Menu Icon

Debt Rattle September 29 2025

Sep 292025
 
 September 29, 2025  Posted by at 10:21 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , ,  33 Responses »


René Magritte Sixteenth of September 1956

 

• John Mearsheimer On Trump Passing The Buck To Europe (ZH)
• UK Journalist Blows Holes In Western Myths About Russia (RT)
• Vance Calls On Russia To ‘Wake Up’ And Accept Reality (RT)
• Vance Claims Russia ‘Refused’ Meetings With Trump (RT)
• US Considering Tomahawks For Ukraine – Vance (RT)
• Ukraine ‘Unlikely’ To Regain Territory Lost To Russia – Independent (RT)
• Zelensky Confirms Israel Sent Patriot Missile Battery To Ukraine
• Kash Patel On Why There Were 100s of FBI Agents on the Hill on January 6 (Vespa)
• Kash Patel Accuses Christopher Wray of Lying to Congress About Capitol Riot (Margolis)
• Is the Fix Already in to Protect James Comey? (Margolis)
• While Men Wonder, ‘What Can I Do?’ They Already Know (Tim O’brien)
• We Now Have a 4th Theory of Charlie Kirk’s Assassination (Paul Craig Roberts)

 

 

 

 

 

 

A very rare clear head and voice.

• John Mearsheimer On Trump Passing The Buck To Europe (ZH)

Professor John J. Mearsheimer’s now famous 2014 hour-and-fifteen minute lecture on how NATO led Ukraine down the primrose path, once it was popularly ‘discovered’ on YouTube after the Russian invasion of 2022, has since racked up several tens of millions of views. We wrote about his insights and forecasts in Mearsheimer’s Ukraine Crystal Ball as well as his 2024 talk on “Social Engineering At The End Of A Rifle Barrel”. And now in 2025 more and more people continue to say: John Mearsheimer was right, and his analysis continues to be accurate as ever.

In his latest appearance on “Judging Freedom”, he talked with the Judge about Trump’s famous Truth Social tweet where the president subtly said that the US is turning responsibility for the Ukraine war to the Europeans and Ukraine, while at the same time he is going to great lengths as the war goes south to protect himself against the charge he “lost Ukraine.” Mearsheimer and Judge Napolitano also discussed the roots of America’s harmful relationship with Israel and Tucker Carlson’s comment that Netanyahu has been telling others that “I control the United States.” Trump insists he has long been seeking to wind down the wars in Ukraine and Gaza, but what’s really going on behind the scenes. Watch the foremost realism foreign policy expert of our time unpack it…

As a reminder, here’s what Trump wrote on Truth Social regarding the future of the Ukraine crisis this week, ‘stunning’ some European officials while unleashing an avalanche of speculation over what precisely he meant.

Read more …

“Believe it or not, Russia is great..”

• UK Journalist Blows Holes In Western Myths About Russia (RT)

British journalist and commentator James Delingpole has shared a provocative account of his recent visit to Moscow, painting a picture of Russia that sharply contrasts with the prevailing negative tone in the Western media. In an essay subtitled “Believe it or not, Russia is great,” published in the UK political and cultural weekly The Spectator earlier this week, Delingpole describes how an invitation from a Russian Orthodox archbishop, an avid listener of his podcast, set the stage for his journey. The columnist admits that many friends and family members considered the trip reckless, some even warning he might be trailed by Russian intelligence or struck by a drone. But instead of a hostile or oppressive environment, he encountered a country that defied many of his expectations.

Delingpole praises Moscow’s clean and safe streets, efficient public transport, and the warmth and dignity of its inhabitants. The award-winning journalist also reflects on the deep spirituality and traditions upheld by the Russian Orthodox Church, drawing a sharp contrast with what he views as the West’s drift into secularism and aggressive progressivism. One part of the essay focuses on Moldova, where he claims the Orthodox Church is facing persecution by pro-EU authorities. Delingpole argues that Western support for such governments often leads to the suppression of conservative religious voices, particularly those opposing gay marriage, LGBT parades or abortion. The writer recounts small but meaningful moments from his trip, such as a local woman teaching him the proper way to cross himself, and the honor of venerating a saint’s relics offered as a gesture of hospitality.

“Though I’m not planning on abandoning my Anglican parish in Northamptonshire, with its six or seven picturesque medieval churches and its Book of Common Prayer communion services, I do find the mysteries of Orthodoxy awfully seductive,” Delingpole noted. The essay does not touch upon any aspects of Russian politics, but does challenge readers to reconsider blanket narratives concerning the country. The author suggests that in condemning everything associated with Russia, the West may “be in danger of throwing the baby out with the bathwater.”

Read more …

Where did he come from? Trump tired?

• Vance Calls On Russia To ‘Wake Up’ And Accept Reality (RT)

US Vice President J.D. Vance has called on Moscow to “’wake up and accept reality,” claiming that Russia has little “to show for” its military effort in the Ukraine conflict. His words echo those of President Donald Trump, who has recently also changed his rhetoric on the issue by stating that Kiev could defeat Moscow. For months, Washington insisted that Kiev would need to give up on certain territorial claims for a US-mediated peace deal with Moscow to move forward. This week, however, the US President made a U-turn by dismissing Russia as a “paper tiger” and urging Kiev to “act.” Vance called on Moscow to sit down at the negotiating table in an interview with Fox News on Sunday.

The US would “keep on working for peace, and we hope the Russians actually wake up to the reality on the ground,” he stated while largely repeating Trump’s recent arguments. According to the vice president, Moscow’s forces have “really stalled” and “don’t have much territorial gain to show for” their efforts, with the Russian economy allegedly “in shambles.” Moscow has repeatedly stated it is open to a peaceful resolution of the hostilities at any time but has maintained that any deal must address the roots of the conflict and respect the realities on the ground. This includes the status of the former Ukrainian territories that joined Russia after public referendums.

Contrary to recent statements by both Trump and Vance, the Russian Defense Ministry reported on Thursday that its forces have taken control of 4,700 square kilometers and 205 settlements this year alone. The Russian economy has also been demonstrating steady growth over the past few years despite the pressure of unprecedented Western sanctions. The nation’s GDP grew by 4.1% in 2023 and by 4.3% in 2024. Although a slowdown is expected this year, it is still projected to grow by 2.5%. The Kremlin had earlier responded to Trump’s original remarks by saying that Russia is traditionally associated with a bear rather than a tiger and there is “no such thing as a paper bear.”

Read more …

They want them well-prepared.

• Vance Claims Russia ‘Refused’ Meetings With Trump (RT)

The Russian side has refused trilateral meetings with US President Donald Trump and representatives from Ukraine, US Vice President J.D. Vance claimed in an interview with Fox News on Sunday. Trump has increasingly expressed impatience with the pace of Ukraine peace talks. The Kremlin says Kiev has demonstrated that it is not interested in peace by sticking to megaphone diplomacy and ignoring Russian settlement proposals. “Unfortunately, what we have seen over the last couple weeks, the Russians have refused to sit down with any bilateral meetings with the Ukrainians,” Vance told Fox News.

“They have refused to sit down with any trilateral meetings, where the president or some other member of the administration could sit down with the Russians and the Ukrainians,” he added. According to Moscow, Russian President Vladimir Putin is ready to meet Trump if the US leader chooses to take up the invitation and visit Moscow. The offer was extended shortly after their summit in Alaska in August. “This invitation still stands,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told TASS on Sunday. “Putin is ready and will be glad to meet President Trump. It will then all depend on Trump’s decision.”

However, a meeting with Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky would first require the peace talks to make some headway, Moscow has argued. An “unprepared” meeting with Zelensky would amount to “a PR-stunt doomed to failure,” Peskov said on Wednesday. Moscow has maintained that it is ready and willing to settle the Ukraine conflict via diplomatic means.

Read more …

“The missiles have a range of up to 2,500km and can be equipped with nuclear warheads.”

If they can, you must presume they do.

• US Considering Tomahawks For Ukraine – Vance (RT)

The US is considering making long-range Tomahawk missiles available for Ukraine, Vice President J.D. Vance told Fox News on Sunday. Several Western news media outlets, including the Wall Street Journal and The Telegraph, previously reported that Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky specifically requested the missiles during a meeting with US President Donald Trump on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in New York last week. According to the WSJ, Trump did not oppose the idea and was also open to lifting restrictions on Kiev’s use of US-made weapons for strikes deep into Russian territory, but made no specific commitments during the meeting. The president was previously against giving Tomahawks to Ukraine, according to Axios.

“We’re certainly looking at it,” Vance said when asked if Washington is considering selling the missiles to other NATO members so that they could be handed over to Kiev. When further pressed on the issue of a potential escalation that could follow such a step, Vance said that Trump would ultimately determine Washington’s course of action. The US president’s special envoy, Keith Kellogg, who also talked to Fox News on Sunday, said that “the decision has not been made,” while confirming that Zelensky did ask Trump for Tomahawks. The missiles have a range of up to 2,500km and can be equipped with nuclear warheads. Moscow has repeatedly warned that Western arms supplies to Kiev will not change the situation on the front line and only risk further escalation, potentially leading to a direct conflict between Russia and NATO.

In November 2024, President Vladimir Putin cautioned that “the regional conflict in Ukraine provoked by the West has assumed elements of a global nature,” and warned of a backlash if tensions escalate further. His comments came after Kiev launched several strikes using US-made ATACMS and HIMARS systems, as well as British-made Storm Shadow missiles, deep inside Russian territory after receiving the green light from its Western backers. The Kremlin also warned that “reckless decisions” of Western nations supplying Ukraine with long-range missiles cannot be left unanswered.

Read more …

“..he did not even entirely understand what Zelensky was “actually talking about.”

• Ukraine ‘Unlikely’ To Regain Territory Lost To Russia – Independent (RT)

Kiev is in no position to reclaim the former Ukrainian regions it lost to Russia without the active participation of its NATO backers, The Independent has reported, citing a group of experts. Earlier this week, US President Donald Trump claimed that the country could potentially win back the territory it lays claim to. The US president likened Russia to a “paper tiger” and said it was “time for Ukraine to act” in a post on Truth Social that was praised by Vladimir Zelensky. However, the experts approached by The Independent poured cold water on Kiev’s hopes. Ukraine would need its NATO backers to provide it with an effective “sky shield” and long-range weapons if it hopes to overpower Russia, according to John Lough, the head of foreign policy at the New Eurasian Strategies Center.

“It doesn’t really look realistic unless Russia can be crippled economically,” he added. Emil Kastehelmi, a military analyst at Black Bird Group, a Finnish open-source intelligence project, called such a prospect nearly unimaginable. “I do not find it possible, under the current circumstances, that Ukraine would be able to take all of its land back,” he told The Independent, adding that such an “immense task” would require the direct participation of NATO nations. He also questioned recent statements by Zelensky about an offensive in the Donetsk People’s Republic, where the Ukrainian leader claimed Kiev’s troops had thwarted a major Russian attack.

“The amount of land that he’s saying has been taken back seems to be over-exaggerated,” the analyst said, adding that he did not even entirely understand what Zelensky was “actually talking about.” Contrary to Trump’s “paper tiger” claims, the Russian Defense Ministry has been reporting steady advances in recent months, particularly in the Donetsk People’s Republic. Russian forces have taken control of 4,700 square kilometers and 205 settlements this year, it reported on Thursday. Earlier this month, Ukrainian Commander-in-Chief Aleksandr Syrsky also admitted that Russia was superior on the front line, with its troops prevailing in all key areas.

.

Read more …

What good are Patriots vs hypersonics?

• Zelensky Confirms Israel Sent Patriot Missile Battery To Ukraine

It was a surprised announcement, given that for over three years of the Ukraine war, Israel has been persistent in resisting calls to send arms to Israel, given it is more concerned with keeping its delicate relations with Moscow positive. Until now it had only sent non-lethal and humanitarian aid. Also, Russia has long maintained a military presence on the Mediterranean, along Syria’s coast. But times have changed, and Russia could be packing up its Syrian naval and air bases, given the December overthrow of its ally Assad and the Jolani regime being installed in Damascus. Moscow is suddenly left with less leverage in the region, and has pivoted to growing closer with Iran, which has supplied it with kamikaze drones used in Ukraine.

It likely rubbed Tel Aviv the wrong way seeing Russia deepen its economic, defense, and technological cooperation with Iran, so in light of all of this it has softened its resistance to arming Ukraine. Back in June, Israel’s ambassador to Ukraine Michael Brodsky was the first to let slip that Patriot systems would protect Ukrainian cities, which was a risk given it has angered Russia. Yet the Ukrainian government had never officially acknowledged this. But to get US-supplied Patriots to Ukraine, there’s been some trickery and serious diplomatic maneuvering involved in order to make it appear all very ‘indirect’ – in part to prevent Israel from provoking too much wrath out of Moscow. Back in May, the NY Times presented how the scheme would work:

A Patriot air-defense system that was based in Israel will be sent to Ukraine after it is refurbished, four current and former U.S. officials said in recent days, and Western allies are discussing the logistics of Germany or Greece giving another one. The officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the discussions, declined to describe President Trump’s view of the decision to transfer more Patriot systems to Ukraine. And Kyiv Post has newly acknowledged, “The deployment confirmed an intricate plan, first reported by US media in May, that involved Washington requesting that Israel return an older Patriot system for refurbishment before it was routed to Kyiv.”

Ukraine is seeking to establish a layered permanent defensive air shield based on advanced systems provided by the West. The Trump administration has largely put the brakes on simply donating arms directly, but wants Europe and allies to foot the bill and make the transfers.

Read more …

“Agents were sent into a crowd control mission after the riot was declared by Metro Police – something that goes against FBI standards..”

• Kash Patel On Why There Were 100s of FBI Agents on the Hill on January 6 (Vespa)

The Federal Bureau of Investigation has been cagey regarding its activities on January 6. The allegation that undercover operatives were embedded in the crowd during the riot isn’t tin foil hat material—the bureau admitted it. The inspector general tried to deny it, but there was no spinning this. The FBI had agents on the ground, some of whom entered the Capitol Building. Now, we’ve learned that there were hundreds of agents on the ground this week, around 275. FBI Director Kash Patel had to clarify what the FBI was doing over the weekend, and former FBI Director Chris Wray might be hauled before Congress again. Mr. Patel said that agents were dispatched for crowd control (via Fox News):

“The FBI responded on Saturday to a report that 274 plainclothes agents were at the U.S. Capitol riot on Jan. 6, 2021, clarifying the role of bureau personnel while still blasting former Director Christopher Wray. While the agents were on hand, they were sent in after the riot had begun to try to control the unruly crowd, officials told Fox News Digital. That is not the proper role of FBI agents, and Wray was not forthcoming about what happened when he testified numerous times on Capitol Hill, Director Kash Patel said. “Agents were sent into a crowd control mission after the riot was declared by Metro Police – something that goes against FBI standards,” Patel told Fox News Digital. “This was the failure of a corrupt leadership that lied to Congress and to the American people about what really happened.” He added, “Thanks to agents coming forward, we are now uncovering the truth. We are fully committed to transparency, and justice and accountability continues with this FBI.”

[…]
Wray told a House Committee on Nov. 15, 2023, “If you are asking if the violence at the Capitol was part of some operation orchestrated by FBI sources or agents, the answer is no,” but he wouldn’t disclose if any agents or sources were embedded within the crowd.” So, did Wray lie to Congress? It might be time to ask him some more questions.

Read more …

“..only showed up after Capitol Police begged for help with crowd control—a job agents resented because they aren’t trained for it..”

• Kash Patel Accuses Christopher Wray of Lying to Congress About Capitol Riot (Margolis)

The narrative that January 6 was purely an organic riot keeps collapsing under the weight of new revelations. For years, the left branded anyone who suggested the FBI had undercover operatives in the crowd a conspiracy theorist. Now, the bureau has admitted it. The inspector general tried to soft-pedal it but couldn’t—FBI agents were on the ground, and some even entered the Capitol Building. This week’s disclosure was even more stunning: about 274 agents were operating on January 6. That’s not “a few.” That’s a coordinated presence. Over the weekend, FBI Director Kash Patel offered some clarification about this new revelation, and there may be implications for former Director Chris Wray. According to a report from Fox News Digital, the bureau now claims its personnel showed up only after the chaos started and handled “crowd control.”

But here’s the problem: that’s not the job of FBI agents. The bureau isn’t a riot squad, and Patel called out the excuse directly. He also reminded everyone that Wray wasn’t honest when he testified on Capitol Hill—he concealed key facts about the bureau’s actions, and that deception continues to hang over his record. “Agents were sent into a crowd control mission after the riot was declared by Metro Police – something that goes against FBI standards,” Patel said. “This was the failure of a corrupt leadership that lied to Congress and to the American people about what really happened.” Patel added, “Thanks to agents coming forward, we are now uncovering the truth. We are fully committed to transparency, and justice and accountability continues with this FBI.”

There’s no indication any FBI agents were involved in any events related to Trump’s speech on the morning of Jan. 6 at the Ellipse, an FBI official told Fox News Digital, adding that Wray should have disclosed that agents were there when he was asked by congressional leaders. President Donald Trump, citing a report that the agents were in the crowd which did not make clear their mission, said earlier that Wray, “has some major explaining to do.” “It was just revealed that the FBI had secretly placed, against all Rules, Regulations, Protocols, and Standards, 274 FBI Agents into the Crowd just prior to, and during, the January 6th Hoax,” Trump wrote in a Truth Social post on Saturday afternoon following a report from The Blaze, revealing the number of agents that were there.

Trump added, “This is different from what Director Christopher Wray stated, over and over again! That’s right, as it now turns out, FBI Agents were at, and in, the January 6th Protest, probably acting as Agitators and Insurrectionists, but certainly not as ‘Law Enforcement Officials.’” The president said he wanted to know each officer’s identity and what they were doing at the U.S. Capitol. “Many Great American Patriots were made to pay a very big price only for the love of their Country,” he said, referring to Trump supporters who faced charges for their involvement on Jan. 6.

A December report from DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz insisted there were no undercover FBI agents in the crowds that day, though he admitted there were informants, including three directed by the FBI. The bureau claims its agents only showed up after Capitol Police begged for help with crowd control—a job agents resented because they aren’t trained for it. According to officials, the first FBI personnel didn’t even arrive until after 2:30 p.m., well after the chaos had begun.

Read more …

“The deep state isn’t afraid of justice—they’re afraid of accountability.”

• Is the Fix Already in to Protect James Comey? (Margolis)

The swamp never wastes time protecting its own, and James Comey is no exception. The disgraced former FBI director, who has finally been indicted for lying to Congress and obstructing a congressional proceeding, is already benefiting from the familiar playbook: put the right judge in place, create an appearance of fairness, and then quietly shield him from any real accountability. On Thursday, following the grand jury indictment, Comey’s case was “randomly” assigned to U.S. District Judge Michael Nachmanoff. In 2021, Joe Biden nominated Nachmanoff, and the Senate confirmed him to the federal bench with a razor-thin 52-46 vote, as three Senate Republicans — Lindsey Graham, Susan Collins, and Lisa Murkowski — crossed over to support his confirmation. If you believe that selecting Nachmanoff to preside over this case was truly random, then you haven’t been paying attention.

Washington’s so-called “random assignments” seem to have a funny way of putting the most Trump-hostile judges on politically charged cases. Take Judge James Boasberg, a Barack Obama appointee, who just happened to land multiple Trump-related cases. Every single time, Boasberg ruled in ways that stretched or outright ignored constitutional boundaries to work against Trump. Yet, somehow, we’re supposed to believe these assignments are pure chance. Sure. Judge Nachmanoff’s résumé doesn’t exactly inspire confidence either. Before becoming a magistrate judge for six years, he spent over a decade working as a federal public defender. That’s a career steeped in finding loopholes, bending rules, and negotiating ways to avoid accountability for defendants. He also defended al Qaeda member Zacarias Moussaoui.

And now he’s tasked with presiding over perhaps the most politically sensitive case since the Trump-Russia debacle that Comey himself helped orchestrate. It has all the makings of yet another judicial performance meant not to obtain justice, but to wash Comey clean. Comey himself is projecting confidence, even smugness. After his indictment, he declared, “I’m not afraid,” clearly confident of his inevitable vindication. Of course he’s not afraid—why would he be? He knows exactly how the swamp game works: the very corrupt institutions that targeted Trump are now circling the wagons to protect him. Washington knows that convicting Comey would mean vindicating Trump’s long-standing claims of a deep-state sabotage. They’ll never allow that because it would expose years of abuse and corruption.

Let’s not forget how deep the animosity runs. Comey’s feud with Trump dates back to 2017 when Trump fired him for insubordination and dishonesty. From there, Comey reinvented himself as the loudest of Trump’s critics, playing the role of “principled public servant” while running cover for the FBI’s disastrous handling of the 2016 campaign and the Russia hoax. I guess we should have seen this coming. The Washington swamp protects its own. James Comey presided over one of the darkest abuses of power in modern American politics, weaponizing the FBI against a duly elected president. Now, as he faces the charges he should have faced years ago, the establishment is already stacking the deck in his favor. The deep state isn’t afraid of justice—they’re afraid of accountability. And once again, it looks like the fix is in.

