Menu Icon

Debt Rattle February 25 2026

Feb 252026
 
 February 25, 2026  Posted by at 10:54 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  62 Responses »


Piet Mondriaan Victory Boogie Woogie 1942-44


• Are Democrats Working Against Their Own Voters? (Eric Florack)
• How a Party Offends Its Voters (Daniel McCarthy)
• What the FBI Is Investigating in Criminal Probe of 2020 Election (ET)
• Democrats Double Down on SOTU Boycott (DS)
• ‘You Owe Us’ Is the Mantra of the Left (Victor Davis Hanson)
• US To Integrate Musk’s Grok AI Into Classified Military Systems (RT)
• Trump, Along With Democrats, Will Make Their Case Tuesday at State of the Union (JTN)
• Netflix’s Stock Plunges After Refusing to Fire Susan Rice (Bryan S. Jung)
• We Need to Talk About Artemis (Stephen Green)
• Royal Theater, Silent Streets: Loud On Epstein Ties, Silent On The Roving Gangs (David Manney)
• Ukraine (EU) Strikes Russian Oil Pumping Station (CTH)
• Slovakia Halts Electricity Supplies To Ukraine (RT)
• Hungary Vetoes €90 Billion EU Loan For Ukraine (RT)
• Ukraine Hates Us – Hungary (RT)
• The New Navalny Poison – This Swedish Disinformation is a British Lie (Helmer)

 


 

Apart from the SOTU, which deerves enough attention already, there’s the rumor today that France and Britain have de facto become Ukraine’s army, and are as we speak preparing to send a nuclear bomb to Kyiv.

 


 

https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2026494398477803567 https://twitter.com/DD_Geopolitics/status/2026269269541916753?s=20

 


 


“I have a new philosophy. I’m only going to dread one day at a time.” — Charlie Brown

• Are Democrats Working Against Their Own Voters? (Eric Florack)

Let’s start with a few quotes. This quote comes from a May 22, 2020, interview on The Breakfast Club, a popular radio show, where Biden was speaking with host Charlamagne tha God. As the interview was wrapping up, Biden famously said: “If you have a problem figuring out whether you’re for me or Trump, then you ain’t black.” Next, we offer up for your inspection this quote from New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, speaking at the Milken Institute Global Conference in Los Angeles on May 6, 2024: “Right now, we have young Black kids growing up in the Bronx who don’t even know what the word “computer” is. They don’t know. They don’t know these things.”She made the remarks while touting a $400 million supercomputer initiative in New York.


And finally, and most recently, we have this from California Gov. Gavin Newsom:”I’m not trying to impress you. I’m just trying to impress upon you, I’m like you. I’m no better than you. You know, I’m a 960 SAT guy… You’ve never seen me read a speech because I cannot read a speech.”nbNewsom was obviously trying to impress the predominantly black audience that attended the Atlanta event promoting his newly released memoir. If you wanted an indication of his presidential ambitions, you need look no further than his book release. If you were looking for an indication of how bad he would be in the role, look no further than the quote. I mean, if he believes black people can’t read, why in the world is he promoting his book to them? For the pictures?

It’s fairly obvious that these were not planned remarks. If they were planned, someone in Gov. Gruesome’s team needs flogging. We can assume these quotes just kind of slipped out, an untold truth.The quotes do reveal something of the inner workings of the leftist mind. Just as obvious, in every case of the above quotes, minority citizens are diminished in the eyes of the members of a party supposedly on their side. Can you imagine the howling and screaming if anyone in the GOP even came close to this level of stupidity? Why, the press would be 24/7 wall-to-wall with it for the next month, if not longer, And it would come up again at the next election. As it is, do a search on the Biden quote, as an example. You’ll find very few references to it.

In a sane world, any of these quotes would be career-ending for any political figure. But of course, these are Democrats, so sanity doesn’t even enter the discussion.Then we have the overarching antisemitism of the Democrats that goes back decades. In that direction, for example, lies the political demise of Joe Lieberman. The cause? His support for Israel in the face of attacks by the Palestinians, as directed by Iran. Matt Margolis gets into some of this: Axios is reporting that senior Democratic officials who worked on the party’s secret post-election autopsy concluded that Kamala Harris lost measurable support because of the Biden administration’s handling of the Israel-Gaza war. According to multiple sources, the DNC’s own data flagged the party’s Gaza position as a “net-negative” in the 2024 election.

That’s a rather diplomatic way of saying that they weren’t anti-Israel enough. According to the report, the DNC did meet with the Institute for Middle East Understanding (IMEU) Policy Project — a pro-Palestinian advocacy organization — as part of its evaluation process. During that meeting, according to IMEU spokesperson Hamid Bendaas, “the DNC shared with us that their own data also found that policy was, in their words, a ‘net-negative’ in the 2024 election.” Two other senior IMEU aides confirmed the same conclusion. Axios independently corroborated that Democratic officials believe the issue damaged the party’s appeal with specific voter demographics. Yeah, that demographic is the antisemitic left.

Indeed so. But of course, a bit under 70% of Jewish citizens vote Democrat at every opportunity. Similarly, black voters vote Democrat in huge percentages, though that’s been changing of late. In every case, the Democrat claim to speak for the advancement of traditional minority groups, for which they receive much support from voters. Democrats claim that the GOP is a bunch of racist, misogynist fools who would bring back slavery if they could.

And yet, finding anti-black, anti-woman, anti-religious, anti-farmer, anti-flyover states, and anti-middle class statements and actions by these same Democrats is easy enough. And of course, Donald Trump is the racist Nazi. Right? Yeah, makes no sense to me, either.nbTake care of yourselves today. I’ll see you here tomorrow.

Thought of the day: “I have a new philosophy. I’m only going to dread one day at a time.” — Charlie Brown

Read more …

“His way of bonding with black ppl is to tell them how stupid he is & that he can’t read..”

• How a Party Offends Its Voters (Daniel McCarthy)

Gavin Newsom won’t be the Democrats’ 2028 presidential nominee unless he wins a significant share of the African American vote. So how’s he courting it? Promoting his new memoir to a largely black audience in Atlanta, the California governor decided to forge a connection by boasting about his poor SAT scores and difficulty reading. “I’m like you,” he said.”You know, I’m a 960 SAT guy” and “you’ve never seen me read a speech. Because I cannot read a speech.”Newsom suffers from dyslexia, but he obviously wasn’t assuming he was addressing a room full of voters with the same debility.He just looked around and concluded this audience wouldn’t have high academic aspirations.


“How insulting” was the response on X from Nina Turner, a former Democratic state senator in the battleground state Ohio and now a senior fellow with the Institute on Race, Power and Political Economy. The outspoken rapper Nicki Minaj was just as direct: “His way of bonding with black ppl is to tell them how stupid he is & that he can’t read,” she posted. Even a tactful Democratic consultant quoted in TheGrio said she was “disappointed” by Newsom: “He’s a great wordsmith, so I was kind of bothered by the way that he said it,” Ameshia Cross told the outlet. Luckily for Newsom, some of his rivals for the 2028 nomination have even less rapport with black voters. Polls often register Pete Buttigieg’s African American support at zero percent.

The likes of Buttigieg are no threat to Newsom no matter how many gaffes he makes, but his fellow Californian Kamala Harris is another story. It’s true her 2020 campaign didn’t even make it to the first primary — it imploded in December 2019. But Harris failed upward, getting chosen as Joe Biden’s running mate and then replacing him without a competition four years later. Now she’s Newsom’s roadblock. The ’28 race isn’t far away: In about a year, all the contenders on the Democrats’ side will be clear — and maybe they already are. Newsom and Harris have serious liabilities, not least the deteriorating condition of the blue state they both call home: Does the whole country want to wind up like today’s California?

Do businesses and families fleeing Newsom’s state for the freedom and lower taxes of Texas and Florida want the governor’s ruinous recipe attempted nationwide? Yet Democrats looking for an alternative to the California scheme represented by Harris and Newsom have little to choose from. Pennsylvania is the nation’s most important battleground state, and culturally and economically similar enough to other battlegrounds like Ohio and Michigan that a successful Pennsylvania pol might have the right stuff to sweep the Electoral College. But Josh Shapiro, the Keystone State’s Democratic governor, has problems of his own with one of the party’s key constituencies — critics of Israel.

Read more …

“Fulton County had more than half a million ballots to tabulate—almost 90 percent cast early or by mail. The result was announced several days later: Biden won the county by 26-point margin.”

• What the FBI Is Investigating in Criminal Probe of 2020 Election (ET)

After the election offices of Georgia’s most populous county were raided last month, the FBI has disclosed information indicating where its investigation is heading. Federal laws may have been broken during the 2020 election according to the affidavit supporting the court-approved raid. Yet the breadth of the materials seized shows the FBI may be able to check the integrity of the ballots more broadly, uncovering further issues or putting speculation to bed. President Donald Trump’s campaign challenged the Georgia election most vigorously, as he lost the state to President Joe Biden by fewer than 12,000 votes according to the official tally.


The legal challenges failed. Instead, Trump was indicted based on rationale that his efforts to challenge the election results were allegedly executed with corrupt intent. The case was dismissed after he became president again in 2025. The renewed investigation now targeting Fulton County, which covers the broader Atlanta area, uses a rationale analogous to the case against Trump. The affidavit states that if known irregularities in the election were intentional, such acts would be criminal. On Jan. 28, agents seized some 700 boxes of election records, including physical ballots from the 2020 election. County officials have since filed a lawsuit seeking to have the materials returned.

The issues detailed in the affidavit were largely discovered years ago by concerned citizens using data obtained through freedom of information requests or litigation. Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, who was responsible for overseeing the election and is running for governor of the state, has dismissed the issues as administrative and human errors too small to affect the election’s result. The FBI, however, has a different perspective. “If these deficiencies were the result of intentional action, it would be a violation of federal law regardless of whether the failure to retain records or the deprivation of a fair tabulation of a vote was outcome determinative for any particular election or race,” reads the affidavit signed by FBI Special Agent Hugh Evans.

Raffensperger has repeatedly stressed that the 2020 votes were counted three times, including a hand recount and a machine recount. However, many of the deficiencies outlined in the affidavit happened during these recounts. Vote counting in Georgia starts by law on election day. Fulton County had more than half a million ballots to tabulate—almost 90 percent cast early or by mail. The result was announced several days later: Biden won the county by 26-point margin. One issue with the results was a lack of receipts. Each tabulator machine should be “closed” at polls closing and tabulator tape should be printed out to show how many ballots and votes for each candidate were counted. Then, the tape should be signed by the poll manager and two witnesses.

Yet tabulator tapes for more than 300,000 votes weren’t signed, and some were missing altogether, wrote Evans, referring to an analysis by Clay Parikh, a voting machine security expert. Raffensperger said that was merely administrative oversight, as the vote tallies aren’t recorded on the tape alone. They are also preserved on memory cards in the machines. But Parikh’s analysis went deeper. “Parikh identified one tabulator that was used to close out 15 tabulator machines from 12 different locations. In addition, the poll closing time and report printed times on several closing tabulator tapes were close enough in time that Parikh believed someone had to have manipulated the times on the reports,” Evans wrote. “Parikh believed this showed that the memory cards were removed from the original tabulator and put in another tabulator to print out the closing tabulator tapes.”

The tabulators also have “protective counters” that track how many ballots have been scanned on them over their lifetime. “The protective counters on at least five tabulator tapes from the same unit were identical,” Parikh found, according to Evans. “Some of the reported ballots scanned exceeded the protective counter number.” “This indicated to Parikh that no ballots were ever scanned on these machines and that the numbers generated from those ballots were done so by placing an unencrypted memory card into the unit to generate the closing tape,” Evans wrote. “This would have allowed an opportunity for the tabulation to be tampered with.”

The tabulators are supposed to scan each ballot, creating a digital record. But the majority of the images from the original in-person voting count have not been preserved by the county, Evans said. At the time, the county was not legally required to preserve them, but it’s not clear why they were discarded to begin with. “This is another impediment to ruling out non-criminal explanations for the activities during the election,” the affidavit said.
Read more …

With the oldest and lamest trope imaginable: “Trump is marching America towards fascism.”

• Democrats Double Down on SOTU Boycott (DS)

More Democrats are joining a boycott of President Donald Trump’s State of the Union address on Tuesday. Sens. Adam Schiff and Ruben Gallego recently joined the ranks of Democrat lawmakers over the weekend. “I am not going to the State of the Union,” Gallego said in a video posted to social media on Saturday. “There’s more productive things than I can do with my time than just sitting there for two hours and clapping on cue. Right now, this country is hurting.” Instead, the senator will be at home in Arizona during the address.


Schiff’s participation in the boycott was also announced on Saturday. MeidasTouch wrote on X that Schiff will instead speak at the “People’s State of the Union,” a counter address hosted by the news outlet and progressive-aligned nonprofit MoveOn Civic Action.

Democrats announcing their boycott of the State of the Union comes after progressive-aligned organizations, like Amplify Edge’s “Young People Address the Nation” campaign, pressured Democrat lawmakers last week to boycott the address. As the boycott grows, the left-leaning sports and political commentator Stephen A. Smith has come out against Democrat theatrics. Smith said on his SiriusXM radio show that the Democrats’ refusal to attend the address “ticks him off,” calling them “juvenile.” “Why do they get to circumvent the need and the insistence of mere decorum? This is the kind of stuff that ticks me off,” Smith stated. “At some point in time, ladies and gentlemen, there’s got to be an adult in the room.”

https://twitter.com/JasonJournoDC/status/2024450693252219275

“If you’re going to act as juvenile, as petulant, as petty as you accuse president of the United States to be, how are you ever going to hold a high moral ground at least high enough to judge him accordingly?” Smith added. During Trump’s address to Congress last year, some Democrats tried to steal the show. Rep. Al Green, D-Texas, interrupted the speech with shouts and gestures several times before he was removed from the chamber.mSchiff’s RSVP to the event hosted former MSNBC anchors Joy Reid and Katie Phang comes after 12 of his congressional colleagues—including Sen. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md.; Rep. Delia Ramirez, D-Ill.; and the chairman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, Rep. Greg Casar, D-Texas—announced last week that they would not “legitimize” Trump’s “lies.”

“Donald Trump will use the State of the Union address as a platform to gaslight the American people and normalize and justify their terror, abuse, and violations of our rights. I refuse to legitimize it,” Ramirez stated in a release. Van Hollen added on X that this “cannot be business as usual” because “Trump is marching America towards fascism.”

Read more …

“So, they’re paying 55% of their income and nobody ever says, “Thank you for doing that, you people, we have a very skilled elite that allows us to have this huge budget.”

• ‘You Owe Us’ Is the Mantra of the Left (Victor Davis Hanson)

Sami Winc: Two things that came together for me. One was [New York City Mayor Zohran] Mamdani’s 9.5% increase in the property tax for New Yorkers, but not that alone. I’m sure our audience has read about that. But I was looking at Power Line. I always like to give a shout-out to them because they have some great articles, and they were comparing New York State’s budget versus Florida’s budget. And they came up with, well, it’s only half at the state level. So, I thought, well, let’s look at the city level, New York City versus Miami. And while the billions that each of them has to spend is not meaningful in and of themselves. So, for example, New York City’s budget is $127 billion while Miami’s is only $3.4. But that being said, per citizen, what has to be paid into these cities? And so, for Mamdani, each of his citizens has to pay $14,431 in for his budget. And in Miami, it’s just half of that, at just under $7,000 per citizen.


