job because of his national security experience and his vision to replace the law enforcement agency’s leadership who allowed politics to usurp crime fighting. “This guy is completely and 100% qualified to run that organization. He’s what’s needed today. He’s the right fix,” retired FBI Supervisory Special Agent Jeff Danik told Just the News in a wide-ranging interview Monday. While Democrats and news media critics have suggested that Patel was selected to be a loyalist seeking revenge on Trump foes, Danik noted Patel’s extensive career experience, which includes stints as a federal public defender, federal prosecutor, counterterrorism director at the National Security Council, senior counsel to the House Intelligence Committee and chief of staff to both the Defense Secretary and the Director of National Intelligence.

“He has the correct balance, in my view, having been there for almost 30 years,” Danik said of Patel. “He has the correct balance of prosecutor, which is what we do. We feed the prosecution tube. Defense attorney, so the other side of that coin. Intelligence, the intelligence agencies, which is a key element to the FBI’s either success or failure. “And then also, I think this is personal, that he’s been a victim himself of the system,” Danik said. “And the combination of those things uniquely qualifies him beyond his, you know, substantial accomplishments.” Those accomplishments, Just the News confirmed, include two major government awards for Patel’s work on national security during the Obama administration.

The recognitions included a 2017 Assistant Attorney General’s award of excellence for Patel’s prosecution of 12 Al-Shabab terrorists who killed 72 and injured dozens more with suicide bombings targeting sports fans watching a 2010 FIFA World Cup soccer match at two locations in Kampala, the capital of Uganda. They also include a Central Intelligence Agency Award for Human Intelligence Gathering for his work combating terrorism in East Africa. Patel mentioned both awards in a lawsuit he filed against a news media organization back in 2019 and they were confirmed by government officials who spoke to Just the News.Danik’s full-throated endorsement of Patel is significant, since he is a popular figure in the FBI retiree community as an accomplished bureau supervisor in the Miami area known to help and counsel agents currently on the job.

“I talk to agents all the time. I’m constantly involved with helping them, counseling them through tough times, or helping on the job or just after retirement,” Danik said during an interview on the John Solomon Reports podcast. “And there’s a large group that are highly, highly supportive of him, of the President-elect, and are willing to help with whatever jobs or tasks are involved in getting behind the scenes.” “When somebody new comes into into an organization, even if they’re somewhat familiar with it, there’s a lot of complexity involved with these federal bureaucracies. They have really established lots of different little machine gunner nests that need to be known about before you go in,” he added. Danik was explicitly supportive of Patel’s oft-stated strategy of “cleaning house” in the upper echelons of the FBI, saying that is where cases involving Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump and others have been politicized to the detriment of the nation.

Read more …

X thread.

• The Government Gangsters (Glenn Beck)

Trumps FBI Director Kash Patel knew the Deep State’s plan to remove Joe Biden and pardon Hunter to hide their crimes. Garland and Wray should have been impeached. Fauci, the CIA and the Media lied about the origins of Covid. Wray has the Epstein files. He says the FBI can be fixed by shutting down the Hoover building immediately and opening it up the next day as a Museum of the Deep State letting everyone walk the halls for free and leaving it open 365 days a year. He says twenty people can run the FBI, the other seven thousand agents that are sitting in that building should be chasing criminals around America, not distorting statistics about January 6th so Christopher Wray can go to Congress and lie and say domestic violent terrorism is on the rise.

He encourages the arrest and prosecution of Hunter Biden over the crime of prostitution for calling a Hooker, which is prosecutable in almost every jurisdiction in America and he also says Joe Biden can be prosecuted for receiving money overseas, ill gotten gains, which is illegal. There are bigger crimes involving Ukraine and other matters, but these are simple and fast crimes to prosecute. The investigation into the Hunter Biden Laptop was shutdown by the FBI and the Department of Justice with the help of the media, proving this was a coordinated Deep State effort. He says the Obama-Clinton Administration has been running the White House for years, not Joe Biden. The Deep State is evil, vindictive and very smart.

He names the Top Five Deep State Operatives in America which are General Mark Milley of the U.S. Department of Defense, Mark T. Esper former Secretary of Defense, William Barr former U.S. Attorney General of the Department of Justice, Christopher Wray current FBI Director and Merrick Garland the current Attorney General of the Department of Justice. He says the Deep State will be shattered under the second Trump Administration, but it will be a monster fight. He read the entire secret JFK files and the secret seven pages of the 9/11 report, he says he has seen it all and will recommend to President Trump to release all the files to the American people including the Epstein files. He refers to the Deep State Operatives as Government Gangsters that will be brought to justice.

Read more …

“..Carlson published a video on X in which he previewed the upcoming release of an interview with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov..”

• Tucker Carlson Claims US Embassy Has Muted Zelensky (RT)

American journalist Tucker Carlson has said the US government has been blocking his attempts to organize an interview with Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky for more than a year. On Wednesday, Carlson published a video on X in which he previewed the upcoming release of an interview with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov. The journalist said the conversation with Russia’s top diplomat was aimed at providing a perspective on how close Washington and Moscow could be to a direct clash, after the administration of outgoing US President Joe Biden granted Ukraine permission to fire American-made long-range weapons deep into Russian territory.

In the same clip, filmed on Manezhnaya Square in the heart of Moscow, the former Fox News host revealed that “we have also tried for over a year to get an interview with Zelensky, the president of Ukraine.” According to Carlson, his team “have attacked that from a bunch of different angles. We have spoken to a lot of different people around him, had dinner with them. We have been in talks continuously.” “And those efforts have been thwarted by the US government. The American Embassy in Kiev, which our tax dollars pay for, told the Zelensky government: No, you may not do the interview. You can talk to CNN. You cannot talk to us,” Carlson said.