Read more …

“We can no longer afford to give a free pass to the people who are engineering the destruction of America as we know it. “It’s time.”

• While Men Wonder, ‘What Can I Do?’ They Already Know (Tim O’brien)

Scott Adams, the Dilbert cartoonist and now “cancelled” conservative podcaster, signaled a broad imperative on his podcast in the days prior to the 2024 presidential election. He said, “Men, it’s time.” He said men would know what he meant, and he was correct. He realized that not all men in America were listening to him and waiting for his instructions, but he knew that enough of them were listening and did hear his rallying cry. He acknowledged that his audience was both male and female, but his message was for the men. He said he had a strong feeling about what men in America were pondering at that moment in America’s history. He pointed to how nature shapes men in their responses to threats or danger, and that biology instinctively drives them to assume the role of protector.

Paraphrasing Adams here, he said essentially that men will wait until the threat can no longer be ignored and the obligation to respond can no longer be ignored. Of course, none of this ignores the fact that conservative women were seeing the same things, going through something very similar at the same time, and responding in their own way. Just prior to the election, Adams said men in America now saw where the country was headed and that a Kamala Harris victory would put America on a path to a very dark place. Action had to be taken now. Men throughout America knew they had a responsibility to respond. They had to flat-out reject the left’s propaganda and the eft’s definition of “the new normal.” They didn’t need Adams or someone like him to tell them what to do or what to see. They already innately knew, Adams said. They just needed a nudge: “It’s time.”

During the Republican National Convention in July of 2024, the CNN analysts were discussing the speaker line-up the night when Kid Rock, wrestling legend Hulk Hogan, and UFC President Dana White took the stage. The pundits didn’t know what to make of it. That’s when Chris Wallace piped up and said, “A lot of testosterone tonight.” He was right. After the attempted assassination of Trump in Butler, Pennsylvania, you started to see people, but particularly young men, unapologetically wearing their MAGA hats outside of just those Trump rallies. Increasingly, you’d see them in stores, on the beach, or at your kid’s baseball game. “Bro humor” broke out, and it became acceptable to mercilessly ridicule the cover-up of Joe Biden’s mental incompetence and the steady diet of word salads Kamala Harris was serving up. No amount of Barack Obama’s finger-wagging, aimed particularly at young black men, could resonate.

Across demographics, enough men knew what to do and they did it. They did what guys do when they get motivated. They spoke their minds. They laughed at what needed to be laughed at, especially while taking it seriously. They openly rejected stupidity and things that lacked common sense. In the process, a contagion was unleashed. Most men caught it, but again, especially young men. No more disengagement. No more looking the other way. No more playing along to get along, as men often do. Instead, men in general made a collective decision: “We are not tolerating the BS anymore. We reject the lies, the dictates, the nonsensical new woke protocols in society. All of it.”They pushed b ack at every turn. In personal conversations, in texts, on social media, in bars and restaurants, with family and friends, on the golf course, in the gym, and at work. They just quit overlooking it and letting it go.

They wore those MAGA hats where “polite company” doesn’t do that. They went to Trump rallies and other events. They tuned into Joe Rogan, Theo Von and other podcasters who interviewed Trump. They registered to vote and voted.They put Donald Trump over the top in a big way. Since then, many have gone back to their old ways, disengaging from politics, going back to watching sports, going to work, coaching their kids’ teams, and cutting the grass. Like their better halves, they work, they pay taxes, and they raise families. And besides, politics does not consume them. But now different things are happening. Strange things. Things that weren’t on the calendar like an election date was in 2024. Violent transgender and leftist killers have started to shoot up schools and churches with more frequency. Unsuspecting young women are being attacked and killed in places like light rail transit cars, and no one is helping.

A Christian bridge builder was assassinated for trying to go to the opposition to build dialogue. To make matters worse, he has been smeared online, in the halls of Congress, and in the media after death. ICE officers just trying to do their jobs are being targeted and told by Democrat politicians and leftist mobs to take off their masks so they can be personally doxed and targeted. While the left likes to pretend it hates guns, the gun has become its weapon of choice when trying to kill free speech, kill conservative momentum, and kill commonsense governing policies that people democratically voted for. Policies that are committed to deporting illegal immigrants; policies that affirm that men are men and women are women; policies that recognize my family and I have a right to speak, a right to hear, and a right to be safe in our own community

Those same men Scott Adams was talking to last year are now well aware of this vibe shift in the country. Now, with the women in their lives, they’re watching. They’re looking for something, some indicator that once again the threat can no longer be ignored and that they must do something. But what to do? The answer is pretty simple and nothing we haven’t done before. We need to reject the BS, the excuses, and the victim-blaming when the victims don’t fit the leftist narrative. There must be zero tolerance for violence in all forms, even if it means overwhelming that violence through bolstered law enforcement and federal resources as in Washington, D.C. Men now see the threat and know it won’t go away on its own or just because we voted on election day. Unlike 2024, this is not a battle for votes’ it’s a battle for the culture. We know this.

Deep down, we know we have to do what we did before. Women and men. We must call out the instigators openly and unapologetically. Hold them to account. Laugh at those who need to be laughed at and trivialize what needs to be trivialized, all the while taking the left very seriously. Whether we’re on a transit car or in a public space, we know that if something happens, we have to step up. We have no choice. Men have to get involved. This battle will be won in the course of our daily routines. At parent-teacher meetings, in school board meetings, by speaking up in everyday conversations or through firm but reasonable social media activity. In all cases, all of us must reject leftist hate in all forms, such as by boycotting weaselly late-night comedians. We need to reject what has now become serious political and religious persecution. We must refuse to let woke dictates and protocols rule.

We must refuse to let the left’s distorted version of reality become reality. Back in New York City after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, law enforcement came up with a catchy saying that is relevant right now: If you see something, say something. That’s where we are. When we see something that isn’t right, whether it feels like an immediate threat, or one that if allowed to stand will add to the decline of our culture, we have a duty to do something or say something. Nothing will change unless we, and millions like us, do the same. Men can’t leave it to the government, to the Trump administration, or to their wives. They must be present and accounted for. We can no longer afford to give a free pass to the people who are engineering the destruction of America as we know it. “It’s time.”

Read more …

Not a complete story. Video hardly accessible.

• We Now Have a 4th Theory of Charlie Kirk’s Assassination (Paul Craig Roberts)

“There is now video evidence that is extremely compelling that Charlie Kirk was fitted with an explosive lavalier mic, attached to his T-shirt that fired a small caliber projectile through the right side of his neck, creating a bloody exit wound on his neck’s left side. The mini-explosion under Charlie’s shirt caused a momentary ballooning of the shirt and smoke coming from under his garment that would not seem to have been caused by a bullet fired at him from a distance. These details are readily visible in the video attached below.

The apparent assassin was a man with a large-square-patterned, brown shirt in the audience several feet away from Kirk. He seems to have “shot” Charlie, not by firing a Derringer-sized pistol at him, as some have speculated, but by triggering the detonator under Charlie’s shirt with a remote-control device under the killer’s own shirt sleeve. He was captured on video on the front row in the audience, “pulling the trigger” through his sleeve, which is precisely synchronized with the sound of the exploding detonator. In the video, the man then exhibits a completely different reaction from the other frightened people around him at the moment after Charlie is shot. Thereafter, he immediately rushes to the crime scene where his accomplices appear to be removing the spent mic detonator, or “squib,” from Charlie’s shirt, and perhaps the spent bullet on the ground as well.

Another man in a blue shirt appears to be putting something in his back pocket, while the man in the brown shirt hands off what appears to be the remote control trigger device used in the assassination to yet another man in a white shirt, who puts that item in his back pocket. Both men in the blue shirt and white shirt run off behind the stage and disappear. The assassin or “trigger man” remains at the crime scene, apparently combing the area and sweeping up any remaining evidence.

Another person moves quickly to remove the SD card in the camera behind Charlie that captured the murder on video up close, although from a rear angle. However this too was an illegal removal of evidence from the crime scene. Even the rushed removal of Kirk’s body, ostensibly, “to the hospital,” when he was obviously already dead was also a criminal removal of evidence. Incredibly, the same man with the brown shirt who “pulled the trigger,” can also be seen in another video (linked below, as well) directing five other men, uniformly dressed in dark shirts and khaki pants, as they hurriedly carry Kirk’s lifeless body to a black Suburban, as one or two clueless police look on and still do nothing to secure the crime scene. Then the man in the brown shirt enters the black Suburban to accompany Kirk’s dead body to the hospital. He was not only the “trigger man” but apparently the person coordinating the entire criminal cooperation.

During the ride to the hospital, there would have been enough time to remove Charlie’s shirt, and perhaps replace it with an identical garment. This would have precluded any forensic discovery of spent gunpowder from the explosive that was discharged underneath the material of his original clothing. Of course, just as we were presented with falsified photos of the entry and exit wounds on President Kennedy’s skull, and misleading testimonies by the government’s obviously compromised and/or threatened pathologists at Bethesda, Maryland, so also was the published report on Kirk’s wounds a total lie. This operation was necessarily conducted by multiple persons known to Charlie, who were either employees of TPUSA or “contractors” hired by Charlie’s organization. They are now helping to perpetuate the cover-up, as if those in Charlie’s inner circle were covert Mossad and/or CIA operatives tasked with “keeping him in line,” or eliminating him if he deviated from the script approved by Israel.

As many will recall, the Israelis developed explosive pagers that made their way into the pockets of administrators of the Hamas government structures, killing the people who were carrying those devices, and injuring many others in the process, on 17 September 2024. The Mossad’s remote control executions continued on 18 September 2024 with explosive walkie-talkies that had been sold to Iranian officials. In this manner, Israel’s remote-control assassination operations resulted in 42 deaths and over 3500 injuries.

A remotely-detonated explosive lapel microphone, magnetically attached to Kirk’s T-shirt with part of the device hidden from view under the shirt, and modified to fire a deadly projectile at close range, would certainly have been within the Mossad’s capabilities in its war against public figures that threaten Israel’s agenda. Moreover, the Mossad would have been able to call on our own government to assist in the murder, as the obedient slave to the Jewish state that it has become, in totality during the first several months of Trump’s second term.

The presenter of this brief video, Stew Peters, is the courageous producer of the riveting documentary, “Died Suddenly,” which exposed the government’s massive killing spree with the COVID vaccine. Peters lays the blame on Kirk’s “Israeli security detail,” for having executed the murder. If so, they were likely aided in the crime by members of Charlie Kirk’s own staff that remain high up in the organization he founded, Turning Point USA. From early on, Kirk’s operation was heavily funded by Jewish donors, and was run by maniacal “Christian-Zionists” who some time ago stopped following the teachings of Jesus Christ after they became deranged, radicalized Zionists. Once Kirk had gone rogue and began calling out both Israel and domestic Jewish influencers, the members of Kirk’s inner circle had to choose between Charlie and the object of their first loyalty – Talmudic Jewry and the Zionist bandit state.

Israel will not tolerate someone taking their money and then turning on them, nor will their non-Jewish sycophants who have become caught up in the mindset of Talmudic Jewry. The Talmud justifies the killing of non-Jews, and its powerful adherents will not allow anyone seen as a threat to Israel to live. Natanyahu kills people with impunity around the world, and his brainwashed, cultish, non-Jewish, Zionist allies cheer him on.

As you well know, these same kinds of twisted souls financed the Trump campaign and now occupy the Trump Administration, in every single key position. No doubt this is why President Trump never deviates from the Israeli playbook. And this will guarantee that his Justice Department will allow the government’s patsy, who, just like Harvey Oswald, has denied shooting anyone, to be “suicided” while in federal custody, resulting in the immediate closure of the case. Just like LBJ, who was the designated custodian for the cover-up of the murder of JFK before the president was assassinated, so also President Trump is already complicit in the murder of Charlie Kirk by falsely blaming his death on “radical leftists.” And he will continue to allow his corrupt FBI director to lie non-stop to the American people during the agency’s sham “investigation” into the murder of Charlie Kirk from beginning to end.

Kirk’s supposed “best friend,” Andrew Kolvet, is also a bad actor, parroting the ridiculous claim that Charlie’s “man of steel” neck bones prevented the alleged assassin’s 30-06 bullet (which has yet to be produced) from piercing his neck. Kolvet went on camera to present this obviously bogus “coroner’s report,” but no one is buying it.

Every distraction imaginable was spring-loaded and ready to go before Kirk’s murder, including an elderly professional crisis actor (also Jewish) claiming to have shot Kirk, to preoccupy the local police while the killers were sweeping the the crime scene, uninhibited. Plus, multiple decoy shooters were positioned on the roof of the buildings that surrounded the temporary arena where Kirk was speaking. Moreover, there is a plethora of misleading videos and false explanations being put out that have been deliberately engineered to confuse the public. However, a consensus among those determined to uncover the true identity of Kirk’s murderers is beginning to coalesce around Stew Peter’s brief video, linked below.

https://stewpeters.locals.com/post/7312395/breaking-charlie-kirk-assassin-identified

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/1972440255992066434

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle September 17 2025

Sep 172025
 
 September 17, 2025  Posted by at 10:00 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , ,  81 Responses »


Camille Pissarro Plum Trees in Blossom, Éragny 1894

 

• Charlie Kirk’s Challenge to a Generation To Be His Legacy (Victor Davis Hanson)
• Charlie Kirk Murder Investigation Expands (Margolis)
• News Anchor Resigns After Being Suspended Over On-Air Charlie Kirk Tribute (ET)
• Utah Attorney Reveals Why Robinson Killed Kirk in Shooter’s Own Words (Salgado)
• Charlie Kirk Shooter Confessed to Murder in Discord Chat Group (CTH)
• Biden’s FBI Targeted Charlie Kirk’s Turning Point USA (Margolis)
• Appeals Court Rules Lisa Cook Can Remain On Federal Reserve Board For Now (JTN)
• Fed Governor Lisa Cook Used as Tool Against Trump Administration (CTH)
• Georgia Supreme Court Rejects Fani Willis’ Bid To Prosecute Trump (JTN)
• The American Dilemma (Paul Craig Roberts)
• Arab States Call For UN Suspension of Israel (RT)
• Israel Guilty of Genocide In Gaza – UN Commission (RT)
• Zelensky Is ‘Going To Have To Make A Deal’ With Russia, Trump Urges (ZH)
• Kaja Kallas’ Ignorance Betrays The EU’s Bleak Future (Gao Jian)
• EU Delays New Russia Sanctions Indefinitely – Politico (RT)
• Lindsey Graham Threatens Hungary and Slovakia Over Russian Oil (RT)
• Von der Leyen Facing Two No-Confidence Motions – Politico (RT)
• Russians Largely Aligned With Americans On Moral Values (RT)

 

 

https://twitter.com/MonBreeden/status/1968020140899045394

https://twitter.com/JesseBWatters/status/1968121351434350616

https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1968108500094955605

https://twitter.com/CharlieKirk4evr/status/1968141785450140145

Cruz

https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1967983048479400253

https://twitter.com/GuntherEagleman/status/1967964208751853918

Bongino
https://twitter.com/TRUMP_ARMY_/status/1967927698887499835

 

 

 

 

“..he was a rare individual. And I don’t think we’re gonna see anybody like him. I can’t think of anybody on the conservative or the Left that has that many skills and that many talents and that much energy..”

• Charlie Kirk’s Challenge to a Generation To Be His Legacy (Victor Davis Hanson)

I’d like to comment on the legacy of the late Charlie Kirk and why he is going to be remembered and what he accomplished. There’s been a lot of encomia about him, but I think one of the most unusual things that he did was he changed politics, but he didn’t address political issues first. In other words, he saw politics as a reflection of deeper social, economic, and cultural issues. I talked to him in late August, and what he was intent on was trying to tell a new generation of Americans that they were suffering from prolonged adolescence, and part of that wasn’t their fault. He was arguing that the Republican Party cannot empower people like [New York City mayoral candidate] Zohran Mamdani and the socialist Left, who have no solutions and will make things worse, but they have to address why they are popular.

Some of it, of course, is ignorance, but what he was trying to say is that people who cannot afford a home, they cannot afford energy, they cannot afford gasoline, they can’t afford to buy a car, they prolong their adolescence. They do not get married, or they’ve been indoctrinated in college that the nuclear family is toxic, or they don’t understand the beauty of child raising or raising children. And in a larger sense, these personal decisions they’re making are not only making them unhappy, but they’re hurting the country. In other words, we’re suffering from 1.6 fertility, a radical drop in the last quarter century from 2.0 at the turn of the millennium.

And what he was also trying to say is that there were solutions to these problems in sort of the red state paradigm in places like Florida, in places like Texas, in places like Arizona, in places somewhat like Nevada, where people were moving to—4 million, 6 million people a year—and they felt they could afford insurance, they could buy a car, it was safe, homes were affordable, they could get married at an earlier age, they could rediscover traditional norms of their grandparents. So, he was concentrated, not in those areas, but in the swing states, especially in the 2024 election—Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Minnesota, not Minnesota so much, but Michigan, somewhat Minnesota—and then blue states because he thought the battle had been won. We turned to common sense in half the country, but he was going as an emissary into hostile territory and telling people:

There is a reason why you’re leaving in the millions. There is a reason why you’re not buying houses. We have to look at zoning laws. We have to look at energy production. We have to unleash people’s individual talent to produce more goods and services at an affordable price. We have to champion the idea that a two-parent family is not aberrant. It was the historical norm for 2,500 years. It’s a good thing to have two or three children. It’s a good thing to be a young person and wanna buy a house in your 20s and not in your 40s, or to have a child in your 20s and not in your late 30s. Nothing wrong with the latter, but he was trying to offer a different paradigm that had proved successful.

The second thing, very quickly, about him is his methodology was as varied as his message. In other words, to get that message across that there were cultural, social, economic factors that reflected one’s political view, and if you’re gonna win people over to the conservative politics, you have to explain socially, culturally, and economically why they’re not receptive at first and what can be done about it. But he also was a good orator. He spoke extemporaneously. He had one year of college, and he waded into Oxford and Cambridge and took on people at, supposedly, the most prestigious universities in the English-speaking world. He could write. He created this huge organization, $100 million budget, somebody—we don’t do that in America without an MBA or a B.A. So, he was a multitalented figure.

And then, finally, as Aristotle said, courage is the most important of all virtues. And he was not afraid of his person. He was not afraid of getting into arguments with people. He was not intimidated by Ph.D.s, J.D.s, MBAs. So, he was a rare individual. And I don’t think we’re gonna see anybody like him. I can’t think of anybody on the conservative or the Left that has that many skills and that many talents and that much energy, and more importantly, saw that the problem with America is not whether you’re conservative or liberal per se, not necessarily, but why you are. And people who have some faith and some vision of being economically viable, and they can marry at an age at which they want to, they can have as many children as they please, they can buy a home, they are happier people. And the Republican Party in the past has not always ensured that they have that opportunity, and he was trying to address it.

Read more …

“Investigators are now pressed with the job of sorting out which of these messages were bluster and which could represent credible coordination or foreknowledge.”

• Charlie Kirk Murder Investigation Expands (Margolis)

The investigation into Charlie Kirk’s murder is expanding, and what’s surfacing should trouble every American who still believes that political violence has no place in this country. The shocking assassination during a Turning Point USA event is now looking more and more like a disturbing level of online chatter may have preceded it, some of it so precise that it pointed to the exact day Kirk was killed. According to a report from the Washington Free Beacon, federal investigators are now digging into at least seven social media accounts that showed apparent advance knowledge of the September 10 shooting. These weren’t vague threats or passing remarks. Some of the archived posts, later deleted, referenced that date more than a month in advance. One account posted, “september 10th will be a very interesting day.”

After Kirk was pronounced dead, the same account mockingly added, “I plead the fifth.” Another user wrote on Sept. 3, “itd be funny if someone like charlie kirk got shot on september 10th LMAO.” And strikingly, within minutes of Kirk’s death, a different account crowed, “WE F*****G DID IT.” These aren’t coincidences. They are signals — ugly, public ones — that suggest that elements of the far-left digital underworld were not only cheering for Kirk’s assassination but potentially knew it was coming. Investigators are now pressed with the job of sorting out which of these messages were bluster and which could represent credible coordination or foreknowledge.

Outside sources preserved screenshots of these posts, which allowed federal agents to review data that might otherwise have been lost. Given how swiftly many of these messages got deleted, the push for platform records, IP logs, and account ID information suddenly matters a great deal. Equally alarming are reports that several of the accounts under scrutiny appear tied to transgender-identifying individuals or figures closely adjacent to that ideology. At least one apparently followed Tyler Robinson’s trans partner on TikTok.

Are we supposed to believe that this is all a coincidence? I can’t buy that. That same circle is believed to have reposted the August 6 “interesting day” prediction before gleefully celebrating Kirk’s death. This raises the uncomfortable but unavoidable question: was this purely one man’s crime, or did the poison brew more widely within extremist circles online and offline? We cannot ignore the larger implications. The FBI is now investigating whether other left-leaning groups in Utah had prior knowledge of or even connections to Robinson’s plans. As authorities dig through the tangled web of leftist online chatter, they’re discovering that Kirk’s assassination isn’t merely the act of a lone shooter on a rooftop. It reflects a culture increasingly willing to tolerate, and at times even celebrate, political violence aimed at conservatives. The harsh reality is that when a bullet silences a right-leaning voice, there are corners of America that respond not with outrage but with applause.

