Mar 202025
 


Caravaggio I musici 1595-96

 

Ukraine Ceasefire ‘Within Weeks’ – Steve Witkoff (RT)
Zelensky Makes New Victory Promise (RT)
Trump Derangement Syndrome Could Be Recognized As A Mental Illness (RT)
Trump Will Run Again In 2028 – Steve Bannon (RT)
Here’s Why Trump Is Talking Peace With Putin (Timofeev)
Trump Looking To Give Up US Command of NATO – NBC (RT)
Trump Wants US Ownership Of Ukraine’s Energy Facilities – White House (RT)
Italy and Spain Reject EU’s Ukraine Spending Hike – Reuters (RT)
Biden Autopen Actions ‘Non-Delegable’ and ‘Invalid,’ Legal Analysis Finds (DS)
USPS Calls on DOGE for Help, but Is It Too Little Too Late? (PJM)
The Judiciary Is Attempting to Seize Executive Power (Paul Craig Roberts)
Trump to Sign Order to Eliminate Department of Education (ET)
Judge Temporarily Blocks EPA From Canceling Climate Grants (ZH)
Trump Fires Democrat FTC Commissioners (ZH)
A Hard Rain’s a-Gonna Fall – From The West Down To The East (Pepe Escobar)
The Kingdom of Judea vs. The State of Israel (Alastair Crooke)
President Trump: Stop Bombing Yemen and Exit the Middle East! (Ron Paul)
What Will US Trade Wars With Canada, Mexico And Europe Lead To? (Pacini)

 

 

 

 


https://twitter.com/AutismCapital/status/1902175105305981196
https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1902173370579337700

Rogan Musk

Sachs

Bessent

American Academy
https://twitter.com/i/status/1902100705969594607

 

 

 

 

“According to Witkoff, more progress was made on March 18 than in the “last three and a half years,..

Ukraine Ceasefire ‘Within Weeks’ – Steve Witkoff (RT)

A complete ceasefire in the Ukraine conflict will likely be implemented within “a couple of weeks,” US President Donald Trump’s special envoy, Steve Witkoff, has stated. He also said that sanctions imposed by Washington on Moscow could be relaxed once they reach such an agreement. Commenting on the phone call on Tuesday between Trump and his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, Witkoff hailed the conversation as “epic” and “transformational.” “President Trump and President Putin were in sync with one another, the call was outcome-oriented,” the official said. He confirmed that the two leaders agreed on a “cessation of attacks on energy infrastructure, from both [Russia and Ukraine], and civilian infrastructure for that matter.” Trump and Putin also undertook to work “toward a Black Sea moratorium on hits on naval vessels and freighters carrying grain and things of that sort.”

Witkoff expressed hope that these initial steps would “evolve into a full-on ceasefire, which is a bit more complicated because there is a 2,000-kilometer border, there’s [Russia’s] Kursk [Region], and there’s a lot of details that go into that.” Commenting on the Russian Defense Ministry’s report that its air defenses had shot down their own drones headed for Ukrainian energy infrastructure after receiving an order to halt such attacks overnight, Trump’s special envoy told Bloomberg TV, “I tend to believe that President Putin is operating in good faith.” According to Witkoff, more progress was made on March 18 than in the “last three and a half years,” with important “trust-building” steps being taken now. President Trump and President Putin “went into how you would put the finishing touches on a full-on ceasefire,” with technical teams expected to meet in Saudi Arabia beginning next Monday or Tuesday, the White House envoy revealed.

“I actually think in a couple of weeks, we’re gonna get to [a ceasefire],” Witkoff told the outlet. When asked about a possible in-person Trump-Putin meeting in Saudi Arabia, the US official said that “my best bet would be that it’s likely to happen.” He reiterated that the two heads of state have a “great rapport,” dating back to Trump’s first term in office, which was “on display yesterday.” While the two leaders “did not discuss specifically sanctions yesterday… everybody is open” to such a conversation down the road, Witkoff added. Once a ceasefire in Ukraine takes hold, “everything else will be a detail: sanction relief and all the other things that go with a full-on peace treaty,” he predicted.

Read more …

“Following Putin’s order the Russian military had to shoot down seven of its own kamikaze drones launched at Ukrainian energy facilities..”

Zelensky Makes New Victory Promise (RT)

Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky on Wednesday reiterated his pledge to achieve a victory over Russia, as he touted an upcoming phone call with US President Donald Trump. Zelensky made the remarks during a press conference alongside Finnish President Alexander Stubb, during which he expressed hope that Trump will brief him on Tuesday’s talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin. “Today I will have contact with President Trump. We will discuss the details with him today. I am thinking about the details of the next steps. Well, and I think I will hear from him the details of his conversation with Putin,” Zelensky stated, reiterating his determination to achieve a victory. “And we live, we defend ourselves, we survive, we fight for our sovereignty and our independence. And we will definitely win this war,” he said.

The conversation between Putin and Trump lasted for 2.5 hours, during which the presidents focusing on the Ukrainian crisis and ways to resolve it. Putin backed Trump’s proposal of a mutual 30-day suspension of strikes on energy infrastructure facilities and repeatedly “immediately” ordered a halt to such strikes, according to the Russian defense ministry. Zelensky publicly backed the idea shortly after the Trump-Putin talks concluded. However, he expressed concerns about how exactly the pause could be implemented. “If Russia stops striking our targets, we will definitely stop hitting targets in Russia. But Putin’s promises alone are not enough; there must be control. The main subject of this control must be the US,” he said during the press conference.

Following Putin’s order the Russian military had to shoot down seven of its own kamikaze drones launched at Ukrainian energy facilities. A few hours after the Putin-Trump talks concluded, Kiev attacked a Russian oil pumping station with three fixed-wing kamikaze drones. The attack sparked a massive fire at the facility, the military noted, describing the incident as “yet another provocation deliberately staged by the Kiev regime to derail the peace initiatives coming from the US president.”

Read more …

“..the acute onset of paranoia in otherwise normal persons that is in reaction to the policies and presidencies of President Donald J. Trump.”

Trump Derangement Syndrome Could Be Recognized As A Mental Illness (RT)

Republican lawmakers in Minnesota have introduced a bill seeking to amend state law to classify ‘Trump Derangement Syndrome’ (TDS) as a mental disorder. The proposal defines TDS as a condition affecting individuals who react irrationally to US President Donald Trump’s policies and presidency. The term ‘Trump Derangement Syndrome’ has been widely used by Trump supporters and conservative commentators to describe strongly negative reactions to the Republican leader. The Minnesota bill was introduced on Monday by five GOP lawmakers who proposed adding TDS to the state’s official list of mental disorders, defining it as “the acute onset of paranoia in otherwise normal persons that is in reaction to the policies and presidencies of President Donald J. Trump.”

The text of the bill claims that TDS can manifest in behaviors such as “verbal hostility or acts of aggression against those with differing political opinions.” The proposal further suggests that individuals with TDS struggle to differentiate between political disagreements and psychological conditions. Senator Glenn Gruenhagen, one of the bill’s authors, defended the proposal, arguing that the “irrational behaviour” exhibited by some Trump critics indicates a “deeper psychological problem” and that the bill seeks to address this issue, “not mere political disagreements.” “We should be able to have civil debates without demonstrating violent and unreasonable reactions such as burning down Tesla dealerships, threatening people who wear Trump hats or committing road rage at the sight of a Trump bumper sticker on a person’s car,” the senator wrote in a Facebook post.

At the same time, Gruenhagen has acknowledged that despite its introduction, the bill is unlikely to pass the Minnesota Senate where Democrats hold a narrow majority. “Of course, we all know that the Democrats and Governor Walz will never allow this bill to pass anyway, so take a deep breath and calm down,” he wrote, referring to the outrage stirred by the bill in the Minnesota Capitol. Critics of the term TDS have argued that it is a rhetorical tool used to dismiss legitimate criticism of Trump’s policies and behavior. Some have also pointed out that the label could apply to Trump supporters who react aggressively to opposition against him.

Read more …

Nothing could trigger Trump Derangement Syndrome more than merely mentioning this:

Trump Will Run Again In 2028 – Steve Bannon (RT)

President Donald Trump will find a way to bypass America’s constitutional two-term limit and run again in 2028, former White House strategist Steve Bannon has said. The 22nd Amendment to the US Constitution states that “no person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice.” Bannon, however, who led Trump’s 2016 election campaign, has argued that Trump would be able to secure a third term. “I’m a firm believer that President Trump will run again in 2028. I’ve already endorsed President Trump,” Bannon told NewsNation’s Chris Cuomo on Wednesday. “A man like this comes along once every century if we’re lucky. We’ve got him now. He’s on fire, and I’m a huge supporter. I want to see him again in 2028,” he added. When asked how Trump would bypass the constitutional ban on a third term, Bannon replied, “We’re working on it.”

“I think we’ll have a couple of alternatives, let’s say that. We’ll see what the definition of term limit is,” the former Breitbart News chairman said. “We’ve had greater longshots than Trump 2028. We’ve got a lot of stuff we’re working on. We’re not prepared to talk about it publicly.” When asked if he was implying a violent revolution or an insurrection, Bannon said, “No. We are big believers in democracy.” The strategist said that the Trump supporters intend to mobilize their voting base, including low-propensity and low-information voters. Trump has repeatedly joked about the possibility that he could serve more than two terms. In January, he told a crowd of supporters in Nevada, “It will be the greatest honor of my life to serve, not once but twice or three times or four times.”

Earlier this year, Republican Congressman Andy Ogles proposed to amend the Constitution to allow presidents who did not serve two consecutive terms to serve three terms in total. “It is imperative that we provide President Trump with every resource necessary to correct the disastrous course set by the Biden administration,” Ogles said in January. Trump was first elected in 2016, defeating former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. He ran for reelection in 2020 but lost to former Vice President Joe Biden. Trump won his second term last year, defeating Biden’s hand-picked successor, Kamala Harris. The two-term restriction was included in the US Constitution in response to Franklin D. Roosevelt serving an unprecedented four terms in office. Before him, presidents had only served one or two terms.