In June, the journalist said he had agreed an interview with the Ukrainian leader. However, Zelensky’s press-secretary, Sergey Nikiforov, swiftly rejected the claim, saying that “Tucker Carlson should check his sources in the FSB (Russia’s Federal Security Service) more carefully.” Zelensky “has a completely different schedule, and Tucker Carlson is not on it,” Nikiforov stressed. Carlson’s latest trip to Moscow is his second since the escalation between Russia and Ukraine in early 2022. In February, he interviewed Russian President Vladimir Putin, with the recording of their two-hour conversation getting 14 million views on YouTube and 185 million views on X in the first three days after its release.

Read more …

Western Canada would be interested. But not the east. Though Québec…

• Trump Offers Canada Chance To Join US (RT)

US President-elect Donald Trump has suggested that Canada should become the 51st US state unless it manages to halt the flow of illegal migrants and drugs across its border with the US, Fox News reported on Monday, citing sources. According to the report, the incoming US leader made the remarks last Friday during a dinner with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. Earlier last week, Trump threatened to place 25% tariffs on goods coming from both Canada and Mexico upon inauguration in retaliation for illegal immigration, as well as the “crime and drugs,” coming to the US across the borders with the two countries. Trudeau called Trump shortly thereafter to attempt to dissuade the incoming US president from going ahead with the proposed hike, and on Friday arrived at Trump’s estate at Mar-a-Lago to continue discussions.

According to people reportedly present at Friday’s dinner who heard Trump’s discussion with Trudeau, the US president-elect repeated his earlier claim that Canada had failed its neighbor by allowing drugs and illegal immigrants from over 70 different countries to enter the US. He also reportedly chided Canada for the US trade deficit with it, which he estimated at around $100 billion. Trudeau reportedly told Trump that such punishing tariffs would destroy the Canadian economy. Trump was said to have replied with a tongue-in-cheek suggestion that Canada could avoid this by becoming the 51st US state, with Trudeau as governor. He later expounded on the idea, saying that Canada could even be divided into two states, one conservative and one liberal. The remark was reportedly received with nervous laughter from Trudeau and other dinner attendants, while Trump once again emphasized that he plans to carry out his threat as soon as he returns to the White House on January 20.

After the dinner, Trudeau told reporters he had “an excellent conversation” with Trump, without revealing its details. Trump later called his meeting with Trudeau “productive” and noted that the Canadian prime minister had “made a commitment” to work with the new US administration on Trump’s key points of concern. He did not mention his previous tariff hike threat again. Many US imports from both Canada and Mexico are currently exempted from tariffs because of the USMCA trade agreement that Trump enacted during his first term. Experts have warned that it is not clear how Trump could implement the proposed tariff hikes without violating that deal. Many economists have also warned that tariff hikes could backfire on the US economy by causing a spike in domestic prices, and also lead to retaliatory actions by targeted countries that could spark a trade war.

Read more …

“Even among past scandals in the abuse of the pardon power, Biden has done lasting damage not just to his legacy but his office.”

• Joe Biden Cloaks His Legacy in Infamy With the Hunter Biden Pardon (Turley)

President Joe Biden’s decision to use his presidential powers to pardon his own son will be a decision that lives in infamy in presidential politics. It is not just that the President used his constitutional powers to benefit his family. It is because the action culminates years of lying to the public about his knowledge and intentions in the influence-peddling scandal surrounding his family. Even among past scandals in the abuse of the pardon power, Biden has done lasting damage not just to his legacy but his office. Despite its noble origins and purpose, the pardon power historically has not been a pristine power used by past presidents. As I have previously written, it was used to benefit the political cronies of past presidents. President Warren Harding was even accused of selling pardons, including to mob enforcer Ignacio Lupo, known as “Lupo the Wolf.” Former president William Clinton waited for the final days of his presidency to pardon his own brother as well as a major democratic donor.

In 2023, I wrote that Biden might follow this same pattern and pardon his son as a lame-duck president. The column suggested that Biden might withdraw as a candidate for office and then take the action as a father: “The pardon-and-apology approach might appeal to Biden not only as an effort to convert vice into virtue but to justify his withdrawal from the election as a selfless act.” In the 2020 election and throughout his presidential term, Biden repeatedly lied to the American public with an ease and impunity that shocked even many political veterans in Washington. He was repeatedly asked if he knew about Hunter’s foreign dealings, including millions in alleged deals with Russians, Ukrainians, Chinese, and other clients. President Biden lied and denied such knowledge. As I detailed in my testimony in the Biden impeachment hearing, he had repeated discussions of these dealings. He is even on tape discussing news stories on the dealings.

President Biden was also repeatedly asked if he met any of his son’s clients. He repeatedly lied. We have pictures and records of dinners and meetings with these clients. Hunter Biden was expressly thanked for his arranging such access to his father. Few reporters pressed Biden on the corruption scandal, but they were often met not only with denials but angry retorts from the president. When Fox reporter Peter Doocy raised it, the President steamed “Yes, yes, yes. God love you, man — you’re a one-horse pony, I tell you.” When CBS’s Bo Erickson broke ranks and raised the scandal and drew a rebuke from Biden “I know you’d ask it. I have no response, it’s another smear campaign, right up your alley, those are the questions you always ask.” The President continued to lie throughout the election, the presidential debates, and his term. Then, the press repeatedly asked him whether he would pardon his son. The President was now running for reelection and again lied.

He and the White House said over and over again that no such pardon would occur and was not being contemplated. That was also a lie. NBC is reporting that, while issuing these denials last June, there were discussions about the pardon. The pardon power was written in absolute terms, and a president can even, in my view, pardon himself. However, what is constitutional is not necessarily ethical or right. This is one of the most disgraceful pardons even in the checkered history of presidential pardons. President Biden has lied to cover up a corruption scandal that reportedly brought his family millions in raw influence peddling. His portrayal of his son as a victim stands in sharp contrast to the sense of immunity and power conveyed by Hunter in his dealings. There were diamonds as gifts, lavish expense accounts, and a sports car, in addition to massive payments that Hunter claimed were “loans.”