Read more …

“..if you do one thing today, make it be with passion, with conviction. Stand up for your friends, stand up for your beliefs, and speak loudly, even if your voice shakes. Your words have meaning, your values have purpose…”

“My resignation is guided by values that are essential to who I am, which I refuse to set aside in order to keep a job. I choose my faith and love of country, and always will.”

• News Anchor Resigns After Being Suspended Over On-Air Charlie Kirk Tribute (ET)

A WICS-ABC20 News anchor in Springfield, Illinois, has announced that she is resigning from her position after her employer suspended her for paying tribute to the late Charlie Kirk on air. Beni Harmony paid an impassioned tribute to Kirk, whom she knew personally, during a Sept. 12 segment on ABC20’s Marketplace program. “I want you to know that it’s OK if you feel sadness, it’s OK if you’re grieving,” the host told her TV audience. “Two days ago, I lost a mentor, my first boss, the first person who made me believe in myself, that encouraged me to chase this dream that you’re watching right now, Charlie Kirk. “I want to share with you one of my favourite sayings that Charlie would always tell us at the office, he would yell it from the mountain-tops, so please listen: When conversations stop happening, when individuals become wordless, that’s when violence begins. So, if you do one thing today, make it be with passion, with conviction. Stand up for your friends, stand up for your beliefs, and speak loudly, even if your voice shakes. Your words have meaning, your values have purpose. Never forget that.

“Thank you, CK, you changed my life.”

According to a post Harmony made three days later, she was suspended by her network for the tribute to her former employer, whose assassination on a Utah college campus on Sept. 10 made national headlines. “Many in the mainstream media have been fired or punished for mocking his assassination,” Harmony wrote in a Sept. 15 post on X. “I believe I am the first to be targeted for honoring him on air. “Effective immediately, I have resigned from @WICS_ABC20 after being SUSPENDED for airing a non-partisan tribute to Charlie Kirk this past Friday.” Explaining the reasoning behind her decision to leave the network, Harmony wrote: “My resignation is guided by values that are essential to who I am, which I refuse to set aside in order to keep a job. I choose my faith and love of country, and always will.”

She then thanked her community in the city of Springfield and shared a prayer for the country, Kirk, and his wife and two young children. When asked on X about how people could support her, Harmony said, “While I’m still looking for my next job in media, I recommend everyone support Charlie’s family first.”

Numerous people in leadership positions have lost employment over inappropriate comments in response to the assassination of Kirk. One of the more prominent early cases was the firing of MSNBC analyst Matthew Dowd on Sept. 11, the day after Kirk was fatally shot. Another media commentator, Washington Post columnist Karen Attiah, also said she had been fired over her comments on the assassination of the conservative influencer. Several universities, including Clemson University in South Carolina, and companies, including American Airlines and Delta Air Lines, have terminated employees over their inappropriate comments on Kirk’s murder. Military officials have also said they are looking into disparaging remarks made by service members about the assassination, and that actions that discredit the service will be addressed immediately.

Vice President JD Vance, who was a close friend of Kirk, hosted a special broadcast of “The Charlie Kirk Show” on Sept. 15—a show that Kirk personally hosted every day from October 2020, right up until his death on Sept. 10, 2025. In the special broadcast, Vance called on his fellow Americans to confront the problem of political violence, which he said has “terrible consequences,” such as the attempted assassination of President Donald Trump and the shooting of GOP leader Steve Scalise. “I really do believe we can come together in this country. I believe we must. But unity, real unity, can be found only after climbing the mountain of truth, and there are difficult truths we must confront in our country,” Vance said.

“One truth is that 24 percent of self-described liberals believe it is acceptable to be happy about the death of a political opponent, while only 3 percent of self-described very conservatives agree. Three percent is too many, of course. “Another truth is that 26 percent of young liberals believe political violence is sometimes justified, and only 7 percent of young conservatives say the same—again, too high a number. “The data is clear, people on the left are much likelier to defend and celebrate political violence—this is not a both-sides problem. If both sides have a problem, one side has a much bigger and malignant problem, and that is the truth that must be told.”

His comments come after Kirk’s suspected assassin was identified as Tyler Robinson, who Utah Gov. Spencer Cox said had “clearly a leftist ideology.” FBI Director Kash Patel said on Sept. 13 that Robinson’s father identified his son from footage released during the manhunt for the suspect. Cox also confirmed that investigators are assessing writings, some with anti-fascist content, allegedly left by Robinson, who had a transgender romantic partner. Authorities have not publicly said whether this is relevant as they investigate Robinson’s motive.

Read more …

“If I am able to grab my rifle and … I will have left no evidence, I have to retrieve it again. Hopefully they have moved on. I haven’t seen anything about them finding it.’

• Utah Attorney Reveals Why Robinson Killed Kirk in Shooter’s Own Words (Salgado)

Hearing a murderer’s reasons for committing an atrocity will always be disturbing, and the new information released by authorities on the messages of Charlie Kirk’s accused shooter, Tyler Robinson, is sickening and insane. Kirk’s young wife is a widow, and his children will grow up without their father. His family, friends, employees, and many fans will never be able to meet or hear him again. All Kirk did was respectfully and charitably debate people, exposing lies without personally attacking the liars. And yet, Robinson proudly murdered Kirk, based on new allegations, and not only boasted about it to his partner, but justified it as laudable because he claimed Kirk was full of hate. Robinson was so blinded by his own hate that he killed a young father for free speech.

Utah County District Attorney Jeff Gray, after announcing charges against Robinson, including aggravated murder, for which he aims to request the death penalty upon conviction, went on to provide more details from the case. Robinson’s parents both thought that the image released of the shooter looked like their son, and also thought they recognized the rifle once it was retrieved. It seems that Robinson had used his grandfather‘s rather distinctive rifle. Family recalled that Robinson had raged against Kirk’s event at Utah Valley University before it occurred and, ironically, accused Kirk of spreading hatred. Robinson‘s mother also knew that her son had been increasingly radicalized by LGBTQ ideology and was dating a man who identified as a woman, much to his more conservative parents’ chagrin.

After some initial refusal to respond, Robinson did communicate with his father and indicated his desire to commit suicide. Instead, the family ended up convincing him to turn himself in. But the most shocking information came from Robinson‘s roommate, the transgender boyfriend who reportedly disclaimed any prior knowledge of the crime and was able to provide text messages to police. On September 10, the day he assassinated Kirk, Robinson texted his roommate, “Drop what you’re doing. Look under my keyboard.” Gray explained: The roommate looked under the keyboard and found a note that stated ‘I had the opportunity to take out Charlie Kirk, and I’m going to take it.’ Police found a photograph of this note, the following … text exchange then took place. After reading the note, the roommate responded, ‘what you’re joking, right?’

Robinson: ‘I am still okay, my love, but I’m stuck in Orem for a little while longer. It shouldn’t be long until I can come home, but I gotta grab my rifle still. To be honest, I had hoped to keep this secret till I died of old age. I am sorry to involve you.’ The apparently stunned roommate pressed, “You are the one who did it, right?” Robinson replied, “I am, I’m sorry.” The roommate asked about the initial report that the shooter was caught, but Robinson stated that the person was a “crazy old dude” and that the second person interrogated by authorities had simply been wearing similar clothes to Robinson. I think what I found most disturbing about the conversation Gray read out is that Robinson did not seem to have the slightest guilt or regret for what he did. His only regret was that he had not gotten rid of all the evidence to his own satisfaction.

In his mind, it seems, he was a hero for murdering a peaceful debater simply because his victim had not agreed that ideology trumps biology. Gray continued to read: [Robinson:] ‘I had planned to grab my rifle from my drop point shortly after, but most of that side of town got locked down. It’s quiet, almost enough to get out, but there’s one vehicle lingering.’ Roommate: ‘why?’ …Robinson: ‘I had enough of his [Kirk’s] hatred. Some hate can’t be negotiated out. If I am able to grab my rifle and … I will have left no evidence, I have to retrieve it again. Hopefully they have moved on. I haven’t seen anything about them finding it.’ Roommate: ‘How long have you been planning this?’ Robinson: ‘A bit over a week. I believe I can get close to [the gun], but there is a squad car parked right by it. I think they already swept that spot, but I don’t want to chance it.’

Robinson again: ‘I’m wishing I had circled back and grabbed it as soon as I got to my vehicle, I’m worried what my old man would do if I didn’t bring back grandpa’s rifle.’ Robinson didn’t believe police could trace the weapon to him just based on the serial number since it was technically not his. He was, however, preoccupied by the thought of fingerprints. “I had to leave it in a bush where I changed outfits. Didn’t have the ability or time to bring it with,” Robinson texted. “I might have to abandon it and hope they don’t find prints.” Still displaying no guilt, Robinson amusedly recounted how he had engraved messages on bullet casings that were “mostly a big meme” and cussed about having to abandon the weapon, smugly saying, “grandpa’s gun does just fine.”

And, ever focused on covering his tracks, Robinson urged the roommate to delete the exchange and worriedly said his father, whom he described as “die hard MAGA,” was asking for pictures of the rifle. Robinson did end up messaging his roommate that he was going to turn himself in, but advised the roommate to “stay silent.” The FBI announced, however, that the roommate was cooperating with the FBI, and police executed a search warrant at the residence, which turned up used target boards and engraved shell casings. All of the Democrats who falsely vilified Kirk and continue to do so have blood on their hands. They are complicit in the radicalization of Tyler Robinson. For example, today’s worst take:

Read more …

“It was me at UVU yesterday. im sorry for all of this.”

• Charlie Kirk Shooter Confessed to Murder in Discord Chat Group (CTH)

There is a great deal of psychological darkness in the background of the Charlie Kirk murder. I strongly urge readers to stay grounded to faith as you engage review in any aspect of this story. The war between good and evil is taking place in the battle for minds. Originally reported by the Washington Post, apparently Charlie Kirk’s assassin, Tyler Robinson, confessed in a chat room just a few hours before he turned himself in.

WASHINGTON POST – […] The 22-year-old suspect in Charlie Kirk’s killing appears to have confessed to friends in an online chat shortly before turning himself in to law enforcement, according to two people familiar with the chat and screenshots obtained by The Washington Post. “Hey guys, I have bad news for you all,” said a message from an account belonging to the suspect, Tyler Robinson, on the online platform Discord. “It was me at UVU yesterday. im sorry for all of this.” The message was sent Thursday night, about two hours before officials said Robinson was taken into custody. Additionally, as state law enforcement and FBI now say they are expanding their investigation to identify if there was a network working with Tyler Robinson (which seems obvious based on the Discord chat), attention is now being paid to militant transgender groups and NGO’s in the Utah area who seem to connect to Robinson and his transgender boyfriend Lance Twiggs.

All of the research being done is preliminary; however, there does appear to be a Utah network of people within the militant left, connected to both Antifa outlooks and armed transgender activism. The scope of how the networks connect to various funding mechanisms is not yet clear, but radicalization does not happen in a vacuum. “Armed Queers SLC” and a Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) known as “Utah Global Diplomacy,” partly funded by the UN appear to be two groups in the region with connections to the overall militant transgender movement: a preliminary motive being explored by federal investigators. The fact that Tyler Robinson was in a Discord chat group with approximately 30 other individuals, does indicate some network of mutually aligned interests that seem to circle around far-left transgender activism.

[…] Discord provided a copy of the message with the confession to authorities, according to a person familiar with the company’s interaction with law enforcement. The person spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to publicly discuss details of the investigation. The message was sent from Robinson’s account to a small private group of online friends, the person said. Discord is working closely with the FBI and local authorities, providing information about Robinson’s online activities on the platform, the person added. Discord has said that an internal investigation found “no evidence that the suspect planned this incident or promoted violence on Discord.”

[…] The Discord conversation shared with The Post shows members of the group chat reacting to Kirk’s shooting Wednesday — before the news broke that Robinson was allegedly involved. The group included about 30 people, according to the person who provided screenshots. “Charlie Kirk got shot,” one friend wrote Wednesday afternoon, according to an image of the messages. “I just saw the video holy s—,” another user wrote about an hour and a half later, adding of Kirk: “Bro didn’t deserve to go out like that sad.” The only response from Robinson’s account came the next day with the message announcing, “bad news i’m surrendering through a sheriff friend in a few moments,” the message, posted at 7:57 p.m. local time in Utah, continued. “thanks for all the good times and laughs, you’ve all been so amazing, thank you all for everything.”

Read more …

“On that political list was one of Charlie Kirk’s groups, Turning Point USA.” [..] Arctic Frost was more than just an anti-Trump operation. It was actually about crippling the Republican political infrastructure.”

• Biden’s FBI Targeted Charlie Kirk’s Turning Point USA (Margolis)

FBI Director Kash Patel faces questions during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing Tuesday morning, during which Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) revealed that whistleblower revelations showed that Joe Biden’s FBI targeted not just Donald Trump, but a wide swath of Republican organizations — including Charlie Kirk’s Turning Point USA. Grassley reminded Patel of the FBI’s recent history of political weaponization, pointing directly to an operation known as “Arctic Frost.” “At your nomination hearing, I made public records that whistleblowers provide me about Arctic Frost,” Grassley said. “Arctic Frost was the FBI case opened and approved by anti-Trump FBI Agent Thibeau. Arctic Frost then became Jack Smith’s elector case against then-citizen Trump and now-President Trump.”

According to Grassley, newly obtained records show that the Arctic Frost probe was far broader than previously known. “The case was expanded to Republican organizations,” Grassley explained. “Some examples of the group that Wray and FBI sought to place under political investigation included the Republican National Committee, Republican Attorney General’s Association, and various Trump political groups.” The scope was staggering. “In total, 92 Republican targets, including Republican groups and Republican-linked individuals, were placed under investigative scope of Arctic Frost,” Grassley said. “On that political list was one of Charlie Kirk’s groups, Turning Point USA.” Grassley argued that the evidence proves that Arctic Frost was more than just an anti-Trump operation. It was actually about crippling the Republican political infrastructure.

“In other words, Arctic Frost wasn’t just a case to politically investigate Trump,” Grassley declared. “It was the vehicle by which partisan FBI agents and Department of Justice prosecutors could achieve their partisan ends and improperly investigate the entire Republican political apparatus.” “So today, Sen. Johnson and I are making these records public for the entire country to see, and I hope a lot of people are interested in seeing what government can do when various agencies have a political agenda,” Grassley said. Grassley also connected the dots to the politically charged prosecution of former Trump adviser Peter Navarro. “My investigative work has also exposed the political way in which Peter Navarro was investigated and prosecuted,” he said, noting one FBI agent’s reaction to Navarro’s charges: “When FBI Agent Thibeau found out that Biden’s DOJ would prosecute Navarro, he said, ‘Wow, great.’ That’s a quote-unquote.”

The exposed weaponization of the FBI isn’t just a matter for Washington insiders; it’s a direct assault on the very foundation of our republic. Americans must demand full transparency and accountability before our institutions become irreparably politicized. This scandal isn’t some partisan gripe; it’s a glaring threat to the democratic process that affects every voter and every election ahead. And let’s not forget, Biden himself set the tone by labeling Trump supporters as enemies of the state. That rhetoric, coupled with a weaponized FBI, created the toxic political climate that ultimately led to Kirk’s assassination.

Read more …

Does she get to keep her cheap mortgage too?

Would murder also not be considered “for cause”?

• Appeals Court Rules Lisa Cook Can Remain On Federal Reserve Board For Now (JTN)

A federal appeals court on Monday ruled Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook can remain on the panel while litigation over President Donald Trump’s attempts to fire her plays out. The Trump administration last week appealed a lower court’s ruling that allowed Cook to retain her position on the board of governors. The judge ruled that the allegations of mortgage fraud would likely prove insufficient to justify her dismissal. Cook is accused of mortgage fraud for allegedly listing a secondary residence as a primary residence. Federal Housing Finance Agency Director Bill Pulte filed a criminal referral to the Justice Department to alert them of the issue.

The appeals court sided with the lower court’s ruling in a split 2-1 ruling, according to CNN, ruling that U.S. District Judge Jia Cobb was correct in her assessment that Cook would likely be successful at this stage in two of her claims, including Cook’s claim that the firing violated the Federal Reserve Act’s “for cause” provision. “In this court, the government does not dispute that it failed to provide Cook even minimal process—that is, notice of the allegation against her and a meaningful opportunity to respond—before she was purportedly removed,” Judges Bradley Garcia and Michelle Childs wrote in their opinion.

“The district court issued its preliminary injunction after finding that Cook is likely to succeed on two of her claims: her substantive, statutory claim that she was removed without ‘cause’… and her procedural claim that she did not receive sufficient process prior to her removal in violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment,” they added. Judge Gregory Katsas wrote the dissenting opinion, arguing that Trump did attempt to remove Cook “for cause.” The ruling comes ahead of a two-day meeting where the Federal Reserve Board is expected to consider lowering interest rates. The meeting begins on Tuesday.

Read more …

“..the issue around Cook is not as much about her unlawful conduct, as it is the value of what Cook represents in the fight against President Trump.”

• Fed Governor Lisa Cook Used as Tool Against Trump Administration (CTH)

We see things for what they are, not what media try to have us believe. Unlike the first term playbook, the Lawfare operation against President Trump is facing a more affirmed attack posture. Instead of Trump (T1) being on constant defense, Trump (T2) is strategically willing to be more confrontational and direct against the use of Lawfare and corrupt courts against Trump’s intended policy changes. T2 Main Justice is still not going to the mattresses as many of us would like, and factually the DOJ and FBI operations are still a weakness in the overall war against the radical left; however, they do appear to recognize that direct aggressive confrontation is needed – despite the shortcomings in their capabilities. In the fight between the executive authority and Federal Reserve board member Lisa Cook, the embattled fed governor is being represented by Norm Eisen. Eisen, together with Mary McCord and other ideological travelers represent Lisa Cook and are using the issue as a point of attack against executive power.

In the latest development, in a 2-1 decision, a federal appeals court has rejected President Donald Trump’s bid to quickly fire Federal Reserve board member Lisa Cook. The two justices who decided to block Trump were appointed by Joe Biden. The justice who sided with the executive authority was appointed by President Trump. Ultimately, this issue is going to the Supreme Court where hopefully the highest court will rule that President Trump can remove Lisa Cook for cause, because Cook falsified federal mortgage loan documents. But in the bigger picture, the issue around Cook is not as much about her unlawful conduct, as it is the value of what Cook represents in the fight against President Trump.

WASHINGTON DC – […] Judges J, Michelle Childs and Bradley Garcia, both Biden appointees, voted to leave Cook in her post, while Judge Gregory Katsas, a Trump appointee, dissented. The Department of Justice declined comment. Last week, U.S. District Judge Jia Cobb rejected Trump’s bid to remove Cook just three years into her 14-year term, saying the president’s justification for the firing — mortgage fraud allegations that have not been adjudicated in any forum — did not meet the legal requirements to overcome laws protecting the independence of the Federal Reserve. While the Supreme Court has repeatedly endorsed Trump’s efforts to remove executive branch officials Congress has sought to insulate from politics, the justices have signaled they view the Federal Reserve as a unique “quasi-private” institution that may put it in a different legal category.

Federal law gives Trump the power to fire members of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors “for cause,” which typically means misconduct or malfeasance on the job. Trump said he had cause to fire Cook due to allegations that she claimed in separate mortgage applications that two different homes were her primary residence, which can entitle a homeowner to lower rates. Cook has denied the allegations. The D.C. Circuit’s majority said there was “no need” at this stage of the case for the appeals court to address whether the allegations against Cook meet the “for cause” standard to fire a Fed member or what that standard would require. Childs and Garcia agreed with Cobb’s finding that Cook’s due process rights appeared to have been violated because she wasn’t properly notified of the accusations against her and given a chance to dispute them.

In his dissent, Katsas grappled directly with the definition of “for cause” firing protections for Federal Reserve board members, concluding that the law gives the president broad power to define the “cause.” “The Board of Governors no doubt is important, but that only heightens the government’s interest in ensuring that its Governors are competent and capable of projecting confidence into markets,” Katsas wrote. “And in empowering the President to remove Governors for cause, Congress has specifically assigned that task to the President.” Delving into the president’s determination of cause, Katsas wrote, “would enable a potentially compromised Governor to engage in significant governmental action — such as voting on whether to adjust interest rates, which Cook says she must do tomorrow.”

The Trump administration’s expected emergency appeal will go to Chief Justice John Roberts, who oversees such appeals out of the D.C. Circuit. He’s all but certain to escalate the issue to the full court, but could issue a temporary order blocking Cook from remaining in her post while the litigation plays out. [..] Norm Eisen is a well-known Lawfare operative, second only to Mary McCord in his high visibility and connections to all of the anti-Trump efforts. Eisen, like McCord, is at the center of the leftist effort to stop the Trump agenda through the manipulation of the courts, ie. ‘Lawfare.’