Read more …

“Russia is willing to incur significant losses and take substantial risks in order to defend its fundamental security interests. It is not willing to back away,..”

Here’s Why Trump Is Talking Peace With Putin (Timofeev)

Tuesday’s talks between Russian President Vladimir Putin and US President Donald Trump have marked a shift towards the resolution of the Ukraine conflict. However, given the number of unresolved issues, the results are still unclear and a setback could occur at any moment. The flaws in the European security system will continue to jeopardize prospects for normalization for a long time. Nonetheless, the window of opportunity for achieving peace is still open. The motivation to leverage these circumstances is shaped by the results that Russia has achieved in its military operation so far, as well as the potential scenarios that could unfold for both sides if the conflict continues.

Among the key results, we may note Russia’s readiness to use force to defend its interests in Europe. For three decades following the conclusion of the Cold War, Moscow’s ability to protect its interests using force was often dismissed. The military operation in Ukraine put an end to this misconception. It has demonstrated that security relations with the West had become so complicated that, from Russia’s perspective, there appeared to be no other option. It became clear that the use of force and a large-scale conflict in Europe were real possibilities, so Moscow’s demands and concerns couldn’t be brushed aside with vague reassurances. Russia is willing to incur significant losses and take substantial risks in order to defend its fundamental security interests. It is not willing to back away, even if it can save face by doing so.

In the field of diplomacy, it’s notable that the non-Western countries have not formed any major anti-Russia coalitions. The Western bloc, united against Russia, has failed to pull in additional players. China, India, Brazil, South Africa – and others – have distanced themselves from sanctions policies. While businesses in these nations are wary of the secondary sanctions that could be imposed by the US and are not always eager to engage with our country, their governments have avoided imposing anti-Russia measures.

Trade with many nations in the Global South has surged. These countries have neither adopted a pro-Russian stance, nor formed a unified anti-Western front. However, discussions about diversifying global finance, trade, and political institutions have gained considerable traction. Ultimately, the resilience of the Western coalition has begun to falter. The new US administration seems to have recognized that the conflict has reached a dead end and has taken preemptive steps to end it.

Among the diplomatic outcomes, we may note Moscow’s ability to contain the escalation of military support for Ukraine. For an extended period of time, Russia’s ‘red lines’ were often crossed, as it struggled to halt increasing weapons supplies to Ukraine. These deliveries increased, with weapons systems becoming more long-range and lethal. Changes in Russia’s nuclear doctrine and the deployment of a new medium-range missile with a non-nuclear configuration have provided a crucial deterrent signal against the potential mass use of Western cruise missiles and other weapons systems by Ukraine.

Another significant outcome has been the ability to engage in a large-scale conflict with an opponent that has received substantial Western support in the form of weapons, intelligence, and funding. Russia’s defense industry has managed to maintain a high pace and scale of operations, quickly adapting to the new challenges posed by advancements in military technology, including the production and use of drones. At the same time, Moscow has essentially maintained an expeditionary approach in its military actions, avoiding extensive mobilization and instead relying on military volunteers and contract soldiers. The ability to conduct a large-scale and sustained military operation with a professional, rather than conscripted army has been a key interim achievement.

Read more …

In Europe, that is.

Trump Looking To Give Up US Command of NATO – NBC (RT)

US President Donald Trump is reportedly considering giving up Washington’s exclusive role in leading NATO’s military command, NBC News has claimed, citing defense officials. The outlet said Trump is exploring the possibility of relinquishing control of the office of Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR), which has been held by a US four-star general since the bloc’s founding in 1949. The SACEUR is tasked with overseeing NATO military operations in Europe. The position is currently held by Gen. Christopher G. Cavoli, who has also been in charge of NATO’s coordination of military assistance to Kiev throughout the Ukraine conflict.

If the US does give up ownership of the role, it would likely be filled by one of NATO’s European member states. According to NBC, Trump weighing the move is part of a broader effort to restructure US military commands and reduce defense expenditures. The report states that his administration has been looking into cutting costs within the Department of Defense. Over the years, Trump has repeatedly criticized NATO. Following his inauguration in January, he urged European bloc members to increase their defense spending and warned that the US would not be responsible for defending NATO countries that do not meet their financial obligations.

Trump has also claimed that NATO’s expansion and its outreach to Ukraine under former US President Joe Biden were among the factors that led to the current conflict. Russia has consistently condemned NATO expansion towards its borders, describing the bloc as a threat to its national security. Russian officials, including President Vladimir Putin, have also repeatedly stressed that NATO’s push to include Ukraine was one of the root causes behind the escalation of the conflict in 2022. The NBC report did not specify whether Trump has made a final decision on relinquishing the SACEUR position, and the extent to which the proposal is under consideration remains unclear. The US Defense Department has also not commented.

Read more …

“American ownership of those plants would be the best protection for that infrastructure..”

Trump Wants US Ownership Of Ukraine’s Energy Facilities – White House (RT)

US President Donald Trump has proposed an American takeover of Ukrainian power plants, suggesting it would be the best way to protect the infrastructure, the White House has revealed. The idea was floated by Trump during a phone conversation with Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky on Wednesday, described by the US president as a “very good” call. “President Trump also discussed Ukraine’s electrical supply and nuclear power plants. He said that the United States could be very helpful in running those plants with its electricity and utility expertise. American ownership of those plants would be the best protection for that infrastructure and support for Ukrainian energy infrastructure,” according to a statement by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and National Security Adviser Mike Waltz released shortly after the call.

The Trump-Zelensky phone call comes a day after the US president held a conversation with his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin. They discussed the Ukraine crisis, with Trump floating the idea for Moscow and Kiev to halt long-range strikes on energy infrastructure. Putin backed the proposal and ordered a halt to such strikes immediately. The Russian military said it had to shoot down seven kamikaze drones en route to Ukrainian energy facilities when the order was issued. Ukraine’s leader has publicly backed the idea as well, albeit expressing concerns about how exactly the truce would be implemented and monitored. Following the phone talk with Trump, Zelensky appeared to offer a broader definition of targets that should be avoided during the period, including unspecified “civilian infrastructure.”

“One of the first steps toward fully ending the war could be ending strikes on energy and other civilian infrastructure. I supported this step, and Ukraine confirmed that we are ready to implement it,” Zelensky said in a statement. Overnight, Kiev attacked an oil pumping facility in Russia’s south with three fixed-wing drones. The strike sparked a massive blaze at the site, the Russian military said. The attack was “yet another provocation deliberately staged by the Kiev regime to derail the peace initiatives coming from the US president,” the Russian Defense Ministry said.

Read more …

“..Lavrov said earlier this month that the Trump administration is “guided by common sense. They say outright that they want to end all wars, they want peace. And who demands a continuation of the banquet in the form of a war? It is [Western] Europe.”

Italy and Spain Reject EU’s Ukraine Spending Hike – Reuters (RT)

The EU’s third and fourth largest economies – Italy and Spain – are skeptical about the bloc’s idea of doubling military aid to Ukraine, Reuters has reported. Proposed by renowned Russia hawk and EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas, the plan would increase the bloc’s cashflow to Kiev from €20 billion ($20,9 billion) last year to €40 billion ($43,7 billion) in 2025. Following a meeting of EU foreign ministers on Monday, Kallas acknowledged that her proposal had “broad,” but not unilateral, support among the 27 member states. She has been pushing for more EU aid to Kiev amid concerns in Brussels that US President Donald Trump could stop the flow of American arms to the government of Vladimir Zelensky.

Earlier this year, Kallas, along with NATO chief Mark Rutte urged EU members against prioritizing social welfare over military spending, arguing that billions already invested in healthcare, education and other areas would be “at risk” if the bloc is unable to defend itself from a supposed “Russian threat.” The idea of ramping up EU military aid to Ukraine has “strong backing” from northern and eastern European countries, the agency said in an article on Monday, citing diplomatic sources. However, some southern European capitals, further away from the Russian border, have been “more reticent,” it noted. Speaking before the meeting in Brussels, the foreign ministers from Italy and Spain made it clear that it was too early to take a definitive stance on Kallas’ proposal, Reuters said.

Italian FM Antonio Tajani said that the decision on doubling aid to Kiev should be made taking into account the progress in the talks between Moscow and Washington. He also noted that Rome needed money to increase its own defense spending. Spain’s top diplomat Jose Manuel Albares reminded that Madrid did not wait for Kallas to make her proposal and had already committed to providing 1 billion euros (around $1.1 billion) in military aid to Ukraine this year. Even France, which has been one of the strongest backers of Ukraine during the conflict with Russia, has questions about Kallas’ plan, according to the diplomats.

During the ministers’ discussions, Hungary and Slovakia, who have long been critical of EU military assistance to Kiev, said that they will not participate in the initiative, Reuters said. EU officials have assured Reuters that Budapest and Bratislava would not be able to block Kallas’ proposal as increased contributions to Ukraine would be voluntary. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said earlier this month that the Trump administration is “guided by common sense. They say outright that they want to end all wars, they want peace. And who demands a continuation of the banquet in the form of a war? It is [Western] Europe.”

Read more …

“Howell predicted the end of the Democrat Party, which he said will meet its demise “defending terrorists, transgenders, and autopens.“

Biden Autopen Actions ‘Non-Delegable’ and ‘Invalid,’ Legal Analysis Finds (DS)

The pardon authority is the president’s alone and cannot be delegated, according to a legal analysis by The Heritage Foundation’s Oversight Project. The watchdog group—which first conducted an analysis of former President Joe Biden’s White House use of autopen—released a memo late Monday night on the matter, bringing the numerous acts of clemency into question. “Every leftist who shrieked, whined, and moaned about defending democracy is a complete hypocrite if they are not outraged by the antidemocratic action on the scale of presidential actions enacted by people who were never elected to anything,” Oversight Project Executive Director Mike Howell told The Daily Signal Tuesday. Howell added, “The pardons are as valid as a $3 bill.”