Victor Davis Hanson: And it’s more disproportionate because in New York, the number of people who are actually paying taxes is a much smaller percentage than in Miami. He inherited the city that was this blue-chip financial market, this cultural, financial capital of the world, and the first thing he did was raise spending by $11 billion. Second thing he did was prove that he couldn’t get the trash or the snow off the street during the storm. Third thing he did, it was very hard to find an appointee who somewhere in their dark history had not issued or written something antisemitic. All he does is smile and try to be … basically, his message is: I’m not Lenin, and Trotsky or Stalin. I’m the nice, happy-faced communist, and you’re going to like me, and you’re going to like my communism. We’re all going to get along.

I mean, if you’re in New York, if you’re in California, you got a choice. If you’re in California and this billionaire tax passes, and you’ve got to come up with $50 million, you’re going flee. If you’re in New York, and they’re going to raise your property tax on these multimillion-dollar buildings, you’re talking what could be $20 or $30, $40, $50 million more a year, then you’re going to flee, get out. If you don’t, they’re just going to keep doing it. They’re going keep targeting you because they have an idea. I don’t think people realize that. nThe socialist mind … I knew a lot of socialists in the universities and some friends of mine, and they always think … The whole core of socialism is, I work hard, and no one knows how I suffer at my job as a nurse, as a farmer, whatever. And I believe in the labor theory of value.

Why is it that when Victor had a Ph.D. but he was pruning vines, he was only making $4 an hour—I was for three years—and then all of a sudden, five years later, he is an academic, and he is sitting in between classes and having coffee and he’s making $50 an hour. That’s not fair. And so, they don’t think about supply and demand, expertise, education, nothing. And somebody would say, “Well, when Victor was pruning vines, a lot of people could not only prune them, they could probably prune them better.” When he was teaching a particular Greek literature class, and they thought that was an important class to offer. Questionable, but that’s what they said. Very few people could do it. They don’t accept that.

And so, they run on this envy that we work hard, and we get up, and we do things, and therefore we should be compensated. And that’s what a socialist is, and they’re going keep raising taxes. The other thing about it is, when they raise taxes, they don’t ever say thank you. California Gov. Gavin Newsom, Rep. Nancy Pelosi, even former Sen. Dianne [Feinstein], they’re all wealthy, but they never said, “We want to thank the people in California that are the 1% that are paying 50% of the income tax.” And by the way, the 50% of the income tax in California, there’s only about, I don’t know what there is, 250 billionaires? They usually pay capital gains tax. They pay at about, I don’t know, 28%. The people in that 1% of Californians are highly compensated professionals and small businesspeople who make a million or two million, three million dollars, and then they get hit with a 13.3% tax rate, plus their federal plus Medicare.

So, they’re paying 55% of their income and nobody ever says, “Thank you for doing that, you people, we have a very skilled elite that allows us to have this huge budget.” They don’t. The attitude is always, “They have to. They have to pay more.”

Read more …

The Pentagon clashed with rival contractor Anthropic over ethics limitations on its tech … Still, not an rexclusive deal. ChatGPT, Gemini et al are there.

• US To Integrate Musk’s Grok AI Into Classified Military Systems (RT)

The US Department of War has reportedly signed an agreement with Elon Musk’s xAI to integrate its Grok chatbot into classified military systems, escalating pressure on rival contractor Anthropic as it refuses to lift safeguards on its Claude model. The deal, first reported by the New York Times and confirmed by Axios on Monday, would make Grok the second AI system approved for use on the military’s most sensitive networks, where intelligence analysis, weapons development, and battlefield operations take place. Until now, Anthropic’s Claude has been the sole model available on classified platforms, through a partnership with Palantir Technologies.


The agreement comes as Secretary of War Pete Hegseth summoned Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei for what sources expect to be a tense meeting at the Pentagon on Tuesday. According to Axios, Hegseth is expected to present an ultimatum: agree to make Claude available for “all lawful purposes” without additional safeguards, or face consequences including potential designation as a “supply chain risk” – a label typically reserved for entities linked to foreign adversaries.


https://twitter.com/iam_smx/status/2026100949618442296?s=20

Anthropic has resisted Pentagon demands to remove restrictions that prevent its technology from being used for mass surveillance of Americans or deployed in fully autonomous weapons systems with no humans in the loop. xAI has reportedly agreed to the demands, but the company has yet to comment on the reports. Google is also reportedly “close” to a deal allowing classified use of its Gemini model, according to people briefed on the discussions, while OpenAI remains “not close” as it continues working on safety technology.

https://twitter.com/ns123abc/status/2026082317253439539?s=20

Pentagon officials acknowledge that replacing Anthropic within its classified systems could cause short-term disruptions. The model was used during the operation to capture Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro last month – the first known instance of AI playing a direct role in an active military raid. Anthropic has positioned itself as the safety-conscious alternative within the AI industry. CEO Amodei has repeatedly warned of the existential dangers posed by unconstrained artificial intelligence, including “autonomy risks.” The company’s Safeguards Research Team lead, Mrinank Sharma, abruptly resigned last week with a cryptic warning that “the world is in peril.”

Read more …

And they did.

• Trump, Along With Democrats, Will Make Their Case Tuesday at State of the Union (JTN)

President Donald Trump is set to deliver his State of the Union Address Tuesday evening, when he is expected to highlight his accomplishments during his first year back in office and spotlight goals for the coming year. During an event at the White House Monday morning, Trump teased that his address is “going to be a long speech, because we have so much to talk about.” The president is expected to tout his accomplishments over the last year, highlighting tax cuts, lower gas prices, a dramatic decline in illegal border crossings, lower crime rates, lower drug costs, international peace deals, and trade deals – despite presiding over the longest government shutdown in history.


Trump’s address comes as the federal government is in the midst of a partial shutdown that is affecting the Department of Homeland Security. Several Democratic lawmakers have announced their intention to boycott the address; it’s unclear if other Democratic lawmakers will protest the president in the House Gallery. Last year, several held paddles to make statements. The president will likely make the economy one of his top priorities, highlighting the passage and signing of the Big, Beautiful Bill last summer. In briefings and news conferences, Trump and his administration often point to higher tax credits and a tax break for tipped workers as well as a healthy stock market, as evidence that his economic policies are winning.

Among the top issues Trump will likely spotlight are crime and immigration. During the past year, the president has deployed the National Guard to select major U.S. cities, including Washington, D.C., to tackle crime. The president will likely spend part of his speech trying to sell his economic agenda, including his use of tariffs. Trump could also use the opportunity to push his Senate Republicans to eliminate the filibuster to pass key legislation, such as election security measures. While Trump will likely point to lower gas prices and lower taxes, Democrats have been pushing affordability.

Democrats have tapped newly inaugurated Gov. Abigail Spanberger, D-Va., to deliver the Democratic response to Trump’s address Tuesday night, with Sen. Alex Padilla, D-Calif., to deliver a Democratic response in Spanish. The address comes ahead of a critical mid-term election, where both Republicans and Democrats have a lot riding on their messaging. It’s unclear who the president will be hosting in the gallery Tuesday evening. However, multiple reports indicate that the men’s U.S. hockey team, which just brought home the gold, has been invited to attend.

Read more …

“.. How much is she being paid, and for what???“

• Netflix’s Stock Plunges After Refusing to Fire Susan Rice (Bryan S. Jung)

Netflix’s stock plunged after its refusal to fire former senior Obama and Biden official Susan Rice from its board, following her threats of retribution against supporters of President Donald Trump under a future Democrat administration. Rice was national security adviser and U.S. ambassador to the United Nations under former President Barack Obama, and later served as a senior advisor in the Biden White House. She returned to Netflix’s board in 2023 after leaving her role as director of the Domestic Policy Council in the Biden administration. Rice boasted during a podcast last week that “it is not going to end well” for corporations, news organizations, and law firms that “bent the knee” to Trump, claiming that their deference to the president is unpopular.


She said that firms aligned with Trump could face an “accountability agenda” if Democrats return to power, stating, “This is not going to be an instance of forgive and forget.” “I think they’ve got another thing coming … they’re going to be surprised. Democrats have had a bellyful, and we’re not going to play by, you know, the old set of rules,” added Rice. Trump has since demanded that Netflix fire Rice and warned the company to get rid of Rice or “pay the consequences.” “Netflix should fire racist, Trump Deranged Susan Rice, IMMEDIATELY, or pay the consequences,” Trump wrote on Truth Social over the weekend. ”She’s got no talent or skills – Purely a political hack! HER POWER IS GONE, AND WILL NEVER BE BACK. How much is she being paid, and for what???“

The streaming service is currently in the midst of a bidding war with Paramount Skydance Corp. to acquire Warner Bros. Discovery Inc., excluding the company’s cable networks, including CNN, which the White House has the power to scuttle altogether. Netflix’s $72 billion bid for Warner Brothers Discovery requires regulatory anti-trust approval from the U.S. Department of Justice, which is scrutinizing the deal during this latest political controversy. Paramount Skydance launched a hostile takeover bid for all of Warner Bros. Discovery, promising shareholders $30 per share in an all-cash deal.

Netflix co-CEO Ted Sarandos has so far refused to fire Rice and told the BBC that the acquisition is a “business deal, not a political deal.” “He [Trump] likes to do a lot of things on social media,” Sarandos said, according to the BBC. Sarandos added that regulatory bodies, not the White House, should make a decision on the deal. The Wall Street Journal reported earlier this month that the DOJ is investigating whether Netflix’s takeover of Warner Bros. Discovery could hurt competition and whether the streaming service’s previous acquisitions may have affected the industry’s creative talent.

The streaming giant has been accused of anticompetitive tactics in negotiations with independent content creators for acquiring programming, reported Bloomberg.It is unknown if the decline in Netflix’s stock price at market open reflected investor concerns over political interference in corporate governance, but the media company’s shares tumbled Monday before slightly recovering at $76.02 per share at closing, a 3.37% loss.

Read more …

Let Elon Musk reorganize US space programs.

• We Need to Talk About Artemis (Stephen Green)

We need to talk about NASA’s Artemis program to get the U.S. back to the Moon because things can’t continue like this.The initial reports of last week’s Artemis 2 wet dress rehearsal (WDR) made it sound like the hydrogen leaks were acceptable and our first manned mission around the Moon would be good to go for launch during the first week of March. That was Thursday evening. Friday’s midday press conference was all happy talk about how well the WDR went.Before anyone at NASA had time to grab lunch on Saturday, agency chief Jared Isaacman revealed that “overnight data showed an interruption in helium flow in the SLS interim cryogenic propulsion stage,” and “teams are troubleshooting and preparing for a likely rollback of Artemis 2 to the VAB [NASA’s massive Vehicle Assembly Building].”


Easy fixes are performed outdoors, right there on the launch pad. Trickier fixes require a slow journey back to the VAB on NASA’s tracked Crawler-Transporter 2 (CT-2). As it turns out, Artemis 2 requires one of those trickier fixes. So much for that March launch window. Now it’s “fingers crossed!” for early April, depending, of course, on how long it takes to find and fix whatever went wrong during last week’s WDR. Here’s the thing to remember about the SLS rocket that by law must launch at least the first three Artemis missions: This is as good as it gets. Leaks, delays, regular trips on CT-2 to and from VAB? That’s the norm for SLS. As discussed in a couple of previous columns, each SLS is a unique snowflake.

Earlier this month, space reporter Eric Berger asked NASA’s top civil servant, Amit Kshatriya, about the SLS’s issues and low flight cadence. “Every time we [try to launch] these are very bespoke components, they’re in many cases made by incredible craftsmen,” Kshatriya replied. “It’s the first time this particular machine has borne witness to cryogens, and how it breathes, and how it vents, and how it wants to leak is something we have to characterize.” nIn other words, figuring out how to correct the hydrogen leak on the Artemis 1 SLS rocket taught NASA very little about the leaks it might encounter on the Artemis 2 rocket. Or what leaks NASA will find on Artemis 3 two years from now. Or maybe three.

The Artemis program was designed during the first Trump administration, using existing hardware with the hope of getting us back to the Moon by 2024. Now NASA claims 2028. 2030 might be more realistic. So whatever the original hope was, it hasn’t materialized. And at $4 billion-plus per SLS, everybody (including high-ranking NASA people) understands that SLS is a dead end. My modest proposal is this: As Dr. Evil might say, a ONE BILLION DOLLAR prize for the first private company to put at least three astronauts on the lunar surface (leaving a fourth one in orbit to crew a command vehicle is fine, if needed) near the southern ice resources. The landing mission must also include a “useful” amount of cargo for at least getting started on a permanent habitat.

The crew must also return safely to Earth, naturally. A billion dollars is a lot of money. But it’s also a little less than 25% of the cost of a single SLS rocket, not including everything else that goes into a manned NASA mission. Just on rockets alone, taxpayers would stand to save more than $7 billion on Artemis 2 and 3 — and at the SLS’s unpredictable launch cadence, we might even get to the Moon sooner.

Read more …

All the attention goes to the man formerly known as prince.

The 1,400 mass-raped girls? Not so much. Their story doesn’t sell. The press make sure of that.

• Royal Theater, Silent Streets (David Manney)

Need an idea about how to start an argument between people in the UK? Mention a royal name alongside Jeffrey Epstein. That should get the fires started. The elite formerly known as Prince Andrew’s association with Epstein remains a global fixation — global if you mean England. Political editor and commentator Emma-Jo Morris recently highlighted how authorities moved aggressively in matters tied to Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, while long-running grooming gang cases have dragged on for years without any similar feelings of urgency.


Andrew, formerly the Duke of York, stepped back from the spotlight after the crown stripped him of public and royal duties following his 2019 BBC Newsnight interview with Emily Maitlis, which generated massive political shockwaves. In America, Virginia Giuffre filed a civil lawsuit against Andrew, which was later settled. Because of the scandal, the Royal Family removed his honorary military titles and patronages. The Epstein story burned like hydrogen fueled by leaking inert helium gas and combusting front pages like the Hindenburg. Every development generated debate in Parliament and endless commentary across Britain.

Meanwhile, documented grooming gang scandals in towns such as Rotherham, Rochdale, and Telford revealed systematic sexual exploitation of young girls. In Rotherham alone, independent investigator Professor Alexis Jay concluded that around 1,400 children were abused between 1997 and 2013, while many of the perpetrators were identified as men of Pakistani Muslim backgrounds. Alexis Jay, who authored the report, used to be chief inspector of social work in Scotland. She’s seen a lot. But despite being deeply familiar with the details of this report, even she seemed shaken by the words coming out of her mouth at Tuesday’s press conference about the victims, some as young as 11, abused from 1997 until last year.

“It is hard to describe the appalling nature of the abuse the child victims suffered. They were raped by multiple perpetrators. They were trafficked to other towns and cities in the north of England. They were abducted, beaten and intimidated,” Jay said. Nine men in Rochdale were convicted in 2012 for grooming and trafficking underage girls.

The nine defendants were jailed for a total of 77 years, with the ringleader, a 59-year-old man from Oldham, who cannot be identified for legal reasons, receiving a 19-year term after being convicted of two rapes, aiding and abetting rape, sexual assault and trafficking for the purpose of sexual exploitation.Kabeer Hassan, 25, of Oldham, was jailed for nine years for rape and three years, concurrently, for conspiracy. Hamid Safi, 22, an illegal immigrant of no fixed address, was jailed for four years for conspiracy and one year, concurrently, for trafficking.Greater Manchester Police were criticized for earlier failures of intervention. The story remained the same in Telford, where an independent inquiry led by Tom Crowther KC discovered that as many as 1,000 girls may have been sexually exploited over decades.