There are messages where Hunter belies the President’s portrayal of a political witch hunt, including messages like the one to a Chinese businessman openly threatening the displeasure of Joe Biden if money is not sent to them immediately. In the WhatsApp message, Hunter stated: “I am sitting here with my father, and we would like to understand why the commitment made has not been fulfilled. Tell the director that I would like to resolve this now before it gets out of hand, and now means tonight. And, Z, if I get a call or text from anyone involved in this other than you, Zhang, or the Chairman, I will make certain that between the man sitting next to me and every person he knows and my ability to forever hold a grudge that you will regret not following my direction. I am sitting here waiting for the call with my father.” The President has now pardoned Hunter for his convicted felonies and any crimes he may have committed from “Jan. 1, 2014, to Dec. 1, 2024.” It is all now being buried under a sweeping immunity deal and a pack of presidential lies.

Read more …

“Too bad that time’s up for you to actually do anything about this kind of systemic selective prosecutorial bullying, beyond serving your own family’s interests.”

• In Pardoning His Own Son, Biden Argues That US Justice Sucks (Marsden)

One of the big bonuses of being US president is that you can pardon any federal crimes you want on the way out the door. It’s a chance to help out family, friends, donors, or curry favor with potential future business associates in your post-White House career. US President Joe Biden just handed one out to his own son, Hunter Biden, who was facing up to 25 years prison in a firearms case and 17 years for a tax case. That length of sentence would make it seem that Hunter was accused of waving a gun around or firing it off in the vicinity of someone, but that’s hardly even the case. Instead, he was convicted of lying on his paperwork when applying for one. One of the questions asks whether you’ve smoked pot or done any other drugs “unlawfully.” No way, Hunter said. But unfortunately for him, a quick Google image search reveals spades of images of him with a crack pipe hanging from his mouth. Whoops.

In the tax case, he was convicted of three felony offenses and six misdemeanor offenses, according to his dad’s Justice Department statement, having “spent millions of dollars on an extravagant lifestyle rather than paying his tax bills.” And when he was finally made to pay up, having blanked out on paying for four tax years, he indulged in some creative accounting in inventing some business deductions. Enter Joe in the role of the parent who shows up at the school principal’s office to explain why his kid is such a screwup and can’t get his homework done on time for the tax man. “Those who were late paying their taxes because of serious addictions, but paid them back subsequently with interest and penalties, are typically given non-criminal resolutions. It is clear that Hunter was treated differently,” Biden wrote in a statement. Sounds like Hunter’s serious addiction in this case was not paying taxes, just like every other American facing similar charges.

Everyone’s addicted to something. Maybe some other Americans were too busy double-fisting Ding Dongs or Twinkies to cater to the tax man? Or working on their gains at the gym? Or on a Netflix bender? Where’s their pardon? I’m sure Americans will be thrilled to learn that the president figures that indulging in some nose candy constitutes a free pass from any serious consequences of messing up your taxes – or just ignoring their existence altogether. Tax man knocking at the door? Just answer while smoking a giant blunt and tell him to bugger off. What about the gun stuff, though? Joe has an answer for that, too. “Without aggravating factors like use in a crime, multiple purchases, or buying a weapon as a straw purchaser, people are almost never brought to trial on felony charges solely for how they filled out a gun form,” he wrote.

Yeah okay, and most drivers who speed aren’t hauled up on speeding charges. Not because they aren’t doing it, but because there isn’t a cop sitting in the back of each one of their cars waiting for them to go over the limit and give them a ticket. Biden is literally saying that Hunter has been “treated differently” simply because he’s Biden’s son. Is he seriously blowing the whistle on his own Justice Department, and American justice, in general, with accusations of political prosecutions? Sure sounds like it. Too bad that, as president, he wasn’t actually in any position to actually do anything about it, huh? How about the tax man targeting Donald Trump’s returns? Is that not political, too, Joe? What about all the other felony charges that seemed designed to derail his return to the presidency? “For the first time in American history a former president that is a convicted felon is now seeking the office of the presidency,” Biden said earlier his year. “But as disturbing as that is, more damaging is the all-out assault Donald Trump is making on the American system of justice.”

Are we talking about the same system of justice that sucks so much that you had to correct its errors so your kid could avoid becoming someone’s Alcatraz amigo? “It says a lot about the United States that we work relentlessly to free Americans who are unjustly held around the world,” Biden said amid a prisoner swap with Russia this summer. How much work has Biden done – beyond his own kid’s case – to ensure that people who mess up on government paperwork in the US aren’t facing prison terms that rival those of genocide perpetrators? “The charges in his cases came about only after several of my political opponents in Congress instigated them to attack me and oppose my election,” Biden said. Sounds like a real problem. Too bad that time’s up for you to actually do anything about this kind of systemic selective prosecutorial bullying, beyond serving your own family’s interests.

Read more …

“Californian voters surprised many Democrats this election with almost 40% voting for President-elect Trump over California’s own Vice President Kamala Harris..”

• “Trump-Proofing” California Could Be a Costly Option for Californians (Turley)

California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) is widely known to be angling to be the next Democratic presidential nominee after the implosion of Vice President Kamala Harris. This week, Newsom positioned not just his campaign but also his state as part of the “resistance” for the next four years against the Trump Administration. Newsom pushed a special session to secure a $25 million war chest to take the Trump Administration to court, even before the inauguration and release of policies by the incoming administration. I wrote earlier about how the loss of both houses, as well as the White House, will mean that lawfare and obstructive efforts will shift to the states. Newsom is moving to out-position governors (and potential primary opponents) like Govs. Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania and Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan.

Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker moved first in a chest-pounding press conference that he would stop the incoming administration from trying to remove undocumented persons, declaring, “You come for my people, you come through me.” New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy (D) added that he will “fight to the death” against Trump’s agenda. Newsom has upped the ante by demanding millions to pre-fund litigation against the new administration. With a massive budget debt burden, Newsom has continued to pile on new debt for politically popular initiatives. I cannot recall any state pre-positioning funds for the sole purpose of litigating against any incoming administration. The most obvious area of disagreement is the effort to ramp up the enforcement of immigration laws and to carry out deportations.