The legal analysis came after President Donald Trump, based on the Oversight Project’s investigative work, said he would nullify the pardons. Pardons included members of Biden’s family, members of the House Jan. 6 committee, former National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Director Dr. Anthony Fauci, and former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen. Mark Milley. “If President Biden’s non-delegable official actions were not his own, then they are invalid,” the analysis says. “Start with the Constitution. Multiple Constitutional provisions, like the pardon power, vest those powers solely in the president. In those cases, the president affixing his signature is his execution of the acts as president.” The use of the autopens occurred amid broad speculation about whether Biden had enough cognitive capacity to carry out the job of president.

An early 2024 Justice Department report by special counsel Robert Hur—regarding Biden’s handling of classified information—found Biden had “diminished faculties” during the counsel’s interview. Biden’s own Democrat Party eventually forced him off the 2024 ticket during last year’s election. Howell predicted the end of the Democrat Party, which he said will meet its demise “defending terrorists, transgenders, and autopens.” “If we have autopen, we don’t really need them anyway,” Howell said. The use of autopen is not new for presidents and staffers, but has traditionally been for minor or routine proclamations. Howell stressed that after the John F. Kennedy assassination, the 25th Amendment was enacted to ensure a process is in place if an incapacitated president is not able to serve. In this case, the autopen was misapplied, Howell said.

“This was a device used as a workaround of the 25th Amendment,” Howell said. Based on a 2005 Justice Department Office of Legal Counsel finding, it’s permissible to use autopen signatures for legislation. The Oversight Project contends the DOJ was wrong in its conclusion. Nevertheless, the DOJ’s Office of Legal Counsel 2005 opinion states, “we are not suggesting that the president may delegate the decision to approve and sign a bill, only that, having made this decision, he may direct a subordinate to affix the president’s signature to the bill.” The Oversight Project analysis adds, “Thus, the Biden administration’s use of the autopen may well have been contrary even to the most permissive interpretation of the law.”

Read more …

“The USPS has been bleeding money for a long time, including a whopping $9.5 billion in the last fiscal year..”

USPS Calls on DOGE for Help, but Is It Too Little Too Late? (PJM)

In D.C., DOGE is the talk of the town. Whether it’s conservatives applauding every move Elon Musk’s governmental organization makes or bureaucrats crying about having to account for their time at work, everybody can’t stop talking about DOGE. This includes the United States Postal Service (USPS), which has authorized DOGE to swoop in and save the day.“The U.S. Postal Service has authorized Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency to help eliminate red tape hurting financial and operational performance in a move Democrats decried but some postal workers say could be beneficial,” reports FreightWaves.“It also gave concrete figures on previously announced force reductions, saying it expects to eliminate 10,000 jobs through a voluntary early retirement program,” the report continues. “Meanwhile, postal workers and community activists this week plan to protest Trump administration expressions of interest in selling the Postal Service to private sector owners.”

The USPS has been bleeding money for a long time, including a whopping $9.5 billion in the last fiscal year. Yet shipping prices keep going up while service has been dissatisfactory for millions of Americans. Postmaster General Louis DeJoy, who is leaving his office once the Trump administration identifies a successor, has been trying to turn things around for about three years. He set out to make the USPS profitable by the end of this decade, although it sounds like a fool’s errand of the highest order. DeJoy told lawmakers last week that he signed an agreement with DOGE and the General Services Administrations to identify inefficiencies and, as FreightWaves reports, “tackle big challenges related to retirement benefit calculations and investments, which have been a drag on Postal Service finances, and reform the Postal Regulatory Commission.”

“The Postal Service once faced the immediate threat of insolvency, which would have required a taxpayer bailout…” DeJoy wrote to congressional leaders. “Our efforts have provided a lifeline to our organization and [a pathway that is] financially sustainable. I ask that you please engage with the Postal Service, our DOGE representatives, and the federal agencies that need… to correct for the deficiencies of the past.” DeJoy believes that fixing accounting errors and revamping pension and worker’s compensation programs will help the USPS become more solvent, which is why he’s seeking DOGE’s help. He also believes that cutting burdensome regulations can save money. But, naturally, Democrats and left-wing media outlets are up in arms.

“As you explain in the letter, this agreement authorizes DOGE to ‘assist’ the Postal Service, presumably in making drastic cuts to Americans’ mail service and firing thousands of postal employees,” Rep Gerry Connolly (D-Va.) carped in a press release disguised as a “letter” to DeJoy. “The actions of employees operating under the ‘DOGE’ moniker have thus far been shielded from transparency and accountability, but this cannot continue.” “This backroom agreement between the billionaire-led DOGE and Postmaster DeJoy sets off alarm bells about this administration’s plans for the Postal Service’s role as a cornerstone public institution,” complained a bunch of Democrats in another letter. (These folks love them some letters.) And the Daily Beast rushed out with the breathlessly melodramatic headline, “USPS Chief Calls in DOGE to Slash Your Local Post Office.”

Read more …

I looked it up. There are 677 district judges in the US.

The Judiciary Is Attempting to Seize Executive Power (Paul Craig Roberts)

Biden judge Tanya Chutkan orders EPA not to obey a presidential order to terminate waste, fraud, and abuse. Chutkan was admonished by the US Supreme Court last June for ignoring presidential immunity and rushing a politically motivated case against Trump just prior to election season. Biden judge Ana Reyes ordered the Defense Department not to enforce a presidential directive to ban transgender people from serving in the military. No Democrat judge blocked the Biden Defense Department’s order to put promotions of white heterosexuals on hold while transgendered, homosexual, and blacks were promoted in their place.

Obama judge James Boasberg ordered planes in flight deporting dangerous immigrant-invader gang members to return the illegal aliens to the US. President Trump called for the lunatic judge’s impeachment, and Republican Supreme Court justice Roberts (no relation) upbraided Trump. Boasberg’s order is especially egregious as is Justice Roberts upbraiding of Trump. It seems neither Boasberg nor Roberts are sufficiently competent to know that the US Supreme Court has previously ruled that deportations under the Alien Enemy Act are not subject to judicial review.

I predicted that the judiciary would be the main obstacle to American renewal. So many incompetent and unqualified people have been put on the bench that the judiciary is an obstacle to governance. So many judges have been put on the bench because of where they stand on liberal causes such as abortion and who use judicial rulings to legislate their personal preferences that the institution of the judiciary is a dangerous threat to the United States. The only solution is to ignore the corrupt judiciary, or perhaps they should all be removed and we start over. The US judicial system is so cumbersome that an appeal of a ruling against a president can take longer than a presidential term. This makes it so easy for ideological judges to prevent governance.

Read more …

Bring the lawfare!

Trump to Sign Order to Eliminate Department of Education (ET)

President Donald Trump is expected to sign an executive order on March 20 that will facilitate the dismantling of the U.S. Department of Education, taking a step toward fulfilling a campaign pledge. The order, which has been under preparation for weeks, will be signed at a White House event with several Republican governors and state education commissioners in attendance, as confirmed by the White House. The plan was first reported by USA Today. Trump will direct his recently confirmed Education Secretary Linda McMahon to take all required steps to prepare for the closure of the Education Department and transfer its authority to the states, according to a White House fact sheet obtained by NTD TV, sister media of The Epoch Times.

According to the fact sheet, the order also aims to ensure that, throughout the process, there is no disruption in the delivery of services, programs, and benefits that Americans rely on. The order also instructs that any programs or activities receiving remaining Department of Education funds will not promote diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) or gender ideology. The Department of Education did not immediately respond to a request for comment. McMahon, confirmed by the Senate on March 3, said in her first message to employees—titled “Our Department’s Final Mission”—that her “vision is aligned with the president’s: to send education back to the states.”

She added, “Our job is to respect the will of the American people and the President they elected, who has tasked us with accomplishing the elimination of bureaucratic bloat here at the Department of Education—a momentous final mission—quickly and responsibly.” The Department of Education employed about 4,200 workers before its recent termination of around 1,300, and the buyout of another 600. The agency’s current form stems from a 1979 law that made it independent by splitting it from the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. The federal government’s role in education, according to the White House, has failed students, parents, and teachers.

National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) scores demonstrate that student achievement has not improved, despite more than $3 trillion invested since the Department of Education’s inception in 1979, according to the fact sheet. Trump promised on the campaign trail to abolish the Department of Education, alleging it is responsible for indoctrinating America’s youth. On Feb. 4, Trump cited global rankings that have the United States behind many other countries, despite spending the most per student. He suggested at the time that he could work with Congress and teachers’ unions to abolish the agency but also did not rule out issuing an executive order.

Read more …

It’s Judge Tanya Chutkan again!

Judge Temporarily Blocks EPA From Canceling Climate Grants (ZH)

A federal judge on March 18 blocked the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from terminating grants that were part of a $20 billion climate funding program created by the previous administration. In a 23-page ruling, U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan issued a temporary restraining order to prevent the EPA from terminating grants awarded to three environmental groups—Climate United, Coalition for Green Capital, and Power Forward Communities—and block Citibank from transferring the funds back to the government. According to the court ruling, the EPA explained that it was terminating the grants because of multiple ongoing investigations into “programmatic waste, fraud, and abuse and conflict of interest.” Chutkan said the evidence was insufficient, as the agency failed to provide specific information about the investigations, factual support for the decision, or an individualized explanation for each plaintiff.

“Based on the record before the court, and under the relevant statutes and various agreements, it does not appear that EPA Defendants took the legally required steps necessary to terminate these grants, such that its actions were arbitrary and capricious,” the judge wrote. Chutkan said the plaintiffs would face imminent harm if Citibank were to transfer the funds—which they use to pay staff, rent, and fund projects—out of their accounts, as the money would be unrecoverable by then. The judge stated that the plaintiffs have no cash or reserves available to cover their operating expenses and have no other committed sources of funding that could replace the grants. Climate United was awarded $6.97 billion, the Coalition for Green Capital received $5 billion, and Power Forward Communities received $2 billion last year through the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, which was created under the Inflation Reduction Act.