In his closing comments, Telford added: “People will not forget Telford’s history of child sexual exploitation – and nor should they. But in my view Telford’s approach – the Council’s approach – to the Recommendations, to engagement with its key partners and most of all with those three people it let down as children, now stands as a model. All involved – but particularly the Consultees, who put aside hurt and anger and years of being dismissed in order to ensure that next generations are better protected than they were – deserve our very high praise.”

Read more …

“.. we see European leaders attacking their own European “allies” through the use of Ukraine. If you do not support the continued bloodlust, you are an enemy of the EU collective hive mind”

• Ukraine (EU) Strikes Russian Oil Pumping Station (CTH)

The Ukraine military, technically and non-pretendingly accepted as the EU military, has targeted a key oil pumping station in Russia that feeds into the westerly directed oil supply. However, if you stand back from the western media, what you will notice from this attack is not the target in Russia, but the customers at the end of the pipeline in Europe, mainly Hungary and Slovakia.


[…] Through local stations, including infrastructure around Kaleykino, oil from Tatarstan and neighboring regions feeds into the main pipeline, which runs through the Samara region and continues westward toward Belarus and further to countries in Eastern and Central Europe. […] There were also earlier reports that Ukrainian forces carried out several attacks on Druzhba pipeline infrastructure inside Russia, which at times disrupted Russian oil supplies to Hungary and Slovakia. {source}


So, what’s going on here?Well, with the anniversary of the Russian Federation beginning the war into Ukraine, the Europeans who now control the military operations inside Ukraine are targeting European countries who do not align with their bloodlust, specifically Hungary and Slovakia. Both Hungary and Slovakia are land locked countries without easy access seaports. Because of their geographic locations, they rely on Russian oil and gas for their energy needs. Hungary and Slovakia have not wanted to expand the war against Russia. The EU is demanding Hungary and Slovakia agree to expanded war. The European ‘coalition of the willing’ is now targeting key Russian infrastructure that supplies energy products to European countries who are not in compliance with the EU dictates of war.

Putin says threats to energy pipelines sabotage peace process with Ukraine. In his televised speech, the Russian president also accused Ukraine of threatening Russian energy pipelines with the help of Western intelligence agencies. He claimed these attacks were aimed to sabotage the peace process. Putin also stressed it was vital for Russia to strengthen the defence of energy infrastructure and other strategic sectors. {source} This is why Secretary of State Marco Rubio travelled to Hungary and Slovakia last week. Essentially, now we see European leaders attacking their own European “allies” through the use of Ukraine. If you do not support the continued bloodlust, you are an enemy of the EU collective hive mind.

https://twitter.com/DD_Geopolitics/status/2026291115100418176?s=20 Read more …

Ukraine blocks the flow of Russian oil to Slovakia, but still expects Slovakia to send it power.

• Slovakia Halts Electricity Supplies To Ukraine (RT)

Bratislava has stopped providing emergency electricity supplies to Ukraine until Kiev restores the flow of Russian oil to Slovakia through the Druzhba pipeline, Prime Minister Robert Fico has said, warning of “further reciprocal steps.” The prime minister made the announcement on Monday, when the ultimatum he issued over the weekend to Kiev to resume operations of the Soviet-era pipeline expired. The Druzhba pipeline, which connects Russia to Slovakia and Hungary, has been out of commission since late January. Kiev claims it was damaged in Russian strikes, which Moscow denies. Both Slovakia and Hungary have accused Ukraine of deliberately withholding supplies for political reasons and threatened retaliation.


Announcing the halt to electricity supplies to Ukraine, Fico reiterated that Ukraine’s actions were a “purely political decision aimed at blackmailing Slovakia.” “Reciprocity is a fundamental rule in international relations. The government’s first response to the hostile acts of the Ukrainian president in the form of stopping emergency electricity supply is therefore entirely appropriate,” Fico stated, warning of “further reciprocal steps” if oil supplies are not resumed. Kiev has been increasingly reliant on electricity imports to stabilize its power grid, which has been battered by Russian strikes on Ukraine’s dual-use infrastructure. According to Fico, Ukraine received twice as much electricity from Slovakia this January as it did throughout 2025.

The retaliatory move came hours after Hungary vetoed the EU’s latest sanctions on Russia, as well as a proposed €90 billion ($106 billion) emergency loan for Ukraine. Budapest tied the double veto to the Druzhba standoff, accusing Kiev of imposing an “oil blockade” on the country and “blackmailing” it. Last week, both Slovakia and Hungary announced that they would suspend diesel exports to Ukraine until the Druzhba pipeline becomes operational again. Budapest has also mulled cutting emergency electricity supplies to Ukraine.

Read more …

“Budapest has also opposed the bloc’s proposed 20th package of sanctions against Russia amid an oil supply row with Kiev..”

• Hungary Vetoes €90 Billion EU Loan For Ukraine (RT)

Hungary has blocked the EU’s proposed €90 billion ($106 billion) emergency loan for Ukraine, as well as the latest package of sanctions on Russia, citing Kiev’s allegedly deliberate disruption of oil supplies to the country. Hungary placed the double veto on the initiatives on Monday as Kiev and Budapest remain locked in a bitter row over the Soviet-era Druzhba oil pipeline – which carries Russian crude to Hungary and Slovakia and has been out of commission since late January. Kiev claims that it was damaged by Russia, which has denied the allegations. Budapest has echoed Moscow’s stance, accusing Kiev of deliberately withholding supplies for political reasons and subjecting the country to an “oil blockade,” and threatening retaliation.


“Ukrainians cannot blackmail us; they cannot jeopardize the security of Hungary’s energy supply by colluding with Brussels and the Hungarian opposition. No, a clear no,” Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto said after a meeting of the bloc’s top diplomats to discuss the loan and sanctions package. EU foreign affairs chief Kaja Kallas said the bloc’s leadership expected the measures to be approved at the meeting, adding that it was a major setback and a “message we did not want to send today.” The €90 billion loan was agreed to in December, when Hungary, Slovakia, and the Czech Republic secured an opt-out scheme, allowing them to not contribute to the scheme financially.

Hungary, as well as the other nation affected by the oil supply disruption, Slovakia, has threatened retaliation over the Druzhba issue, demanding that Kiev resume its operations immediately. Last week, both countries announced that they would suspend diesel exports to Ukraine until the pipeline becomes operational again. This weekend, Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico also threatened to stop providing Ukraine with emergency electricity supply unless Kiev restores oil deliveries within two days. Fico said on Monday that he will keep his promise, raising the issue with the nation’s electricity provider. In January alone, Kiev received more emergency electricity from Slovakia than throughout 2025 to stabilize its energy grid amid Russian long-range strikes, he noted. https://twitter.com/HungaryBased/status/2026333804428705922?s=20

Read more …

“We don’t hate Ukraine. The problem is that the Ukrainian state hates Hungary..”

• Ukraine Hates Us – Hungary (RT)

Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto has rejected accusations that Budapest hates Ukraine, suggesting that it’s Kiev that’s been pursuing hostile policies toward his country for years. The remarks came in response to questions from reporters on the sidelines of the EU Foreign Affairs Council, as Hungary threatened to veto the bloc’s latest sanctions package against Russia. When one journalist confronted Szijjarto, suggesting that Hungary should direct its ire at Moscow, the minister offered a scolding response. “We don’t hate Ukraine. The problem is that the Ukrainian state hates Hungary,” Szijjarto said, accusing Kiev of undermining Budapest’s energy security by blocking crude oil supplies via the Druzhba pipeline, among other issues.


At the heart of the dispute is the Soviet-era Druzhba pipeline, the main artery carrying Russian crude to Hungary and neighboring Slovakia. As landlocked countries in Central Europe, both are heavily dependent on it. Another journalist charged that Hungary’s Russian oil purchases mean Budapest is “financing the war.” Szijjarto dismissed the claim, pointing out that the value amounts to a mere 0.2% of Russia’s gross domestic product. Later in the day, Hungary followed through and vetoed the sanctions package. Szijjarto said that Budapest would consider lifting its block only when Ukraine resumes oil flow via the Druzhba pipeline. Previously, Budapest halted diesel supplies to Ukraine and threatened to cut off electricity and natural gas.

When the oil flow stopped in late January, Ukraine blamed a Russian airstrike. Moscow, however, insisted that Kiev was using energy as leverage to blackmail the two EU countries, which have been critical of the bloc’s support for Ukraine. The diplomatic dispute between Hungary and Ukraine has escalated in recent weeks, spilling over into personal jabs. Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky launched a string of attacks against Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, including fat-shaming him during the Munich Security Conference earlier this month.

Orban, a vocal critic of EU support for Kiev, responded by saying Zelensky’s comments demonstrate why Ukraine “cannot become a member of the European Union.” The Hungarian prime minister has long opposed Ukraine’s push to join the bloc and has repeatedly refused to send it weapons or approve EU military aid, calling for diplomacy instead.

Read more …

Between Novichok and Navalny, we’ve come to know we cannot trust one single word from the British government.

And that’s how we also know that Russia did NOT kill Navalny.

• The New Navalny Poison – This Swedish Disinformation is a British Lie (Helmer)

The Swedish Government has admitted it has no direct evidence of the cause of Alexei Navalny’s death – only British Government hearsay.In a series of email exchanges last week, the Swedish Foreign Ministry has revealed that its military laboratories and scientific establishments have not received post-mortem samples of Navalny’s tissues. There has been no Swedish analysis of the toxicology of those samples. There is no Swedish documentation proving in the toxicology of the Navalny samples epibatidine poisoning as the cause of Navalny’s death on February 16, 2024. Forensically speaking, the Swedish Government does not know — cannot know — if Navalny died of natural causes or was poisoned to death. Ten days ago, however, on February 14, the Swedish Government signed with four other states – UK, Germany, France and The Netherlands – an announcement of fact and allegation of murder it had no intention to verify.



“The UK, Sweden, France, Germany and The Netherlands are confident [sic] that Alexei Navalny was poisoned with a lethal toxin,” the statement declared. “This is the conclusion [sic] of our Governments based on analyses [sic] of samples from Alexei Navalny. These analyses have conclusively [sic] confirmed the presence of epibatidine. Epibatidine is a toxin found in poison dart frogs in South America. It is not found naturally in Russia. Russia claimed that Navalny died of natural causes. But given the toxicity of epibatidine and reported symptoms [sic], poisoning was highly likely the cause of his death. Navalny died while held in prison, meaning Russia had the means, motive and opportunity to administer this poison to him.”

Sic is the old Latin adverb manuscript which editors traditionally used to mark an original word or term that applied to a surprising claim, faulty reasoning, fabrication, or falsehood which the reader might otherwise interpret as a mistake of transcription. No mistake here by the Swedes – this wording is their cover for not being caught at a provable lie. An investigation in Stockholm by lawyer Mats Nilsson, based on Swedish freedom of information law, has produced the record to show that the only conclusion the Swedish Government has reached is to accept that Porton Down, the British Government’s chemical warfare laboratory, which synthesized epibatidine at least a decade ago and has accumulated operational stocks since then, has reported the discovery of that poison in the Navalny samples.

However, the British Government has not transferred these samples to Sweden for investigation. The Swedish Government’s chemical warfare laboratory at Umeå does not confirm it has either received the samples, or analysed them, or reported any findings. Instead, a series of emailed answers from the Swedish Foreign Ministry’s Disarmament Non-proliferation and Export Control (NIS) Unit has repeated the February 14 joint statement allegations. When requested to substantiate them, the Ministry has added a series of disclaimers:

“we will not comment on the details regarding how the samples were obtained. What we can say is that we have high confidence in the integrity of the process… We will not comment on the details of the entities involved in the forensic investigation… We will not comment on the exact details of the identification process. We will not comment on the details regarding how the samples from Navalny were obtained. What we can say is that we have high confidence in the integrity of the chain of custody.”

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/InvestWithD/status/2025921193019346964?s=20 https://twitter.com/JimFergusonUK/status/2026006356918992965?s=20 https://twitter.com/Rainmaker1973/status/2026541355820831115?s=20

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle February 15 2026

Feb 152026
 
 February 15, 2026  Posted by at 10:46 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,  33 Responses »


Ito Shinsui Snowy night 1923


• Newsom Tells EU “Trump Is Temporary,” Doubles Down On Failing Green Agenda (ZH)
• Rubio on Fire! (Sarah Anderson)
• Vast Majority Of Americans Want Voter ID And Democrats Don’t Care (ZH)
• The Least Laid Generation in History: Gen Z Is Ghosting Sex (Pinsker)
• OH BABY! Couples Could Make Big Money on Trump Accounts (DS)
• Americans Could Be Silenced by EU Online Speech Laws (ET)
• More Nations Are Mulling Social Media Bans For Teens (ZH)
• The Unsettling Truths the Epstein Files Reveal About Power and Privilege (ET)
• California Democrats Trigger a Reverse Gold Rush with a Wealth Tax (Turley)
• FBI Opened 1,200 ‘Assessments’ Of Sensitive Figures (JTN)
• US Smuggled Starlinks Into Iran Amid Riots – WSJ (RT)
• Trump Makes A HUGE Promise About Voter ID
• American Workers Have Less Than A $1000 in Retirement Savings (Turley)
• Stolen Land At The Grammys: How Hollywood Groupthink Threatens Democracy (ET)
• “Billion Dollar Movie In One Prompt” (ZH)

 


 

Make sure you take your time today for the Debt Rattle. I know it can seem overwhelming. Watch some videos. Use the time well. Everything goes faster than you think.

Then again, Elon Musk says we are In The Singularity. That means ALL predictions are off. Including Elon’s.

 


 

Miles Deutscher@milesdeutscher

Ok fine – maybe you don’t want to listen to me. I’m just a 25-year-old on the internet.

But maybe you’ll listen to them.

I documented every major warning from the people actually building AI.

Every CEO. Every founder. They’re all saying the same thing.

Read this slowly:

• Mustafa Suleyman, CEO of Microsoft AI: “Being a lawyer, an accountant, a project manager, a marketing person – most of those tasks will be fully automated by AI within 12 to 18 months.”

• Elon Musk: “AI and robots will replace all jobs. Working will be optional.” Called AI his “biggest fear.”

• Dario Amodei, CEO of Anthropic: AI will eliminate 50% of entry-level white-collar jobs. Unemployment could hit 20%. Called it “unusually painful.” Then said: “Most lawmakers are unaware this is about to happen.”

• Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI: “Some areas, I think just like totally, totally gone.” Said changes that normally take 75 years will be compressed into a short period. Admitted he loses sleep over it.

• Jensen Huang, CEO of Nvidia: “Every job will be affected, and immediately. It is unquestionable.”

• Jamie Dimon, CEO of JPMorgan Chase: “It will eliminate jobs. People should stop sticking their head in the sand.” Warned mass AI layoffs without safeguards could trigger “civil unrest.” Said he’d welcome a government ban on mass-firing for AI.

• Stuart Russell (author of the most-used AI textbook in history): Political leaders are “staring 80% unemployment in the face”.

• Kai-Fu Lee, VC & former head of Google China: Called predictions of 50% job displacement by 2027 “uncannily accurate.”

These aren’t journalists. These aren’t influencers. These aren’t politicians trying to get elected.

These are the people building it. Funding it. Deploying it.
And not one of them is saying your job is safe.

 


 

Elon Musk just gave retirement planning the most radical advice possible:

“Don’t worry about squirreling money away for retirement in 10 or 20 years — it won’t matter.

You won’t need to save for retirement.” His reasoning (from the same conversation):

We’re already in the singularity — “the event horizon” where prediction breaks down.