While polls show that the public overwhelmingly supports such enforcement, including deportations, California is seeking to take the lead in court actions designed to slow or frustrate such efforts. It could prove costly, not just in litigation expenditures. The Trump Administration could seek to withhold federal funding from states and cities obstructing enforcement efforts. In the meantime, sanctuary cities are continuing to face rising costs associated with rising populations of undocumented migrants. For example, as we previously discussed, Denver Mayor Mike Johnson (D) declared that he was preparing the Mile-High City for its “Tiananmen Square moment” to fight the federal government in any attempt to deport unlawful migrants. Johnson warned that he would have not only Denver police “stationed at the county line to keep [ICE] out” but also “50,000 Denverites.” He later walked back the comments while repeating that the city is positioning itself to be part of the resistance.

Now the Common Sense Institute (CSI), a non-partisan research organization estimated that eight percent of the city’s 2025 budget of $4.4 billion is now dedicated to housing and services for undocumented persons. If true, that amounts to $356 million or $7,900 per migrant. California has led other states in offering a wide array of benefits to undocumented persons. Notably, Californian voters surprised many Democrats this election with almost 40% voting for President-elect Trump over California’s own Vice President Kamala Harris.

Read more …

“Russian President Vladimir Putin has said Kiev’s NATO ambitions were the key reason behind the current conflict.”

• Ukraine Will Reject Any Alternative To NATO Membership – Foreign Ministry (RT)

Ukraine will not accept any kind of security guarantees as a substitute for NATO membership, according to a Foreign Ministry statement published on Tuesday. In the document issued ahead of the NATO foreign ministers’ meeting in Brussels this week, Kiev blasted the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, under which Ukraine gave up its Soviet-era nuclear arsenal for security guarantees from Russia and the West. The Foreign Ministry called the pact a “monument to short-sightedness in strategic security decision-making,” and urged its Western backers to issue it an invitation to the US-led military bloc during the meeting in Brussels. “Having the bitter experience of the Budapest Memorandum behind us, we will not settle for any alternatives, surrogates, or substitutes for Ukraine’s full membership in NATO,” the ministry said in a statement, marking this week’s 30th anniversary of the memorandum’s signing.

The criticism comes amid recent Russian advances and the upcoming return of US President-elect Donald Trump to the White House in January, which has raised uncertainty over US support as Kiev fears it could be forced to the negotiating table. “We are convinced that the only real security guarantee for Ukraine, as well as a deterrent factor for further Russian aggression against Ukraine and other states, is only Ukraine’s full membership in NATO,” the statement said. Ukraine was left with around 1,700 nuclear warheads after the collapse of the Soviet Union. While this stockpile technically made Ukraine the world’s third-largest nuclear power, the weapons themselves remained under the operational control of Russia, and were surrendered under the 1994 Budapest Memorandum. This agreement involved the US, UK, and Russia providing security assurances to Kiev in return for the removal of the weapons.

While Ukraine has never controlled nuclear weapons, in 2022, Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky expressed regret about his country agreeing to relinquish them, suggesting that Kiev has “every right” to reverse the decision. Earlier this year, Zelensky said Ukraine could protect itself by becoming either a nuclear state or a member of NATO. He later backtracked, saying Kiev does not have any alternative “except NATO.” NATO, however, is “highly unlikely” to heed Kiev’s call for a membership invitation during this week’s meeting, Reuters reported, citing diplomats, saying it would take weeks or even months to reach a consensus from the bloc’s 32 members for the decision. Ukraine made NATO membership a strategic goal in 2019. This was a red line for Moscow, which has for years expressed concerns about the bloc’s creeping expansion towards its borders. Russian President Vladimir Putin has said Kiev’s NATO ambitions were the key reason behind the current conflict.

Read more …

Forget it. Think Oreshnik.

• Kiev Should ‘Disregard Everything And Everyone’, Become Nuclear Power – MP (RT)

Ukraine must become a nuclear power to protect itself no matter the consequences, an opposition MP said on Tuesday. Becoming a member of NATO, which the current government hopes will happen, is not enough, Aleksey Goncharenko has argued. This week marks the 30th anniversary of the signing of the Budapest Memorandum, which comprises three nearly-identical multilateral agreements with former parts of the USSR that had nuclear weapons stationed on their territories at the time the Soviet Union dissolved in 1991. Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Ukraine agreed to denuclearize in exchange for security assurances by Russia, the US, and UK. The Ukrainian Foreign Ministry issued a statement on Tuesday to complain that the document has not applied to Kiev since the US-backed armed coup of 2014.

The anniversary, it said, is a good time to extend to Ukraine a formal invitation to NATO, it claimed. ”NATO is a good thing. But NATO will not defend us. Nuclear weapons would,” Goncharenko wrote in response on social media. “So we should disregard everything and everyone and make the bomb. Then we’ll figure things out.” The MP also rebuked Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky for missing the opportunity to get a “normal peace treaty” with Russia and NATO membership before the 2023 ‘counteroffensive’. He belongs to the party of former President Pyotr Poroshenko, who lost to Zelensky in the 2019 presidential election. The Budapest Memorandum with Ukraine should serve as a reminder to Western leaders that the “development of European security architecture at the expense of Ukrainian interests rather than in alignment with them is doomed to fail,” the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry said in the statement.

The country “will not accept any alternative, imitation, or substitute for a NATO membership with full rights,” it added. In recent statements, Zelensky has been sending mixed messages on NATO membership, suggesting that Kiev would be willing to accept accession of only the territories currently under its control, or accession of all claimed territories without protection under Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty. Kiev claims that Ukraine was the third-largest nuclear power after Russia and the US, before agreeing to give up the weapons. The Ukrainian government has denied having a secret nuclearization plan, after German media claimed last month that it does.

Read more …

The EU’s foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas took the side of the 34%, whom she declared to be the “Georgian people,” not the 54% who won the election.”