Their grants, held by Citibank, were part of the $20 billion in funding the Biden administration awarded to eight entities for projects aimed at curbing pollution. The three nonprofits filed the lawsuit on March 8 after Citibank withheld their funding and their grants were terminated. The plaintiffs alleged that the EPA’s decision to terminate their grants was unlawful. Climate United CEO Beth Bafford said in a statement that the preliminary injunction was “a strong step in the right direction” for their legal challenge against the EPA. “In the coming weeks, we will continue working towards a long-term solution that will allow us to invest in projects that deliver energy savings, create jobs, and boost American manufacturing in communities across the country,” Bafford stated.

Commenting on the ruling, EPA administrator Lee Zeldin said the former Biden administration awarded the grants to “politically connected” nonprofit organizations “in a manner that deliberately reduced the ability of EPA to conduct proper oversight.” Zeldin vowed to claw back the funding and ensure that “every penny EPA spends” is directed toward its core mission of protecting human health and the environment. “I will not rest until these hard-earned taxpayer dollars are returned to the U.S. Treasury,” the EPA head said in a statement. Zeldin said last month that the EPA had decided to rescind the grants for climate and clean-energy projects because of concerns over lack of oversight and transparency.

Read more …

“We are still commissioners. We’re suing to make that clear for everyone..”

Trump Fires Democrat FTC Commissioners (ZH)

President Trump has fired the two Democrats sitting on the Federal Trade Commission. Rebecca Slaughter – a former legal advisor to Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY), and Alvaro Bedoya – a former Georgetown official, were informed by the White House that the president was terminating their positions at the FTC, which enforces consumer protection and antitrust laws. The Commission typically has five members, with the president’s party holding three seats and the opposing party two. Slaughter and Bedoya say they plan to challenge their dismissals in court. “Today the president illegally fired me from my position as a federal trade commissioner, violating the plain language of a statute and clear Supreme Court precedent,” said Slaughter, who Trump nominated to the FTC during his first term in 2018. “Why? Because I have a voice. And he is afraid of what I’ll tell the American people.”

Former FTC Commissioners Rebecca Kelly Slaughter (L) and Alvaro Bedoya (R) say they plan to sue President Trump’s administration over their firings. Bedoya wrote on social media, “I’m a commissioner at the Federal Trade Commission. The president just illegally fired me,” adding that Trump wants the FTC to be “a lapdog for his golfing buddies.” “We are still commissioners. We’re suing to make that clear for everyone,” Bedoya said in a follow-up statement reported by Fox News. FTC Chairman Andrew Ferguson, a Republican first appointed by President Biden and recently made chairman by Trump, said he sees no issues with the firings. “President Donald J. Trump is the head of the executive branch and is vested with all of the executive power in our government,” Ferguson wrote. “I have no doubts about his constitutional authority to remove commissioners, which is necessary to ensure democratic accountability for our government.”

“I wish Commissioners Slaughter and Bedoya well, and I thank them for their service,” he added.The FTC firings are set to become yet another test to the limits of Trump’s executive authority, as Democrats who don’t get their way can simply go venue shopping for an activist judge who will halt, even if temporarily, various decisions by the executive branch. Last week, US District Court Judge James Boasberg issued a 14-day restraining order to immediately halt several planes full of Tren de Aragua gang members under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 – which the Trump administration ignored since the planes were over international waters at the time.

Read more …

“..what matters is off the record. And that might as well have been Iran.”

A Hard Rain’s a-Gonna Fall – From The West Down To The East (Pepe Escobar)

Let’s start with that phone call. The is quite sober – but it does reveal a few nuggets. There is no comprehensive deal – yet – between Moscow and Washington. Far from it: we are just in the initial tentative stage of talking and talking about several interconnected dossiers. President Putin gave absolutely nothing away. The agreed-upon pause on attacks on energy infrastructure – not energy and (italics mine) infrastructure – spells out as Putin imposing a stop on dangerous Ukrainian hits on the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant. That may be lost among all the Western hysteria; but there are two absolute conditions expressed by Moscow for anything in this riddle to start complying with objective reality – and not muddle along as a reality show narrative trainwreck:
1.“The settlement in Ukraine must take into account the unconditional need to eliminate the root causes of the crisis, Russia’s legitimate security interests.”
2.“The key condition for preventing the escalation of the conflict should be a complete cessation of foreign military aid and the provision of intelligence information to Kiev.”

U.S. special envoy Witkoff is spinning that ceasefire “details” will be ironed out on Sunday in Saudi Arabia. No matter the amount of shrieking, Kiev will have to accept it. Putin-Trump did not spend over 2 hours just talking hockey, hazy Black Sea navigation prospects and a quite limited energy infrastructure missile strike one-month pause. In this incandescent juncture, what matters is off the record. And that might as well have been Iran. And the prospect of serious Hard Rain fallin’.

I’ve stepped in the middle of seven sad forests
I’ve been out in front of a dozen dead oceans
I’ve been ten thousand miles in the mouth of a graveyard

A certain psychopathological entity in West Asia is obsessed to ram all its opponents through the mouth of a graveyard. Putin must have had the chance to explain to Trump that Russia respects the UN Charter and abides by international law. Russia and Iran – top BRICS members – signed a comprehensive strategic partnership last January in Moscow. Russia provides detailed ISR/air defense/EW intel to Tehran. A proverbially hysterical narrative now imprints the notion that Tel Aviv – courting Trump 2.0 backing – is ready to inflict airstrikes on Iran to “prevent it from going nuclear”. Tehran, as detailed by Ayatollah Khamenei, has no interest whatsoever in building a nuclear weapon. There’s no way Russia will allow Israel – with crucial American backing – to wreak havoc on Iran. Even as Tehran is already capable to react to any attack, with devastating consequences. Without nuclear weapons – and even without Russian direct help.

Operation True Promise 2 – True Promise 3 is still on hold – had already demonstrated that Israel is absolutely defenseless against wave after wave of sophisticated Iranian missiles. Were the U.S. under Trump 2.0 to be involved in a direct attack, all U.S. military bases in West Asia would be incinerated, plus severe punishment to vassals hosting these bases. End result: oil prices skyrocketing, massive global economic crisis.

I saw a newborn baby with wild wolves all around it
I saw a room full of men with their hammers a-bleedin’
I saw ten thousand talkers whose tongues were all broken

While the self-proclaimed peacemaker was on the phone polishing the newest iteration of his Art of the Deal, genocidal psychopathological Zionists with hammers a-bleedin’ were unleashing wild wolves on displaced newborn babies – huddling in tents ablaze in Khan Yunis. And ten thousand EUrotrash talkers with their tongues all broken were mute on genocide but ready to erupt in shrieking delight pledging loyalty – and billions in funds – to the envoy of the former self-proclaimed Emir of Al-Nusra, a moderate head-chopper turned Hugo Boss-clad President. sAll yelled a Eurovision-tinged Sieg Heil to the protégé’s mercenary “army”, duly backed by Qatari, British and European masters: ISIS-clad Salafi-jihadis, al-Qaeda remnants, assorted takfiris, Chechens, Uzbeks, Uighurs, a movable Terror Inc. on tour slashing Alawites, Christians, Shi’ites and even moderate Sunnis, facilitating the evisceration of Syria and the “donation” of large swathes of Syrian sovereign territory to Tel Aviv.

The Zionist SS Brussels Medusa von den Lugen gleefully showered the moderate head-chopper gangs – al-Qaeda R Us – with 2.5 billion euros. It was Qatar that pressured the European Commission (EC) to invite Jolani’s henchman turned Foreign Minister, Asaad al-Shaibani to the 9th Brussels Conference for Donors on Syria – even as at least 7,000 Alawites and Christians were being “slaughtered” by his goons, according to a Greek Member of the European Parliament, Nikolas Farantouris, who visited Damascus on March 8-9 and met, among others, with the Patriarch of the Greek Orthodox Church of Antioch and the Near East.

In parallel the Exceptionalist “peace through strength” circus ringmaster – dubbed across vast swathes of the Arab street as “The Marmalade Moron” – brutally started bombing Ansarallah in Yemen, to force unbowed warriors to ditch their unwavering support for Palestine and wallow in submission. Additionally, “Bomb, bomb, bomb – bomb bomb Iran” was back as the crypto-Beach Boys theme song, because in the end Tehran must by all means be turned into Syria, Jordan, Qatar, UAE, Saudi Arabia, South Yemen: a pitiful Quisling Zionist regime.

The destabilized but not broken Axis of Resistance is fighting titanic, simultaneous battles against the Axis of Genocidal Zion on several fronts: the psycho-killers in Tel Aviv; the Jolani mercenary army in Syria, de facto ground troops of Israel, simultaneously supported, ideologically, by Zionist Arab regimes and assorted Salafi/takfiri Islamic outfits blessing the massacre against Palestinians; the Eurotrash liberal totalitarians, who are financing Jolani; and Washington/Pentagon-bombed Ansarallah in Yemen.

Abdul-Malik al-Houthi, leader of Ansarallah, made it all very clear in his March 16 speech: “Our decision to support the Palestinian people, including our move to block Israeli maritime navigation, that clearly targets the Israeli enemy and no one else, is aimed solely at pressuring Israel to open the crossings, allow the entry of humanitarian aid, and put an end to the starvation of Gaza.”

Read more …

Deep state.

The Kingdom of Judea vs. The State of Israel (Alastair Crooke)

Israel is deeply fractured. The schism has become bitter and heated as both sides see themselves to be in an existential war for the future of Israel. The language used has become so venomous (particularly in reserved channels in Hebrew) that calls for a coup and for civil war are far from uncommon. Israel is nearing the precipice and the seemingly irreconcilable differences may soon erupt into civil unrest – as Uri Misgav writes this week, the “Israeli spring” is on its way. The point here is that President Trump’s utilitarian and determinedly transactional style may work effectively in the secular western hemisphere, but with Israel (or Iran) Trump may find little or no traction amongst those with an alternative weltanschauung that expresses a fundamental different concept of morality, philosophy and epistemology, to the classic western deterrence paradigm of material ‘carrots and sticks’.