The accelerating timeline makes long-term saving irrelevant.

Services, homes, healthcare, entertainment — abundance will be so extreme that the old rules vanish.

Peter Diamandis: “The way this unfolds is fundamentally impossible to predict because of self-improvement of the AI and the accelerating timeline.”

Elon: “We’re in this beautiful sweet spot… like being at the top of the roller coaster about to drop. I don’t just have courtside seats — I’m on the court.”

If saving for retirement becomes pointless in the next 10–20 years because we’re already past the event horizon…

what’s the first thing you’d change about how you live right now?

 


 

Software that rewrites itself. https://twitter.com/Khulood_Almani/status/2022315978575483386?s=20 Huang GenZ 4 Hours? 18 hrs https://twitter.com/iam_smx/status/2022743830491988095?s=20

 


 


Two -very- different futures for America, courtesy of Rubio and Newsom.

• Newsom Tells EU “Trump Is Temporary,” Doubles Down On Failing Green Agenda (ZH)

California Gov. Gavin Newsom spoke at the Munich Security Conference earlier on Friday, telling European elites that President Trump is “temporary” and will be gone within three years. Newsom, noticeably angered by Trump’s push for deregulation and the rollback of climate policy, lashed out at the president, calling him “more destructive” than the current occupant of the White House. The issue for Newsom is that he still operates within the climate crisis framework promoted by globalists, even as the West is moving on from two decades of nation-killing green policy regime that hollowed out parts of the industrial base and fueled inflation.


On Thursday, President Trump rescinded the 2009 Obama-era “Endangerment Finding,” a determination that greenhouse gases threaten public health and welfare, which he said has been used by the radical left to justify $1.3 trillion in regulatory costs that have hurt American households and sent consumer prices soaring, especially for automobiles. “The single largest deregulatory action in American history. That’s a big statement in American history, and I think we can add the words by far,” Trump told reporters. Also this week, there was considerable discussion among industry leaders in Europe about Brussels watering down carbon-pricing markets, which have made electricity outrageously expensive and crushed the industrial base (Goldman explained more here).

And it is not just Trump and European industry leaders pushing to unwind green policies that have financially crushed working-class families and hollowed out the industrial base; major companies are also dialing back EV production plans and softening green targets as the net-zero dream collides with reality. Here’s what Newsom said earlier at the MSC (courtesy of Real Clear Politics):

GOV. GAVIN NEWSOM: “Donald Trump is doubling down on stupid. California has been a leader in climate policy going back to Ronald Reagan. In 1967, Governor Ronald Reagan established the first tailpipe emissions standards in the United States of America and created the California Air Resources Board. Three years later, a president by the name of Richard Nixon — another Republican — codified California’s leadership under the Clean Air Act.

Never in the history of the United States of America has there been a more destructive president than the current occupant in the White House in Washington, D.C. He’s trying to recreate the 19th century. He’s a wholly owned subsidiary of big oil, gas, and coal. He’s quite literally reopening coal plants in the United States of America. He’s received close to half a billion dollars in campaign contributions. He asked for $1 billion — look it up — in return for basically eliminating all regulations in the United States of America. De facto, he just did that yesterday with federal regulations and the endangerment finding.

It is code red in terms of American leadership in this space — low-carbon, green growth — and I know a thing or two about this. I represent the fourth-largest economy, from a GDP perspective, in the world, and we ran the fourth-largest economy last year nine out of ten days on 100% clean energy — two-thirds renewable energy. We’ve seen our GDP grow by 81% since 2000, and we’ve reduced our greenhouse gas emissions by 21%. Seven times more clean energy jobs than fossil fuel jobs.

We’re proving at scale that we can implement, we can compete, and we can dominate. But Donald Trump is trying to turn back the clock. And so we’re showing up, but we’re also showing what can be accomplished — the power of emulation. We are in the great implementation in my state. Final word. I hope, if there’s nothing else I can communicate today: Donald Trump is temporary. He’ll be gone in three years. California is a stable and reliable partner in this space, and it’s important for folks to understand the temporary nature of this current administration in relationship to the issue of climate change and climate policy.

MODERATOR]: Governor, many have called Joe Biden the climate president, but that didn’t help with his re-election. So how important do you think climate issues will be for the 2028 presidential election?

GAVIN NEWSOM: Well, you may not believe in science, but you’ve got to believe your own eyes. I mean, people are burning up, choking up, heating up. We have simultaneous droughts and floods. Historic wildfires. You may know little about California, but you’ve seen those images of these wildfires. Talk about being as dumb as we want to be — places, lifestyles, traditions being wiped off the map. Greenville. Paradise, California. And so this issue has been brought home in a very personal way, not a political way. Senator Whitehouse is here — he’s also someone who deeply understands that climate risk is financial risk. It’s becoming uninsurable.

This is an economic issue, not just a moral issue. It’s not just a competitiveness issue. And so it’s incredibly important that we talk in those terms to address some of the political dynamics. But it’s again something we’re on the other side of in California. It’s a big blue state, but it also has more Republicans than most Republican states. And we have long moved beyond the partisanship on this issue, because there is no Republican thermometer, there’s no Democratic thermometer — there’s just reality.And people in my state have been mugged by reality. Those that have been in denial understand that we’re on the other side of the debate.

Read more …

“And that is what we are defending: a great civilization that has every reason to be proud of its history, confident of its future, and aims to always be the master of its own economic and political destiny.”

We Won’t Be ‘Polite and Orderly Caretakers of the West’s Managed Decline’

• Rubio on Fire! (Sarah Anderson)

https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2022816808403615888?s=20
“The world is changing very fast right in front of us. The old world is gone… We live in a new era in geopolitics, and it’s going to require all of us to reexamine what that looks like and what our role is going to be.” That’s what Secretary of State Marco Rubio told the press before he boarded a plane to Munich, Germany on Thursday evening. Little did we know that this quote was setting the stage for what turned out to be a momentous speech at the Munich Security Conference on Saturday morning, a speech that framed the end of one major geopolitical era and the beginning of another. We may well look back on this speech in Munich as another defining moment in the secretary’s career.


Rubio told European leaders that the post–Cold War era is over, that the “euphoria of this triumph led us to a dangerous delusion: that we had entered, quote, ‘the end of history;’ that every nation would now be a liberal democracy; that the ties formed by trade and by commerce alone would now replace nationhood; that the rules-based global order – an overused term – would now replace the national interest; and that we would now live in a world without borders where everyone became a citizen of the world.” He said that this idea was foolish and “ignored both human nature and it ignored the lessons of over 5,000 years of recorded human history.”

While championing the Donald Trump administration’s America-First foreign policy, he also reaffirmed the bond between our nations, saying that the Western Hemisphere may be our home, but we’re a child of Europe, and we share history, culture, and heritage. “We belong together,” he said. But he also made it clear that the world has reached a turning point and course correction is required. Europe must save itself because, “we in America have no interest in being polite and orderly caretakers of the West’s managed decline.” Rubio called on our European allies to revitalize their nations and reject policies leading to their decline.

That includes the embracing of “a dogmatic vision of free and unfettered trade” and shuttering our plants, which resulted “in large parts of our societies being deindustrialized, shipping millions of working and middle-class jobs overseas, and handing control of our critical supply chains to both adversaries and rivals.” He continued: “We increasingly outsourced our sovereignty to international institutions while many nations invested in massive welfare states at the cost of maintaining the ability to defend themselves. This, even as other countries have invested in the most rapid military buildup in all of human history and have not hesitated to use hard power to pursue their own interests.

To appease a climate cult, we have imposed energy policies on ourselves that are impoverishing our people, even as our competitors exploit oil and coal and natural gas and anything else – not just to power their economies, but to use as leverage against our own.”n nAnd in a pursuit of a world without borders, we opened our doors to an unprecedented wave of mass migration that threatens the cohesion of our societies, the continuity of our culture, and the future of our people. We made these mistakes together, and now, together, we owe it to our people to face those facts and to move forward, to rebuild.

Under President Trump, the United States of America will once again take on the task of renewal and restoration, driven by a vision of a future as proud, as sovereign, and as vital as our civilization’s past. And while we are prepared, if necessary, to do this alone, it is our preference and it is our hope to do this together with you, our friends here in Europe. But it wasn’t just a critique or warning about globalization. Rubio explained that it’s the fundamental part of national security. “The fundamental question we must answer at the outset is what exactly are we defending, because armies do not fight for abstractions. Armies fight for a people; armies fight for a nation. Armies fight for a way of life,” he said.

“And that is what we are defending: a great civilization that has every reason to be proud of its history, confident of its future, and aims to always be the master of its own economic and political destiny.” Rubio also spoke of how “we can no longer place the so-called global order above the vital interests of our people and our nations,” and how we must reform global institutions. He used the United Nations as an example, explaining that it has potential to be a “tool for good” but right now, it’s basically useless. “But we cannot ignore that today, on the most pressing matters before us, it has no answers and has played virtually no role.”

It could not solve the war in Gaza. Instead, it was American leadership that freed captives from barbarians and brought about a fragile truce. It had not solved the war in Ukraine. It took American leadership and partnership with many of the countries here today just to bring the two sides to the table in search of a still-elusive peace. It was powerless to constrain the nuclear program of radical Shia clerics in Tehran. That required 14 bombs dropped with precision from American B-2 bombers. And it was unable to address the threat to our security from a narco-terrorist dictator in Venezuela. Instead, it took American Special Forces to bring this fugitive to justice.

He concluded: “…America is charting the path for a new century of prosperity, and that once again we want to do it together with you, our cherished allies and our oldest friends. We want to do it together with you, with a Europe that is proud of its heritage and of its history; with a Europe that has the spirit of creation of liberty that sent ships out into uncharted seas and birthed our civilization; with a Europe that has the means to defend itself and the will to survive.”

The speech, which ended with a long standing ovation, was similar to that of Vice President JD Vance’s Munich moment from last year but a bit softer, a bit more diplomatic. Rubio assured the Europeans that the United States is not abandoning them, but the old playbook is shelved. If the alliance is to continue, Europe must adapt and defend the true interests of its people and Western civilization unlike ever before. You could almost hear a sigh of a relief in the room, but how these European leaders will actually respons remains to be seen. I, for one, am not particularly hopeful.

Read more …

Democrats Don’t Care.

• Vast Majority Of Americans Want Voter ID And Democrats Don’t Care (ZH)

Are voter ID requirements considered a controversial idea in the eyes of US citizens? If you watch the establishment media or follow leaders in the Democratic Party then you might think bills like the SAVE Act are the end of freedom as we know it However, outside the echo chambers of DNC propaganda, the vast majority of Americans have no problem whatsoever with people proving their US citizenship before they vote in local and federal elections. The widespread support for voter ID is undeniable. Surveys from the past year including those from Pew and Gallup show that, regardless of party or ethnicity, Americans citizens want elections to be protected from manipulation through mass illegal immigration.


A Pew Research Center survey from August 2025 found that 83% of Americans favor requiring all voters to show government-issued photo ID to vote. This includes:
95% of Republicans
71% of Democrats
Only 16% of people oppose it.

A Gallup poll from 2024 shows 84% support for requiring photo ID to vote, with 98% of Republicans, 84% of independents and 67% of Democrats in approval.A recent CNN segment featuring number cruncher Harry Enten confirms that the backing for the SAVE Act is also dominant regardless of ethnicity: 85% of white voter, 82% of Latino voters and 76% of black voters all want voter ID. It’s difficult to find many issues which the American public universally supports at this level.

Democrat leaders, however, don’t care that the majority of their own base wants voter ID laws. Party officials and the left-wing media have engaged in a shameless propaganda campaign designed to frighten the public into opposing the SAVE Act, despite their previous platforms defending majority rule. They consistently compare the new laws to “Jim Crow” era restrictions, claiming that minorities (and rural Americans) are too dumb to figure out how to get access to state IDs and birth certificates.

In truth, every state that already has some form of election ID laws has seen a spike in voter participation, not a decline. Only 8 states have laws demanding proof of citizenship before voting (half of the states are in legal battles to implement them); the other 42 only require that you check a box that says you are a citizen. When Democrats are asked why they are ignoring their majority of their constituents when it comes to the SAVE Act, they launch into tirades about racism and fascism, but never seem to be able to answer the question.

It’s difficult to reconcile the rhetoric of Democrats from 2024 when they wailed and screamed about conservatives being a “threat to democracy” compared to their rhetoric today. At bottom, the political left only supports majority public decisions when those decisions work in the favor of leftist elites. The majority of Americans continue to support the Trump Administration’s deportations of all illegal migrants (not just migrants with violent criminal records), but Dem leaders and their NGO partners continue trying to thwart the will of the people. By extension, voter ID makes it far more difficult for non-citizens to vote and makes it easier for voting records to be checked for discrepancies.

It’s clear that ID requirements and tighter controls on mail-in ballots will work heavily against Democrats and, if passed, they are likely to see a sharp decline in votes across the board. They are fighting against the SAVE Act because they want oligarchy, not “democracy.” They want minority elitist control over government policy. Voter ID is perhaps the most important legal question of our era; it will determine the course of elections for many years to come. Most western countries have laws in place to prevent illegal migrant voting and foreign manipulation of elections. The US is the only country in which this type of law is treated as “racist”.

Read more …

Ask the one-child Chinese how fast this can get out off hand.

• The Least Laid Generation in History: Gen Z Is Ghosting Sex (Pinsker)

So, barmaid, bring a pitcher, another round of brew
Honey, why don’t we get drunk and screw?
—Jimmy Buffett, Why Don’t We Get Drunk (and Screw)


It’s not just sex: Alcohol consumption has dropped by 54%, with youth (18 to 34) drinking falling ANOTHER 9% just between 2023 and 2025. From TIME magazine’s article, “Why Gen Z is Drinking Less”: “[R]esearch from the National Institute on Drug Abuse shows that lifetime drinking, past month drinking, and past year drinking among young people began to decline around the year 2000. That means that such declines have especially impacted Generation Z, defined as anyone born from 1997 to 2012, and some Millennials, born between 1981 and 1996. […]

“It is becoming clear that, for whatever reasons, today’s younger generations are just less interested in alcohol and are more likely than older generations to see it as risky for their health and to participate in periods of abstinence like Dry January,” said National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism George F. Koob in a statement. Maybe that’s not coincidental. Perhaps there’s a causal link (as famed philosopher Jimmy Buffett suggested). Maybe, just like peanut butter and jelly are complementary products, sex and alcohol are, too. Koob seemed to agree with Buffett:

“Another contributing factor has to do with the changing socialization patterns of younger generations. “Alcohol tends to be a social drug, even for young people, so part of the decline in underage drinking could be related to less in-person socializing,” said Koob. On average, the amount of time people spent with friends in-person decreased from 30 hours a month in 2003 to 10 hours a month in 2020, according to the U.S. Surgeon General’s advisory on the epidemic of loneliness. That decline was especially marked for people aged 15 to 24.

Back in 1991, more than half — 54.1% of all high school students — were sexually active. (The other 45.9% lied about it.) By 2007, the number fell to 47.8%. Four years later, it dropped again to 43%. By 2017, it was just 39.5%. As of 2023, it’s 31.6%. What’s going on with kids today, with their wild, out-of-control abstinence and crazy teetotalling?! It’s one of the strangest, most inexplicable cultural shifts in recent memory. I was certainly blindsided: I figured our sex drive was so biologically ingrained, it would never go away! But it has. And with it, so has the U.S. birthrate: It’s now at a 40-year low.