Read more …

“..Georgia’s Prosecuting Attorneys’ Council could appoint a new prosecutor to take the case, that could be a months-long process, leaving the case in limbo.”

• Georgia Supreme Court Rejects Fani Willis’ Bid To Prosecute Trump (JTN)

The Georgia Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis’ (D) bid to prosecute President Trump over the 2020 presidential election. The court’s 4-3 decision upholds a lower court ruling disqualifying Willis over a “significant appearance of impropriety” because of her romantic relationship with a top prosecutor in the case, The Hill news outlet reported. Willis had attempted to prosecute Trump and his allies in the state on racketeering charges for allegedly attempting to overthrow the 2020 election. While the Georgia’s Prosecuting Attorneys’ Council could appoint a new prosecutor to take the case, that could be a months-long process, leaving the case in limbo.

Trump’s lead attorney in Georgia, Steve Sadow, said in a statement that the state’s high court had “correctly denied review.” “Willis’ misconduct during the investigation and prosecution of President Trump was egregious and she deserved nothing less than disqualification. This proper decision should bring an end to the wrongful political, lawfare persecutions of the President,” Sadow said. Willis’s office had not yet responded to The Hill’s request for comment.

Read more …

“The two most powerful vested interests in America are the US military/security complex and the Israel Lobby. As they share the interest in war and its profits in terms of money and territory, peace faces a powerful counterforce..”

• The American Dilemma (Paul Craig Roberts)

The problem that ethnic Americans face is that neither Republicans nor Democrats can represent their interest. The Republicans represent Israel’s interest. The reason for this is that Republicans tend to be more conservative, more religious, and more patriotic than Democrats and are often seen by their opponents as jingoistic. The Republican mentality toward Israel comes from the “Judeo-Christian ethic” and the long Cold War against the Soviet Union. The Judeo-Christian ethic is an oxymoron. God in the Old Testament is angry and vengeful. In the New Testament he is loving and forgiving. The “Judeo-Christian ethnic” is a propaganda term that disarms Christians from seeing Zionists for what they are. During the Cold War of the 20th century, there was much focus on the Middle East. Washington was determined to minimize Soviet influence and to control oil flows.

Israel was hyped as our ally, our base in the Arab Middle East against Soviet Communism. Thus, for conservatives, Israel is just part of America. Two consequences are that conservative Americans are blind to Zionist Israel’s genocide of the Palestinians and to the fake “war on terror” which in actual fact was Israel’s use of American lives and money against Israel’s opponents in the Middle East. Washington has spent the first quarter of the 21st century clearing away obstacles to Greater Israel. The Democrats represent the interests of those who are alleged to be “oppressed by prudes and white racists.” Democrats are the defenders of immigrant-invaders who enter our country illegally. They champion “multiculturalism,” which is white replacement and a Tower of Babel.

Democrats are the champions of sexual perverts. It is more important to a progressive, liberal, leftist Democrat that a male who declares himself a female have access to women’s spaces and athletic competitions than for a criminal suspect to have a fair trial. Democrats think that the most important civil right in the world is for biological males who self-declare themselves “transgendered” into females to take a woman’s place on a swim or soccer team and share the showers with the biological female members of the teams. The Democrats have no concern with the rights of the displaced real women to compete in sports. Similarly, Democrats are concerned with the sexual preference rights of “minor-directed persons” (pedophiles), not with the sexual abuse of children.

Have you not noticed how vehement the Democrat progressive liberal left is in defending the rights of sexual perverts? Indeed, you are not even allowed to use such a term as sexual perverts, because sexual perversions have been normalized by the Democrat liberal left. It is entirely possible that the Democrats will criminalize heterosexual sex, because it produces more “aversive racists,” thus perpetuating white racism. Yes, laugh, but the prospect has already been explored in science fiction. The consequence of the two parties’ indoctrinated biases is that it is impossible for either to represent the values and interests of the ethnic base of America. By supporting whatever crime Israel commits, Republicans maintain their pro-Israel base at the expense of the moral values of their base. Even red states such as Texas and Florida will not give you a state contract or job if you criticize or boycott Israel.

The Democrats, committed as they are to white replacement as all whites are aversive racists, refuse to protect American borders from immigrant-invaders. Democrats are committed to emptying citizenship from meaning. What is the result of the inability of either party to represent Americans? If Republicans are in office, it means wars for Israel. If Democrats are in office, it means open borders and wars against the family, wars against real Christianity not the fake Christian Zionist variety created by Israel, wars against normal heterosexuality, wars against merit and, thereby, the destruction of educational standards, and advancement based on skin color and perverse sexuality. For the Biden regime the ideal candidate was a black transgendered. Biden’s black Secretary of Defense announced that there would be no promotion of white heterosexual males until “equity had been attained.”

Elon Musk was correct when he said that America needs a new political party, one independent of economic, foreign, and ideological interests. But Musk did not say who would finance it. It would take Musk’s entire wealth. The combination of the corrupt US Supreme Court ruling that it is legal for corporations to purchase the US government with campaign contributions and the stupidity of the annual subsidy of billions of US dollars to Israel, which is used by Israel to purchase the House of Representatives, the US Senate, the President and the administration, make it abundantly clear that Americans have a government that is totally incapable of representing Americans.

Throughout the Western World it is not democracy that rules. The Western World is ruled by vested interests whose campaign contributions determine policy. When Putin and Lavrov negotiate with Washington officials, they are not negotiating with a government. They are negotiating with representatives of the private interests whose money places Representatives, Senators, and Presidents in office. The two most powerful vested interests in America are the US military/security complex and the Israel Lobby. As they share the interest in war and its profits in terms of money and territory, peace faces a powerful counterforce as peace does not serve the interests of the two most powerful interest groups in the United States.

Read more …

“..the Qatari capital had been used as a key venue for peace talks between West Jerusalem and Hamas.”

• Arab States Call For UN Suspension of Israel (RT)

Arab and Islamic leaders have called for Israel to be suspended from the United Nations over its alleged violations of the organization’s charter. The demand comes amid Israel’s military campaign in Gaza and after last week’s airstrike on Doha which left six people dead, including a Qatari security officer. On Monday, the leaders of the League of Arab States and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation convened an emergency summit in Doha. In a final statement following the summit, the group called on member nations to “consider the compatibility of Israel’s membership in the UN with its Charter” and coordinate efforts to suspend Israel from the organization.

Israel has said its Doha strike targeted Hamas officials, although Arab and Islamic leaders branded it a “dangerous escalation that exposes the extremist hostility of the Israeli government.” They also accused Israel of undermining the international mediation and peacemaking process, given that the Qatari capital had been used as a key venue for peace talks between West Jerusalem and Hamas. The statement urged all states to review diplomatic and economic relations with Israel and take “legal and effective measures” to stop Israeli actions, including sanctions, suspension of arms, and dual-use exports. The Israeli offensive in Gaza began on October 7, 2023 after Hamas attacked southern Israel, leaving about 1,200 people dead and more than 250 taken hostage. Over 64,000 people, including women and children, have since reportedly been killed in Israel’s military campaign in the Palestinian enclave.

The conflict has drawn international condemnation with many countries accusing Israel of genocide against the Palestinian people. Israel’s attacks on neighboring countries have also been widely criticized, with UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres denouncing the recent Doha strike as a violation of Qatar’s sovereignty. Qatari Prime Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani called it “state terrorism.” Russia also said the strike was a blatant violation of international law and the UN Charter. Israel has defended its operations, with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu insisting the Hamas leadership must be eradicated.

Read more …

“It is clear that there is an intent to destroy the Palestinians in Gaza through acts that meet the criteria set forth in the Genocide Convention.”

• Israel Guilty of Genocide In Gaza – UN Commission (RT)

Israel has committed genocide against Palestinians in Gaza, a UN commission of inquiry said in a report published on Tuesday. According to the findings, Israel has committed four of the five genocidal acts defined under the 1948 Genocide Convention since the start of its war with Hamas in 2023. These include killing, causing serious bodily or mental harm, deliberately inflicting conditions of life aimed at destroying Palestinians in whole or in part, and imposing measures to prevent births. “The commission finds that Israel is responsible for the commission of genocide in Gaza,” Navi Pillay, chair of the UN body, said at a press conference in Geneva. “It is clear that there is an intent to destroy the Palestinians in Gaza through acts that meet the criteria set forth in the Genocide Convention.”

Pillay blamed “Israeli authorities at the highest echelons” for “these atrocity crimes,” saying they “have orchestrated a genocidal campaign for almost two years now with the specific intent to destroy the Palestinian group in Gaza.” She added that Israeli authorities have also failed to prevent or punish those responsible by not investigating or prosecuting the perpetrators of genocidal acts. The commission said it had analyzed Israeli actions in Gaza, including “imposing starvation and inhumane conditions of life for Palestinians,” concluding that “genocidal intent was the only reasonable inference.” It also cited the “systematic destruction” of healthcare and education, along with “systematic” sexual and gender-based violence against Palestinians. The commission urged Israel to “end the genocide in Gaza” and called on UN member states to halt arms transfers and prosecute individuals or companies complicit in genocide.

The Israeli Foreign Ministry has rejected the commission’s report as “fake,” accusing its authors of being “Hamas proxies” and calling for the “immediate abolition” of the panel. “The report relies entirely on Hamas falsehoods, laundered and repeated by others,” the ministry claimed. “Israel categorically rejects this distorted and false report and calls for the immediate abolition of this commission of inquiry.” The conflict has continued since October 7, 2023, when Hamas militants launched a surprise assault on southern Israel, killing about 1,200 people and taking more than 250 captive. The Palestinian death toll has risen to 64,905 as of Monday, according to the Gaza Health Ministry. On Tuesday, Israel launched a ground offensive in Gaza City – one of the few areas still outside IDF control – after weeks of intensified strikes on alleged Hamas targets. The move followed the Israeli Security Cabinet’s approval of plans to seize the city last month.

Read more …

“..So far Trump has not been willing. He could simply cut off the weapons and money flows to the Zelensky government if he wanted to – but he’s not even threatening to at this point.”

• Zelensky Is ‘Going To Have To Make A Deal’ With Russia, Trump Urges (ZH)

President Trump told reporters in passing on the White House lawn Tuesday that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky “is going to have to make a deal” with Russia to end the the long-running war. Last month’s historic Alaska Trump-Putin summit failed to produce or lead to anything substantial, other than perhaps an improvement of bilateral relations. Trump acknowledged in the fresh remarks that the Ukrainian and Russian leaders “hate each other,” and said “it looks like I have to sit in the room with them, because they can’t sit in a room together.” “There’s great hatred there. But no, that meeting accomplished a lot,” he said in reference to the Alaska summit. And yet the reality remains that Putin and Zelensky are at this point no closer to actually being in the same room together, much less the same venue, even if other mediators like Trump are there.

Trump also in his comments took the opportunity to apply more pressure on the European Union, saying it must stop all purchases of Russian oil “immediately”. “They’ve got to stop immediately, not fair to us. They’re purchasing Russian oil, and we have to do this,” he said. Ukraine’s Zelensky without doubt wants the next round of EU sanctions to hit Moscow, but has also appeared supportive of Trump calling out Europe’s oil and other energy imports. “I’m sure the US can apply enough sanctions in order to hurt the Russian economy, plus Donald Trump has enough force to make Putin afraid of him,” Zelensky said. Still, Kiev wants to see more and more robust sanctions leveled from Washington’s direction. “Europe has already introduced 18 sanctions packages against Russia. And all that’s lacking now is a strong sanctions package from the US,” Zelensky has said.

As for Trump admitting that Zelensky must make a deal, the big question remains whether Trump is willing to use the significant leverage the United States has over the Ukrainian leader. So far Trump has not been willing. He could simply cut off the weapons and money flows to the Zelensky government if he wanted to – but he’s not even threatening to at this point. Such actions would result in huge pushback from Trump’s own Republicans. So for now, his urging Zelensky to the peace table appears to just be empty words, with no threat of repercussions. Meanwhile: TRUMP ADMINISTRATION CLEARS FIRST UKRAINE ARMS AID PACKAGE PAID FOR BY ALLIES, SOURCES SAY. Currently, there are reports indicating that Trump and Zelensky might meet again next week. At this point, there’s no sign of a Putin-Zelensky meeting being anywhere on the horizon.

Read more …

“.. the EU’s politicians have over-consumed its accountability and jeopardize a still possible peace not just for Europe, but for global balance and security.”

• Kaja Kallas’ Ignorance Betrays The EU’s Bleak Future (Gao Jian)

China and Russia on the victorious side of World War II? “That is something new.” When EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas questioned whether China and Russia belonged to the victorious side of WWII during a conference organized by the EU Institute for Security Studies earlier this month, she revealed more than just personal historical ignorance. Her remark underscores a troubling detachment from fundamental historical truths that continue to shape today’s geopolitical landscape. While interpretations of WWII may vary across ideological lines, it is widely accepted that the Allied victory was the result of a collective effort involving multiple nations. The Soviet Union, in particular, bore the unimaginable cost of 27 million lives in its struggle against Nazi Germany, effectively dismantling the Wehrmacht on the Eastern Front.

Similarly, China’s resistance against Japanese militarism – lasting 14 years and costing over 35 million casualties – prevented Imperial Japan from expanding its aggression further into Asia and the Pacific. The tremendous sacrifices of both nations played a decisive role in the ultimate triumph of the worldwide anti-fascist war. To ignore these contributions is not merely an oversight; it is a deliberate erosion of historical memory. Yet Kallas is not an outlier in this regard. She represents a broader, though often unspoken, tendency within parts of the European political and media elite to re-frame WWII as a victory primarily achieved by Western powers. This revisionist narrative not only distorts history but also undermines the moral and strategic credibility of the European Union. When those in high office casually dismiss the sacrifices of nations that were vital in defeating fascism, they weaken the EU’s diplomatic standing.

What makes Kallas’ comments particularly damaging is the current social context in the EU and the UK. They are currently navigating multiple overlapping crises: economic stagnation, energy insecurity, military instability in their eastern neighborhood, and a growing loss of confidence in their governance model. At such a critical juncture, the EU cannot afford foreign policy leadership that indulges in historical denialism or rhetorical provocations. Comments by Kallas diminish the EU’s stature and fuel perceptions that it is led by figures who prioritize ideological posturing over strategic thinking. In such a self-righteous manner by merely detaching from history and social realities, the EU’s politicians have over-consumed its accountability and jeopardize a still possible peace not just for Europe, but for global balance and security.

One has sufficient justification to suspect a deeper crisis within EU democratic institutions since Kallas is so bafflingly incompetent. Is the EU still a politically serious entity? If its foreign policy chief behaves so senselessly, what can we expect from the EU as a whole? Can it still secure its supranational ambition under such poor leadership? The requirement for consensus among member states often results in fragmented foreign policies and ambiguous messaging. Nowhere is this more evident than in the EU’s uneven response to the war in Ukraine, fraught with internal divisions over military aid, sanctions, and long-term strategy. Kallas’ remarks – though not representative of all EU members – highlight how individual officials can amplify these contradictions and undercut collective credibility.

If the EU wishes to be taken seriously as a geopolitical power, it must ensure that its representatives embody diplomatic rigor and historical awareness. Kallas is demonstrating the opposite, at the expense of the EU’s democratic resilience and political seriousness. A very natural question would be: Is the EU sliding into being a potential liability for its member states’ interests? The bloc’s institutional design, often a product of political compromise, leads to confusion and inefficiency. When the High Representative for Foreign Affairs appears unaware of basic historical facts that underpin modern global relations, she not only erodes the EU’s ability to act as a reliable international actor but also dwarfs the international images of its member states.

Predictably, the anxiety of the EU’s future will loom larger as it fails to find its orientation in such a tremendously changing world. There is a growing fear that the Union is sliding into being a body hampered by bureaucratic inefficiency, ideological fragmentation, and a lack of strategic vision. Kallas’ absurd remarks are nothing more than empty talk, but they imply a wider governance crisis. For the EU to regain its credibility and influence, it must recommit to historical accuracy, foster diplomatic discipline, and reclaim a sense of strategic purpose. Otherwise, it is little more than a platform for uncoordinated and counterproductive rhetoric – a talking shop that weakens Europe from within rather than empowering it on the global stage.

Read more …

They don’t know what to do with Hungary and Slovakia. They’re trying to change the law that says decisions must be unanimous, but for now they still are.

• EU Delays New Russia Sanctions Indefinitely – Politico (RT)

The EU has postponed presenting its new package of sanctions against Russia, Politico has reported, citing several EU diplomats. The outlet attributed the delay to pressure from the Trump administration to impose even tougher restrictions on Moscow, which has elicited resistance from Slovakia and Hungary. The proposed 19th package of measures targeting Russian oil exports and the banking sector over the Ukraine conflict was due to be presented on Wednesday. However, it has been dropped from the European Commission’s agenda indefinitely, several EU diplomats told Politico on Tuesday.

According to the report, the suspension comes as Brussels is increasing pressure on Hungary and Slovakia to cut their energy reliance on Moscow in light of a fresh ultimatum to do so from Washington. US President Donald Trump, who has so far refrained from imposing direct sanctions on Russia, reportedly said over the weekend he was ready “to move ahead” if Washington’s European partners halt Russian oil purchases. He has also urged the EU to slap tariffs of up to 100% on China and India – the key buyers of Russian oil since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022. Russian President Vladimir Putin has warned Western nations against adopting a “colonial” tone toward China and India and trying to “punish” them.

As part of its sanctions’ pressure, Brussels has pledged to phase out Russian fossil fuels entirely by 2027, but several member states – including Hungary and Slovakia – continue to oppose the move, citing risks to their national energy security. The European Commission has recently proposed scrapping unanimous voting on the bloc’s foreign policy decisions to sideline dissenting members. Russia has denounced Western sanctions as “illegal,” stating that they have not only failed to derail the national economy, but have provided an impetus for domestic development. Russian officials maintain they seek a long-term peace, accusing Kiev and its Western backers of undermining the process.

Read more …

The War Party is not happy.

• Lindsey Graham Threatens Hungary and Slovakia Over Russian Oil (RT)

US Senator Lindsey Graham has threatened Hungary and Slovakia with consequences if they do not halt purchases of Russian oil. The Republican from South Carolina issued the warning after President Donald Trump renewed calls for NATO states to end energy imports from Moscow, in apparent frustration over the pace of peace talks between Moscow and Kiev. The president was “right to demand that Europe stop buying Russian oil,” Graham wrote on X on Monday. He conceded that the EU had largely done so, adding it was “now virtually down to Hungary and Slovakia… to step up to the plate soon.” “If not, consequences should and will follow,” he warned.

The two countries blocked the EU’s 18th sanctions package in June, warning it threatened their energy security. Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto said the plan would prevent states from buying “cheap Russian natural gas and cheap Russian oil,” while Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico branded some proposals “economic suicide” without viable alternatives. Brussels has pledged to phase out Russian fossil fuels by 2027, but Hungary and Slovakia remain opposed to immediate restrictions, citing dependence on the Druzhba pipeline. Kiev repeatedly struck the Druzhba pipeline in August, with Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky describing the attacks as “sanctions.”

The EU is currently drafting its 19th sanctions package, expected to target Russian oil exports and the banking sector. The measures, initially planned to be presented this week, have reportedly been delayed as Brussels debates how to respond to demands from Washington regarding Russian energy imports. Russia has denounced Western sanctions as “illegal,” stating that they have not only failed to derail the national economy, but have provided an impetus for domestic development. Russian officials maintain they seek a long-term peace, accusing Kiev and its Western backers of undermining the process.

Read more …

“No-confidence motions used to be quite rare at the EU Parliament. Prior to the July vote, such a motion was last tabled against Jean-Claude Juncker in 2014.”

• Von der Leyen Facing Two No-Confidence Motions – Politico (RT)

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen is set to face two separate no-confidence votes at the EU Parliament in early October, Politico reported on Tuesday, citing an internal email from the legislature’s president, Roberta Metsola. The motions of censure are scheduled to be debated during the plenary session from October 6 to 9. The motions submitted against von der Leyen, a divisive figure in Brussels, come from both right and left – the Patriots for Europe and The Left parliamentary groups.The Patriots for Europe have accused her of lacking transparency and accountability, particularly in relation to the EU’s trade agreements with the United States and the South American trade bloc Mercosur.

“The EU is weaker today than ever due to the persistent failure of the president of the Commission to cope with the most pressing challenges,” the group stated in its motion, as quoted by Politico. The Left has also criticized von der Leyen’s trade policies but placed greater emphasis on the EU’s handling of the conflict between Israel and Hamas in Gaza. The group argued that the Commission has shown inaction and failed to hold Israel accountable. Both motions were filed at midnight on September 10, which was the earliest opportunity following a previous no-confidence vote in July. Von der Leyen survived that vote, which was initiated by Romanian right-wing MEP Gheorghe Piperea and focused on the so-called Pfizergate scandal.