Indeed, the very attempt to impose deterrence – and to threaten ‘all hell breaking out’ if his injunctions are not followed – may produce the opposite to that which he seeks: i.e. it may trigger new conflicts and wars. An angry plurality in Israel (led for now, by Netanyahu) have taken the reins of power after a long march through the institutions of Israeli society, and now have their sights focussed on dismantling the ‘Deep State’ within Israel. Equally, there is a furious push-back to this perceived take-over. What exacerbates this societal fracture are two things: Firstly, it is ethno-cultural; and second it is ideological. The third component is the most explosive – Eschatology. At the last national election in Israel, the ‘underclass’ finally broke the glass ceiling to win election and to take office. The Mizrahi (Jews from the Middle East and North Africa) have been long treated as the poorer, lower order in society.

The Ashkenazi (European, largely liberal-secular Jews) form much of the urban professional (and until recently) the security class. These are the élites whom the coalition of National Religious and Settler Movement displaced at the last election. This present phase to a long struggle to power perhaps can be put at 2015. As Gadi Taub has recorded, “It was then, Israel’s Supreme Court judges removed sovereignty itself—that is, the power of final decision over the whole realm of law and politics—from the elected branches of government and transferred it to themselves. One unelected branch of government officially holds power, against which there are neither checks, nor balances, by any counterforce”. In the optic of the Right, the self-awarded power of Judicial Review, gave to the Court power, Taub writes, “to prescribe the rules of the political game – and not just its concrete results”.

“Law enforcement then became the huge investigative arm of the press. As was true of the “Russiagate” hoax, The Israel Police and State Attorney were not so much collecting evidence for a criminal trial as they were producing political dirt for leaks to the press”. The ‘Deep State’ in Israel is a consuming point of contention for Netanyahu and his cabinet: In a speech at the Knesset this month – as one example – Netanyahu savaged the media, accusing news outlets of “full cooperation with the deep state” and of creating “scandals”. “The cooperation between the bureaucracy in the deep state and the media didn’t work in the United States, and it won’t work here”, he said.

Read more …

“In a real “America first” foreign policy we would be following the Russian and Chinese lead and staying out of the conflict..”

President Trump: Stop Bombing Yemen and Exit the Middle East! (Ron Paul)

Over the weekend President Trump ordered a massive military operation against the small country of Yemen. Was Yemen in the process of attacking the United States? No. Did the President in that case go to Congress and seek a declaration of war against the country? No. The fact is, Yemen hadn’t even threatened the United States before the bombs started falling. Last year, candidate Trump strongly criticized the Biden Administration’s obsession with foreign interventionism to the detriment of our problems at home. In an interview at the Libertarian National Convention, he criticized Biden’s warmongering to podcaster Tim Pool, saying, “You can solve problems over a telephone. Instead they start dropping bombs. Recently, they’re dropping bombs all over Yemen. You don’t have to do that.”

Yet once in office, Trump turned to military force as his first option. Since the Israel/Hamas ceasefire plan negotiated by President Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff, Yemen has left Red Sea shipping alone. However, after Israel implemented a total blockade of humanitarian relief to citizens of Gaza last week, Houthi leaders threatened to again begin blocking Israel’s Red Sea shipping activities. That was enough for President Trump to drop bombs and launch missiles for hours, killing several dozen Yemeni civilians – including women and children – in the process. After the attack, Trump not only threatened much more force to be used against Yemen, but he also threatened Iran. His National Security Advisor Mike Waltz added that the US may start bombing Iranian ships in the area, a move that would certainly lead to a major Middle East war.

Like recent Presidents Bush and Obama, candidate Trump promised peace after four years of Joe Biden’s warmongering and World War III brinkmanship. There is little doubt that with our war-weary population this proved the margin of his victory. Unfortunately, as with Bush and Obama, now that he is President, he appears to be heading down a different path.The Republican Party is gradually becoming a pro-peace, America first party, but the warmongers and neocons of the old line in the Party are not going to let go so easily. Unfortunately many of these dead-enders have found their way to senior positions in Trump’s Administration, with voices of restraint and non-intervention nearly nowhere in sight among his top tier of advisors.

To solve the Yemen problem we must understand it: Russian and Chinese ships, for example, are not being threatened because they are not enabling the Israeli demolition of Gaza. The slaughter there has been facilitated with US money and US weapons. It is the US doing Israel’s bidding both in Gaza and in the Red Sea that is painting a target on us and unnecessarily putting our troops at risk of retaliation.The US government, starting with Biden and continuing now with Trump, seems eager to make this our war even though, as Rep. Thomas Massie pointed out over the weekend, Red Sea shipping is of minor importance to the US economy. In a real “America first” foreign policy we would be following the Russian and Chinese lead and staying out of the conflict. It’s not our war. End US military involvement in the Middle East and our troubles disappear. It really is that simple.

Olmert
https://twitter.com/AdameMedia/status/1901998480756793838

Read more …

They will lead to tariffs.

What Will US Trade Wars With Canada, Mexico And Europe Lead To? (Pacini)

The recent trade wars waged by the United States against Canada, Mexico and Europe have had a significant impact on the international economic system. These protectionist measures, characterized by the imposition of significant tariffs on a wide range of imported products, have raised concerns about the possible consequences for global trade dynamics and economic relations between the world’s major powers. In particular, the question arises as to whether these tensions can favor greater commercial, economic and investment cooperation between the United States and Russia. The main questions that arise are: what will be the consequences of these trade wars on global trade and on the economies involved? Could these conflicts favor an economic rapprochement between the United States and Russia?

Trade tensions between the United States and its main economic partners are not a new phenomenon, but they have intensified in the last decade with a return to protectionist policies. With regard to Canada and Mexico, the United States has imposed tariffs of 25% on steel imports and 10% on aluminum imports from Canada and Mexico, provoking negative reactions from both countries. North American trade relations, traditionally based on a free trade agreement (USMCA, formerly NAFTA), have been seriously damaged by these measures. In Europe, on the other hand, we have the EU, which has been hit by tariffs on imports of cars and other luxury goods, in response to European duties on U.S. agri-food products. Tensions between the United States and Europe have led to a worsening of transatlantic relations, compromising the economic stability of both parties.

Trade wars inevitably lead to an increase in production costs, which translates into higher inflation and a reduction in the competitiveness of companies. The imposition of tariffs makes imported goods more expensive, with repercussions on various economic sectors: industries that depend on imported components, such as the automotive and technology industries, are strongly affected by the price increase; Producers in the U.S. of soy, meat and dairy products have suffered significant losses due to trade retaliation from Canada, Mexico and the EU; transatlantic tourism and transportation have been affected by economic tensions, reducing growth in the sector. The interruption of global supply chains is one of the most serious consequences of trade wars (and, let’s remember, it’s a consequence that also has an impact on many other countries that apparently don’t seem directly involved, but that in reality depend on the trend of that market).

Modern industry depends on a complex network of international suppliers, and customs tariffs increase production costs, making global trade less efficient. Trade wars are not just an economic issue, they have profound geopolitical implications. It is now well known and widely acknowledged that sanctions policies have been a tool for the planned weakening of Europe. The data shows that the EU has a significant trade surplus with the USA in the goods sector, equal to 157 billion euros in 2023. However, in the services sector, the EU has a deficit of 109 billion. The economic ties between the two areas are therefore not as unbalanced as is often claimed. European companies export many goods to the United States, but on the other hand Europe buys many services, particularly digital services, from the U.S. American tariffs on European goods could damage the sectors most dependent on the U.S. market, with different impacts depending on the countries and the types of goods affected (such as cars).

There may be an intention to exploit this disparity to divide EU member states and push them to negotiate separately, while trade policy should remain the exclusive competence of the Union. Some are already putting forward the idea of negotiating favorable conditions to the detriment of others, but it is clear that the EU should maintain a unified approach to exert greater influence in the negotiations. The European single market is the largest in the world, with around 450 million people representing 20% of global GDP. It is clear that Europe will have to adopt a strategy that combines both pressure and incentives in order to remain in the international game.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

1991

 

 

BBee

 

 

Fractals

 

 

Smart bird
https://twitter.com/buitengebieden/status/1902042650527600713

 

 

Shower
https://twitter.com/Rainmaker1973/status/1902364436062728572

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Aug 152024
 
 August 15, 2024  Posted by at 8:38 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , ,  97 Responses »


Vincent van Gogh The Rispal Restaurant at Asnieres 1887

 

Will Trump End Elections? Anatomy Of A Failed Hoax (Miele)
Olympic Boxer’s “Cyberbullies” Lawsuit A Threat To Free Speech (MN)
Olympic Gold Winner Sues Musk Over ‘Cyber Harassment’ (RT)
‘Democracy Dies in Darkness’ WaPo Urges White House Crackdown on Media (Sp.)
WaPo Reporter Calls on White House to Censor Trump for America (Turley)
Scott Ritter Says FBI Monitored Him For Years (TASS)
The Murder of Others (Scott Ritter)
Hunter Biden Asked State Department To Aid Burisma Deal While Joe Was VP (ZH)
Biden Admits ‘Direct Contact’ With Ukraine Over Assault On Kursk (RT)
Ukraine Wants Talks Using Kursk Nuclear Plant Seizure as Ultimatum (Sp.)
Ukraine Has Defaulted – Fitch (RT)
Pro-Israel Lobby Overrides US Public Opinion on Gaza (Miles)
Cracks in the Dome: Israel’s Security Mirage (Raiss)
FTC Hints Tech ‘Monopolist’ Google Should Be Broken Up (ZH)

 

 

 

 

Doocy

 

 

One time

 

 

Kamala headlines

 

 

Internet czar
https://twitter.com/i/status/1823379194258010348

 

 

Taliban

 

 

 

 

Benz

 

 

O’Leary

 

 

RFK
https://twitter.com/i/status/1823592168549728720

 

 

RFK

 

 

 

 

“This election will be the most important election in the history of our country. We’re going to save our country with this election.”