We need a birthrate of 2.1 babies per woman to maintain our population. We’re currently at 1.6.mnFor decades, our shrinking birthrate was masked by immigration growth. In 1991, the U.S. population was 253 million. By 2025, it grew to 343.6 million. = Since 2020, immigration has been the #1 driver of American population growth. With the new crackdown on illegal immigration, we’re flirting with our first-ever population decline. And it’s not just an American phenomenon — all over the world, birthrates have collapsed. At least one geopolitical strategist and demographic expert predicts it’ll lead to the end of China within the next 10 years:

“And three months ago, the Chinese government updated the data. They’re now reporting a 70% drop in the birthrate since 2017. That’s a faster decline than what was suffered by the Jews of Europe during the Holocaust. And the Shanghai Academy of Sciences, which is kind of the Wiseman organization of statisticians in China that interprets all the data, says that this is still wrong. They estimate that the Chinese system has overestimated its population by over 100 million people. With all of the missing millions being people who would’ve been born during the one-child era, which is a rather sterile way of saying that all the missing millions are under age 40 suggesting that these yellow bars don’t even exist. China has, at most, 10 years before it faces national dissolution. They will not be a unified industrialized nation state 10 years from now. ”

—Peter Zeihan

Read more …

Prediction: “The Least Laid Generation in History” will start boinking for cash. Then again, Elon says they won’t need the cash.

• OH BABY! Couples Could Make Big Money on Trump Accounts (DS)

The Trump administration has created an incentive for Americans to have more children within the next three years. Any baby born between Jan. 1, 2025, and Dec. 31, 2028, is eligible for $1,000 of seed money in a tax-advantaged investment account known as a “Trump Account,” though any parent with a child under 18 can open an account for their son or daughter. The account operates similarly to an IRA, and parents, relatives, and friends can contribute up to $5,000 annually, though they do not have to make regular contributions.


“Your child’s funds will automatically be invested in American companies,” according to the Trump Accounts website.mWhen the child turns 18, they can either allow the account to continue to grow, or they can withdraw the funds for education costs or to purchase a home. If the maximum amount is contributed to the account annually from the time the child is born, the account will have grown to over $270,000 by the child’s 18th birthday.

Between the rapid increase in the cost of living over the past 20 years and many young people in debt with student loans, true financial freedom is a distant dream for many in their 20s and 30s, but Trump Accounts could change that for the next generation. If Americans take advantage of the program to its full extent, Generation Alpha, born between 2010 and 2024, and Beta, born between 2025 and 2039, can hope to avoid the financial situation many Millennials and members of Gen Z find themselves in today.

Read more …

Trump will not accept this.

• Americans Could Be Silenced by EU Online Speech Laws (ET)

Europeans who face criminal charges for what they said or wrote warned that Europe’s speech laws can silence Americans as well, regardless of the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment protections. While testifying before the House Judiciary Committee last week, Paivi Rasanen, a member of parliament in Finland, recounted how she has been prosecuted since 2021 for quoting Bible verses to church members and on social media that questioned her church’s participation in a Gay Pride march. Although she was acquitted, first by a local district court and then by an appellate court, prosecutors appealed the decision to Finland’s supreme court, where the case currently sits.


“My prosecution shows how quickly democratic societies can abandon free expression when the state decides which beliefs are acceptable,” Rasanen told The Epoch Times. “I never imagined that quoting the Bible in a Twitter post would lead to years of criminal charges, yet this is now the reality in Europe,” she said. “Americans should be concerned because once censorship is normalized, it never stays confined to one country.”

The trend among Western countries to restrict religious speech has spread beyond Europe, with the Canadian government currently advancing a bill that would remove a religious exemption from “hate speech” laws in the country’s Criminal Code. Similarly, newly proposed legislation in Queensland, Australia, would criminalize certain symbols and phrases, with penalties of up to two years in prison. While speaking before Congress, Rasanen was joined by Graham Linehan, an Irish writer and comedian who was arrested upon traveling through Heathrow Airport in 2025 for statements he had made in America on transgender issues. “For a decade, the British police have harassed me for expressing views that the majority of the public share,” Linehan stated. “We have simply been punished for objecting to fashionable yet incoherent orthodoxies.”

‘Foreign Censorship Threat’
Their testimony was underscored by the release of a Feb. 3 House report titled “The Foreign Censorship Threat,” which charged that “The European Commission, in a comprehensive decade-long effort, has successfully pressured social media platforms to change their global content moderation rules, thereby directly infringing on Americans’ online speech in the United States.” More specifically, the report states that “though ostensibly meant to combat ‘misinformation’ and ‘hate speech,’ nonpublic documents produced to the Committee show that for the last 10 years, the European Commission has directly pressured platforms to censor lawful, political speech in the European Union and abroad.”

This included regular meetings between U.S. tech companies and European Union regulators to put “content moderation” policies and algorithms in place to conform to European laws regarding “hate speech” and “misinformation,” the report states. The EU claims these initiatives were voluntary, but subpoenaed emails from tech executives stated that “we don’t really have a choice.” Judicial Committee Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) told hearing attendees that, based on subpoenas issued to U.S. tech companies regarding their correspondence with EU officials, a pattern of compelled censorship emerged that included U.S. citizens.

“The European Commission successfully pressured social media companies to change their global content moderation rules, directly harming the speech of Americans in the United States,” Jordan stated. He also referenced an incident in which European commissioner Thierry Breton warned X owner Elon Musk that his company may face penalties for posting an interview with Donald Trump during the 2024 presidential campaign. “The European Commission is trying to censor speech and meddle in elections worldwide,” Jordan said. “When the European Commission makes censorship demands, platforms have to listen.”

According to the European Commission’s website, the Digital Services Act (DSA) “empowers citizens by strengthening the protection of their fundamental rights online and giving them greater control and more choices when they navigate online platforms and search engines.” The DSA also requires platforms to “minimise the risks of exposing citizens, including children and young people, to illegal and harmful content.” nCritics of EU speech laws say they have become a tool to punish U.S. tech companies for allowing any content that a European country has deemed to be illegal. In countries such as Germany, that could include insulting government officials.

French member of the European Parliament Virginie Joron called the DSA a “Trojan horse for surveillance and control.” Joron accused government officials of having “seized upon the DSA as a political tool to control speech, particularly targeting platforms like X, Facebook, and Telegram.” And legal analysts say that the reach of the DSA extends beyond Europe. The DSA “creates a pathway for foreign governments to influence public debate inside the United States without ever passing a single American law,” Lorcan Price, an Irish barrister who defended Rasanen and testified at the House hearing, told The Epoch Times.

“The EU’s Digital Services Act gives European regulators unprecedented leverage over American tech companies, which means European speech rules can end up shaping what Americans are allowed to say online,” Price said. “Once U.S. platforms are forced to comply with European censorship demands to avoid massive fines, those restrictions don’t stop at Europe’s borders.”

Read more …

Maybe they should see if they can agree on something. 15, 16, 18, not at all?

• More Nations Are Mulling Social Media Bans For Teens (ZH)

After Australia’s first-of-its-kind social media ban for adolescents under the age of 16 came into effect in December, more countries in Europe and elsewhere are taking steps to implement their own restrictions. As Katharina Buchholz reports, according to Statista research, France and the United Kingdom have gotten furthest, with laws passing in one chamber each of the countries’ bicameral legislatures as of early February. While the latter country is also aiming to ban social media for kids under the age of 16, France’s proposed law targets only those under the age of 15.


.


Six more nations have seen country leaders announce initiatives aiming to ban social media access for adolescents. While Indonesia, Malaysia, New Zealand and Spain all have more restrictive regulations in mind, excluding those under the age of 16, Greece is aiming to exclude those under the age of 15 and Austria those under the age of 14 from social media.Social media, including personalized algorithms and the possibility to scroll endlessly, is receiving scrutiny for its effect on mental health, especially in younger people.

.


Social media addiction can affect any age group, but it is seen as especially harmful in adolescents which are still developing social behaviors, body image and time management skills. Two more planned bans announced in Europe, by Portuguese and Danish leadership, are reportedly willing to leave a back door open for parental consent, putting them in a different category that already exists in several nations like France, Italy and, since recently, Brazil, where children of the applicable ages can access social media sites if their parents are in agreement.

While outright bans like the Australian one often plan implementation via a strict official age-verification mechanism, parental consent regulation can work by linking parents accounts, for example. Instagram has meanwhile already rolled out this feature in Europe, the U.S., Australia and Canada, with teenagers between the ages of 13 to 15 only in the position to disable a special restricted account mode with the consent of their parent’s account. Like other platforms, Instagram accepts users from the age of 13, but this restriction is so far not tied to verification. In the EU, social media sites are since 2018 under further restrictions concerning the use of personalized ads for minors.

Read more …

“He functioned as a social broker among financiers, politicians, academics, royalty, and celebrities…”

• The Unsettling Truths the Epstein Files Reveal About Power and Privilege (ET)

The public fixation on the Epstein files has settled, predictably, on the most lurid elements of the story. This is understandable. Sexual exploitation, particularly of the young, is among the most corrosive of crimes, and the scale of Epstein’s abuse, as well as the apparent indifference of powerful institutions to it, demands moral outrage. But to focus exclusively on the sexual scandal is to miss the deeper and more unsettling lesson the affair reveals. What the Epstein files expose, above all, is the social and moral estrangement of American elites from the people they claim to govern.


Epstein was not merely a predator who gained access to power. He was a node within a closed world of wealth, influence, and immunity. The scandal is not that powerful people behaved badly in private—history shows many such examples—but that they did so with a confidence rooted in the belief they were insulated from the consequences of their behavior. They moved through a transnational elite culture that had largely severed itself from ordinary moral constraints, legal accountability, and civic obligation. That culture did not merely tolerate Epstein but normalized him.

This echoes the point Christopher Lasch made decades ago, long before private islands and hedge-fund philanthropy became familiar symbols of elite excess. In his 1994 book “The Revolt of the Elites,” Lasch argued that the modern American ruling classes had stopped seeing themselves as stewards of a shared national project. Instead, they increasingly saw themselves as a mobile, globalized caste, educated in the same institutions, moving through the same cities, governed by the same tastes, and primarily accountable only to each other. Citizenship was seen as a minor inconvenience. Nationhood and patriotism were just sentimental relics from less enlightened times.

The Epstein affair reads like a case study in Lasch’s thesis. Here was an individual whose wealth was opaque, whose sources of income were rarely scrutinized, and whose social standing seemed immune to ordinary reputational risk. He functioned as a social broker among financiers, politicians, academics, royalty, and celebrities, many of whom publicly advocated policies of moral uplift, social justice, and global responsibility. Yet in private, they inhabited a world defined by indulgence, entitlement, and a contempt for limits.

Elite detachment today is not only economic but also existential, and it is hardly confined to Americans. The governing classes of advanced democracies increasingly inhabit a world defined by mobility, abstraction, and insulation from consequence. Their loyalties are professional rather than civic, global rather than national, and managerial rather than moral. They experience society less as a shared inheritance than as a set of problems to be administered at a distance. In such a world, attachment to place, memory, and common fate appears parochial, even suspect, while belonging itself is quietly redefined as an obstacle to progress.

Those who create policies affecting immigration, policing, education, public health, and national security rarely face the consequences themselves. They do not send their children to failing schools, live in high-crime neighborhoods, compete for scarce housing, or navigate broken public institutions. Their lives are shielded by wealth, location, private services, and increasingly by law itself.

The Epstein files sharpen this reality because they reveal not just hypocrisy, but impunity. Despite extensive documentation, repeated warnings, and credible testimony, accountability arrived slowly and incompletely. This is not because the crimes were ambiguous, but because the accused moved within a protected sphere where consequences were negotiable and enforcement discretionary. Justice, like morality, was something applied elsewhere for other people.

What enrages the public is not prurience, but recognition. The scandal resonates because it confirms a growing suspicion among ordinary people that there is one moral universe for the governing class and another for everyone else. Elites preach restraint, sustainability, and responsibility while living lives of extraordinary consumption and indulgence. They urge social sacrifice while exempting themselves from its costs. They speak the language of progress while practicing a refined form of decadence.

Lasch warned that such a ruling class would eventually forfeit legitimacy, not because of ideology, but because of character. A society cannot be governed indefinitely by people who do not believe they belong to it. When elites become tourists in their own countries, financially global, culturally unrooted, and morally untethered, their authority rests on little more than coercion and spectacle. The Epstein files should therefore be read less as an aberration than as a symptom. They reveal a governing class that has lost the habits of self-restraint that once justified its power, and the sense of common fate that once bound leaders to citizens. For many, the salient point of the Epstein files is the scandal. I think it is more accurately seen as a disclosure.

The danger is not merely that such elites are corrupt, but that they are bored. Bored with limits, bored with norms, bored with accountability, and ultimately bored with democracy itself. That boredom, Lasch understood, is the precondition of revolt, not by the masses, but by those who no longer feel answerable to them. If the Epstein affair provokes lasting anger, it is because it crystallizes a truth many citizens already sense, that the people shaping the future live in a world apart, governed by different rules, and increasingly incapable of moral seriousness. No society can long endure that division without consequence. The question is not whether further revelations will emerge. It is whether the public will finally insist that elites once again live under the same moral and civic conditions as those they presume to lead.

Read more …

“.. you made…all your money in California, you ungrateful piece of s***, you could figure out a way to pay more taxes, and we deserve the taxes from you, given you made your wealth here . . . so why don’t we just do shock and awe at this point, because you don’t seem to be availing yourself to thinking that you owe your state something more.”

• California Democrats Trigger a Reverse Gold Rush with a Wealth Tax (Turley)

This month, the anniversary of the California Gold Rush came and passed with little mention … for good reason. When James W. Marshall found gold at Sutter’s Mill, millions traveled great distances to seek their fortune in the “Golden State.” Now, 178 years later, California has engineered an inverse Gold Rush, virtually chasing wealth from the state. Rather than covered wagons going West, there is a line of U-Hauls going anywhere other than California.


From boondoggle projects to reparations, California politicians continue to rack up new spending projects despite a soaring deficit and shrinking tax base. Rather than exercise a modicum of fiscal restraint, Democrats are pushing through a tax that takes five percent of the wealth of any billionaires left in the state. I have long criticized the tax as perfectly moronic for a state with the highest tax burden and one of the highest flight rates of top taxpayers. In my new book, “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution,” I discuss the reversal of fortunes in California and other blue states as politicians unleash new “eat the rich” campaigns before the midterm elections.

The problem, of course, is that billionaires are mobile, as is their wealth. Liberals expect billionaires to stay put in a type of voluntary canned hunt. They are not. Billionaires are joining the growing exodus from the state, taking their companies, investments, and jobs with them. The latest billionaire to be chased off may be Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, who is reportedly heading for Florida. The growing departures have triggered outrage among many on the left, who are in disbelief that billionaires will just not stand still to be fleeced.

Former New York Magazine editor Kara Swisher captured that rage in a recent posting, declaring “you made…all your money in California, you ungrateful piece of s***, you could figure out a way to pay more taxes, and we deserve the taxes from you, given you made your wealth here . . . so why don’t we just do shock and awe at this point, because you don’t seem to be availing yourself to thinking that you owe your state something more.” By some estimates, California has already cost over a trillion dollars in lost investments and business. That is no small achievement. Here’s a mind teaser: How can you burn a trillion dollars (which would create a stack some 67,866 miles high) without taking years and destroying the environment? California politicians have a solution: Have people take it out of the state in a reverse gold rush.