The controversy stemmed from the disappearance of text messages between von der Leyen and Pfizer’s CEO during negotiations for a major Covid-19 vaccine procurement. Von der Leyen, a former doctor and German defense minister, was accused of a lack of transparency in negotiating the multi-billion-euro deal. She dismissed the allegations against her as “simply a lie” and branded her critics “conspiracy theorists.” The initiative ultimately failed, supported only by 175 MEPs with 360 voting against it. To pass, two-thirds of the 720 MEPs must vote in favor. No-confidence motions used to be quite rare at the EU Parliament. Prior to the July vote, such a motion was last tabled against Jean-Claude Juncker in 2014.

Read more …

Of course they are. Both are deeply Christian. Much more than, say, western Europe. Lots in common.

• Russians Largely Aligned With Americans On Moral Values (RT)

Russians and Americans share similar views on key aspects of private life, from relationships to having children outside marriage, a poll by the Russian Public Opinion Research Center (VCIOM) has shown. The study, released on Monday, compared moral values in the two countries using Gallup’s July US survey and a parallel poll in Russia. It found broad overlap on personal issues but sharp differences on more sensitive topics such as gender transition and newer social norms. Some 90% of Americans and 82% of Russians said contraception was acceptable. Views on premarital sex were nearly identical, with 68% of Americans and 69% of Russians approving.

Russians were more permissive about children born out of wedlock, with 71% calling it acceptable compared with 67% in the US. Fewer Russians viewed divorce as acceptable – 65% versus 75% of Americans. Sociologists said private life was increasingly seen as a matter of personal choice in both countries. In Russia, researchers pointed to a “shift toward individualization,” where people decide for themselves when to have children and who to live with. On extramarital affairs, 16% of Russians and 8% of Americans said they were acceptable. Polygamy and suicide were judged permissible by 21% of Americans, compared with 11% and 7% of Russians.

The sharpest differences emerged on same-sex relations, deemed acceptable by 64% of Americans but only 12% of Russians. Russia has banned LGBT organizations and propaganda since late 2023. Attitudes also diverged on teenage sex: 41% of Americans said it was acceptable versus 14% of Russians, although US opinion was split, with 51% rejecting it. Researchers noted that Russian society was more willing to forgive ‘personal weaknesses’ like infidelity, but far less accepting of practices such as gender transition or same-sex relations.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

London
https://twitter.com/VetaChain/status/1967676147136930028
https://twitter.com/TRobinsonNewEra/status/1967884271126974985

Scott

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle September 7 2025

Sep 072025
 
 September 7, 2025  Posted by at 10:06 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , ,  50 Responses »


Rembrandt van Rijn Self-portrait, wearing a ruff and black hat 1632

 

• President Trump Was an FBI Informant Against Epstein (Margolis)
• Trump Says Justice Department Has Done Its Job on Epstein Case (ET)
• Was Joe Biden Worse Than Jeffrey Epstein? (Margolis)
• 70% of ICE Arrests Are Charged/Convicted Criminals (Salgado)
• When The Pentagon Shifts Its Priorities Will US Strategy Follow? (MoA)
• Trump Considering Strikes In Venezuela – CNN (RT)
• Venezuela Starts Preparing for ‘Armed Struggle,’ In Case of Attack – Maduro (Sp.)
• EU Energy Chief Demands Permanent Ban On Russian Imports (RT)
• Trump Cutting Military Funding To NATO Countries Bordering Russia – FT (RT)
• Ukrainian Government Seat Damaged By Russian Strike – Kiev (RT)
• Germany’s Embattled Army a ‘Laughingstock’ – Ex-AfD Politician (Sp.)
• Kremlin Sets Conditions For Return Of Western Companies To Russia (RT)
• ‘Someone’ Might Have To Blow Up Power of Siberia 2 Pipeline – Jesse Watters (RT)
• Israel Backs Away From West Bank Annexation Plan After UAE Warning – WaPo (RT)
• Trump Threatens EU Over ‘Unfair’ $3.5bn Google Fine (RT)
• Conor McGregor Urges Irish To Lobby Councillors For Presidential Bid (RMX)
• In Secular Britain, Church Is the New Rebellion (Queen)

 

 

Optimus

https://twitter.com/SaiKate108/status/1964277429079523653

Kobyakov

Tylenol

Conor
https://twitter.com/mcgregorufc22/status/1964143600805073236

Euro
https://twitter.com/27khv/status/1964050810217677176

Peskov

 

 

 

 

“Curiously, this revelation has gotten very little attention in the legacy media.

Gee, I wonder why.”

• President Trump Was an FBI Informant Against Epstein (Margolis)

House Speaker Mike Johnson made a stunning revelation Thursday in response to questions from CNN’s Manu Raju about President Donald Trump’s use of the term “hoax” to describe the ongoing controversy surrounding the Epstein files. In defending the president, Johnson disclosed that Trump had once acted as an FBI informant against Jeffrey Epstein—a fact that has never before been publicly acknowledged by a sitting congressional leader.“What Trump is referring to is the hoax that the Democrats are using to try to attack him,” Johnson said. “He has never said or suggested or implied—I’ve talked to him about this many times, many times. He is horrified. It’s been misrepresented. He’s not saying that what Epstein did is a hoax. It’s a terrible, unspeakable evil. He believes that himself.” Johnson then dropped the bombshell revelation.

“When he first heard the rumor, he kicked him out of Mar-a-Lago. He was an FBI informant to try to take this stuff down,” Johnson said, appearing to confirm for the first time that Trump had assisted federal authorities in building a case against Epstein. The speaker emphasized that Epstein’s crimes had long disgusted Trump. “The president knows and has great sympathy for the women who have suffered these unspeakable harms. It’s detestable to him. He and I have spoken about this as recently as 24 hours ago,” Johnson explained. “What he’s talking about is the Democrats who are doing this with impure motives. If they cared so much about this, why didn’t they do something during the four years of the Biden administration when the Biden DOJ had all the records? They didn’t say a word about it. Now, they’re doing it for political purposes. Not everybody, but a lot of them, and that’s what the President’s frustrated about.”

For Johnson, Trump’s rhetoric mirrors his past experiences with partisan attacks. “They’re creating a hoax, just like they did with the Russian dossier, because they think it’s going to somehow be mud thrown on him. It’s not. He has no culpability in this thing at all. The president has clean hands. He wants all the records out. He has told me that himself.” Raju pressed Johnson on whether Trump should meet with Epstein’s victims, a question that has been raised by critics who argue that the president needs to show more direct support for survivors. Johnson suggested such a meeting was not out of the question. “I suspect he probably will. Yeah, he has great compassion for them,” the speaker said. “The President has a very compassionate heart. He hates the fact that these women suffered those wrongs. He hates what Epstein is accused of and who he was.”

Johnson continued, highlighting Trump’s early decision to sever ties with Epstein. “When he recognized that, he realized Epstein wasn’t just some sort of, you know, socialite. He was an evil person, and, you know, alleged to have been involved in evil schemes. And the president distanced himself, before he was president, from that because that’s not who he is. And I think he’s being falsely accused and maligned, and that’s a frustration of all of ours. That’s what he’s talking about when he says it’s a hoax.” The revelation that Trump was an informant against Epstein is sure to trigger the left, who have spent years trying to turn Epstein into a Trump scandal. Curiously, this revelation has gotten very little attention in the legacy media.

Gee, I wonder why.

Read more …

Pam Bondi promised a list that does not exist.

She regrets that now.

• Trump Says Justice Department Has Done Its Job on Epstein Case (ET)

President Donald Trump said in a lengthy social media post that the Department of Justice (DOJ) has “done its job” on releasing information connected to deceased convicted sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein. “The now dying (after the DOJ gave thousands of pages of documents in full compliance with a very comprehensive and exacting Subpoena from Congress!) Epstein case was only brought back to life” in recent days for political purposes, not for the victims, Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social on Sept. 5. Trump added that the Justice Department “has done its job,“ and ”they have given everything requested of them“ in the Epstein case, adding that it’s time for Democrats who are making Epstein-related demands to ”end“ what he called the ”Epstein hoax.”

In the post, he also said that the chatter around Epstein is designed to serve as a “hoax” to gain political points and an attempt “to deflect and distract from the great success of a Republican President.” Democrats and some Republicans in the House have called for disclosures related to the case, about six years after Epstein was charged with sex trafficking counts before he was found dead in a Manhattan jail cell in August 2019. This week, lawmakers hosted a news conference with women who said they were victims of Epstein to call for more transparency. On Tuesday, the House Oversight Committee, under Chair James Comer (R-Ky.), released a batch of Epstein-related files that it said it obtained from the DOJ in response to a subpoena for those records. The records encompass 33,295 pages of material, which were uploaded onto Dropbox and Google Drive.

Speaking to reporters in the Capitol on Tuesday, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) said that the document disclosure “is the beginning and not the end” and that “we want to bring justice to every single person who is involved in the Epstein evils and the cover up thereof, but we also want to be equally certain we protect the innocent victims.” The materials include videos that were captured outside of Epstein’s jail cell, footage from his Florida home, audio files between his former associate Ghislaine Maxwell and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche over the summer, and other documents.

Transcripts of the interview between Maxwell and Blanche were released last month. Maxwell is currently serving out a 20-year prison term after she was convicted on charges in 2021 of conspiring with Epstein to sexually abuse minors over the course of a decade. In the news conference, the women who said they were Epstein’s victims called on members of Congress to pass a bill requiring the release of more documents related to the case. “Survivors need protection, resources, and legal support. If this Congress is serious about justice, then let this moment also affirm your commitment to provide victims with the legal aid they need,” Anouska De Georgiou, a self-described Epstein victim, said at the press event earlier this week that had been organized by Reps. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and Ro Khanna (D-Calif.).

Read more …

“Between Jan. 2021 and Dec. 2024, more than 470,000 unaccompanied children crossed into America under Biden’s watch.”

• Was Joe Biden Worse Than Jeffrey Epstein? (Margolis)

When Jeffrey Epstein’s crimes finally came to light, America recoiled in horror at the scope of his sex trafficking operation. Yet as disturbing new details emerge about the Biden administration’s handling of unaccompanied migrant children, we’re forced to confront an uncomfortable question: Did Joe Biden’s border policies enable exploitation on a scale that makes Epstein look like a small-time operator?The numbers alone are staggering. Between Jan. 2021 and Dec. 2024, more than 470,000 unaccompanied children crossed into America under Biden’s watch. Tens of thousands simply vanished into the shadows, handed over to unvetted sponsors through what can only be described as a bureaucratic assembly line designed to move bodies as quickly as possible, consequences be damned.

Now, thanks to President Trump’s commitment to cleaning up this mess, we’re getting our first real look at the carnage Biden left behind. According to an exclusive report from Fox News Digital, the Trump administration has assembled a dedicated team to track down these missing children, and what they’ve found should haunt every American parent. So far, they’ve located over 22,000 children and arrested more than 400 sponsors. Authorities sadly found that 27 children died from murder, suicide, or drug overdoses. But the living children may have suffered even worse fates. “We found children who have been raped,” says John Fabbricatore, senior advisor at the HHS Office of Refugee Resettlement.

The team has uncovered cases of debt bondage, where children work as virtual slaves to pay off trafficking debts. They’ve found minors “treated like sexual slaves,” and discovered children in homes where sponsors are heroin dealers, leading to overdose deaths. The systematic nature of this catastrophe exposes the Biden administration’s willful negligence. While Epstein operated in secret, Biden’s team created an official government pipeline that delivered vulnerable children directly into the hands of predators. The administration’s lax vetting policies were so inadequate they routinely failed to confirm basic family relationships through DNA testing. Children were handed over to complete strangers based on nothing more than a sponsor’s word.

“There wasn’t very good record keeping,” Fabbricatore explains, using a bureaucratic euphemism for what amounts to criminal negligence. The Biden team was so focused on processing children quickly that they entered wrong information into computer systems, making it nearly impossible to track where these vulnerable minors ended up. It’s as if they designed a system specifically to lose children. The Trump administration inherited a backlog of over 65,000 unaddressed reports of concern, including allegations of trafficking and criminal exploitation. Think about that number for a moment. Sixty-five thousand red flags that the Biden team simply ignored, while more children poured across the border daily.

The new administration has implemented common-sense safeguards that should have been standard practice all along: DNA testing to verify family relationships, criminal background checks, fingerprinting, and proof of income to ensure sponsors can actually care for these children. Yes, this means children stay in custody longer, but as Fabbricatore notes, “we want to ensure that these children remain safe.” What makes this situation even more infuriating is that many of these children had families back home. Rather than facilitating safe reunification with their actual parents, the Biden administration chose to hand them over to strangers who turned out to be traffickers, drug dealers, and worse.

The comparison to Epstein isn’t hyperbole. While Epstein operated a private criminal enterprise, Biden’s policies created a government-sanctioned system that delivered thousands of children into exploitation. The scale dwarfs anything Epstein accomplished, and unlike Epstein’s secretive operation, this happened in plain sight with taxpayer funding. Every parent in America should be asking how this was allowed to happen and demanding accountability for those who prioritized political optics over child safety. The Trump administration’s rescue efforts are commendable, but they can’t undo the trauma that thousands of vulnerable children who deserved protection, not abandonment, have already suffered. From my perspective,Trump must hold the Biden administration accountable—and the responsibility for what happened to those children goes all the way to the top.

Read more …

ICE does not throw dice.

• 70% of ICE Arrests Are Charged/Convicted Criminals (Salgado)

Contrary to the ridiculous Democrat narrative that the Trump administration is heartlessly rounding up loving parents and outstanding community pillars, nearly three-fourths of ICE arrests target charged or convicted criminals. In fact, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) just released the names of dozens of other criminals they arrested this week or who are now incarcerated in the Louisiana Lockup, including numerous murderers, robbers, and pedophiles from Vietnam, Cuba, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Venezuela, Russia, and other countries all around the world. All illegal aliens are criminals to the extent that they are not allowed to be in this country by federal law, but there are so many thousands of outright dangerous criminals in the United States that ICE is still focused on rounding up the worst of the worst.

An unnamed Department of Homeland Security (DHS) spokesperson said in a Sept. 4 press release, “Thanks to the courage of our ICE law enforcement, these criminal illegal aliens are no longer free to terrorize our communities and prey on innocent Americans.” He added, “[DHS] Secretary Noem unleashed ICE to target the worst of the worst. 70% of ICE arrests are of illegal aliens who have been charged or convicted of a crime in the U.S. This doesn’t even count illegal aliens with rap sheets in foreign countries, gang members, and suspected terrorists.” Significantly, at least 382 illegals from the terrorist watchlist tried to enter the U.S. under Joe Biden and Kamala Harris.

The real number was probably actually much higher, considering the number of gotaways and virtually unvetted illegals allowed into the country, including suspected terrorists who were later identified because they tried to commit crimes. Indeed, as of Aug. 2024, the House Judiciary Committee stated that 99 suspected terrorists had been released into the United States by the Biden administration. For context, on 9/11, 19 terrorists managed to kill nearly 3,000 people. This is why ICE’s activities are so vital. Yet Democrats continue to go all out violating the law in order to protect illegal aliens. In fact, authorities arrested more than a dozen rioters, including two journalists, in July for aggressively protesting the arrest of an illegal alien who is on the terror watchlist with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.

Just one of many Democrats sobbing about ICE activities is Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker. Trying to frame immigration law enforcement by the Trump administration as random racist persecution, Pritzker asserted at a Tuesday press conference, “In a circumstance where they’re simply celebrating their heritage, they shouldn’t be interrupted in this way. This is the aim of this government. They don’t actually care if you’re here and undocumented, they just care if your skin color is a little off of theirs and that you’re Latino, they’re going to just target you.”

He rambled mendaciously, “All of us need to speak up and speak out about the assault on just regular residents who are following the law, who are going to work, paying their taxes, who’ve been around in our city for ten, 20, 30 years. We ought to be protecting those people. And if they want to celebrate Mexican Independence Day, they ought to be able to do that without being terrorized by ICE.” Interestingly, as of last summer, a majority of Hispanics in the U.S. supported mass deportations. Because ordinary Americans want to live in a safe and secure nation, unlike Democrat elites, who love criminals — as long as the crime doesn’t affect them.

Read more …

“Or did he compare videos of the ‘woke’ U.S. military parade in Washington DC earlier this year with the recent flawless one in China? The difference was indeed glaring. It demonstrated that the U.S. has no chance of winning in a war against China.”

• When The Pentagon Shifts Its Priorities Will US Strategy Follow? (MoA)

Is this a sign of a shift in the global U.S. strategy? Politico reports:

Pentagon Plan Prioritizes Homeland Over China Threat
“This marks a major departure from the first Trump administration, which emphasized deterring Beijing.

Pentagon officials are proposing the department prioritize protecting the homeland and Western Hemisphere, a striking reversal from the military’s yearslong mandate to focus on the threat from China.nA draft of the newest National Defense Strategy, which landed on Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s desk last week, places domestic and regional missions above countering adversaries such as Beijing and Moscow, according to three people briefed on early versions of the report.

The move would mark a major shift from recent Democrat and Republican administrations, including President Donald Trump’s first term in office, when he referred to Beijing as America’s greatest rival. And it would likely inflame China hawks in both parties who view the country’s leadership as a danger to U.S. security. “This is going to be a major shift for the U.S. and its allies on multiple continents,” said one of the people briefed on the draft document. “The old, trusted U.S. promises are being questioned.”

The National Defense Strategy (NDS) is written by the office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy which currently is held by arch-Realist Elbridge Colby. The draft of the new NDS seems to be a contradiction of his previous beliefs: “Identifying as a realist, Colby believes China is the principal threat faced by the United States. He believes the US should shift its military resources to Asia to prevent a Chinese takeover of Taiwan. Colby supports reducing military aid to Ukraine. During the AUKUS review in 2025, Elbridge pressured Australia to confirm what role it would play in a war with China over Taiwan.

Colby wants to change U.S. defense policy from concentrating on China, as he had previously argued, to the Western Hemisphere. He may have seen new facts that have moved his opinion.” The failed attempt by the U.S. Navy to secure shipping through the Red Sea against attacks by Houthi in Yemen may have caused such rethink. As may have the loss of the US/NATO’s proxy war against Russia in Ukraine. Or did he compare videos of the ‘woke’ U.S. military parade in Washington DC earlier this year with the recent flawless one in China? The difference was indeed glaring. It demonstrated that the U.S. has no chance of winning in a war against China.

Trump seems to concede that China is winning:
“Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump – Sep 04, 2025, 22:14 UTC
“Looks like we’ve lost India and Russia to deepest, darkest, China. May they have a long and prosperous future together! President Donald J. Trump.”

It is difficult to believe though that the Trump administration will be able to change U.S. grand strategy. Any change will typically happen only at a snail’s pace. It would need all party support over multiple administrations. The pivot to Asia was launched by the Obama administration in 2010 and has since has been followed by all later ones.

More from Politico: “Elbridge Colby, the Pentagon’s policy chief, is leading the strategy. He played a key role in writing the 2018 version during Trump’s first term and has been a staunch supporter of a more isolationist American policy. Despite his long track record as a China hawk, Colby aligns with Vice President JD Vance on the desire to disentangle the U.S. from foreign commitments. Colby’s policy team is also responsible for a forthcoming global posture review, which outlines where U.S. forces are stationed around the globe, and a theater air and missile defense review, which takes stock of U.S. and allies’ air defenses and makes recommendations for where to locate American systems. The Pentagon is expected to release both reviews as soon as next month.”

It is expected that the new global posture review will move U.S. military resources from Europe, and probably also from Asia, back to the States. But a shift in resources may well be all that there is. Over the last year the U.S. has urged its ‘allies’ to invest more in defense than previously. Moving U.S. resources away from where allies take over is not a real change of strategy. The U.S. pulls back from Ukraine but pushes the Europeans to continue the war against Russia. The general aim of ‘weakening Russia’, thus stays the same.

So while U.S. military resources are shrinking or shifting to geographically more nearby issues the overarching grand strategy aim, the achievement of global U.S. primacy, may well stay the same. It is just that other are pushed to carry a bigger burden for it. Colby’s pressure on Australia and Japan is pointing that way.

Read more …

Those shale reserves look mighty tempting.

• Trump Considering Strikes In Venezuela – CNN (RT)

US President Donald Trump is considering carrying out strikes against drug cartels on Venezuelan soil, CNN reported on Friday, citing sources familiar with the matter. The reported deliberations come as the Pentagon has deployed at least eight warships and one submarine to the eastern Caribbean. According to CNN, Tuesday’s missile strike on a boat allegedly smuggling drugs from Venezuela was just the first step in Trump’s efforts to neutralize drug trafficking in the region and potentially topple Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro. The US imposed sweeping sanctions on the socialist-ruled South American county during Trump’s first term in office, targeting its oil trade and financial sector.

Last month, Attorney General Pam Bondi doubled the reward for information leading to Maduro’s arrest to $50 million. Although Trump denied plans for regime change on Friday, he described Venezuela’s 2024 presidential election as “very strange.” Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated earlier this week that the US would “take on drug cartels wherever they are.” Maduro has denied the accusations of involvement in drug trafficking and vowed to declare Venezuela a “republic in arms” if attacked by the US. “Just as it wasn’t true that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, what they’re saying about Venezuela isn’t true either,” Maduro said on Friday, referring to the rationale behind the 2003 US invasion of Iraq.