Will Trump End Elections? Anatomy Of A Failed Hoax (Miele)

The good news is that Donald Trump is very familiar with the Democrats’ tactic of character assassination. For the past nine years he has been subjected to endless false attacks that aimed to polarize him as first a Russian stooge, then a white supremacist, and finally an enemy of democracy who threatened a “bloodbath” if he wasn’t reelected in 2024. Those attacks have all been exposed as partisan chicanery, but that doesn’t stop his opponents from repeating them every chance they get. Two weeks ago, Democrats and the mainstream media were caught red-handed as they tried to jump-start a new hoax that suggested Trump would cancel future elections if he were elected this year. The video that played on Sunday morning shows and across the universe of cable news channels for three days at the end of July came from a speech that Trump delivered to the Turning Point Action Believers Summit on Friday, July 26.

This clip from CNN typified the way Trump’s words were portrayed, with one commentator saying that “it certainly sounds like a presidential candidate that is determined to shut down the democratic process.” CBS News reached the same conclusion, saying that on social media there were “some calls of alarm in response to Trump’s comments, expressing concern that they alluded to authoritarianism and could be interpreted as an indication that he would not leave office if he wins the election.” That’s ridiculous, of course, and if there should be any concern about Trump’s words, it would be about how nonchalantly the media distorted them for the purpose of character assassination.

The part of Trump’s speech that was played or quoted ad infinitum by mainstream media for those three days was this: “Christians, get out and vote, just this time. You won’t have to do it anymore. Four more years, you know what, it’ll be fixed, it’ll be fine, you won’t have to vote any more, my beautiful Christians … In four years, you don’t have to vote again. We’ll have it fixed so good you’re not going to have to vote.” Twisting those words to suggest Trump was planning “to shut down the democratic process” is just cynical. But if anyone were sincerely alarmed, you’d think that their next step would be to listen to the entire speech where these words were uttered to find out if there was any missing context.

A real journalist would look for answers before running with a hugely damaging and potentially slanderous story. But this episode demonstrates conclusively that there are very few real journalists left in America. I knew the real meaning of Trump’s words because I had watched the speech live on a streaming channel, but how much work would it take for a highly paid network reporter or anchor to look at the Believers speech after the fact before accusing the former president of plotting to eliminate elections? If they had, they would have found that, a little over 37 minutes into his speech, Trump explained to his audience that Christians vote in disappointingly low numbers, and if they wanted him to return to the White House, they needed to go out and vote “at least this election.” Here’s the full quote that I don’t believe was ever played, not once, by any major media outlet:

“And by the way, Christians have to vote. You know, I don’t want to scold you, but do you know Christians do not vote proportionately, they don’t vote like they should. They’re not big voters … They have to vote. If they don’t vote, we’re not going to win the election. If you do vote, we’re going to win in a landslide. Too big to rig. We’re gonna win in a landslide. … You know, you have tremendous power, but you just don’t know that. But you have to use that power. Christians are a group that’s known not to vote very much. You have to go out at least this election, just get us into that beautiful White House. Vote for your congressmen and women. Vote for your senators. We will change this country for the better. This country will be great again like never before. You gotta vote. … This election will be the most important election in the history of our country. We’re going to save our country with this election.”

Read more …

Wonder who set up XY for this.

Olympic Boxer’s “Cyberbullies” Lawsuit A Threat To Free Speech (MN)

A human rights lawyer has warned that a lawsuit brought by Algerian Olympic boxer Imane Khelif against the likes of Elon Musk and JK Rowling could set a significant precedent against free speech. Khelif, who competed and won a gold medal in the women’s welterweight division, despite having XY chromosomes, is charging that prominent personalities and bodies engaged in “acts of aggravated cyber harassment.” Questions were raised by both the World Boxing Organisation and the International Boxing Association regarding Khelif’s eligibility to compete as a woman following two previous ‘failed’ gender tests. Speaking to GB News, human rights lawyer David Haigh warned that the lawsuit could lead to “policing of social media” across borders. Haigh outlined “If they proceed with this, the Paris prosecutors have the reach jurisdiction to come to other countries. And if that is the case, that then is a very concerning development.”

“You can have countries around the world basically policing social media in other countries. It could be a very, very significant case in free speech, the use of social media,” Haigh added. He continued, “are we now going to see France trying to extradite or issuing arrest warrants for JK Rowling? It’s a very slippery slope and it could become a very significant case.” The lawyer also noted that the case could also set a legal precedent in terms of gender ideology. “If it proceeds, and that’s a big if, it could have significant ramifications. Whether or not there has been harassment, you will have a debate on what is and isn’t a man or a woman in the court,” he noted. “If part of whether or not there has been harassment and abuse comes down to whether or not that boxer is a man or a woman, obviously evidence will need to be put forward on both sides of that,” Haigh further explained.

Read more …

Trump will also be part of the suit. You could get a Paris prosecutor go after a US president for saying “I will keep men out of women’s sports!”

They want a French judge to redefine for the whole world what a woman is.

Olympic Gold Winner Sues Musk Over ‘Cyber Harassment’ (RT)

French prosecutors have opened a probe into a claim by Algerian Olympic boxer Imane Khelif over alleged “acts of aggravated cyber harassment” during the games by several prominent figures, including Elon Musk, according to Variety magazine. Prosecutors reportedly said on Wednesday that the X (formerly Twitter) owner was named in the criminal complaint, along with Harry Potter author JK Rowling. In the complaint, Khelif claimed she was targeted by a “misogynist, racist and sexist campaign” as she fought her way to gold in the women’s welterweight division. Nabil Boudi, the Paris-based attorney for Khelif, told the magazine that the complaint was posted to the anti-online hatred center of the Paris Prosecutor’s Office on Friday.

The prosecutor’s office reportedly confirmed that an investigation had been launched. “J. K. Rowling and Elon Musk are named in the lawsuit, among others,” Boudi told the magazine, adding that former US President Donald Trump would be part of the investigation. “Trump tweeted, so whether or not he is named in our lawsuit, he will inevitably be looked into as part of the prosecution,” he stated. The attorney also noted that the lawsuit was filed against X, which under French law means that it was filed against unknown persons. That “ensure[s] that the ‘prosecution has all the latitude to be able to investigate against all people,” Boudi said. The 25-year-old boxer, who on Saturday won the Olympic gold medal in the women’s 66-kilogram boxing competition, has found herself at the center of a gender controversy. Khelif became the subject of global attention after defeating Italian boxer Angela Carini in just 46 seconds in a preliminary match.

The short bout sparked outrage online, with many calling the Algerian athlete ‘male’ due to previous failed gender tests. According to Algeria, Khelif is not transgender at all but a woman affected by a condition known as hyperandrogenism, characterized by a high level of testosterone and the presence of XY chromosomes. Following the match, J. K. Rowling posted on X a picture of the boxers, accusing Khelif of being a man who was “enjoying the distress of a woman he’s just punched in the head.” Musk, meanwhile, shared a post that claimed “men don’t belong in women’s sports,” captioning it “Absolutely.” Trump’s post about the boxing match was accompanied by the message: “I will keep men out of women’s sports!” The International Olympic Committee, for its part, defended Khelif and denounced those peddling misinformation.

Read more …

“..you think your job is to collude with the White House press secretary to censor Americans with whom you disagree?”

‘Democracy Dies in Darkness’ WaPo Urges White House Crackdown on Media (Sp.)

Washington Post White House reporter Cleve Wootson Jr. is taking flak from conservatives, media impartiality and free speech activists after a controversial exchange with WH press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre apparently urging the federal government to “stop” the spread of “misinformation” relating to the 2024 campaign and beyond. “I think that misinformation on Twitter is not just a campaign issue. It’s an America issue. What role does the White House or the president have in sort of stopping that, or stopping the spread of that or intervening in that?” Wootson asked in anticipation of the Elon Musk-Donald Trump interview on X Monday night, which reportedly wound up garnering as many as a billion combined views. “You’ve heard us talking about this many times from here about the responsibilities that social media platforms have when it comes to misinformation and disinformation.

I don’t have anything to read out from here about specific ways that we’re working on it. But we believe that they have the responsibility. These are private companies, so we’re also mindful of that too. But I think it is incredibly important to call that out as you are doing. I just don’t have any specifics on what we have been doing internally,” Jean-Pierre responded. The Wootson-Jean-Pierre exchange spread like wildfire online, with commentators sarcastically recalling the Washington Post’s ‘Democracy Dies in Darkness’ slogan and expressing concern over the outlet’s apparent request that the White House “cancel the Bill of Rights,” whose Free Press Clause protects the publication of information and opinions, no matter their content. “The Washington Post trying to get the government to shut down private citizen interviews with presidential candidates. Because democracy dies in people speaking freely,” one popular response quipped.

“Washington Post reporter asks if Biden/Kamala administration should permit Trump to talk to Elon Musk or if the government should block their conversation. This is where we are, much of the media opposes free speech,” one person lamented. “Truly pathetic…You are a White House reporter for the Washington Post. And you think your job is to collude with the White House press secretary to censor Americans with whom you disagree? Do you understand how dumb and dangerous you sound? You’re truly shameful,” another wrote. WaPo critics’ outrage over Wootson’s suggestion is itself somewhat of a surprise, given the increasingly well-documented collusion between the US government, traditional media and Big Tech, from orders to ban or otherwise restrict foreign media (including Sputnik), to revelations in the ‘Twitter Files’ detailing some of the “specifics” mentioned by Jean-Pierre of government-big tech complicity in taking down stories and banning users to try to control informational awareness on topical issues ranging from wars and politics to elections.

The Washington Post’s request that the White House cracks down on “misinformation” also comes in the face of increasingly bald-faced attempts by the mainstream media to control the narrative relating to the upcoming US election, with a slew of blunt efforts by outlets to prop up one candidate, or silence criticism of said candidate’s lack of media interviews, being met with increasingly loud resistance.