In addition to saying that they want to grab 5 percent of the wealth of these billionaires, California Democrats are planning to base wealth calculations on the voting shares of corporate executives. Often, particularly with start-ups, entrepreneurs have greater voting shares than actual ownership. However, they will be taxed as if voting shares amounted to actual wealth. In other words, California is moving to nuke the entrepreneurs who created the Silicon Valley boom. Emmanuel Saez, the U.C. Berkeley economist who helped design the tax, insists that they may not want to stay, but they will still be tapped. They are planning to trap the wealthy fleeing the state retroactively: “The tax is based on residence as of Jan. 1, 2026, sharply limiting their ability to flee the state to avoid paying. Despite billionaires’ threats to leave, I think extremely few will have been able to change residence by Jan. 1, given the complexity of doing so.”

The effort to retroactively impose such a tax is legally controversial and will face years of challenges. In my view, this is unconstitutional, but admittedly it is a murky area. Regardless of the outcome, a wealth tax will affect a wide range of other wealthy taxpayers. If Democrats can get a retroactive wealth tax to be upheld, it is doubtful that they will stop with billionaires. Why should other top taxpayers stick around to find out where the next cull will fall in the tax brackets? Recently, Gavin Newsom boasted, “California isn’t just keeping pace with the world — we’re setting the pace.” That is undeniably true if the measure is the record number of U-Hauls fleeing the state — more than any other state. Indeed, the only thing harder to find than a wealthy taxpayer in California appears to be a U-Haul.

According to U-Haul’s data, the state is again leading blue states in the exodus. The Washington Post noted recently that “California came in last. Massachusetts, New York, Illinois, and New Jersey rounded out the bottom five. Of the bottom 10, seven voted blue in the last election.” Conversely, “nine of the top 10 growth states voted red in the last presidential election,” with Texas again leading the growth states. The Post put it succinctly, “People want to live in pro-growth, low-tax states, while the biggest losers tend to be places with big governments and high taxes.” The problem is that, while the economics are horrific, the politics remain irresistible.

Democratic Rep. Ro Khanna, who represents part of Silicon Valley, recently mocked billionaires rushing to escape the state. Laughing at his own constituents, Khanna quipped, “I will miss them very much.” You will not be alone as California becomes known as the La Brea Tar Pit of taxation. They are on the verge of converting the state motto from “Eureka” to “Welcome to Hotel California, you can check out any time you like, but you can never leave.”

Read more …

I have questions.

• FBI Opened 1,200 ‘Assessments’ Of Sensitive Figures (JTN)

The FBI opened 1,200 probes related to politicians, journalists, religious leaders, academics and others tied to “sensitive investigative matters,” using a special investigative tool that requires no factual predicate to launch, according to a Government Accountability Office report. The GAO report, which was obtained by Just the News, was published last month but not made public, and it was titled FBI Investigative Activities: Oversight Efforts of Opening and Conducting Assessments Should be Strengthened.


The report, which assists in congressional oversight of the executive branch, provided details on the roughly 127,000 FBI “assessments” in all opened from 2018 to 2024, the vast majority of which were eventually closed without accusations of wrongdoing or criminal charges against those targets being scrutinized. The 57-page report did not include any names of those targeted for assessment. Among the total assessments, 1,200 were related to “sensitive investigative matters” that target public officials, news organizations, houses of worship or members of academia, which the bureau views as more sensitive in nature.

So-called “assessments” were established by Justice Department guidelines in 2008, providing the FBI with an investigative tool short of opening a full-fledged investigation requiring a factual predicate. The probes are used by the bureau to “address a potential threat to national security or potential violation of federal criminal law,” the congressional watchdog said. They allow FBI agents to open probes on authorized matters but without a factual basis and allow them to employ investigative such techniques as physical surveillance on subjects.

If sufficient basis is found, assessments can turn into preliminary investigations, full investigations or enterprise investigations. But most assessments are closed without meeting the standards for a full inquiry by the bureau, the GAO said. nn The revelations were detailed in the GAO’s January 2026 report, which was designated “For Official Use Only” because of the sensitive information it contains. GAO noted that the report should be “safeguarded when not being used and destroyed when no longer needed.”

Read more …

I don’t think Trump wants to attack Iran. But does he have a choice anymore?

• US Smuggled Starlinks Into Iran Amid Riots – WSJ (RT)

The Trump administration covertly smuggled approximately 6,000 Starlink satellite internet terminals into Iran amid a nationwide unrest earlier this year, the Wall Street Journal has reported, substantiating Tehran’s claims of foreign interference behind the deadly riots. The operation, which senior US officials said involved State Department funding, came after Iranian authorities imposed a sweeping internet blackout in January. President Donald Trump was aware of the deliveries, officials told the WSJ on Thursday, though it remains unclear whether he personally approved the plan.


Iranian officials have repeatedly blamed Washington and Tel Aviv for fueling the unrest, which began in December as peaceful demonstrations over economic hardship but escalated into widespread violence. Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi stated last month that more than 3,000 people had been killed, including nearly 700 individuals he described as “terrorists,” alongside civilians and security personnel. President Masoud Pezeshkian has accused the US and Israel of embedding “foreign terrorists” within protest crowds, alleging they have employed what an Iranian diplomatic source described to RT as “ISIS-like” tactics – including beheadings of law enforcement officers and civilians being burned alive.

At the height of the unrest, Trump openly encouraged “peaceful” Iranian protesters, posting on Truth Social: “All Iranian patriots, keep protesting. Take over your institutions if possible.” He also promised that “help is on its way,” and deployed a “beautiful armada” to the region, raising speculation of an imminent military intervention. The State Department supports a range of so-called “internet freedom” tools, including virtual private network (VPN) service providers to Iran. To purchase Starlinks, the department reportedly redirected funds from US-supported VPNs, which had allowed an estimated 20-30 million Iranians to stay online during the previous 2022 riots and the Israeli-US bombing last year.

Washington seeks to pressure Iran into accepting a new nuclear deal, after Trump unilaterally withdrew from the 2015 agreement (JCPOA) during his first term, reimposing sanctions against Tehran under a “maximum pressure” campaign. Decades of US economic pressure were the primary driver of the country’s economic deterioration, according to officials in Iran – the world’s second most sanctioned country after Russia. Despite the US administration’s public denials of involvement in fomenting anti-government riots, the reported Starlink operation reveals expanded covert support for what Moscow called an attempt to “destroy the Iranian state” through a “color revolution” playbook.

Read more …

“I will be presenting them shortly, in the form of an Executive Order.” An executive order would not be ideal, but I’m hoping it won’t be necessary.”

• Trump Makes A HUGE Promise About Voter ID

They finally have the votes. Now the real fight begins. The SAVE Act already cleared the House in a tight 218–213 vote, with just one Democrat, Henry Cuellar, willing to break with his party and support basic election safeguards. That tells you everything you need to know about where Democrats really stand on election integrity. Senate Republicans also just locked down the 50 votes they need to move ahead on the SAVE Act, thanks to Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) finally jumping off the fence and signing on as a cosponsor. With Vice President JD Vance ready to break a 50–50 tie, Republicans now have the votes to pass the bill if it ever reaches a final vote. That’s the good news.


The bad news is that Democrats still have one powerful weapon left: the filibuster. In the Senate, the math is brutally simple. Republicans have the votes to pass the bill, but they do not have the 60 votes needed to break the filibuster. Not even Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) will support the SAVE Act — and he claims to support voter ID. So what’s the next move? Well, that’s up to the Senate GOP leadership. If they are serious about this bill, they have to force a real, old-school, stand-on-the-floor-and-talk-until-you-drop filibuster. Not the fake Cory Booker kind, either, but a real filibuster. It’s time for the Democrats’ abuse of the filibuster, effectively turning it into a de facto veto of the minority party, to be over.

Sen. Mike Lee laid out the path in a video message on X. “If senators want to debate this, if they want to filibuster it, make them work for it,” he said. “Make them stand up, make them speak. If we do it this way, we can continue this progress, and I think we can get this thing done.” The only problem is that even then, nothing is guaranteed. A talking filibuster is a tool, not a magic wand. It forces a showdown. It does not promise victory. “Look, there are no guarantees here,” Lee conceded. “But the only shot we’ve got at this is through the talking filibuster. Thanks for fighting. Keep going. We’ll get it done.”

There is, of course, a backup plan. On Friday, President Donald Trump announced that if the SAVE Act can’t pass the Senate, he plans to bypass Congress altogether and use executive action to require voter ID for the November midterms. “There will be Voter I.D. for the Midterm Elections, whether approved by Congress or not!” he wrote on Truth Social. “This is an issue that must be fought, and must be fought, NOW!” he wrote in a follow-up post. “If we can’t get it through Congress, there are Legal reasons why this SCAM is not permitted. I will be presenting them shortly, in the form of an Executive Order.” An executive order would not be ideal, but I’m hoping it won’t be necessary.

Read more …

But Elon says in 10 years it won’t matter anymore.

• American Workers Have Less Than A $1000 in Retirement Savings (Turley)

There is a new, troubling study on the financial status of most American workers. The National Institute on Retirement Security (NIRS) found that the median American worker has just $955 saved for retirement through defined-contribution plans such as 401(k) accounts. Given the expected job losses from robotics and AI, the study only deepens concerns about the economic and political pressures facing this country in the years to come.


In my new book, “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution,” I discuss those impacts from robotics and AI on our democracy. Using the most conservative estimates of job losses, the book explores how a large population of unemployed citizens will affect their relationship with the state. We cannot maintain a “kept citizenship” while preserving the essential elements of the American republic. A large population of static, unemployed citizens poses challenges for what I call a “liberty-enhancing economy,” an economy that affords citizens independence from the state.

This study magnifies those concerns. If accurate, it suggests that even a short displacement in employment will return state support. Many jurisdictions are already launching Universal Basic Income (UBI) pilot programs. If this republic is to survive in the 21st Century, it will require developing new areas of “homocentric” jobs while avoiding predictable measures to subsidize positions that will inevitably be lost to robotics. Notably, the study found that among those with positive retirement plans, median savings were much higher at $40,000. Those with a defined contribution (DC) plan are far better off with an average savings of $179,082.

The takeaway from the report, for me, is the need to instill greater private savings. Some workers are barely paid above subsistence. However, we also need to educate citizens about the importance of setting aside retirement funds to the extent possible. As I previously wrote, I am a great fan of the Trump Accounts. The $6.25 billion gift of Michael and Susan Dell (now augmented by dozens of corporations) could offer the single best hope for the survival of our system. Millions of young people will be able to experience the benefits of investments, savings and, most importantly, economic independence.

The study also shows the growing dangers of the collapse of the social security accounts. Despite assurances made when Congress established the system, Congress has continued to draw on Social Security funds to avoid reducing spending levels. The system could fail for these workers, who will not be able to draw upon money taken from their paychecks for the purpose of retirement. It is one of the most outrageous betrayals in United States history.

To this day, Democrats are opposing efforts to make major changes to guarantee the viability of the system for future generations, including the use of private investment accounts that could no longer be raided by Congress for easy money. All politicians express alarm at the potential failure, but they attack any efforts to address the underlying problems as an attack on social security. As a result, we just drift toward this cliff knowing that most citizens have practically no other source of retirement support.

Read more …

AI trumps groupthink too.

• Stolen Land At The Grammys: How Hollywood Groupthink Threatens Democracy (ET)

Among the consolations of youth is the certainty with which one holds beliefs about the world. There is comfort in the conviction that one’s moral bearings are firmly set, that one’s understanding of complex questions is not only sincere but also correct. The world appears legible; right and wrong seem sharply drawn; doubt and nuance are dismissed as weakness or evasion. There is rarely a single moment when these certainties collapse. They loosen instead through the slow accumulation of experience. Over time, one discovers that life resists easy judgments. Circumstances complicate principles. Good intentions collide with unintended consequences. Our friends betray us. The world proves denser, more conflicted, and less amenable to neat and tidy conclusions than youthful confidence would suggest.


This recognition of complexity, fallibility, and the limits of one’s own certainty is among the quiet achievements of maturity. It marks the point at which conviction learns restraint and moral seriousness acquires humility. Yet much of our public culture now moves in precisely the opposite direction. It rewards juvenile certainty while punishing hesitation, qualification, or good-faith disagreements. Confidence is applauded regardless of depth; slogans substitute for argument; restraint is recast as moral failure. That inversion was on clear display at the recent Grammy Awards, when Billie Eilish declared to enthusiastic applause that “no one is illegal on stolen land.”

It was left unspecified just whose land was being referenced, by whom it was stolen, and according to what historical or legal criteria that claim could be made. The audience, however, needed no clarification. Eilish’s statement was rewarded exactly because it avoided complexity and invited no questions. What was on display was not moral seriousness but a high school performance, an adolescent sense of righteousness delivered with absolute certainty and accepted as self-evident truth. One might charitably attribute such unthinking, categorical statements to Eilish’s youth. Alas, hers is a posture that we have come to expect from many of Hollywood’s men and women: confident, declarative, and curiously uninterested in the burdens of thought that genuine moral judgment requires.

This brings us to the core issue. The greatest threat to free expression today isn’t obvious censorship or government orders. Instead, it’s a more subtle and widespread force: cultural groupthink. This informal but influential system of rewards and punishments quietly limits the range of acceptable opinions, shaping what people feel allowed to say, what they hesitate to voice, and which questions are no longer askedn Nowhere is this trend more evident than in modern celebrity culture. Hollywood and the broader entertainment sector have become models of ideological conformity, especially on divisive social and political topics.

From climate change and gender issues to racial justice and international conflicts, Hollywood repeats the same messages, all delivered with youthful confidence. The same moral language, slogans, and conclusions are echoed with ritualistic consistency. The Eilish episode was not an aberration but a symptom. It illustrated a broader pattern in which public speech functions less as a means of inquiry than as a test of ideological conformity. The cost of dissent is not a thoughtful and considered rebuttal. Rather, it takes the form of reputational damage through social media pile-ons, calls for boycotts, professional exclusion, or quiet blacklisting.

Under such conditions, silence is often the rational choice. Most people have families to support and livelihoods to protect.The greater danger lies in the lesson this celebrity culture teaches: that there is only one permissible way to think and speak about certain issues, and that deviation signals not error but moral failure. Political and social questions are reduced to dogma rather than debated. Once moralized in this way, disagreement becomes illegitimate by definition. This logic now extends well beyond Hollywood. Similar patterns can be found in journalism, medicine, academia, corporate governance, and even the legal profession.

Approved vocabularies narrow discussion; certain premises must be affirmed before conversation can begin; others may not be questioned at all. Arguments are no longer answered on their merits but dismissed as evidence of bad character or suspect motives.The consequences for democratic culture are profound. Democracies do not depend on unanimity but on citizens who can weigh competing claims, tolerate uncertainty, and revise their views in light of evidence and argument. Groupthink undermines these capacities by rewarding conformity and punishing independent judgment. Over time, public discourse loses its corrective function. Errors persist not because they are persuasive, but because questioning them carries too high a cost.

[..] Free speech, properly understood, is not a threat to democracy. It is its foundation.

Read more …

“AI Disruption Crosshairs Hone In On Hollywood Studios ..”

Why pay Brad Pitt 100 million when a computer can “build” his scenes?

• “Billion Dollar Movie In One Prompt” (ZH)

:AI-driven equity disruption was everywhere this past week, spreading like wildfire beyond software into insurance, commercial real estate, financials, shipping, wealth management, and likely many more industries in the coming trading sessions.One industry in the crosshairs of AI disruption is Hollywood. Some of the publicly traded studios include The Walt Disney Company, Warner Bros. Discovery, Paramount Global, Sony Group Corporation, Netflix, Lionsgate, and others.nOn Friday, Axios reported that the Walt Disney Company sent a cease-and-desist letter to ByteDance, alleging that the Chinese tech firm has been infringing on its films to develop Seedance 2.0 without compensation.