• Georgia: A Second Front for Putin (Paul Craig Roberts)

President Putin faces the possibility of a second Ukraine, a second war front that could result from Washington’s success in staging a coup d’etat in Georgia with a color revolution. Riots ongoing since the “Russian party” defeated the “Western party” by 54% to 34% have convinced the Prime Minister of Georgia that the West is in the process of launching a color revolution to overthrow, as was done in Ukraine, the democratically elected government. Putin is silent and consequently could find himself fighting on two fronts. Then the West will open a third front. This is what Putin can expect from consistently presenting himself as a non-interventionist unless Russia is attacked. Russia, certainly the most powerful military entity on earth, carries no weight in Western councils. Georgia, the country, became a part of Russia in early 1800. In 1917 Georgia became one of the provinces of the Soviet Union.

The country became independent in 1991 when the collapse of the Soviet Union gave Washington the opportunity to break up the Soviet Union. Georgia, Ukraine, Belarus, and the Central Asian provinces were turned into independent countries. In 2003 Washington engineered the “Rose Revolution” in Georgia, which put a pro-Western government in office. In 2008 Washington sent its US trained and equipped Georgian army into South Ossetia, a disputed province that did not agree to leave Russia with Georgia. As Russian peacekeepers were killed in the Georgian invasion of South Ossetia, Putin sent in the Russian Army which quickly destroyed the American trained Georgian Army and conquered Georgia in five days, which is what should have happened in Ukraine. Failing to realize that Washington would continue to try to turn Georgia into a front against Russia, Putin turned Georgia loose and took his army home.

Putin, a true believer in non-interference even when it is at Russia’s expense, left Georgia to be subverted by Washington. Putin did not require that Georgia shut down Washington’s NGOs operating in the country or that Georgia subordinate itself in any way to Russia. Consequently, Washington got a French-born woman installed as president of Georgia, and Washington’s propaganda and NGOs have convinced 34% of Georgians to prefer alignment with the West than with Russia. It is part of Washington’s intent to surround Russia with missile bases. Washington’s EU puppet has threatened to impose sanctions on the democratically elected Georgian government for failure to void the election and put in office a pro-West government. The EU’s foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas took the side of the 34%, whom she declared to be the “Georgian people,” not the 54% who won the election.

She promised that the EU would punish those who won and that sanctions against Georgia was one of the options for dealing with the Georgian people’s refusal to comply with EU rule. Last Saturday the US State Department spokesman announced Washington’s suspension of its strategic partnership with Georgia, thus setting up Georgia for overthrow. The Georgian President supports Washington’s NGO protesters and said the parliamentary elections are illegitimate. There is no indication that the Russian government realizes that the overthrow of the pro-Russian government means trouble for Russia. Fyodor Lukyanov, chairman of the Presidium of the Council on Foreign and Defense Policy, writes nonsensically about the attempt at “color revolution” as if it is merely an internal affair for Georgia.

Read more …

“..Uyghur jihadists in Syria pose an overlooked yet significant regional and international security problem..”

• The Second Front Has Been Activated In Syria (Sonja van den Ende)

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who will go down in history as the most corrupt leader of the most extreme radical settler regime ever seen in the “promised land” called Israel, has negotiated a supposed ceasefire with Hezbollah, which will last for 60 days. Shortly after the ceasefire in Lebanon came into effect, and after Israeli Netanyahu warned Syrian President Bashar al-Assad that he was “playing with fire”, a new front was opened from Idlib to Aleppo. The terrorist group called Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) launched an attack on Aleppo from their last enclave in Idlib. HTS and other factions called the al-Fatah al-Mubin group, just another small terrorist organization affiliated with HTS, advanced in the western countryside of Aleppo and took control of strategic points in the villages of Qubtan al-Jabal and Sheikh Aqil.

According to sources and Syrian media, around 50 people were killed, including terrorists, Syrian Arab Army (SAA) soldiers and an SAA soldier who was taken back to Idlib as booty. Who is HTS? If you believe Western sources, they are a Sunni Islamist political and armed organization involved in the Syrian civil war. It was formed on January 28, 2017, as a merger between Jaysh al-Ahrar, Jabhat Fatah al-Sham, Ansar al-Din Front, Jaysh al-Sunna, Liwa al-Haq and Nour al-Din al-Zenki Movement. Syrian and Iraqi people call the organization Daesh, which means “the one who crushes”. The West sometimes gave it another name, ISIS or Islamic State. Also, the so-called Syrian civil war is a proxy war of the West to get the oil and gas out of Syria (and Iraq). This is well known among Syrians, who see their oil being stolen by the U.S., initially by their proxies Daesh, but now more directly with the help of the U.S. military.

The main goal of the U.S. is to replace Russian allies with those of the U.S., usurping Assad’s power with radical jihadists, aligned in the past mainly with Saudi Arabia and Qatar, so that the U.S. could build a pipeline through Syria to Europe. The evidence is clear that U.S. President Barack Obama, against advice and warnings from his top military officers, pursued a policy to protect the fundamentalist Sunni organization Al Qaeda in Syria. Proof that the U.S. (and its Western client states) under the Obama administration sponsored terrorists in Syria and Iraq is in the form of the last mentioned group, the Nour al-Din al-Zenki Movement. Obama had to admit before the entire Western press that Nour al-Din al-Zenki, who beheaded an eleven-year-old Palestinian boy in cold blood in front of rolling cameras, was indeed a terrorist group.

But so were all the others who the U.S. kept on sponsoring with weapons and money (as did Europe and the entire West). Later, they all merged with Daesh (ISIS). In 2016, during the liberation of Aleppo by the Syrian Arab Army, fighters from other terrorist groups (all fighting under the banner of Daesh but fighting among themselves) captured and killed members of the Zenki movement. Many of those who survived were later granted asylum in Europe (particularly Germany) along with other terrorists. But to this day, Europe is in denial and calls them rebels, while the evidence of gang violence happening in the cities of Europe is clear. Some say because of President Assad’s humane offer, they chose to be exiled to the enclave of Idlib, where a concentration of jihadists (after 2016) is now located.