Read more …

“There was a time when a reporter calling for censorship of a political opponent would have been a matter for immediate termination in the media..”

WaPo Reporter Calls on White House to Censor Trump for America (Turley)

In my new book on free speech, I discuss at length how the mainstream media has joined an alliance with the government and corporations in favor of censorship and blacklisting. The Washington Post, however, appears to be taking its anti-free speech campaign to a new level with open calls for a crackdown. The newspaper offered no objection or even qualification after its reporter, Cleve Wootson Jr., appeared to call upon the White House to censor the interview of Elon Musk with former President Donald Trump. Under the guise of a question, Wootson told White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre that censoring its leading political opponent is “an America issue.” During Monday’s press briefing, the Washington Post’s Cleve Wootson Jr. flagged the interview and said “I think that misinformation on Twitter is not just a campaign issue…it’s an America issue.” After making that affirmative statement, Wootson then asked

“…What role does the White House or the president have in sort of stopping that or stopping the spread of that or sort of intervening in that? Some of that was about campaign misinformation, but, you know, it’s a wider thing, right?” Note how his question was really a political statement. Wootson begins by stating as a fact that Musk and X are engaging in disinformation and it is a threat to the country. He then asks a perfunctory softball question at the end to maintain appearances. Jean-Pierre’s response was equally telling. While noting that this is a private company, she praised the Washington Post for calling for action, saying “[i]t is incredibly important to call that out, as you’re doing. I just don’t have any specifics on what we have been doing internally.” So let’s recap. The Washington Post used a White House presser to call for censorship of one of the leading candidates for the White House and then demanded to know what the White House would do about it. The censorship was framed as an “America issue.”

There was a time when a reporter calling for censorship of a political opponent would have been a matter for immediate termination in the media. Instead, the newspaper that prides itself on the slogan “Democracy dies in Darkness,” has been entirely silent. No correction. No qualification. The Washington Post has long run columns supporting censorship of information that it deems disinformation or misinformation. For many of us in the free speech community, it has become one of the most hostile newspapers to free speech values. Now censorship has become “an America issue” for the Washington Post. The collapse of any semblance of support for free speech is complete. The call for censorship for disinformation is ironic given the Post’s publication of a series of false stories and conspiracy theories. When confronted about columnists with demonstrably false statements, the Post simply shrugged.

[..] The decline of the Post has followed a familiar pattern. The editors and reporters simply wrote off half of their audience and became a publication for largely liberal and Democratic readers. In these difficult economic times with limited revenue sources, it is a lethal decision. Robert Lewis, a British media executive who joined the Post earlier this year, reportedly got into a “heated exchange” with a staffer. Lewis explained that, while reporters were protesting measures to expand readership, the very survival of the paper was now at stake: “We are going to turn this thing around, but let’s not sugarcoat it. It needs turning around,” Lewis said. “We are losing large amounts of money. Your audience has halved in recent years. People are not reading your stuff. Right. I can’t sugarcoat it anymore.”

Other staffers could not get beyond the gender and race of those who would be overseeing them. One staffer complained “we now have four White men running three newsrooms.” The Post has been buying out staff to avoid mass layoffs, but reporters are up in arms over the effort to turn the newspaper around. Yet, in this case, a reporter openly advocated for censorship and pushed the White House to take action against X and Trump; to use government authority to “intervene” to stop Trump from being able to make certain claims on social media.

We have previously written how the level of advocacy and bias in the press has created a danger of a de facto state media in the United States. It is possible to have such a system by consent rather than coercion. The Biden White House has become more open in its marching orders to media, including a letter drafted by the Biden White House Legal Counsel’s Office calling for major media to “ramp up their scrutiny” of House Republicans. President Biden has even instructed reporters “[t]hat is not the judgment of the press” when asked tough questions. To the credit of the Post, it is not killing “democracy in the darkness.” This incident occurred in the light of day for all to see as its reporter pushed the White House for the censoring of political opponents.

Read more …

“It came down to their concern about my relationship with the Russian government, and that somehow I’m taking direction from the Russian government..”

Scott Ritter Says FBI Monitored Him For Years (TASS)

Former US intelligence officer Scott Ritter said the FBI had monitored him for years. “They admitted that they’ve been monitoring me for years,” he said on a podcast called Judging Freedom, which is hosted by Andrew Napolitano. “I got nothing to hide here. But they [the FBI] are concerned. It came down to their concern about my relationship with the Russian government, and that somehow I’m taking direction from the Russian government,” the former officer said. On August 7, NBC television reported Ritter’s home was subjected to a search. The FBI confirmed to TASS that its agents conducted investigative actions at the former officer’s home. Ritter had previously said the searches could be related to the US government’s concerns about violations of the US Foreign Agents Registration Act. The Times Union reported that the law requires individuals and organizations representing foreign interests in the United States to register with the Department of Justice and disclose their activities. Ritter strongly denies all of the allegations. He also stated the US government is seeking to intimidate him.

Read more …

“There was, literally, no valid reason to drop an atomic bomb on a Japanese city.”

The Murder of Others (Scott Ritter)

Ignoring the fact that the Soviet Union and its leader, Joseph Stalin, were exhausted by a war that had destroyed a third of its industry and killed more than 27 million of its citizens and, as such, were looking for peace, not a new war with the West, Truman fell under the sway of his closest advisers, including his choice to be secretary of state, James Byrnes, who viewed the Soviets as a threat that had to be contained and, if necessary, confronted by U.S. military power in the post-war period. How to square the need to simultaneously defeat Japan, deal with the increasing political pressure to demobilize, and present a strong military posture to the Soviet Union was one of the more pressing challenges facing Truman and the men he had gathered in the White House cabinet room. The answer lay in the atomic bomb — J. Robert Oppenheimer’s “gadget ”— which was, at the time of the June 18 meeting, being prepared for testing in the badlands of New Mexico.

The huge responsibility that attached itself to the existence and potential use of this new weapon weighed heavily on the attendees. During this meeting, Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson reminded those present that “our leadership in the war and in the development of this weapon [the atomic bomb] has placed a certain moral responsibility upon us which we cannot shirk without very serious responsibility for any disaster to civilization which it would further.” When the discussion turned to the use of the atomic bomb as a “war winning” tool designed to break the spirit of the Japanese and compel them to surrender unconditionally, Assistant Secretary of War John J. McCloy proposed a compromise: why not show flexibility regarding the need for “unconditional surrender,” such as allowing the Japanese emperor to stay in place as the head of state, and, as a way of reinforcing to the Japanese the reality of America’s overwhelming superiority in arms, tell the Japanese about the existence of the atomic bomb, giving them the clear option of capitulating under reasonable terms or watching their cities be destroyed?

Truman, intrigued with the concept, had McCloy take his proposal to Byrnes to see what the future secretary of state thought about it (Byrnes was, at the time, in the process of being confirmed by the U.S. Senate). Byrnes, concerned about the perceived threat from the Soviet Union, rejected McCloy’s proposal, opting instead to go forward with the use of the atomic bomb on Japan with the dual mission of helping bring a rapid end to the war with Japan and, perhaps more importantly, since McCloy and others believed Japan was ready to surrender, obviating the need to use the bomb, as a demonstration of U.S. military power to the Soviet Union in an effort to deter any post-war antics on their part in Europe.

Byrnes’ strategy, however, was nonsensical given what subsequently transpired. On July 17, 1945, Truman was in Potsdam, Germany, for a major post-war conference with Joseph Stalin and British Prime Minister Winston Churchill (the “Big Three”). The day before, July 16, Oppenheimer had successfully tested a prototype of a plutonium bomb in the deserts of Alamogordo, New Mexico. (Oppenheimer and his team of nuclear scientists had also developed an atomic bomb that made use of highly enriched uranium as its core. This weapon was far simpler in its design, and as such the need to test it was not as acute.)

Truman revealed the existence of this weapon to Stalin on July 24. The Soviet leader, nonplussed, said he hoped the Americans would put it to good use against the Japanese. Stalin had committed to entering the war against Japan no later than Aug. 15. Soviet forces, fresh from their victory over Nazi Germany, were being redeployed to the Soviet Far East, where they would be used to defeat the more than 1 million Japanese soldiers who occupied northern China and Korea. With the promised involvement of the Red Army, the military defeat of Japan was assured. Truman, in notifying Russia of the existence of the bomb, had put the Soviets on notice about the reality of American military might. There was, literally, no valid reason to drop an atomic bomb on a Japanese city.

Read more …

“The Ambassador already replied to one letter from Mr. Biden. He may be shopping for more support than he got here..”

Hunter Biden Asked State Department To Aid Burisma Deal While Joe Was VP (ZH)

While Joe Biden was vice president, his son Hunter attempted to obtain State Department assistance in securing a deal for Ukrainian gas company Burisma, of which Hunter was a highly-compensated board member despite having no experience in its industry, the New York Times reported on Tuesday. The revelation of the 2016 episode underscores allegations that Hunter sought to enrich himself by trading on his father’s influence. The Times report draws on newly-released government records pertaining to Hunter’s pushing of a Burisma deal in Italy. The Biden White House had resisted releasing the files for years, only to relent soon after Biden was pressured into abandoning his reelection bid. The Times says it was unable to read Hunter’s email to the US ambassador, as it appears to have been “redacted in its entirety” somewhere within the trove of documents turned over by the government.

However, in communications sparked by Hunter’s 2016 inquiries, federal government officials appear to have been anxious about Hunter’s request. For example, a Commerce Department official assigned to America’s embassy in Rome wrote: “I want to be careful about promising too much. This is a Ukrainian company and, purely to protect ourselves, USG should not be actively advocating with the government of Italy without the company going through the [Commerce Department] Advocacy Center.”