Disney’s outside attorney, David Singer, wrote a letter to ByteDance global general counsel John Rogovin, accusing the AI company of “pre-packaging its Seedance service with a pirated library of Disney’s copyrighted characters from Star Wars, Marvel, and other Disney franchises, as if Disney’s coveted intellectual property were free public domain clip art.” “Over Disney’s well-publicized objections, ByteDance is hijacking Disney’s characters by reproducing, distributing, and creating derivative works featuring those characters. ByteDance’s virtual smash-and-grab of Disney’s IP is willful, pervasive, and totally unacceptable,” Singer said.

He added, “We believe this is just the tip of the iceberg, which is shocking considering Seedance has only been available for a few days.” It’s not just ByteDance’s Seedance 2.0 that has spooked Hollywood studios. A growing wave of video-generation models suggests that Hollywood’s moat is crumbling, and its control of the media game is nearing its end.

“Authorities should use every legal tool at their disposal to stop this wholesale theft,” the Human Artistry Campaign – a coalition that includes dozens of creative groups such as SAG-AFTRA and the Directors Guild of America – said in a statement on Friday. Seedance 2.0 model …

Hollywood is living on borrowed time. The next big AI disruption trade could be studios.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Optimus COVID RFK jr Joe Rogan and Dr. Robert Malone https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/2022601763405103379?s=20 Pepe Casey https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/2022673982432886873?s=20 https://twitter.com/MAGAVoice/status/2022410612689768945?s=20

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle February 5 2026

Feb 052026
 
 February 5, 2026  Posted by at 11:15 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , ,  53 Responses »


Paul Cézanne Countryside in Auvers-sur-Oise 1881-82


• Putin Notifies Xi Of New START Status (ZH)
• The Two Levels of EU-Sanctions Illegality (Luis Roberto Zamora Bolaños)
• Rutte Says Post-Ukraine Peace To Include NATO Boots By Air, Land & Sea (ZH)
• Breaking News From Miami, Teheran (Helmer)
• A Bigger Backstory, Vindicating DNI Tulsi Gabbard (CTH)
• Rep. Jerry Nadler Triggers Outcry Over Violent Rhetoric Against ICE (Turley)
• Spain Announces Major Social Media Crackdown (RT)
• ‘I Wasn’t Friendly With Epstein’ – Trump (RT)
• Tom Homan Pulls 700 Agents Out of Minnesota (Matt Margolis)
• Minnesota Counties Begin Cooperating With ICE (ZH)
• FBI Director Kash Patel Outlines Fulton County Objective (CTH)

 

 



 

 


New START expires today. It’s the last remaining treaty. Trump wants China to sign any new deal.

• Putin Notifies Xi Of New START Status (ZH)

President Putin in his Wednesday video call with Chinese President Xi Jinping underscored that the last major nuclear treaty with the United States is on the eve of collapse. New START is set to expire on Thursday. Putin notified Xi that Washington has not yet responded. “As you know, on September 22, 2025, we proposed to the Americans to extend the key quantitative limits for one year as voluntary self-restrictions. However, we have not yet received an official response from the Americans,” Putin said, as quoted in state media.


Despite the situation with the New START Treaty, Russia remains open “to seeking negotiated ways to ensure strategic stability” – the Russian leader explained. Putin further stated his country will act “in a measured and responsible manner, based on a thorough analysis of the overall security situation.” Over several years going back to his first term, Trump has signaled a desire to forge a broader deal which would bring China into the agreement, which hearkens back to the Obama administration. Politico is meanwhile reporting that the Trump administration is preparing to “let go of arms control with Russia”:

The likely dissolution of the agreement comes at an especially fraught time. Russia and China are expanding their strategic arsenals and the Kremlin has threatened to use nuclear weapons on Ukraine. The Defense Department has held a series of internal meetings in preparation for a post-New START world, according to the two people and another person familiar — all of whom were granted anonymity to discuss internal talks — although it’s not clear what was discussed in the meetings. “We’re looking at a very uncertain path ahead,” said Daryl Kimball, the executive director of the Arms Control Association. “Unless Trump and Putin reach some sort of understanding soon, it’s not unlikely that Russia and the U.S. will start to upload more warheads on their missiles.”

The Kremlin has made clear Russia is willing to extend it for another year, to allow more robust negotiations and for a longer deal to be finalized. But again, unless it is renewed or extended at the last minute, the landmark treaty will expire on Thursday, February 5. Former Russian president Dmitry Medvedev, now deputy chairman of the country’s Security Council, on Monday made clear that Russia’s offer to quickly extend “remains on the table, and the treaty has not even expired yet, and if the American side wants to extend it, then this can be done.” He also confirmed that Moscow has received no response on this offer from Washington:

Medvedev told the newspaper Kommersant that Moscow might have to wait until the expiry of the treaty on February 5 for a U.S. response to the Russian initiative. When contacted for comment, a White House official told Newsweek Monday: “The president will decide the path forward on nuclear arms control, which he will clarify on his own timeline.” Indeed, the Trump White House has yet to issue anything official. Of course, President Trump is also known for making key decisions at the last moment, building suspense and leverage, based on also on his notorious unpredictable decision-making style.

According to Monica Duffy Toft, professor of international politics and director of the Center for Strategic Studies at The Fletcher School, “By providing transparency into the world’s two largest nuclear arsenals, New START has lowered the risk that either side will misinterpret normal military activity as preparation for a nuclear strike.” It was signed in 2010 by Presidents Barack Obama and Dmitry Medvedev, and limits the number of deployed strategic warheads to 1,550 per side, and caps deployed delivery systems – including of missiles, bombers, and submarines – at 700. There’s also a mutual inspection regimen, allowing each side to monitor the other’s sites.

Read more …

International Law is a bummer!

• The Two Levels of EU-Sanctions Illegality (Luis Roberto Zamora Bolaños)

Pascal’s Note: A previous guest on my YouTube Channel, Luis Roberto Zamora Bolaños—the international lawyer who, back in the 2000s, forced his native Costa Rica to withdraw from George W. Bush’s Coalition of the Willing—sent me a short assessment of the legality of EU sanctions. He argues that the Eurocrats are, in fact, grossly overstepping their competencies under international law. Not only are the sanctions in breach of the law between nations, but they are also a heavy infringement on the Human Rights of the targeted people. Here is his verdict.


Unilateral Sanctions against States are Illegal.

Can states do whatever they want within their own borders and jurisdictions? On the one hand, under the Lotus Principle, states (and more generally, subjects of international law) are indeed allowed to act freely as long as they don’t contravene other rules of international law, customary rules, or peremptory norms. Nonetheless, the freedom of action of a subject of international law (IL) is limited by the rights of other States, most notably the principle of sovereignty.

While unilateral acts like sanctions are not explicitly codified in IL, that doesn’t mean they are unrecognized or exempt from scrutiny. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has dealt with them in several cases, most notably the Nuclear Tests case (also in the UK-NOR Fisheries Case). Moreover, in 2006, the United Nations International Law Commission (ILC) issued its “Guiding Principles applicable to unilateral declarations of States capable of creating legal obligations,” which should be fully applicable to other subjects of international law. Principle 9 establishes that: No obligation may result for other States from the unilateral declaration of a State. However, the other State or States concerned may incur obligations in relation to such a unilateral declaration to the extent that they clearly accepted such a declaration.

In its commentaries about this principle, the ILC indicated that: “It is well established in international law that obligations cannot be imposed by a State upon another State without its consent.” The same idea applies to sanctions, which is precisely the reason State consent in the form of jurisdiction acceptance is needed to be subject to a ruling by the ICJ. The UN Charter is less clear about the limits of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) to impose sanctions. However, it has been widely accepted that the Council has that capacity. The European Union, on the other hand, as a normal subject of international law, shouldn’t have the capacity to create obligations on other subjects of international law.

The issue is further complicated if the sanctions are imposed following a proposal from a member State. Unless the proposing State abstains from voting, the principle of impartiality would be grossly violated. Additionally, it can be said that the EU, by imposing sanctions against non-member States, would be confiscating functions reserved for international adjudicatory bodies, such as the ICJ or the Permanent Court of Arbitration. It would be highly contradictory, even immoral, if the EU justified its action by pointing to the lack of jurisdiction acceptance by the sanctioned non-member States, since several EU members have not accepted compulsory universal jurisdiction before the ICJ.

Unilateral Sanctions against Individuals are Contrary to International Law

A second level is the human rights question of the people targeted by sanctions. Article 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms establishes that: 1. In the determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law.

Although it has been recognized that administrative bodies can impose certain types of sanctions, the right to be heard and to exercise a defense is absolute. No one can be subject to a sanction without an opportunity to exercise a defense or challenge the sanction—before the measures take effect—which doesn’t happen with EU Council sanctions. Moreover, Article 7 of the European Convention established the principle of nulla pena sine lege previa, meaning that the conduct and its sanction must be clearly established in a law before its imposition. The EU doesn’t have a “criminal code” or anything like that.

Furthermore, EU States (or any State) can create a subject of international law to avoid obligations that they would otherwise bear. This would be fraud on law. To illustrate with a case, EU member states cannot authorize the EU Council to impose the death penalty, even when the EU itself is not a party to the EU Human Rights regime. Substantively, depending on the content of the sanctions, they could violate the freedoms of thought and conscience, the right to private property, privacy, movement, and family. It could further be claimed that the conditions imposed by certain sanctions are equivalent to torture.

There is a fundamental distinction to highlight here: between rights and freedoms. Unlike rights, which require positive action by the States for their fulfillment, freedoms demand negative action. States should refrain from intervening in the enjoyment of freedoms unless a lawfully established excess has been committed. Thought and expression are freedoms, not rights, meaning that States (and the EU) should minimize their intervention and limitation, especially sine lege previa.

I think that the issue can be tackled from several fronts. Internationally, in addition to EU internal mechanisms, complaints should be submitted to the High Commissioner on Freedom of Expression and the Committee against Torture. I think this could be a particularly interesting scenario.

Read more …

Never ever. Promises he knows he can’t keep. Makes you wonder why he says it regardless.

• Rutte Says Post-Ukraine Peace To Include NATO Boots By Air, Land & Sea (ZH)

NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte said the so-called “coalition of the willing” will deploy forces across Ukraine – on land, at sea, and in the air – once a peace agreement with Russia is signed, making clear that Western boots, jets, and naval assets would follow any ceasefire. Rutte said Ukraine needs binding commitments and security guarantees in order to prevent future Russian aggression. This is to include the deployment of European forces and a “crucial” US “backstop”. His words are consistent with the Western position – and specifically the European view – on what a final Ukraine peace deal would require

.
The Kremlin has as expected consistently rejected this ‘option’ as a non-starter, given this is why Russia went to war in the first place: to stop a NATO troop outpost right on its border, and constant NATO expansion. What Moscow will find doubly alarming is that Rutte issued the words directly before Ukraine’s Verkhovna Rada (the unicameral parliament of Ukraine). Other NATO states, Rutte laid out, would continue to assist through additional channels in a support role to Western boots on the ground.

But Russia has again warned that foreign boots on the ground in Ukraine would warrant a military response, and that they could be targets for future Russian action. All of this contradicts Russia’s ‘red lines’ for what it says is acceptable. Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has been even more blunt, stating that security guarantees for Ukraine based on “foreign military intervention on some part of Ukrainian territory” would be unacceptable to the level that a post-war “peacekeeping” mission would fast spiraling into the next flashpoint.

According to more of Rutte’s words, summarized via The Guardian:
• Rutte also urged for more equal “burden-sharing” as some allies “are doing a lot” and a few are “doing nothing”. He stressed the positive contributions of countries including Norway, Holland, Germany, Denmark, Canada and Sweden.
• Rutte said Russia’s full-scale invasion, launched in February 2022, was “crazy” and said its continuing assault on Ukraine is targeting civilian infrastructure, creating “chaos” for innocent civilians.
• Rutte said Ukraine is ready “to play ball” and come to a deal – acceptable to Kyiv – with the Russian side, but added that the massive Russian attack last night was a “really bad signal” ahead of future negotiations.

Yet, Russia will not “play ball” on these terms, and this signals that US-Russia negotiations continue to be stuck, going nowhere substantial, but the reality remains – at least the two sides are being candid and are communicating.

This represents Europe keeping up its intractable position, also as territorial concessions are a prime point of disagreement. US officials have at times signaled their view that European leaders are more hostile to peace, or even thwarting it, amid Trump’s apparent good-faith efforts to bring a resolution to the war which is about to enter its fifth year, after hundreds of thousands have perished. Still, Trump could bring pressure on Kiev – including halting all arms deliveries, and forcing it to make serious land concessions – but there’s as yet no evidence he’s done this in any meaningful way.
Read more …

There are different reports about the latest meetings.

• Breaking News From Miami, Teheran (Helmer)

Nuri al-Said, the long-serving but ill-fated Iraqi prime minister of the 1940s and 1950s, once said that you can rent an Arab but you can’t buy him. On July 15, 1958, he ended up shot by an Iraqi Army coup, buried, dug up, and his corpse mutilated as it was dragged through the streets of Baghdad. His end confirmed his truth. President Vladimir Putin knows better than most that the Nuri Pasha maxim applies to American government officials up to and including the presidents — except that they don’t honour their promises, demand more bribes, and survive intact to die in bed (most of them).


Still, Putin has delegated Kirill Dmitriev, a US-educated and trained investment banker, to deliver the bribes (left, right) to President Donald Trump (extreme right) and his go-betweens, and return with what Dmitriev claims to be their promises for terms of settlement of the Ukraine war, the lifting of sanctions, and the release of about $300 billion in Central Bank of Russia (CBR) funds frozen and part-confiscated over the past four years.

Putin has done this so that he can ask the General Staff, the intelligence services, and the Security Council what they make of the deal by a show of thumbs up, thumbs down, after Dmitriev presents the costs and benefits of his proposal and the Trump administration’s response. Dmitriev was sent back to Miami last weekend. When he returned to report to the Kremlin, spokesman Dmitry Peskov said “there will be no details. You’ve heard the conceptual assessments from both sides, from Dmitriev and from Witkoff. In general, these were quite positive and constructive talks.” Witkoff had tweeted the adjectives, “productive and constructive”.

Witkoff also revealed that several Americans were with him at the meeting with Dmitriev: US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Jared Kushner and Joshua Gruenbaum. This is the first time Putin has authorized a single representative to meet a full US delegation. On January 22, in addition to Witkoff and Dmitriev, Kushner and Gruenbaum were matched at the Kremlin by Putin himself and Yury Ushakov, the Kremlin national security advisor. Bessent’s attendance in Miami signals the talks with Dmitriev covered terms for ending the US sanctions on Russian trade and assets, including the secondary sanctions on Indian and Chinese purchases of Russian oil. Bessent’s press office at the US Treasury has remained silent; so too his Twitter stream.

At the same time, Bessent has continued to sharpen sanctions against Iran, tweeting “the regime has chosen to squander what remains of the nation’s oil revenues on nuclear weapons development, missiles, and terrorist proxies around the world. President Trump stands with the people of Iran and has ordered Treasury to sanction members of the regime. Treasury will continue to target Iranian networks and corrupt elites that enrich themselves at the expense of the Iranian people. This includes the regime’s attempts to exploit digital assets to evade sanctions and finance cybercriminal operations. Like rats on a sinking ship, the regime is frantically wiring funds stolen from Iranian families to banks and financial institutions around the world. Rest assured. Treasury will act.”