The biggest Daesh group there has become HTS, and almost all groups are affiliated with them. Also, there are remaining Uyghurs, many of whom are in Idlib. This group is extremely violent, and they know they can’t go back to China. According to one report, Uyghur jihadist fighters in Syria have served as a force multiplier for insurgents there. Uyghur fighters gained ground in Idlib, the only Syrian province that still has a large local and foreign jihadist presence. Uyghur jihadists in Syria pose an overlooked yet significant regional and international security problem. They are likely to become a greater threat if fighting in Idlib winds down and the province is not decisively captured by a strong state or non-state actor hostile to jihadist groups.”

Read more …

Here’s the plan: “The negative natural change (more deaths than births) was outnumbered by the positive net migration..”

• EU Reports Dramatic Fall In Birth Rate (RT)

The number of babies born in the EU fell to a record low last year, according to the latest data from the bloc’s statistical office (Eurostat). Despite this, the total population has been on the rise due to mass immigration. Births across the EU’s 27 member states stood at 3,665,000 in 2023 – a decline of 5.5% year-on-year, as per Eurostat’s figures. Birth rates have been falling steadily across the EU since 2008. The number of births last year was the lowest in the EU countries since comparable data was first collected in 1961, and the annual decline is the largest on record, the Financial Times (FT) reports. The sharpest drops in births over the past decade have been recorded in Italy, Spain, Greece, Poland, Finland, and the Baltic states.

Demographic experts polled by the FT believe the longstanding trend of Europeans having fewer babies may have been exacerbated by concerns over economic and political tensions on the international level, the worst surge in inflation in a generation, climate change, and the Covid-19 pandemic. According to a recent report, the Total Fertility Rate has halved from 3.3 children per woman in 1960 to 1.5 in 2022 in the 38 countries that are members of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), which include 22 EU member states plus Australia, Canada, Japan, South Korea, and others. According to Eurostat, all EU regions have fertility rates below the replacement level of 2.1 live births per woman.

Nevertheless, the population of the EU has been on the rise over the past decade, with the exception of the pandemic year of 2021. The most notable jump was recorded in 2023, according to Eurostat figures. “The negative natural change (more deaths than births) was outnumbered by the positive net migration,” the agency said in a release in July. Eurostat attributed the population growth to increased migration after the pandemic and the influx of immigrants from Ukraine who received temporary protection status in the EU.

Read more …

“When I sit on the meetings of the Foreign Affairs Council with other foreign ministers and listen to some, I’m so sad, that such kind of extreme pro-war positions are present..”

• EU Has Weakened ‘A Lot’ Amid Ukraine Conflict – Hungarian FM (RT)

The EU approach to the Ukraine conflict has ultimately weakened the bloc “a lot,” Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto has said, branding the decision to blindly follow Washington’s polices a “big mistake.” The top diplomat made the remarks while speaking exclusively to RT’s Saskia Taylor in an interview on Monday. Comparisons between EU and US aid to Ukraine by the bloc’s leaders are a “very bad and harmful approach from the European perspective,” Szijjarto said. While the US is hardly affected by the enduring hostility between Moscow and Kiev, the conflict has taken a heavy toll on the EU, according to the minister. “There is destruction taking place in Europe, and the European economy is faced with the impacts and the consequences of this war. So therefore, following the US policies without any kind of criticism, that’s a big mistake and I do believe that the strategy the European Union has been following in the recent 1000 days is a failed one,” Szijjarto said.

The EU has “weakened a lot” during the conflict, and the approach taken by the bloc has proven to be a wrong one, the diplomat stated. I do believe that instead of globalizing the conflict, the right strategy would have been to localize it and to do everything in order to resolve it, to make peace, instead of pouring oil on the fire, which has been the case. “There are many extremely pro-war politicians in Europe. When I sit on the meetings of the Foreign Affairs Council with other foreign ministers and listen to some, I’m so sad, that such kind of extreme pro-war positions are present,” Szijjarto stated. Hungary itself has taken a different approach, remaining “the only country in Europe or European Union which has not delivered weapons to Ukraine,” he noted. “We are the only country in NATO, almost the only one, which speaks openly about the red lines which must be kept seriously. And we are the ones who speak openly about our assessment that NATO is a defense alliance and not an attack,” Szijjarto added.

The foreign minister also touched upon the situation in Georgia, which has been gripped by unrest over the past few days after Georgian Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze announced that he would freeze accession talks with the EU until 2028. The protests have been openly backed by the EU, with the stance taken by the bloc’s leadership hardly surprising given that Hungary has been “under attack for the last 15 years,” Szijjarto suggested. “My problem is that this is very [common] in Europe. In the case, if it is not the liberals to win an election, the democratic nature of the whole country and the whole political system is being questioned immediately. If it is liberals to win, everything’s fine. If it’s patriots to win, if it is conservatives to win, if it is right-wing to win, the nature of democracy is immediately questioned. And this is totally unacceptable,” he said.

Read more …

“During the week of Nov. 6, MSNBC averaged just 38,000 viewers among adults 25-54..

• The End Of Fake News? MSNBC Hits New Low In Ratings (ZH)

The leftist “news” channel MSNBC is facing a ratings crisis, with some of its advertiser-coveted viewership dropping to a two-decade low, according to Nielsen data reviewed by Fox News. During the week of Nov. 6, MSNBC averaged just 38,000 viewers among adults 25-54, its lowest-rated non-holiday weekday since July 19, 2004. As reported by Fox News, this demographic is widely prized by advertisers and is crucial for network revenue. Low viewership impacted shows like The 11th Hour with Stephanie Ruhle and Jose Diaz Balart Reports, both of which saw their smallest audiences ever. Other shows—including Chris Jansing Reports, Deadline: White House and Katy Tur Reports—saw their worst days ever among the demos. Several shows lost over 50% of their 25-54 audience.

Among those shows are The 11th Hour with Stephanie Ruhle, All In with Chris Hayes, Chris Jansing Reports, Inside with Jen Psaki, The Rachel Maddow Show and Joy Reid’s ReidOut. This slump couldn’t have come at a worse time, as MSNBC’s parent company, Comcast, announced cuts to cable channels, excluding NBC News and Bravo TV. CNN reports that MSNBC will be moved into “SpinCo,” a publicly traded cable programming company. Tech mogul Elon Musk has hinted at purchasing MSNBC, while journalist Jack Posobiec says he’s recruiting investors to take control of the left-wing network.