Read more …

Are we seeing Rubio’s signature here?

• Venezuela Starts Preparing for ‘Armed Struggle,’ In Case of Attack – Maduro (Sp.)

Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro has warned that if his country is attacked, it will move into a phase of active military preparedness to defend its national integrity and sovereignty. On Friday, CNN reported citing sources that US President Donald Trump was considering various options for carrying out military strikes against drug cartels in Venezuela, including on Venezuelan soil, with a broader goal of weakening Maduro. “If Venezuela were attacked in any way, it would move into a stage of planned and organized armed struggle by all its people against aggression, whether local, regional, or national, in defense of peace, territorial integrity, sovereignty, and our people,” Maduro said on Friday. The Venezuelan leader announced the start of training a militia to defend the country, which involves citizens in the national defense system.

Maduro presented a diagram of the operational readiness levels of the defense forces and explained that Venezuela was in the yellow phase of integrated defense. The Venezuelan leader explained that, currently, his country was in the phase of non-violent struggle, with political, informational and diplomatic means involved. On Tuesday, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said that the US military had struck a drug-carrying vessel in the southern Caribbean that he claimed had left Venezuela. Rubio said that Trump was going to wage war on “narco-terrorist” organizations. Trump told reporters at the White House on Friday that Washington was not seeking a regime change in Venezuela, but the US was concerned about “billions of dollars of drugs [that] are pouring into our country from Venezuela.”

On August 7, US Attorney General Pamela Bondi announced a $50 million reward for information that leads to the arrest of Maduro, whom the US accuses of leading the Cartel de los Soles. The measure was shortly followed by the deployment of several US naval assets to the Caribbean under the pretext of countering cartel activity in the region. In response, Maduro ordered the mobilization of Bolivarian Militias to ensure the country’s defense. Caracas has repeatedly argued that US naval deployments in the Caribbean are unrelated to counter-narcotics efforts and instead serve to pressure Venezuela.

Read more …

We’re not going bankrupt fast enough. Try harder!

• EU Energy Chief Demands Permanent Ban On Russian Imports (RT)

The European Union must permanently cut off all Russian energy imports, Commissioner for Energy and Housing Dan Jorgensen has declared. Most EU countries have halted direct imports of Russian crude and gas under sanctions over the Ukraine conflict. However, Brussels continues to push for a full phase-out of Russian energy by the end of 2027 under its RePowerEU Roadmap. The plan calls for ending spot gas contracts, suspending new deals, limiting uranium imports, and targeting the so-called Russian “shadow fleet” of oil tankers allegedly used to bypass sanctions. Jorgensen, who has championed the plan for months, said the bloc must urgently agree on its framework and stick to it even after the Ukraine conflict ends.

“For us the objective is very, very clear. We want to stop the import as fast as possible,” he told reporters in Copenhagen on Friday. “And in the future, even when there is peace, we should still not import Russian energy… In my opinion, we will never again import as much as one molecule of Russian energy once this agreement is made.” Jorgensen noted that the US has backed Brussels’ plans. President Donald Trump, frustrated with slow Ukraine peace talks, urged European allies on Thursday to halt Russian energy imports. The July trade deal between Washington and Brussels also included a pledge that the EU would replace Russian oil and gas with American LNG and nuclear fuel.

Hungary and Slovakia, both heavily dependent on Russian supplies, have been the strongest opponents of the phase-out, arguing it would undermine the bloc’s security and raise prices. On Friday, Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto accused the EU of “hypocrisy,” saying many members still buy Russian crude through intermediaries even as they call for a phase-out. Jorgensen said he was in talks with Budapest and Bratislava but noted the plan can be approved without them, as it requires only a qualified majority. Moscow considers any restrictions targeting its energy trade illegal and has warned that abandoning its energy will drive up prices and weaken the EU’s economy by forcing it to rely on costlier alternatives or indirect Russian imports.

Read more …

That’s where the paranoia hits hardest.

• Trump Cutting Military Funding To NATO Countries Bordering Russia – FT (RT)

The US has begun to phase out foreign funding programs for NATO countries bordering Russia in an effort to push its European allies to pay for their own security, Financial Times has reported. Pentagon officials last week told Western European diplomats that Washington will no longer fund programs aimed at training and equipping the militaries of the bloc’s eastern member states, the outlet wrote on Thursday, citing anonymous officials.mMoscow has long insisted that it views eastward NATO expansion, and the military buildup of countries on Russia’s western border as a security threat. The funding for the Pentagon program needs to be approved by the US Congress, but the White House has not applied for more money, according to FT.

The availability of previously approved funds reportedly ends next September. Western European diplomats were “startled” by Washington’s move, and worried whether their domestic funding could cope with the loss, the outlet wrote. “It’s causing a lot of concern and uncertainty,” the newspaper cited one diplomat as saying. The cut corresponds with US President Donald Trump’s earlier executive action on realigning foreign aid with his ‘America First’ doctrine, FT said, citing a White House official. “This action has been coordinated with European countries in line with the executive order and the president’s long-standing emphasis on ensuring Europe takes more responsibility for its own defense,” the official reportedly said.

Under pressure from Trump, European NATO states promised to increase military budgets to 5% of GDP earlier this year. EU governments have also announced large-scale military investments, citing an alleged threat posed by Russia. Moscow has repeatedly brushed off assertions that it intends to attack the US-led military bloc. Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has pointed to the military buildup and Western European leaders’ increasingly bellicose rhetoric, accusing them of steering towards a direct clash. “They are once again trying to prepare Europe for war – not some hybrid war, but a real war against Russia,” he warned in July.

Read more …

Why now, after 3,5 years? With a littlse drone? Is this a warning?

“I know where your house lives?”

• Ukrainian Government Seat Damaged By Russian Strike – Kiev (RT)

The seat of the Ukrainian government in Kiev has been struck by a Russian drone, Mayor Vitaly Klitschko said on Sunday. The Russian Defense Ministry has yet to comment. Ukrainian officials reported strikes in different parts of the capital, adding that the cities of Odessa, Krivoy Rog, Dnepr, and Kremenchug also came under attack. Klitschko wrote on Telegram that “a government building caught fire following the apparent shootdown of a drone.” Ukrainian news agency UNIAN shared a video of smoke rising from a building near Independence Square. Ukrainian Prime Minister Yulia Sviridenko later confirmed damage to the government building, saying it was the first incident of its kind, with the roof and upper floors hit.

“Rescuers are extinguishing the fire,” she said, sharing a photo of a helicopter dousing the building and images of the badly damaged interior. MP Yaroslav Zheleznyak suggested that the office of the prime minister was not far from the epicenter of the strike, adding that there were also a couple of technical premises there. According to the city authorities, at least two people were killed and 15 were injured in the attack on Kiev. Russia has conducted long-range drone and missile strikes on Ukraine for months, targeting military-related facilities and the defense industrial base. It has said the attacks are retaliation for Kiev’s strikes deep into Russia, often damaging residential areas and critical infrastructure. Moscow maintains that it never targets civilians.

Read more …

“At this point, it’s more of a danger to itself during drills than to any external enemy..”

• Germany’s Embattled Army a ‘Laughingstock’ – Ex-AfD Politician (Sp.)

The German armed forces lack equipment, personnel and “everything” in general, with stocks depleted by military deliveries to Ukraine, the parliamentary commissioner for the Bundeswehr, Eva Hoegl, admitted last year when presenting the annual report on the state of the German military. Germany can’t even defend itself right now, let alone offer the Ukraine regime a model of security guarantees, Olga Petersen, a former Hamburg parliament member with the Alternative for Germany (AfD) party, told Sputnik. The army, whose budget has been shrinking year after year, can no longer provide proper training or prepare its personnel, she underscored. “At this point, it’s more of a danger to itself during drills than to any external enemy,” Petersen said.

According to her, Germany’s current military readiness is “laughable” to any potential adversary. She argued that sweeping reforms are urgently needed if Germany wants to have any real shot at safeguarding its own sovereignty. Germany’s military is running on fumes, Bundestag defense commissioner Eva Hoegl said when presenting her annual report in 2024, admitting that it was short on just about everything. “Unfortunately, I have to admit that the Bundeswehr still has too little of everything.

There is a shortage of ammunition, spare parts and radio equipment. There are not enough tanks, ships and aircraft,” Hoegl said. At the same time, Hoegl praised Berlin’s “outstanding” support for Ukraine. Currently, the so-called Coalition of the Willing, involving Germany, has been thrashing out details of security arrangements for Ukraine, presupposing deploying a ‘reassurance force.’ Russian President Vladimir Putin warned at the recent Eastern Economic Forum (EEF) that NATO troops under any flag and in any capacity would be legitimate targets for the Russian military if deployed to Ukraine.

Read more …

“..welcome to return to Russia if they have not supported the Ukrainian army..”

• Kremlin Sets Conditions For Return Of Western Companies To Russia (RT)

Western businesses are welcome to return to Russia if they have not supported the Ukrainian army and have met all obligations to their employees and the state, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said. In an interview with TASS on the sidelines of the Eastern Economic Forum in Vladivostok released on Saturday, Peskov outlined Moscow’s approach to foreign companies that left the Russian market after the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022 and Western sanctions. He stated that “it would be wrong to say we are not interested in these companies returning.” According to Peskov, many companies that left “reserved the right to return, fulfilling all their obligations to employees and to Russian regions… With them, of course, we need to conduct a very careful, respectful dialogue, observing our interests.”

Other companies, however, abandoned their employees without paying out salaries or fulfilling their social obligations, Peskov said. He added that they will still be allowed to return as long as they make amends. “Everyone should be allowed back. It will just be very expensive for them to return.” The Kremlin spokesman stressed that the only companies that are not welcome are those that have supported the Ukrainian military. “These companies have already become enemies, and that is how they should be treated,” he said.

As Western companies exited the Russian market, they lost billions of dollars in assets. BP alone reportedly took a write-off of more than $25 billion from exiting its Rosneft stake. McDonald’s, which sold its Russian restaurants to a local licensee, had to write off $1.3 billion. A Reuters analysis earlier this year estimated that foreign companies exiting the country lost more than $107 billion. According to Russian President Vladimir Putin, Moscow remains “open to cooperation, particularly with our friends,” and has never “turned away or pushed anyone out.” He added that many Western companies “are eagerly waiting for all these political restrictions to be lifted,” while some continue to operate in Russia.

Read more …

Russia let Nordstream go. China would get real mad.

• ‘Someone’ Might Have To Blow Up Power of Siberia 2 Pipeline – Jesse Watters (RT)

“Someone” could blow up Russia’s planned gas pipeline to China to derail the energy cooperation between the two countries, conservative Fox News host Jesse Watters has suggested. Speaking on air on Thursday, Watters said Russian President Vladimir Putin had “lost his customers in Europe” after the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022 and unprecedented Western sanctions, and was now turning to Asia. He described the Power of Siberia 2 gas pipeline as a key element of that strategy. “Putin’s putting down a big old pipeline to China. It’s supposed to be finished next decade and supply 15% of China’s energy. Russia and China are growing closer. Someone might have to bomb that pipeline like Nord Stream,” Watters told viewers. He did not elaborate on who could want to destroy the project.

Earlier this week, Russia announced that Moscow and Beijing had signed a memorandum on the Power of Siberia 2 pipeline, designed to bring up to 50 billion cubic meters of natural gas annually to China via Mongolia. It is expected to be launched in 2033. According to Putin, the project “is not charity” but rather a mutually beneficial agreement under which gas will be supplied at market-based rates. Russian officials did indicate, however, that gas prices for China would be lower than for the EU market, mostly due to the easier logistics. They also rejected the notion that Russia was reorienting itself toward the East, stressing that Russia is open to cooperation with all willing parties.

The Nord Stream pipelines were severely damaged by undersea explosions in the Baltic Sea in September 2022 in what is widely believed to have been an act of sabotage. American investigative journalist Seymour Hersh suggested the attack was orchestrated by US intelligence services under the administration of former US President Joe Biden. Russian officials have supported Hersh’s version. While the US denied any involvement, mere weeks before the escalation of the Ukraine conflict, Biden warned that “if Russia invades… there will be no longer Nord Stream 2. We will bring an end to it.”

Read more …

I get complaints I don’t pay enough attention to Gaza et al. But the whole thing feels so stuck, it’s hard to say anything. Other than lament the dying children, but I’ve done that so mch already. It’s just that it’s so long ago, people forget. Which is exactly the problem. But maybe the UAE struck a nerve here.

• Israel Backs Away From West Bank Annexation Plan After UAE Warning – WaPo (RT)

A public warning from the United Arab Emirates prompted the Israeli government to drop a planned discussion on annexing the West Bank, the Washington Post has reported. A senior UAE diplomat reportedly told Israeli media earlier this week that such a move would be a “red line” that would block Israel’s path to regional integration. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was scheduled to discuss the issue at a major government meeting on Friday, according to local media. On Wednesday, UAE special envoy Lana Nusseibeh told the Times of Israel that annexation would “foreclose the idea of regional integration.” “For every Arab capital you talk to, the idea of regional integration is still a possibility, but annexation to satisfy some of the radical extremist elements in Israel is going to take that off the table,” she stated.

The UAE was the first Arab nation to normalize relations with Israel in over a quarter century under the Abraham Accords brokered by President Donald Trump during his first term in office. The public warning from Abu Dhabi “came as a surprise,” an Israeli official told the Post, calling the situation “very unusual.” On Thursday, the issue of annexation was removed from the Israeli ministerial meeting agenda, according to the newspaper. Washington has not taken a stance on the issue so far. Secretary of State Marco Rubio described potential annexation as “not a final thing” earlier this week, adding that he was “not going to opine on that.”

The West Bank returned to the spotlight earlier this year after a group of Israeli ministers urged that the territory be formally annexed. Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich claimed control could be asserted at any moment. Israel seized the West Bank from Jordan in the 1967 Arab-Israeli war and has been actively building settlements there – which is widely regarded as illegal by the international community. It was close to annexation in 2020 but dropped the idea in exchange for normalizing relations with the UAE and Bahrain.

Read more …

“Google reported $264.6 billion in ad revenue in 2024..” And a $3.5bn fine is unfair?

Know what’s unfair about this monopoly y’all keep feeding? That it’s cost me some $60,000 over the past 5 years.

Cut the nonsense, all of you. There are plenty firms that would love to compete with Google here. Open it up.

• Trump Threatens EU Over ‘Unfair’ $3.5bn Google Fine (RT)

US President Donald Trump has threatened the EU with a probe that could lead to higher tariffs after the bloc fined Google for violating antitrust laws. The European Commission on Friday ordered the US company to pay a €2.95 billion ($3.5 billion) fine for allegedly abusing its dominant position in the advertising technology market by favoring its own display services. Regulators said the practice allowed Google to charge high fees, harming rivals and online publishers. The company was told to stop the “self-preferencing” practices, address conflicts of interest, and present a compliance plan within 60 days or face further penalties.

Trump blasted the ruling in a post on Truth Social, calling it “unfair” and “discriminatory.” “Europe today hit another great American company, Google, with a $3.5 Billion Dollar fine, effectively taking money that would otherwise go to American Investments and Jobs,” he wrote. “We cannot let this happen to brilliant and unprecedented American Ingenuity and, if it does, I will be forced to start a Section 301 proceeding to nullify the unfair penalties.” Section 301 of the 1974 Trade Act allows Washington to penalize foreign countries for practices deemed harmful to US commerce, including through tariffs.

Trump has criticized the EU for targeting US tech giants with privacy and antitrust rules stricter than those in America. His latest warning comes weeks after securing a trade deal that imposed a 15% tariff on most EU exports while scrapping tariffs on US industrial goods. The deal drew backlash from EU officials, who said it favored Washington. Google rejected the commission’s ruling and vowed to appeal. Google reported $264.6 billion in ad revenue in 2024 – 75.6% of its total income – cementing its status as the world’s largest advertising firm. The latest fine is the fourth penalty the EU has levied against it since 2017. Google also faces a trial in the US later this month over a separate Justice Department case in which a judge found it held illegal monopolies in online advertising technology.

Read more …

Sure to shake it all up. But a long way to go.

• Conor McGregor Urges Irish To Lobby Councillors For Presidential Bid (RMX)

Former MMA champion Conor McGregor has urged his online supporters to pressure local councillors into nominating him as a candidate for the Irish presidency. In a video filmed outside Government Buildings in Dublin, McGregor attacked the government over homelessness, migration, and security. “We have seen the homelessness of Irish children rise to levels unprecedented, proving this government’s refusal to abide by and respect our proclamation where all children of Irish are to be cherished. Instead, our children abandoned,” he said. He also claimed tourism had declined and “danger on our streets has risen” as a result of mass immigration.

Describing himself as a “master of martial combat” and a “solution-driven man,” McGregor called on his followers to contact councillors. “If you want to see my name on the ballot for the presidency, I urge you to contact your local county councillors today and ask them to nominate me,” he said. “Our councillors are the backbone of our communities. They work harder and deliver more for the people than those in the Oireachtas, who continue to fail this country time and again.” He told supporters he wanted to be “a president face to face with government officials with only one priority — to ensure that the country our founding fathers gave their lives for is strictly adhered to on behalf of its citizens.”

He tied his message to Ireland’s republican tradition, invoking the 1916 Proclamation. “Ireland, under my tenure, the will of the people will be heard. Ireland under my tenure, we will return important articles of our constitution prior, and thus again aligning with Padraig Pearse’s proclamation,” he said, referring to the revolutionary who was one of the leaders of the Easter Rising. To run, a candidate must secure the backing of either four of the State’s 31 local authorities or 20 members of the Irish bicameral parliament. McGregor’s plea suggests he is not confident about securing the latter, and is thus seeking the people to lobby their local councillors to get him on the ballot. The Irish presidential election is scheduled to be held on Oct. 24.

https://twitter.com/mcgregormma11/status/1964021366258028641

Read more …

How can you address this and miss the elephant? (Young) people don’t choose between atheism and Christianity. Instead, they see their world being invaded by islamic hordes and pick the obvious defense.

• In Secular Britain, Church Is the New Rebellion (Queen)

I’ve written before about how the UK is beginning to rediscover Christianity. Great Britain has been so lost in secularism (not to mention the rise of Islam) that entire generations have grown up without exposure to Christianity at all. I heard a conversation earlier this week between writer and podcaster Justin Brierly and the Colson Center’s John Stonestreet. The two men talked about the UK’s “quiet revival,” particularly among young people. What’s behind this sea change that is coming just a few years after the “new atheists” captured so much attention? Brierly told Stonestreet that the events of the past few years have awakened Britain’s young people spiritually. m“So something’s happened, and one of the things obviously is COVID and the lockdown and all of that produced in terms of the soul-searching that a lot of people went on, a sense that we actually need something more than just what technology and science can offer us,” Brierly said.

“But I think we’ve also seen just a real sea change among young people who I think have just been let down, frankly, by a lot of the promises of secular culture, which haven’t worked out for them, and they’re looking for a better story,” he added. “That’s the simplest way I can put it, that’s what I hear time and again when I hear from some of these Gen Z youngsters who are finding God, finding faith, walking into church for the first time.” Brierly pointed out that one thing that’s driving many young British people to church is that they don’t have the “church hurt” or preconceived notions about church that Americans have in our Christ-haunted culture (to borrow Flannery O’Connor’s wonderful phrase): In the UK, it’s a bit different, because there are very few people saying, “The church let me down,” because most people haven’t been in church for a, for a long time, you know, and Gen Z in particular, that they are a generation that, that have grown up amongst basically default secular atheism in the UK.

And, interestingly, one of the reasons they’re so open to going to church, ironically, is because they don’t have any baggage attached to church. And they… whereas an older generation, the sort of Gen X boomers, they still had that kinda cultural Christianity where they had been… maybe it had been forced on them in school or at Sunday school or whatever, and that they sort of… they had enough of it to be able to reject it. That’s not been the case with Gen Z. And one person put it to me like this. They said, “It’s now actually more edgy, more interesting, more cool for a young person to investigate and potentially become Christian than to be an atheist,” ’cause everyone’s an atheist, you know, around them. There’s nothing interesting.