Read more …

They try very hard to make Tulsi look bad.

• A Bigger Backstory, Vindicating DNI Tulsi Gabbard (CTH)

The Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG) delivered the “read and return” intelligence report to congress that sits at the background of an anonymous whistleblower complaint against Director of National Intelligence, DNI Tulsi Gabbard. [CBS Story] In addition to delivering the report, the ICIG also delivered a declassified letter outlining the framework of the backstory [SEE HERE]. I strongly urge pe ople to take a few minutes and read both links above, particularly the pdf of the ICIG report that frames the complaint. In essence, the same playbook the IC tried to create the impeachment narrative against President Trump (2019), they used again against DNI Tulsi Gabbard.


Now, the story gets a little weedy, so at the risk of yet another subpoena for outlining highly classified intelligence information simply by using public sourcing information and strategic brain mapping to put dots together, the easiest way to explain what has happened is to tell the big picture story of it. People opposed to President Trump inside the National Intelligence Council (NIC), which in 2025 was a sub-silo inside the CIA, wrote an analysis saying the Venezuela gang ‘Tren de Aragua” (TdA) was not officially affiliated with the Venezuela government. Therefore, when President Trump and Secretary Rubio defined TdA as an officially recognized terrorist group, the analysis was intended to separate the TdA violence from the official U.S. policy toward Venezuela.

[The NIC is the “federal agency” being described in the media reports. I suspect the report’s authors were Mike Collins and Maria Langan-Riekhof or close associates therein.]

The “highly classified” component to the analysis, the part that intentionally skewers the telling of the story, is almost certainly the sourcing for the NIC analysis.Here I would estimate with 90%+ confidence, that a CIA asset within the Venezuela government was the source of the intelligence saying TdA is not officially aligned with the Venezuelan govt. That CIA asset could be someone very close to former dictator Nicholas Maduro, or someone currently inside the transitional government. That source makes the component to the NIC analysis “highly classified.” [However, it also fulfills the goals and operational agenda of the people who want to weaponize the “whistleblower angle.]

Now, I want to break out a component here because it is directly related to the reason for anti-Trump IC to manufacture this official CIA-NIC analysis. Remember, Judge James Boasberg’s argument against deporting TdA members was based on his refusal to accept the deportees were designated terrorists. Venezuela would not take them back, so President Trump sent them to the maximum-security prison in El Salvador. This is where the policy of the Trump administration runs into the lawfare created by the manufactured CIA analysis. The IC aligns with Lawfare. Insert the familiar name Mary McCord here and you will see why momentarily, including her personal relationship with Judge James Boasberg who appointed Mary McCord as amicus curiae to the FISA Court.

The CIA analysis saying TdA is not an official agency of the Venezuela government. This becomes a hot button issue around the deportation of the TdA gang members as terrorists. Trump, Rubio, Noem and Homan using the designation to facilitate fast removal and deportation, while Lawfare operate using the technical definitions of “terrorist group” against the intentions of the administration. That’s the baseline for the construct, and that also explains why Judge James Boasberg doubles, triples and quadruples down against the DOJ on this issue.

Read more …

“Ohio Democratic Attorney General candidate Elliot Forhan is running on the catchy pledge that “I will kill Donald Trump.”

• Rep. Jerry Nadler Triggers Outcry Over Violent Rhetoric Against ICE (Turley)

Rep. Jerry Nadler (D., NY) is under fire this week for joining other Democratic members in reckless rhetoric to fuel the growing threats against federal law enforcement officers. Nadler suggested that citizens could be justified in shooting masked agents, a chilling claim made earlier by other Democratic leaders. The New York Post reported the comments made in a Judiciary Committee hearing. Nadler declared: “What is really the major problem in this country today is the fascism in our streets. The attacks on American citizens, by masked hoodlums. If you were attacked by a masked person, you might think you were being kidnapped. You’d be justified in shooting the person — to protect yourself.”


The agents are wearing masks because different groups are actively publishing their identities and personal information online. The result has not only been doxxing but threats made against the families of these agents. Democratic politicians have pledged to assist in the effort to “unmask” and publish the identities of these officers as threats soar. For many, these statements suggest that they have a license under laws like Stand Your Ground to shoot at agents and claim mistaken self-defense. The continued use of such rhetoric in the face of soaring attacks and threats against officers is the worst form of demagoguery.

At the same time, members like Rep. Dan Goldman (D. NY) deny that there is evidence of a sharp increase in attacks despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.Notably, Nadler and his colleagues pushed for the impeachment of Donald Trump for what they called his inflammatory rhetoric on January 6th despite his call for the protests to remain peaceful. Other members are engaging in the same hyperbolic rhetoric to appeal to the growing mob on the left. Sen. Chris Murphy (D. Conn.) seems the most unhinged: “What is happening in Minnesota right now is a dystopia. ICE is tear gassing elementary schools. It is disappearing legal residents into cars. It is murdering American citizens.”

Aspiring Democrats are getting the message. Total Wine billionaire David Trone — who is running to recapture his Maryland congressional district from fellow Democrat Rep. April McClain-Delaney, declared this week that the federal government is “literally executing people on the streets” in “not just Minneapolis… all over the United States.” Ohio Democratic Attorney General candidate Elliot Forhan is running on the catchy pledge that “I will kill Donald Trump.” It is a race to the bottom as Democratic leaders try to take the lead in mob politics.

When combined with the rationalization for the use of lethal force against officers, this rhetoric is not just inflammatory but dangerous. We have heard these voices before in our history. As discussed in Rage and the Republic, we have a rising class of new Jacobins, politicians and pundits who are pandering to the mob. History does not bode well for these politicians seeking to ride the wave of rage when the mob turns against them..

Read more …


“…personally singled out X owner Elon Musk, accusing the billionaire of spreading “disinformation” about his decision to grant amnesty to half a million illegal immigrants last week..”:”

• Spain Announces Major Social Media Crackdown (RT)

Spain will ban social media use for children under 16 and hold tech executives personally accountable for “hateful content” spread on their platforms, Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez announced on Tuesday. Speaking at the World Government Summit in Dubai, Sanchez said that his administration will implement five measures to regulate social media, with sweeping consequences for free speech. “First, we will change the law in Spain to hold platform executives legally accountable for many infringements taking place on their sites,” he announced, explaining that executives who fail to remove “criminal or hateful content” will face criminal charges.


Most jurisdictions view social media sites as ‘platforms’ rather than ‘publishers’, meaning users themselves are responsible for the content they post. Sanchez’ proposed change goes beyond the scope of the EU’s Digital Services Act, which mandates fines for platforms that fail to remove “disinformation” after being alerted to it. Sanchez did not explain what constitutes “hateful content,” while the text of the DSA does not explain the term “disinformation.” Sanchez said that his government would also turn “algorithmic manipulation and amplification of illegal content” into a criminal offense, track and study “how digital platforms fuel division and amplify hate,” ban social media use for under-16s, and launch a criminal investigation into alleged offenses committed by Grok, TikTok, and Instagram.

During his speech, Sanchez personally singled out X owner Elon Musk, accusing the billionaire of spreading “disinformation” about his decision to grant amnesty to half a million illegal immigrants last week. On Sunday, Musk accused Spanish MEP Irene Montero of “advocating genocide” after she declared that she wants a “replacement of right-wingers” by migrants. Sanchez said that five other European countries, which he called a “coalition of the digitally willing,” would pass similar legislation. France passed a much narrower bill banning under-15s from social media last week, while Greece is “very close” to announcing a similar ban, Reuters reported on Tuesday.

Read more …


“…the emails instead show the convicted sex offender frequently disparaging the president, calling him “stupid” and questioning his mental fitness…”:”

• ‘I Wasn’t Friendly With Epstein’ – Trump (RT)

US President Donald Trump has denied being friends with Jeffrey Epstein, accusing the late convicted sex offender of plotting against him. Last week, the US Department of Justice released the final batch of over 3 million pages, 2,000 videos, and 180,000 images under the Epstein Files Transparency Act, legislation signed by Trump in November, compelling the agency to publish data tied to federal criminal investigations into the disgraced financier. The US president’s name is mentioned in the files on at least 3,000 occasions.


The documents also show that Epstein, who died in a New York jail in 2019 while awaiting trial on federal sex-trafficking charges, had communication with multiple high-profile US figures, including former President Bill Clinton and billionaires Bill Gates and Elon Musk. Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform on Monday that “not only wasn’t I friendly with Jeffrey Epstein but, based upon information that has just been released by the Department of Justice, Epstein and a SLEAZEBAG lying ‘author’ named Michael Wolff, conspired in order to damage me and/or my Presidency.”

“Unlike so many people that like to ‘talk’ trash, I never went to the infested Epstein island but, almost all of these Crooked Democrats, and their Donors, did,” he insisted. Trump already promised on Saturday that he would sue Wolff, a US journalist behind the 2018 unauthorized autobiography ‘Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House’. Wolff said in an Instagram message on Sunday that he wasn’t sure what had caused Trump’s anger, but acknowledged that he had encouraged Epstein to “go public with what he knew about Trump.”

The journalist featured in many of the Epstein files published by the DOJ last November. In an email from February 2016, Wolff suggested that the disgraced financier could become the “bullet” to end Trump’s first presidential campaign. The DOJ prefaced its latest release with a statement, saying the emails revealed no suggestion from Epstein that Trump “had done anything criminal or had any inappropriate contact with any of his victims.” According to the agency, the emails instead show the convicted sex offender frequently disparaging the president, calling him “stupid” and questioning his mental fitness.

Read more …


Hard to surprise Homan; he’s been doing it for years.

• Tom Homan Pulls 700 Agents Out of Minnesota (Matt Margolis)

Border Czar Tom Homan is making changes in Minneapolis, and while the left may think the changes signal a retreat, they do not. It’s anything but. “Given this increase in unprecedented collaboration, and as a result of the need for less law enforcement officers to do this work in a safer environment, I have announced effective immediately, we will draw down seven hundred people effective today. Seven hundred law enforcement personnel,” Homan said.


He also said Customs and Border Protection personnel have been fully integrated into the ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) team under a single, unified chain of command. “We have also fully integrated CBP personnel into the ICE ERO team structure under one unified chain of command. Not two chains of command, there’d be one chain of command here,” Homan said, adding that the approach reflects standard practice in major enforcement efforts. “Any large enforcement operation I’ve ever been involved with, there’s one chain of command, and that’s where we’re moving forward.”

Homan said ICE will return to its traditional model of targeted immigration enforcement. He noted that, “moving forward, ICE will be conducting targeted immigration enforcement operations, like ICE has traditionally done for decades, based on reasonable suspicion to question and detain.” He said those operations, along with investigations into transnational criminal organizations, will focus on national security and public safety. “ICE will conduct these operations and transnational criminal organization investigations with a focus on national security and public safety,” Homan said.

Homan emphasized that prioritizing serious threats does not mean abandoning broader enforcement. “I want to be clear, just because you prioritize public safety threats don’t mean we forget about everybody else,” he said. “We will continue to enforce the immigration laws in this country.” Some on the left may see this as a victory for their cause. Trust me, it’s not. Homan called it a “safer, smarter ICE strategy” that is only possible due to the cooperation with local authorities and a more efficient use of manpower. He said ICE now has “an unprecedented number of counties communicating with us now and allowing ICE to take custody of illegal aliens before they hit the streets,” calling the level of cooperation “unprecedented.”

In other words, the Trump administration has persuaded Walz and Frey to allow local law enforcement to assist ICE agents, making it easier and safer for them to do their jobs. “I’ll say it again, this is efficient and requires only one or two officers to assume custody of a criminal alien target, rather than eight or ten officers going into the community and arresting that public safety threat,” Homan said, adding that this model “frees up more officers to arrest or remove criminal aliens.”

He stressed that pulling agents off repetitive street operations and instead taking custody of offenders directly from jails increases overall enforcement capacity. “More officers taking custody of criminal aliens directly from the jails means less officers on the street doing criminal operations,” Homan said, adding that “this is smart law enforcement, not less law enforcement.” Homan said the strategy improves safety across the board. “It’s safer for the community, safer for the officers, and safer for the alien,” he said, and he pointed specifically to coordination in Minnesota as an example: “This coordination also makes it far more safe for the Twin Cities.” He added, “arresting a public safety threat in the safety and security of a jail is the safest thing we could do.”

Read more …


“Much of the chaos in Minneapolis stems from the sanctuary state not honoring ICE detainers. ”

• Minnesota Counties Begin Cooperating With ICE (ZH)

Border czar Tom Homan revealed moments ago at a press conference in Minneapolis that an unprecedented number of counties are now coordinating with federal authorities and allowing ICE to take custody of illegal aliens before they reach the streets. As a result, Homan noted, fewer federal agents are needed in the metro area. “We currently have an unprecedented number of [Minnesota] counties communicating with us now and allowing ICE to take custody of illegal aliens before they hit the streets,” Homan said. Homan continued, “I have announced that, effective immediately, we will draw down 700 people effective today. 700 law enforcement personnel.”


At the end of last week, Homan said federal immigration officials had made “a lot of progress” with local officials in Minnesota, signaling a possible shift in enforcement tactics amid rising tensions following recent deadly shootings involving federal immigration agents. Homan’s second news conference in Minneapolis comes after he replaced Gregory Bovino as the lead of ICE operations. He recently warned that “justice is coming” for the far-left groups funding the attacks on ICE on the ground.

Much of the chaos in Minneapolis stems from the sanctuary state not honoring ICE detainers. This forced the Trump administration to surge federal agents into the Democratic-run town to retrieve illegals. Then, far-left militant groups and nonprofits unleashed a well-coordinated pressure campaign (“Signal-Gate”), which only suggests to us that the Democrats’ plan all along was in hopes of spreading revolution nationwide ahead of spring. Well played by Homan and the Trump administration in pushing for a major de-escalation now that local counties are coordinating with federal authorities on ICE detainers.

But why were ICE detainers not being honored in the first place? It’s time to rethink the sanctuary status of left-wing-controlled cities.

Read more …


No love lost on Sundance’s part: “…subversive operatives are actively successful because of his incompetence…”:

• FBI Director Kash Patel Outlines Fulton County Objective (CTH)

As background for this interview, I’m going to say something that generally will not be received well by many. I have it on very good authority that FBI Director Kash Patel’s organization is currently one of the biggest impediments to successful execution of Trump administration domestic policy goals.


Specifically stated, DC operatives within the FBI are creating, manufacturing and leaking information against the goals and objectives of the White House, DOJ and other administration executive offices. In short, Kash Patel does not have his arms around the agency and subversive operatives are actively successful because of his incompetence. Accept it or disregard it, but that is the honest expressed sentiment from officials who are having to deal with the consequence.

All of that said, here is FBI Director Kash Patel appearing on Fox News to again emphasize that the agency is working in a supportive role on various domestic issues of concern. Not “lead“, “support.”


Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/WallStreetApes/status/2019018096686616718

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

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)

 

 

https://twitter.com/Bubblebathgirl/status/1972292337427738821

https://twitter.com/JasonJournoDC/status/1972334411229057323

https://twitter.com/SilentlySirs/status/1972382218480922969

 

 

 

 

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.”

https://twitter.com/rinalu_/status/1972353752800657510

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/FarmGirlCarrie/status/1971980846455541929

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


https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1963624700845731852

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 …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/Awesomevideos07/status/1963615997283246500

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)

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/1946261573301096571

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.

 

 

 

 

 

 Older Entries