Podcast host Joe Rogan joked about replacing Rachel Maddow if Musk buys MSNBC: “I will wear the same outfit and glasses, and I will tell the same lies.”Along with viewership and Comcast scandals, MSNBC is under the scrutiny of its viewers after Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski met with Donald Trump, despite having previously compared him to dictators. Al Sharpton faces ethical scrutiny after his nonprofit quietly took a $500,000 donation from the Harris campaign ahead of his interview with Vice President Kamala Harris. MSNBC conceded that Sharpton blindsided them with the donation. “MSNBC was unaware of the donations made to the National Action Network,” an MSNBC spokesperson told the Washington Free Beacon.

Read more …

“Hamburg will see its flights cut by 60 percent, BER by 20 percent and Cologne/Bonn by 10 percent.”

• Ryanair CEO O’Leary: Germany Is Run By ‘Idiots’ (RMX)

In an interview for the industry magazine “Airliners,” Ryanair CEO Michael O’Leary attacked German politicians, calling them “a government of idiots,” criticizing in particular the Greens, whom he accused of “stupid solutions,” reports DoRceczy. He was also skeptical about the future government of the Federal Republic of Germany. “I don’t think the next government of Germany will be any better,” he said. Ryanair’s boss described the German aviation market as one of the worst in Europe, calling Berlin’s BER airport “dysfunctional,” adding that the airport could only function as “a regional airport at best.”

According to him, high fees of over €50 per passenger are a key reason why the German aviation industry is only slowly recovering from the coronavirus pandemic. This is why Ryanair has already reduced its German capacity from 16 million to 13.5 million seats. The fleet of 300 aircraft will be moved to more attractive markets, with the location “determined strictly on the basis of expected profits,” he said. Ryanair will be withdrawing completely from Dortmund, Dresden, and Halle/Leipzig airports by March 2025, while Hamburg will see its flights cut by 60 percent, BER by 20 percent and Cologne/Bonn by 10 percent. “Further cuts could come next year with the summer flight schedule, as Ryanair increasingly favors lower-cost destinations outside Germany,” DW reports.

Read more …

“Defendant is ORDERED to provide Plaintiff with copies of all responsive records that are not legally exempted or excepted from disclosure..”

• Fani Full Release Ordered After Fulton DA Sat On RICO Records (ZH)

Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis has been ordered by a local judge to release all communications between her office, Special Counsel Jack Smith’s office, and the January 6th Committee regarding her RICO case against President Donald Trump and his allies, after she was found to have violated federal law by withholding them. “The Court also hereby ORDERS Defendant to conduct a diligent search of her records for responsive materials within five business days of the entry of this Order. Within that same five day period, Defendant is ORDERED to provide Plaintiff with copies of all responsive records that are not legally exempted or excepted from disclosure,” reads a Tuesday order. If Willis can’t find them, she is mandated to follow court-ordered procedures to “provide an explanation why such correspondence does not exist.”

Willis, who had been served on March 11, 2024 in the suite involving conservative watchdog Judicial Watch, failed to respond by an April 10 deadline. After later claiming she ‘misunderstood’ the court’s directive, she then said that the document release would jeopardize her RICO case. [..] As the Epoch Times notes further… “In mid-2023, Willis told a local radio station that she was not coordinating in any way with Smith’s office in investigations and cases brought against former President Donald Trump. Smith had charged Trump, now the president-elect, with both classified documents-related and 2020 election-related charges in two different jurisdictions, while Willis brought charges against him and more than a dozen others for alleged election-related crimes in Fulton County.

“I don’t know what Jack Smith is doing and Jack Smith doesn’t know what I’m doing,” Willis said in July of that year. “In all honesty, if Jack Smith was standing next to me, I’m not sure I would know who he was. My guess is he probably can’t pronounce my name correctly.” Since then, however, she has made no comments about Smith’s investigation. Smith, meanwhile, has never commented on Willis’s case against Trump. Smith in November filed court papers confirming he would be dropping his election case against Trump and would stop the appeals process in his classified documents case. During his 2024 presidential campaign, Trump said he would terminate Smith as special counsel upon taking office.

A letter sent by Willis’s office on Dec. 17, 2021, to the House Jan. 6 committee had “requested access to any Select Committee records relevant to her investigation into President Trump’s actions to challenge the 2020 presidential election, including ‘recordings and transcripts of witness interviews and depositions, electronic and print records of communications, and records of travel,’” House Judiciary Republicans said in a report released last year relating to an investigation they launched into Willis. Willis has been critical of House Republicans’ investigation into her office and the Trump case, accusing House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) of trying to interfere in the case at one point. “Jim Jordan has, time after time after time, attacked my office with no legitimate purpose,” she told MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow in May. “Anyone who knows Jim Jordan’s history knows that he only has the purpose of trying to interfere in a criminal investigation.”

In a letter issued to Republicans in 2023, Willis said Republicans are trying to “obstruct a Georgia criminal proceeding and to advance outrageous partisan misrepresentations.” Her case against Trump has stalled in recent months after one of the president-elect’s co-defendants submitted a court filing earlier this year claiming Willis and then-special prosecutor Nathan Wade were engaged in a romantic relationship. The pair confirmed they were in a relationship but denied any wrongdoing. A judge overseeing the case issued an order in March allowing Willis to remain on the case if Wade resigned, which he did hours later. Trump and several of his co-defendants appealed the decision to the Georgia Court of Appeals earlier this year, where the case is still pending.”

Read more …

“By nearly all measures of science, if there was evidence of a natural origin it would have already surfaced..”