Brierly cited Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s conversion to Christianity, historian Tom Holland’s conclusion that Christianity has been a force for good in the world for centuries (Holland also seems close to believing in Jesus himself), and notorious “new atheist” Richard Dawkins’ embrace of “cultural Christianity” without faith in Jesus as positive signs that Christianity is making a comeback in Great Britain. He also said that the “new atheists” were a blessing in disguise, as churches throughout the West are stressing theology and apologetics more. Trends are encouraging here in the States, too, with Millennials and Gen Zers attending church more often than older generations. It might be too early to call this a revival in the West, but it’s definitely an encouraging sign.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Ladapo

RFK

Malhotra

Makary
https://twitter.com/_aussie17/status/1964070478055952502

Tired
https://twitter.com/buitengebieden/status/1964217245212594456

Shadow
https://twitter.com/buitengebieden/status/1964286432815567217

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle September 6 2025

Sep 062025
 
 September 6, 2025  Posted by at 9:56 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , ,  37 Responses »


Pablo Picasso The dream 1951

 

• Vance Torches Hypocritical Dems for Targeting RFK (Salgado)
• Robert F. Kennedy Jr.: A Voice That Cannot Be Silenced (Jamie K. Wilson)
• The Grifters’ Lament (James Howard Kunstler)
• A New World Order Where The West Is Optional (Lukyanov)
• Russia Never Turned Its Back On The US – Putin (RT)
• Did Putin Really Threaten Potential Peacekeepers In Ukraine? (RT)
• Ukraine’s Backers Select Non-NATO Forces For Buffer Zone – NBC News (RT)
• US Generals Involved In European Plan To Send 10,000 Troops To Ukraine (RT)
• NATO Troops In Ukraine Would Be ‘Legitimate Targets’ – Putin (RT)
• ECHR ‘Endangers The Existence Of Western Democracies’ (RMX)
• The FBI Corruption Scandal Just Got a Whole Lot Worse (Margolis)
• Letitia James Asks Appeals Court to Reinstate Trump’s $500 Million Penalty (ET)
• Damning New Evidence Emerges in Biden Autopen Scandal (Margolis)
• New Biden Autopen Scandal Bombshell Involves Kamala (Margolis)
• Tesla Offers Musk Unprecedented $1 Trillion Pay Package (ZH)
• President Trump Hosts Tech Executives at White House for Dinner (CTH)

 

 

Gen. Flynn is right: the song is brilliant. And the video too.
It should be no.1 in the British charts.

RFK
https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1963616927982493702

A complete idiot

Rutte

Medvedev

Musk
https://twitter.com/iam_smx/status/1964127814904316142

 

 

 

 

“We were lied to about everything — we were lied to about natural immunity,” he said. “We were told again and again the vaccines would prevent transmission, [that] they prevent infection. It wasn’t true. They knew it from the start.”

• Vance Torches Hypocritical Dems for Targeting RFK (Salgado)

After Democrat senators made fools out of themselves at a Thursday congressional hearing with Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Vice President JD Vance called out the senators for “enriching big pharma” at the expense of Americans. The Big Pharma acolytes have their knives out for Kennedy right now, since he is actually trying to put Americans’ health ahead of corporate kickbacks and pressure. Democrats are particularly manic about the fact that Kennedy backed away from the controversial COVID-19 vaccines. Vance disgustedly posted on X, “When I see all these senators trying to lecture and ‘gotcha’ Bobby Kennedy today all I can think is: You all support off-label, untested, and irreversible hormonal ‘therapies’ for children, mutilating our kids and enriching big pharma. You’re full of shit and everyone knows it.” Kennedy reacted to Vance’s comment:

One of the senators who almost exploded spontaneously from fury at Kennedy was Elizabeth “Fauxcahontas” Warren, who came in full war paint, ready to tomahawk Kennedy for no longer unequivocally recommending the COVID-19 vaccines to every age group. “If you don’t recommend then the consequence of that in many states is that you can’t walk into a pharmacy and get one. It means insurance companies don’t have to cover the $200 or so cost,” she said. “As senator — doctor Cassidy said, you are effectively denying people vaccines.” Kennedy countered, “We’re not going to recommend a product for which there’s no clinical data for that indication. Is that what I should be doing?” He later exposed exactly why Warren is beside herself.

“And I know you’ve taken $855,000 from pharmaceutical companies, senator!” As Rush Limbaugh always said, follow the money. Warren apparently doesn’t care whether any safety and efficacy tests were done as long as she gets kickbacks. Perhaps that is also why Democrats are so enthusiastically behind unscientific transgender “treatments.” Secretary Kennedy also ripped apart those in the medical, scientific, and political communities who falsely framed untested and ultimately harmful COVID-19 policies as incontrovertible science. “We were lied to about everything — we were lied to about natural immunity,” he said. “We were told again and again the vaccines would prevent transmission, [that] they prevent infection. It wasn’t true. They knew it from the start.”

In fact, Kennedy stated, “It wasn’t true because that’s what the animal studies in the clinical trial showed. We were told that there was science behind cloth masks. The CDC allowed the teachers unions to write the order closing our schools, which hurt working people all over the country, and then pretend it was science-based.” But it turned out that was very far from the truth. And how many children suffered because of it? Nor can any alleged vaccine benefit be quantified, Kennedy said, because of the “data chaos at CDC.” He bluntly asked, “Did it save a million lives? Well, there’s no data to support that, or … there’s no studies, …there’s faulty data. I’m not going to sign on to something if I can’t make it to a scientific certainty. It doesn’t mean that I’m, you know, anti-vax, it just means I’m pro-science.”

Read more …

Lovely portrait. Is it the female touch?!

• Robert F. Kennedy Jr.: A Voice That Cannot Be Silenced (Jamie K. Wilson)

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. does not sound like other politicians. Where others glide on polished cadence, his words arrive jagged and rasping, sometimes strangled mid-syllable as though each one must be forced out against resistance. For many, the sound is jarring. For him, it is a daily war. Kennedy suffers from spasmodic dysphonia, a rare neurological disorder of the voice. In this condition, the brain misfires signals to the larynx, causing the vocal cords to spasm uncontrollably just as they’re needed for speech. Instead of vibrating smoothly, they seize up, clamp shut, or flutter open at the wrong moment. The result is a broken, strangled voice — not from weakness of will, but from muscles betraying the speaker at the most intimate moment of communication.

The mechanics are cruel enough. But what it feels like is worse. Patients describe it as trying to talk while someone presses fingers into their throat. The words are fully formed in the mind, yet trapped in the larynx. Each syllable becomes a contest of strength, like forcing air through a blocked pipe. The effort leaves muscles sore and the speaker fatigued, as if a long run had been crammed into a two-minute conversation. And layered over the physical strain is the constant social pressure: the sideways looks, the assumption that the speaker is nervous, drunk, or evasive. Most who live with this condition retreat. They limit calls, avoid public speaking, or slip quietly out of leadership roles. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. did not.

He was diagnosed in the late 1990s at Massachusetts General Hospital after years of legal advocacy had already begun to strain his voice. Treatments exist — botulinum toxin injections that temporarily paralyze the spasming muscles, voice therapy to retrain breathing — but none are permanent. Every few months, the fight resets. For most patients, the disorder is enough to narrow their lives. Kennedy chose the opposite: to live in the open arena of public speech, and to keep showing up even when every sentence feels like lifting a stone uphill.

That persistence is not simply personal grit; it’s leadership. Kennedy’s willingness to endure visible and audible struggle in order to be heard demonstrates the same force of will he applies to his causes: a refusal to be silenced, even when silence would be easier. Where his father and uncle were remembered for soaring oratory, he is remembered for the determination it takes to simply finish a sentence. And in that difference lies a different kind of strength.

Which is why it was especially ugly to see The Daily Beast sneer at his “Darth Vader breathing” during Senate testimony. This was not satire or cleverness, but cruelty: mocking a man for a neurological disorder that makes every sentence a battle. The same media class that congratulates itself for “amplifying marginalized voices” revealed its hypocrisy by jeering at the very act of persistence. Kennedy’s strained cadence is not an affectation. It is authenticity, and their contempt shows how little of it they can bear.

But wait, there’s more. That hearing centered on the COVID vaccine — and many of the senators shouting Kennedy down were the same ones who, during the Biden years, colluded with media and tech giants to muzzle scientists and doctors who questioned its safety or proposed alternatives. They silenced debate then, and now, faced with a man whose own body fights to silence him, they fall back on the same tactic: shouting, jeering, and trying to drown him out, even as his own body seeks to silence him.

Kennedy’s voice, then, is more than sound. It has become a metaphor for freedom of speech itself. Just as his body tries to choke off his words, powerful institutions try to silence dissenting voices. Just as his disorder demands greater effort to be heard, so too does speaking uncomfortable truths in an age of censorship, cancellation, and corporate propaganda. Every phrase he utters, forced through pain, echoes the larger struggle to preserve open expression in a society and culture where free speech grows more fragile by the year.

He is no victim. His broken voice is his banner — the scar that testifies to endurance. It is impossible to fake authenticity at this cost. In a political age of spin and slogan, Kennedy’s strangled cadence carries a weight others cannot match: it is the sound of someone who refuses to surrender his voice, no matter how hard the world — or his own body — tries to take it away. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. embodies the First Amendment in flesh and blood: freedom of speech under siege, battered but unbroken, still alive because one man wills it to be so. His voice is more than a condition. It is a witness.

Read more …

“We are the sickest country in the world. That’s why we have to fire people at the CDC … They did not do their job! This was their job to keep us healthy!” —Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.

• The Grifters’ Lament (James Howard Kunstler)

What a gruesome spectacle it was to see HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. take on a conclave of vicious grifters on the Senate Finance Committee straining to warp reality in defense of their mighty patron, the nation-wrecking pharmaceutical companies. Do you understand how deep, convoluted, and grave the political sickness is? Over the years, the public health agencies and “big pharma” had evolved into a symbiotic vector driving the nation into chronic illness. They allowed the population to poison themselves on a diet of corn syrup, engineered snack foods, and chemical additives. Result: epidemic obesity, diabetes, and many other illnesses. To counter that, they dosed everybody to-the-max with sketchily-tested pharma products while the agency employees raked in royalties and pharma got a get-outa-jail-free card in the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA) — legal liability cancelled.

Then, they all badly mis-stepped, conniving in the Covid-19 operation, a still poorly-comprehended scheme to punk the American people and enable mail-in ballot fraud to steal the 2020 election. First, there was Dr. Fauci’s years’ long effort to hatch a novel corona virus, Covid-19, in labs here and overseas. Then, there was the opportune release of the virus in 2019. Then, the pharma response to the virus: a “miracle” mRNA vaccine that was likely already developed in secret, even before Operation Warp Speed was acted-out to pretend that pharma just came up with it. And, of course, there was President Trump 1.0 getting hosed by his Covid Response Team (Fauci, Birx, et al.) on all this.

Thus, you have that battery of US Senators all paid handsomely by Pharma to defend the industry with hysterical obfuscation against the lone figure, Mr. Kennedy, striving to correct all that fantastic corruption. He retorted to their malign nonsense honorably, revealing their conflicts of interest, their cupidity, the bales of dollars paid by pharma to the likes of Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, and the rest over the years, and their longstanding silence on the afore-mentioned poisoning and drugging of America.

Incidentally, to understand how this grift got so exorbitant, look to the unfortunate 2010 Supreme Court decision Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (558 U.S. 310). In a 5-4 ruling (by majority conservative justices, then including Alito, Thomas, and Scalia), SCOTUS decided that previous prohibitions on corporate money in election campaigns were unconstitutional because corporations enjoy legal status as persons, that is, as citizens, and giving money to election campaigns is a form of free speech under the first Amendment, which can’t be abridged by any law.

And so, the spigot opened on vast fortunes laid on politicians by corporations seeking to protect their interests. If anything went to warp speed, it was the Beltway lobbying industry. The Citizens United decision was a singular tragedy for our country. The legal reasoning behind it was specious because corporations, unlike real human citizens, do not have duties, obligations, and responsibilities to the nation, entailed in their citizenship. Rather, corporations have duties, obligations, and responsibilities solely (and explicitly in law) to their shareholders, whose interests are not necessarily consistent with the public interest. Why has no one noticed this?

Read more …

“The West is retreating inward, shifting to a defensive crouch – sometimes aggressively so – and in the process cutting itself off from much of the world.”

• A New World Order Where The West Is Optional (Lukyanov)

Historical anniversaries often provide the backdrop for diplomacy to become spectacle. This week’s Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit in Tianjin was deliberately staged ahead of China’s grand parade marking 80 years since the end of World War II. Beijing, the host, made sure the symbolism landed. The timing also underscored the contrast with Washington: Donald Trump, who has long admired military parades, is already planning a lavish one next July for America’s 250th anniversary, after his low-key attempt last summer fell flat. For the SCO itself, the Tianjin meeting carried weight comparable to last year’s BRICS summit in Kazan. Documents were signed, but as always the road from declarations to implementation will be long. What mattered most was setting a benchmark. In international politics, the very act of gathering matters as much as the outcomes.

By inertia, many still measure importance by whether Western powers are in the room. For decades, world affairs were shaped by East-West confrontation in the Cold War, and then by the unilateral primacy of the US and its allies. Membership of the G7 (at one time G8) was once the crown jewel of global respectability. Even the G20, designed to reflect a more diverse world, remained dominated by Western influence over its agenda. Meetings without the West were seen as parochial or symbolic. That perception is now outdated. The real turning point came last year – first at BRICS, now at the SCO. Both groupings, very different in composition, are drawing growing interest. Countries are applying to join or at least to participate. Simply appearing at these forums has become prestigious, and the corridor diplomacy surrounding them allows for meetings that are otherwise difficult to arrange.

The shift is not just about Russia. The attempt by Western governments to isolate Moscow after the escalation in Ukraine has backfired. Instead of leaving Russia in the cold, it accelerated the formation of what is now described as the “global majority.” Many states do not want to submit to anyone else’s political logic. They follow their own calculations of interest and expediency. Structures once mocked in the West as artificial, jealous imitations of Western clubs – BRICS and the SCO foremost among them – are now becoming indispensable. They are no longer simply ideological counters to hegemony, but practical platforms. This explains efforts to expand the BRICS New Development Bank and to set up an SCO Development Bank. These institutions will not rival the IMF or World Bank immediately, but the trajectory is clear: to build alternatives that bypass Western gatekeepers.

The West finds this almost impossible to digest. For Washington and Brussels, any institution outside their control looks like a threat, a conspiracy “against democracy.” In fact, the opposite is taking place. The West is retreating inward, shifting to a defensive crouch – sometimes aggressively so – and in the process cutting itself off from much of the world. The formula that has gained currency in Moscow – “not against the West, but without it” – is finally becoming reality.

Read more …

“The two-headed eagle, one of our national symbols, looks both ways,” Putin said, referencing Russia’s coat of arms. “Did we turn our backs on anyone? We did not. The eagle looks both ways just like always.”

• Russia Never Turned Its Back On The US – Putin (RT)

Moscow remains open to economic cooperation with the United States, and American businesses could benefit from joint projects if Washington allows it, Russian President Vladimir Putin said Friday at the Eastern Economic Forum in Vladivostok. “The two-headed eagle, one of our national symbols, looks both ways,” Putin said, referencing Russia’s coat of arms. “Did we turn our backs on anyone? We did not. The eagle looks both ways just like always.” Putin said US companies have expressed an interest in projects and proposed joint natural gas production in Alaska. “They have resources, and we have extraction and liquefaction technologies that are significantly more efficient than what our American partners have,” he said. Putin said American and Russian companies are eager to cooperate, should the US government give the green light.

The Russian leader added that opportunities also exist in the Arctic. “Together with our Chinese friends, we discussed possible three-way operations in our Arctic fields that can be done right now,” he said. “Those proposals are on the table and require a political decision.” US President Donald Trump has argued that expanding economic cooperation with Russia is in America’s best interest, but the Ukraine conflict continues to stand in the way of the normalization of relations. Earlier this week, Kirill Dmitriev, Putin’s aide on international economic affairs who is directly involved in talks with the US, said trilateral Arctic ventures involving Russia, the US and China could ease geopolitical tensions among the three powers.

Read more …

We’re talking about two very different situations: 1) before a peace treaty, and 2) after a peace treaty. Before, any troops are a threat to Russia. After, it’s different. First, because as Putin says, no troops are needed. When there is a treaty, Russia will stick by it. Second, because the west appears sensible enough to agree sending non-NATO troops.

There’s talk of Bangla Deshi and Saudi peacekeeping troops. If the will is there, so is the solution. But of course, there’s still people like Rutte, who says it’s none of Russia’s business what troops are in Ukraine. Yes it is.

• Did Putin Really Threaten Potential Peacekeepers In Ukraine? (RT)

When Russian President Vladimir Putin spoke on Friday, he issued his familiar warning: any foreign troops entering Ukraine during active fighting would be considered “legitimate targets.” Yet Western media ran with a drastically different narrative – suggesting he was threatening peacekeepers, not just combatants. That framing missed a crucial distinction. In the same remarks, Putin separately addressed the idea of postwar peacekeeping forces, saying they would be unnecessary once a settlement was reached. Within hours, Western headlines turned those words into something much starker – a supposed threat against European “peacekeepers.” By erasing the context that Putin had separated conflict intervention from postwar scenarios, much of the press presented a conditional statement as intimidating.

1) What Putin actually said Putin’s remarks drew a clear line between two situations. Speaking of the conflict as it stands, he said: “If some troops appear there [in Ukraine], especially now during military operations, we proceed from the fact that these will be legitimate targets for destruction.” This was a reiteration of Russia’s long-stated position: any foreign forces fighting alongside Kiev would be treated as combatants. Later, he addressed the idea of international peacekeepers in the event of a settlement: “And if decisions are reached that lead to peace, to long-term peace, then I simply do not see any sense in their presence on the territory of Ukraine, full stop.” In other words, once hostilities end, the presence of foreign troops would be irrelevant because they would not be needed – not because they would be attacked.

2) What Western media reported The Washington Post explicitly collapsed the two scenarios, writing that “any foreign military troops deployed to Ukraine – even for peacekeeping – would be considered targets.” By inserting “peacekeeping” into the “legitimate targets” line, the paper presented Putin as threatening stabilizing forces that might only arrive after a settlement. The Financial Times published the headline: “Foreign troops in Ukraine would be ‘legitimate targets’ for Russia, Putin warns.” While the article noted elsewhere that Putin dismissed the need for peacekeepers after a deal, the headline stripped away the condition and implied a sweeping threat.

The BBC headlined its story: “Putin says EU troops in Ukraine would be legitimate targets.” Without the qualifier “during military operations,” the piece left readers with the impression that all EU deployments, including peacekeepers, would be targeted. The Guardian summed it up as: “Putin threatens Western troops in Ukraine.” Again, no mention of the wartime vs. postwar distinction, effectively merging peacekeepers and combatants into a single hostile category. In each case, coverage framed Putin as if he had rejected any Western presence in Ukraine, even under a peace deal. The nuance – that his threat applied only to wartime combatants – was stripped away.

3) Why it mattersThis shift in framing has significant consequences. Diplomatically, it paints Russia as unwilling to tolerate even postwar stabilization forces, which narrows the range of perceived options for negotiation. For public opinion, it reinforces the view that Moscow is hostile, potentially hardening attitudes against ceasefire or peacekeeping initiatives. And for journalism itself, it illustrates how stripping away conditions in pursuit of the narrative can distort meaning and erode trust.

4) Bottom line Putin’s remarks drew a clear boundary: foreign soldiers fighting in Ukraine during the conflict would be treated as legitimate targets, while peacekeepers after a settlement would be unnecessary. By collapsing those two scenarios into one, Western media reframed a conditional warning into a sweeping threat – turning a repeat of long-standing policy into another headline of Russian aggression.

Read more …

“..foreign soldiers would either become targets for Russian forces during hostilities or serve no purpose if a genuine peace agreement were reached..”

• Ukraine’s Backers Select Non-NATO Forces For Buffer Zone – NBC News (RT)

Kiev’s European backers want the US to oversee a buffer zone between Russia and Ukraine in the event of a peace deal, with troops from non-NATO countries such as Bangladesh or Saudi Arabia potentially deployed on the ground, NBC News reported Friday, citing anonymous sources. According to the outlet, Washington’s role would be to use drones, satellites, and other intelligence capabilities to monitor conditions and coordinate with participating nations. Moscow has repeatedly rejected the idea of foreign troops in Ukraine as part of any peace settlement.

Politico previously outlined the same proposal for a buffer zone, suggesting involvement of third-party states but not naming them, and indicating that French and British troops could make up much of the force. A former Pentagon official told the outlet the plan reflected Kiev’s European backers “grasping at straws.” On Friday, Russian President Vladimir Putin again stressed Moscow’s opposition, warning that foreign soldiers would either become targets for Russian forces during hostilities or serve no purpose if a genuine peace agreement were reached. He added that “the West’s dragging of Ukraine into NATO was one of the causes of the conflict” and said any settlement would have to include security guarantees for both Russia and Ukraine.

On Tuesday, Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky met with members of the “coalition of the willing,” the group of nations supplying Kiev with weapons and promising security commitments in the event of a resolution with Russia. Most of them have publicly ruled out putting their own forces on the ground. Meanwhile, Moscow has said it plans to establish its own buffer zone along parts of the border to protect Russian civilians, particularly in Kursk and Bryansk regions. Putin noted in May that Ukrainian forces often target non-military assets, including homes and civilian vehicles such as ambulances and farm equipment, which he said made such measures necessary.

Read more …

Does this sound like a peace treaty to you?

“..two groups of forces that are to be sent to Ukraine, according to the report. One of them would be tasked with training and assistance to the Ukrainian military, while the second would serve as a “reassurance force” for Kiev.”

• US Generals Involved In European Plan To Send 10,000 Troops To Ukraine (RT)

Top US military officials have been involved in drawing up a plan for “security guarantees” for Kiev advocated by Paris and London that includes a massive troop deployment to Ukraine, the Wall Street Journal reported on Thursday, citing a European diplomat. The scheme drawn up primarily by European army chiefs includes two groups of forces that are to be sent to Ukraine, according to the report. One of them would be tasked with training and assistance to the Ukrainian military, while the second would serve as a “reassurance force” for Kiev. The troops are to be deployed once Moscow and Kiev reach a peace deal. A total of 26 nations agreed to contribute to “security guarantees” for Ukraine in various ways, French President Emmanuel Macron said earlier this week, following a meeting of the so-called ‘coalition of the willing’ – a group of Kiev’s European backers.

The current commitments would allow for a deployment of over 10,000 troops to Ukraine, the WSJ source said, adding that the plan “received input from some US generals,” including the US head of the NATO Allied Command Operations. The level of US involvement in the scheme remains unclear, the report said, adding that there have been no clear statements from President Donald Trump. Russia has expressed strong opposition to any NATO troop deployment to Ukraine. On Friday, President Vladimir Putin warned that foreign soldiers would either become targets for Russian forces or serve no purpose if a genuine peace agreement were reached.

He added that “the West’s dragging of Ukraine into NATO was one of the causes of the conflict” and said any settlement would have to include security guarantees for both Russia and Ukraine. NBC News also reported on Friday that Kiev’s European backers want troops from non-NATO countries such as Bangladesh or Saudi Arabia to be sent to a “buffer zone” between Russia and Ukraine overseen by the US in the event of a peace deal.

Read more …

“Nobody should doubt that Russia would implement the agreed terms fully. We will respect security guarantees that both Russia and Ukraine need to be offered.”

• NATO Troops In Ukraine Would Be ‘Legitimate Targets’ – Putin (RT)

Any Western troops deployed to Ukraine would either become legitimate targets for Russian forces while hostilities continue or irrelevant in the event of a peace deal, President Vladimir Putin said on Friday. Speaking at the Eastern Economic Forum in Vladivostok, Putin commented on the recent meeting of Ukraine’s European backers – dubbed the “coalition of the willing” – in Paris. He reiterated Moscow’s opposition to the group’s proposals for the deployment of troops to Ukraine. “The West’s dragging of Ukraine into NATO was one of the causes of the conflict. If any troops show up now, while the hostilities are ongoing, we would consider them legitimate military targets,” Putin said. “If decisions are made that result in long-term peace, then I simply see no sense in such a presence,” he added. “Nobody should doubt that Russia would implement the agreed terms fully. We will respect security guarantees that both Russia and Ukraine need to be offered.”

Putin also noted that Kiev’s backers have not seriously discussed security guarantees with Moscow. The coalition – including the UK, France, Germany, and other European nations providing weapons to Kiev – is weighing possible security commitments, although many of its members have publicly rejected sending ground forces to Ukraine. Earlier this week, former Polish President Andrzej Duda said the Ukrainian leadership is “dreaming” of drawing NATO into a direct war with Russia. He referred to a 2022 incident when a Ukrainian missile struck a Polish border village, killing one person, and Kiev swiftly accused Moscow of attacking the member of the US-led military bloc.

Read more …

“European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) is undermining national sovereignty by creating what he called a “de facto right to immigration through the back door.”

• ECHR ‘Endangers The Existence Of Western Democracies’ (RMX)

Hans-Jürgen Papier, Germany’s former chief justice and one of the country’s most senior legal scholars, has warned that the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) is undermining national sovereignty by creating what he called a “de facto right to immigration through the back door.” The 82-year-old Ludwig Maximilian University professor, who led Germany’s Federal Constitutional Court at the start of Angela Merkel’s chancellorship, told The Times newspaper that a growing body of asylum case law from national courts and the ECHR in Strasbourg had created an “ever deeper reaching and ever more closely meshed agglomeration” of rulings. These, he said, were now “settling like mildew over the states’ political power to take action.” In his view, the result has been a dramatic broadening of the right to asylum, far beyond what was originally intended under the Geneva Convention.

“The citizens expect those with political responsibility to revise the asylum policies to suit the changed circumstances. But that is in danger of failing because of the ossification of a body of law that is getting increasingly rarefied and ultimately looks irreversible to many politicians,” he said. Papier criticized the way European courts have interpreted Articles 3 and 8 of the ECHR — the rights against inhuman treatment and to family life — to block deportations, including cases where asylum seekers could face homelessness or irregular work in other EU states. “That simply goes too far,” he argued. “Here, human dignity is being treated like small change and thereby robbed of its special dignified status.”

The former judge warned that the overzealous application of human rights laws by the ECHR was “generally destroying the European citizen’s trust in the capacity of their democratic institutions to act, and so at the end of the day endangering the existence of Western democracies.” He called for reforms to the ECHR itself, though he admitted this was unlikely given the need for consensus among all 46 Council of Europe states. Instead, he suggested that the EU or national parliaments draft a “precisely formulated law of migration” that would reduce judges’ scope for interpretation and return asylum rights to the original Geneva standards.

Among his proposals are electronic asylum visas for those with a realistic chance of success, strict annual ceilings on “subsidiary protection” — a weaker asylum status covering people at risk of violence or hardship — and potential third-country solutions for processing applications abroad. Papier has long been a critic of what he sees as Europe’s open-border approach. In an op-ed for the Bild newspaper in November 2023, he warned that “essentially nothing has changed” since the 2015 migration crisis. He accused Germany of allowing migrants to bypass the Dublin Regulation, which requires asylum seekers to lodge claims in the first EU country they enter, and insisted that Berlin should move “as quickly as possible” to introduce clear and enforceable rules.

“It is not about affecting the right to asylum for people who are actually being persecuted,” he wrote, “it is about protecting this right from being abused for reasons that are clearly unrelated to asylum.”

Read more …

“While Hunter Biden was collecting millions from Chinese energy interests, a corrupt FBI official was sabotaging the investigation that might have exposed the entire scheme.”

• The FBI Corruption Scandal Just Got a Whole Lot Worse (Margolis)

Just when you thought the web of corruption surrounding the Biden family’s foreign dealings couldn’t get any more tangled, along comes a bombshell revelation that exposes how deep the rot truly goes within our federal law enforcement agencies. According to a new Justice Department Inspector General report, Charles McGonigal, the former head of the FBI’s New York counterintelligence division, leaked sensitive details about a criminal investigation into CEFC China Energy—the same Chinese conglomerate that funneled millions to Hunter Biden.Let’s be crystal clear about what happened here. While the FBI was secretly investigating CEFC China for criminal activity, McGonigal was simultaneously tipping off the very people they were pursuing. He admitted during a November 2023 proffer session that he warned an associate of the Chinese energy giant about upcoming arrests and shared classified investigative details. His exact words to this individual, known as “Person B,” were that he “made it perfectly clear” that CEFC-related figures would be arrested.

Just the News has more: “McGonigal, who was sentenced in December 2023 for money laundering related to a Russian oligarch, met with prosecutors in November 2023 and “acknowledged during the proffer interview that he shared information with Person B about the CEFC investigation and anticipated arrests arising from it.” “The DOJ watchdog said that “Person B was a consultant to foreign governments and businesses on international investments, and, in addition to his work for CEFC China, Person B was a non-governmental advisor to the Prime Minister of Albania.”

Horowitz assessed that “although the full extent of the harm from McGonigal’s leaks of sensitive investigative information to foreign subjects and targets will likely never be fully known, we determined that the impact of McGonigal’s conduct on the CEFC investigation, a significant FBI criminal investigation, was substantial.” Hunter Biden and his associated businesses are also believed to have received $5 million or more in payments from CEFC in 2017 and 2018, and CEFC Chairman Ye Jianming’s deputy, Patrick Ho, also agreed to pay Biden, the son of former President Joe Biden, a $1 million legal retainer after Ho was eventually arrested. Hunter referred to him as “the f***ing spy chief of China” in a May 11, 2018, voice recording.

Inspector General Michael Horowitz didn’t mince words about the damage McGonigal caused. He assessed that these leaks inflicted “substantial” harm on a significant criminal investigation, emphasizing that the full extent of the damage will likely never be known. Think about that for a moment—we may never understand how badly this betrayal compromised national security and ongoing investigations. McGonigal’s corruption extends far beyond these China-related leaks. He faced multiple charges for accepting hundreds of thousands of dollars from individuals with European business ties and foreign intelligence connections. In December 2023, he was sentenced to fifty months in prison for conspiring to violate the International Emergency Economic Powers Act and money laundering, specifically related to his work for sanctioned Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska in 2021.

The pattern here is undeniable. A senior FBI counterintelligence official was simultaneously working for foreign interests while protecting those same interests from American law enforcement. Meanwhile, the Biden family was getting rich off deals with the very Chinese energy company that McGonigal was protecting from federal investigation. This isn’t just another Washington corruption story—it’s a national security nightmare that reaches the highest levels of government. While Hunter Biden was collecting millions from Chinese energy interests, a corrupt FBI official was sabotaging the investigation that might have exposed the entire scheme.

Read more …

Is she just playing for time?

• Letitia James Asks Appeals Court to Reinstate Trump’s $500 Million Penalty (ET)

New York Attorney General Letitia James filed an appeal on Sept. 4 of a court ruling that threw out an estimated $500 million penalty in President Donald Trump’s business fraud case. James’s office filed a notice of appeal with the New York Supreme Court in Manhattan, indicating an appeal was being launched with the state’s highest court, the Court of Appeals of the State of New York, on behalf of the state. The brief notice does not spell out arguments from James as to why the appeal should be allowed. The filing came after a ruling on Aug. 21 by the New York Appellate Division’s First Judicial Department, a branch of the New York Supreme Court, tossed the penalty in a fractured ruling but left the civil judgment against Trump undisturbed. The case concerned allegations that the Trump Organization was involved in financial fraud by misrepresenting property values.

The trial judge, New York Supreme Court Justice Arthur Engoron, ruled against Trump in February 2024, issuing a judgment of more than $460 million, with interest accruing. Trump posted a bond of $175 million, and the appeals process moved forward in the New York Appellate Division’s First Judicial Department. The Appellate Division affirmed the judgment issued by Engoron, but the panel of five judges was divided, filing three separate opinions, including partial dissents. Two of the jurists—Justices Peter Moulton and Dianne Renwick—said they thought James “acted well within her lawful power in bringing this action, and that she vindicated a public interest in doing so.” However, both disagreed with the high-dollar penalty.

Moulton said in a concurring opinion that the lower court’s penalty order “is an excessive fine that violates the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution.” Justices John Higgitt and Llinet Rosado joined an opinion saying Engoron’s judgment should be vacated and a new trial ordered. Justice David Friedman criticized James, saying she was focused on “political hygiene, ending with the derailment of President Trump’s political career and the destruction of his real estate business.” He said that the court’s ruling “unanimously derails the effort to destroy his business.”

Trump hailed the Appellate Division ruling in an Aug. 21 post on Truth Social, saying he achieved “total victory” and that he was “so honored by Justice David Friedman’s great words of wisdom.” James lauded the Appellate Division ruling when it came out. “The First Department today affirmed the well-supported finding of the trial court: Donald Trump, his company, and two of his children are liable for fraud,” she said on X. “The court upheld the injunctive relief we won, limiting Donald Trump and The Trump Organization officers’ ability to do business in New York.” It is unclear when the Court of Appeals of the State of New York will act on the appeal.

Read more …

“Biden’s team ran a shadow presidency, making major decisions while their boss stayed clueless, and in the process, they shredded any pretense of accountability.”

• Damning New Evidence Emerges in Biden Autopen Scandal (Margolis)

Fresh revelations about Joe Biden’s autopen scandal paint a picture so damning that even his most loyal defenders should be squirming in their seats. Internal emails obtained by the New York Post show a White House in complete disarray, with staff frantically scrambling to figure out whether Biden actually knew what documents were being signed in his name. The timeline alone should make every American’s blood boil. On Jan. 11, Biden allegedly gave verbal approval for commuting the sentences of crack cocaine offenders. But those documents weren’t signed until Jan. 17, and only after a series of panicked late-night emails between White House staff trying to establish some semblance of proper authorization.

Staff Secretary Stef Feldman, clearly the only adult in the room, demanded verification of Biden’s approval before allowing the autopen to do its work. At 9:16 p.m. on Jan. 16, she wrote to Biden’s aides, “I’ll need an [email] from [Deputy Assistant to the President Rosa Po] confirming the president’s sign-off on the specific documents when they are finalized.” But here’s where it gets really ugly. Deputy White House Counsel Tyeesha Dixon forwarded concerns to Chief of Staff Michael Posada, asking, “Michael, any thoughts on how to address this?” Most tellingly, Dixon noted in her email that “the president did not review the warrants.” The expectation that autopen would handle Biden’s pardons and commutations says everything about how his White House operated and raises legitimate questions about who was really running the country.

Staffers routinely mechanically applied Biden’s signature to legal documents, and now we know his own counsel admitted he never actually reviewed what he was supposedly signing. Among those benefiting from this constitutional chaos was Russell McIntosh, a 51-year-old involved in the 1999 murder of a woman and her two-year-old child in North Carolina. This is the caliber of individual Biden’s team was cutting loose while the president remained blissfully unaware of the specifics. The Justice Department wasn’t faring any better. Here’s more from the Post:

“The emails also indicate Justice Department confusion on how to carry out Biden’s orders — with the department not receiving names of the roughly 2,500 affected inmates from the White House until after the public announcement and then quibbling with the content of the files. DOJ veterans expressed concerns about the fact that some of the commutation recipients were violent criminals — and also raised questions about whether the wording of one of three of Biden’s clemency warrants rendered the grants null and void. That document said offenders were having their punishments reduced for “offenses described to the Department of Justice,” without any specifics. DOJ official Elysa Wan wrote to Dixon, English and White House associate counsel DeAnna Evans on the evening of Jan. 17: “We do not know how to interpret ‘offenses described to the Department of Justice.’ Could you please clarify?”

Then-Associate Deputy Attorney General Bradley Weinsheimer wrote to Dixon and Evans on Jan. 18 that he too was concerned about the vague wording of the clemency warrants impacting dozens of more serious cases. This wasn’t a fluke or a simple mistake. Biden’s team ran a shadow presidency, making major decisions while their boss stayed clueless, and in the process, they shredded any pretense of accountability. This was a full-blown constitutional crisis. Americans should be furious.

Read more …

“Kamala effectively exercised presidential power without constitutional authority, creating one of the gravest constitutional crises in modern history.”

• New Biden Autopen Scandal Bombshell Involves Kamala (Margolis)

The Biden autopen scandal just got even worse, and this time Kamala Harris finds herself squarely in the crosshairs.The Trump administration’s investigation into former president Joe Biden’s reliance on the autopen has unearthed internal White House memos that reveal something far more damaging than anyone initially suspected: Biden wasn’t just using the autopen to sign documents—he was effectively handing over presidential power to his vice president, who had no constitutional authority to wield it. In the earliest days of Biden’s presidency, White House Staff Secretary Jess Hertz circulated a draft memo that should alarm every American. Just the News obtained and reviewed the documents, which recommended that Biden “personally approve and hand-sign all decisions that require presidential action,” particularly when it came to pardons.

You have to wonder why such a memo was even necessary. From the very start, those closest to Biden knew he wasn’t capable of handling the most basic responsibilities of the office, and decisions normally reserved for the president were being delegated to others. By Biden’s final year in office, even that minimal safeguard had collapsed. Internal memos obtained by the Trump White House reveal that Biden was increasingly deferring to Kamala Harris on clemency decisions. A particularly damning February 2024 memo from Biden’s White House Counsel’s office noted that while Biden had previously asked to discuss pardon candidates personally, the process had shifted to the point where “the Vice President’s approval was sufficient to obtain his approval.”

The Constitution grants the power to “grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States” exclusively to the president—yet Biden was outsourcing this authority to Kamala Harris, who had no constitutional right to exercise it. The National Archives has been unable to find records proving Biden attended four crucial clemency meetings in late 2024 and early 2025. These sessions covered commutations for federal death row inmates, CARES Act recipients, and even controversial preemptive pardons for Biden family members. Despite retroactive emails claiming Biden was present, the Archives found “no specific meeting notes that clearly mention or note that the President was present” for any of them.

Even more troubling, Biden’s clemency decision memo on federal death row cases remains completely unmarked, with no version indicating presidential approval. Yet 37 commutations were signed and executed. If Biden didn’t approve them, who exactly was running the country? The scope of this deception becomes clearer when you look at the numbers. According to the Pew Research Center, Biden granted 4,245 acts of clemency during his tenure—more than any president in history. And based on internal memos, Kamala may have been the one driving that process. Do you remember when Biden tried to dismiss the autopen scandal back in June? He said, “I made the decisions about the pardons, executive orders, legislation and proclamations. Any suggestion that I didn’t is ridiculous and false.”

But these documents from his own White House now contradict that claim. That’s not a misunderstanding—it’s a cover-up. The Trump administration’s investigation is only beginning, but the evidence already points to a scandal that reaches the very top of the former administration. Kamala effectively exercised presidential power without constitutional authority, creating one of the gravest constitutional crises in modern history. Even more damning, it shows she knew Biden was mentally unfit all along. While she publicly denied his decline, behind the scenes she was actively complicit in deceiving the American people about his health and his ability to govern.

Read more …

This is not about cars. It’s the Optimus personal robot.

• Tesla Offers Musk Unprecedented $1 Trillion Pay Package (ZH)

The same leftist activist judge who torpedoed Elon Musk’s Tesla pay deal earlier this year will likely go berserk over the company’s latest plan: a jaw-dropping 10-year, $1 trillion compensation package for the billionaire. This is the largest in the history of corporate America. Then again, when you’re running a company positioned to dominate the 2030s – from EVs to robots to chips to AI – and make the U.S. competitive against China in these critical technologies, it all starts to make sense. Bloomberg reports Musk’s trillion-dollar pay package over ten years is contingent on achieving ambitious growth milestones, such as:

Musk must expand Tesla’s robotaxi business and increase market value from $1 trillion to $8.5 trillion. The terms of the new pay package were outlined in Tesla’s proxy filing on Friday. The additional shares would raise Musk’s stake in the electric-vehicle maker to at least 25%, a level he has previously stated he wants. Unlocking the full 423 million-share payout will be challenging. To justify an $8.5 trillion market value – up from about $1 trillion on Friday – Tesla would need to sell 12 million additional EVs, secure 10 million autonomous driving subscriptions, deploy 1 million robotaxis, sell 1 million AI-powered robots, and expand adjusted earnings 24-fold to $400 billion.

Tesla’s proxy filing highlights some novel features of this new CEO performance award:

Despite a leftist activist judge in a Delaware court who struck down Musk’s prior $50 billion pay package from 2018, Tesla’s board offered the CEO an interim $30 billion pay package in August. “Simply put, retaining and incentivizing Elon is fundamental to Tesla achieving these goals and becoming the most valuable company in history,” Tesla Board Chair Robyn Denholm wrote in a letter to shareholders. Tesla’s proxy filing also details how Musk must participate in the board’s development of a framework for long-term succession planning as the CEO. There was also talk that Musk would “wind down” political work… Recall yesterday, Musk was snubbed from a tech CEO party at the White House.

Read more …

It feels extremely short-sighted to assume that Zuckerberg and Gates, whose fortunes stem from pre-AI, will also rule the (post-)AI era.

• President Trump Hosts Tech Executives at White House for Dinner (CTH)

Initially it was supposed to be closed to the press, but President Trump decided to bring in the media as interest increased. President Trump hosted a significant group of some of the most influential tech leaders into the White House for dinner. In large measure, this group is not -by disposition- very favorable toward President Trump, however with the power of the office they understand how dependent they are to his favor. From his perspective, Trump is leveraging the power and ingenuity of advanced technological capacity against adversaries who might align against U.S. dominance (China, Russia et al), so this group represents a capability he is leveraging. Some of the group, looking specifically at Bill Gates, are just plain globalist a-holes, promoting their self-importance as global influencers. President Trump’s decision to open the doors to the media puts the group in an uncomfortable position as they are then forced to reveal publicly their opinion of the assembly. [Insert fox smiling picture here].

Russian President Vladimir Putin made remarks earlier in the day about discussions with President Trump and corporate global energy developers about collaborating in the artic circle and Alaska. In the big picture, President Trump wants both peace and economic abundance globally, and while regional interests like Ukraine influence the background of collaboration, nonetheless the desire remains. One side has raw industrial power; the other has technological capabilities. President Trump is leveraging the abilities of the latter against the strength of the former. I enjoy watching this dance. Somewhere in my smiling dream state I imagine Tulsi Gabbard and Marco Rubio discussing the challenges when President Trump walks into the room and says, “eh, quit worrying; if we need to, we can turn off their little machines. C’mon, let’s go eat tacos, and Marco can tell us about his trip down south.”

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Scott

kookaburra

Surf

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

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.

 

 

 

 

 

 Older Entries