• House Oversight Report Supports Lab-Leak Theory for COVID-19 Origin (ET)

A Republican-led oversight subcommittee has concluded that the COVID-19 virus likely originated from a laboratory in Wuhan, China, following a two-year investigation into the pandemic. The House Oversight Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic released a 520-page report on Dec. 2, detailing the findings of the subcommittee’s investigation. The report found that the U.S. National Institutes of Health funded gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), and that EcoHealth Alliance Inc. used U.S. taxpayer dollars to facilitate this research at the lab. It also found that the Chinese communist regime, agencies within the U.S. government, and some members of the international scientific community sought to cover up facts concerning the origins of the pandemic.

The committee said that COVID-19 possesses biological characteristics not found in nature and that data indicates that all COVID-19 cases stemmed from a single introduction into humans, unlike previous pandemics, where there were more spillover events. “By nearly all measures of science, if there was evidence of a natural origin it would have already surfaced,” the oversight subcommittee said in a statement. The report said that the Wuhan Institute of Virology has a history of conducting “gain-of-function” research under low biosafety precautions. Several researchers from the Wuhan Institute of Virology fell sick with a COVID-like virus months before the first case of the outbreak was allegedly detected at a wet market, according to the report.

The report said that in January 2021, the U.S. State Department published an unclassified fact sheet that stated: “The U.S. government has reason to believe that several researchers inside the WIV became sick in autumn 2019, before the first identified case of the outbreak, with symptoms consistent with both COVID-19 and common seasonal illness.” Citing the fact sheet, the report stated that the Wuhan Institute of Virology “has a published record of conducting ‘gain-of-function’ research to engineer chimeric viruses.” The report said the June 2023 ODNI assessment supported this conclusion and went further, stating, “Scientists at the WIV have created chimeras, or combinations of SARS-like coronaviruses through genetic engineering, attempted to clone other unrelated viruses, and used reverse genetic cloning techniques on SARS-like coronaviruses.”

The June 2023 ODNI Assessment said that some of the “WIV’s genetic engineering projects on coronaviruses involved techniques that could make it difficult to detect intentional changes.” Among those interviewed during the panel’s investigation was Anthony Fauci, former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), who stepped down from his role in December 2022. The report stated that Fauci had “prompted” a research study titled “The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2”—which dismissed the idea that the virus was laboratory constructed—to “disprove” the lab leak theory. Fauci testified at a June hearing that he did not suppress the lab leak theory and did not view it as inherently a conspiracy theory but said that “some distortions on that particular subject are,” according to the report.

Read more …

“Hughes’s expression of his gratitude to everyone associated with the Novichok narrative except for the Skripals means he is burying them..”

• The Skripals Are As Good As Dead – The Judge Has Buried Them (Helmer)

After Yulia Skripal has testified through her doctor that she was attacked with a poison spray in a restaurant minutes before she and her father, Sergei Skripal, collapsed on March 4, 2018, the British Government hearings on what happened have attempted to suppress her evidence. Yesterday, December 2, the hearings ended with a statement by Jack Holborn, a lawyer paid by the Home Office to say he represents the Skripals, and to claim they agree to the suppression of their own evidence. “Sergei and Yulia Skripal are grateful to this Inquiry for its work,” Holborn said. “Thank you.” Page 158 The retired judge who has directed the hearings, Anthony Hughes (titled Lord Hughes of Ombersley), let slip in his closing statement that he understands the Skripals are dead or incommunicado in prison because he omitted to thank them for their participation. “

I am grateful,” Hughes said, “to all the Core Participants and chiefly, of course, to those most closely connected to the events, namely Dawn Sturgess’ family, who have coped, if I may say so, admirably with what must have been at times extremely difficult evidence to listen to.” Only the Skripals were closer to the events than the Sturgess family or the ambulance crews, police, intelligence agents, doctors, and government officials who have been called to testify on their oaths. But Hughes ruled on September 23 that the Skripals were not allowed to testify either in the open hearing room, behind closed doors, or by remote internet link. Hughes’s expression of his gratitude to everyone associated with the Novichok narrative except for the Skripals means he is burying them.

Holborn has been seconding Andrew Deakin KC, a lawyer also paid by the Home Office to represent the Skripals. Neither of them has asked questions of any witness nor made submissions throughout the eight weeks of the Dawn Sturgess Inquiry hearings. Deakin’s opening statement on October 14 lasted 88 seconds. “Both Sergei and Yulia Skripal,” Deakin said, “would like to express their sorrow at the death of Dawn Sturgess and to offer their deepest sympathies to her family and loved ones. Sergei and Yulia Skripal also express their sympathy to those who were injured in the course of this incident. Finally, Sergei and Yulia would like to express their profound gratitude to the emergency workers, police and hospital staff who risked their lives to help them. Sergei and Yulia keenly await the outcome of this Inquiry. They look forward to better understanding the circumstances of the Salisbury attack, to considering the Inquiry’s conclusions as to who was responsible for that attack and to being able to move on with their lives.” Page 156-57. Deakin did not appear again.

In open testimony at the Inquiry it has been revealed that Yulia Skripal’s doctor at the Salisbury District Hospital, Stephen Cockroft, discovered she had recovered consciousness on March 8, four days after the attack. The police evidence to the Inquiry is that Skripal then communicated by eye signals to Cockroft that she remembered being sprayed, not at home but at Zizzi’s Restaurant where she and her father had been lunching just before they collapsed. The senior police source for this evidence was Keith Asman; he is the chief of forensics for the Counter Terrorism Policing (CTPSE) group which in the investigation of the Novichok affair has combined the Metropolitan and regional police forces with the Secret Intelligence Service (MI6) and the Security Service (MI5). In his witness statement, Asman repeated what another police officer, code-named VN104, had recorded from Dr Cockroft. The evidence of Detective Inspector (DI) VN104, identified as the deputy head of the Metropolitan Police investigating Novichok, was not called into open or closed testimony by Hughes.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Frens
https://twitter.com/i/status/1863534908569981204

 

 

Slide
https://twitter.com/i/status/1863660969118822457

 

 

Bonedigger

 

 

Kestrel

 

 

Seal

 

 

Dunkin

 

 

Chihuahua
https://twitter.com/i/status/1863677018270994682

 

 

Save the bees

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 Older Entries