The White House told the Times that then-Vice President Biden had no knowledge of his son’s inquiries. Hunter’s attorney, Abbe Lowell, acknowledged that Hunter asked US ambassador to Italy John R. Phillips and “various people” for help facilitating a dialogue between the president of Tuscany and Burisma leaders. “No meeting occurred, no project materialized, no request for anything in the U.S. was ever sought and only an introduction in Italy was requested,” Abbe told the Times. Burisma was pursuing a geothermal energy project. Though Burisma didn’t respond to inquiries, an unnamed businessman associated with the Italian machinations told the Times that Biden’s moves came when Burisma or partner entities were struggling to obtain regulatory approval for a geothermal project.

The initiative was also the subject of communications that were found in Hunter’s infamous laptop, which he abandoned at a Delaware repair shop. For example, Hunter business partner Eric Schwerin wrote an email to an Italian businessman who had connections to Tuscany’s president. “Burisma is hoping that some of its executives can get a meeting with the president to discuss their geothermal business in Tuscany,” he wrote in July 2016. Meanwhile, the government records seem to suggest a persistent effort by Hunter across multiple US government channels. “The Ambassador already replied to one letter from Mr. Biden. He may be shopping for more support than he got here,” a Commerce official emailed other federal officials.

Read more …

To what extent did they push for the assault?

Biden Admits ‘Direct Contact’ With Ukraine Over Assault On Kursk (RT)

Washington is in touch with Kiev about Ukraine’s ongoing incursion into Russia’s Kursk Region, which is creating a problem for Moscow, US President Joe Biden has said. Last week, Ukraine sent several thousand troops across the Russian border to seize a dozen villages and indiscriminately target civilians, according to Moscow. “I have spoken with my staff on a regular basis, probably every four or five hours for the last six or eight days and it’s creating a real dilemma for [Russian President Vladimir] Putin,” Biden told reporters on Tuesday, in his first remarks about the Kursk offensive. “And we’ve been in direct contact, constant contact with the Ukrainians. That’s all I’m going to say about it while it’s active,” he added. The US leader spoke just outside Air Force One, as he arrived in New Orleans. Earlier in the day, EU foreign policy commissioner Josep Borrell said that Kiev had the bloc’s “full support” for the Kursk offensive.

Washington and Brussels have previously responded to press inquiries about the events in Kursk by quoting generalities about support for Ukraine and unchanging policies. “We’re in touch with our Ukrainian counterparts, and we are working to gain a better understanding of what they’re doing, what their goals are, what their strategy is, and I’m going to leave a little bit of space for us to have those conversations before I try to characterize what’s going on,” National Security Council spokesman John Kirby said on Friday. Later that same day, the US announced another $125 million in military aid to Ukraine. On Monday, however, Senator Lindsey Graham – a South Carolina Republican – went to Kiev and praised the Kursk incursion as “bold” and “beautiful.” He also urged retired Western pilots to enlist in the Ukrainian air force and fly NATO-provided F-16 fighters against Russia.

At least 12 Russian civilians have been killed and another 121 wounded by Ukrainian invaders, acting regional governor Aleksey Smirnov said on Monday. Ukrainian soldiers who spoke to Western outlets have admitted taking significant casualties in the invasion. They also said their objectives were to capture some territory that could be traded away in possible peace talks with Moscow, as well as to relieve pressure on the Donbass front. On Monday, Putin said that the Russian forces were actually advancing at a faster pace, while military enlistments were up because of the fighting in Kursk.

Read more …

Failed.

Ukraine Wants Talks Using Kursk Nuclear Plant Seizure as Ultimatum (Sp.)

The Ukrainian Armed Forces went on the offensive on August 6 to seize territory in Russia’s Kursk region, but their advance was stopped, said Valery Gerasimov, chief of Russia’s General Staff. He stressed that the operation in Kursk will be completed by defeating the enemy and reaching the state border. Units of the Russian Armed Forces are in the Kursk city of Sudzha, which the enemy does not control but there are daily clashes, commander of the Akhmat special forces Apti Alaudinov told Russian media. “Today there are units of the Russian Defense Ministry in Sudzha. There is an enemy around and in some parts of the city. There are active clashes there every day. The enemy cannot say that he completely controls Sudzha, because he does not really control it,” Alaudinov said.

The major general also said that Kiev is planning on seizing the Kursk nuclear power plant on August 11 and use this to start negotiations with Moscow with an ultimatum. “We received very interesting materials — the whole layout of the operation, which was being prepared, by what forces and what was planned. What can I say: on the 11th [of August] it was necessary to take the nuclear power plant in Kurchatov… [Ukrainian President] Zelensky’s blitzkrieg, which was planned with the seizure of the Kursk nuclear power plant and already entering negotiations with an ultimatum… failed,” Alaudinov explained. The operation had not been completed, despite all the reserves directed by Kiev in this direction, Alaudinov said. “Most of the equipment has already been destroyed from what was deployed in the Kursk direction,” Alaudinov concluded.

Read more …

There’ll be nothing left after Zelensky.

Ukraine Has Defaulted – Fitch (RT)

Fitch Ratings has downgraded Ukraine’s credit rating to ‘restricted default’ on Tuesday, citing the expiry of a ten-day grace period for the coupon payment on the country’s $750 million 2026 Eurobond, which was due on August 1. The US-based credit-rating agency said it has lowered the rating on the 2026 Eurobond to ‘D from ‘C’ and affirmed the other foreign-currency bonds at ‘C.’ The downgrade comes after Kiev passed a law permitting the suspension of foreign debt payments until October 1. On July 18, the Ukrainian parliament approved legislation that allows the government to temporarily suspend payments on state and state-guaranteed external commercial debt until a restructuring agreement with external commercial debt creditors is completed. “This marks an event of default under Fitch’s criteria with respect to the sovereign’s IDR [Issuer Default Rating] as well as the individual issue rating of the affected security,” Fitch stated.

Rival US ratings agency S&P Global also cut Ukraine’s rating to ‘selective’ default on August 2. Ukraine has been negotiating with creditors a restructuring of its nearly $20 billion in international debt. A preliminary deal with a committee of its main bondholders was achieved on July 22, two weeks before the grace period for coupon payment expired. Kiev secured a preliminary deal to suspend debt repayments back in 2022 after the escalation of its conflict with Russia. The two-year payment moratorium on payments expired on August 1. Fitch had earlier projected Ukraine’s state deficit to remain high, at 17.1% of the country’s GDP this year, noting that defense spending amounted to 31.3% of its annual economic output in 2023. The agency expects government debt to surge to 92.5% of GDP in 2024.

According to the Ukrainian Finance Ministry, the country’s public debt surged by more than $1 billion in June, with its total volume now exceeding $152 billion. The International Monetary Fund in June revised downwards Ukraine’s gross domestic product forecast for this year to 2.5% from its April estimate of 3.2%, citing worsening sentiment among consumers and businesses over the course of the conflict with Russia.

Read more …

“It is acting with complete, insouciant, contemptuous disregard for international law, conventions, and common morality..”

Pro-Israel Lobby Overrides US Public Opinion on Gaza (Miles)

“It is most especially in the conduct of foreign relations that democratic governments appear to me to be decidedly inferior to governments carried on upon different principles,” wrote Alexis de Tocqueville in 1835 after his famous visit to the United States. The famed French political philosopher was impressed by the still-nascent experiment in self rule underway in the young country, walking away with numerous insights and accolades. But Tocqueville questioned whether the country’s democratic principles could extend to the realm of international affairs, writing, “foreign politics demand scarcely any of those qualities which a democracy possesses; and they require, on the contrary, the perfect use of almost all those faculties in which it is deficient.” Nearly two centuries later questions remain over the extent to which the popular will can dictate matters of foreign relations, which often require rapid and complex decision making.

Analysts claim the functioning of the US government has only become more opaque since the mid-twentieth century, with the development of nuclear weapons requiring an unprecedented level of secrecy that informed the creation of the modern-day “deep state.” Independent journalist Dr. Jim Kavanagh joined Sputnik’s The Critical Hour program Tuesday to discuss the Biden administration’s foreign policy and the growing gulf between public opinion in the United States and its actions on the world stage. “Israel has crossed all and everybody’s red lines,” Kavanagh wrote in a recent piece published on the website The Polemicist. “Israel is telling the world it will kill anyone and any number of people, anywhere, at any time of its choosing and it does not give a damn about what anyone in the world thinks of it. It is acting with complete, insouciant, contemptuous disregard for international law, conventions, and common morality, certainly of the people and nations it considers its adversaries and of the countries on whose support it depends.”

“Israel is only slightly less contemptuous of Americans than the Palestinians,” the journalist claimed, noting Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s skill in manipulating the United States to serve his interests. “Palestinians they consider subhuman and dispensable persons versus the Americans they consider necessary fools whom they have to pretend they’re interested in ceasefires and two-state solutions for because the Americans are stupid enough to believe it.” “They just got to keep the Americans around because the Americans are their patrons,” he continued. “The United States of America is the indispensable patron of Israel. They could not do anything that they’re doing without it. And we are completely complicit in it.” The longtime Israeli Prime Minister once claimed the United States is “a thing you can move very easily” in private comments secretly recorded in 2001. Since then the controversial leader has often publicly waded into US politics, perhaps most famously in 2015 when he gave a speech to a session of the United States Congress denouncing former President Barack Obama’s Iran nuclear deal.

Read more …

“..its most prized defensive weapon is part of a broader branding effort, rooted in techniques pioneered by Edward Bernays..”

Cracks in the Dome: Israel’s Security Mirage (Raiss)

The Iron Dome, touted as Israel’s most-effective defense shield, was designed to project an image of security and technological superiority. Promoted as a cutting-edge mobile air defense system, it was intended to symbolize an impenetrable barrier safeguarding the occupation state from external threats. However, the reality reveals a different picture: much like a child in a knight costume – impressive against plastic swords but utterly defenseless against real weapons – the Iron Dome excels mainly against the relatively crude weapons of the Palestinian resistance in Gaza. Israel’s carefully-crafted image of its most prized defensive weapon is part of a broader branding effort, rooted in techniques pioneered by Edward Bernays. The occupation state has positioned itself as a cosmopolitan, progressive, and democratic society – in stark contrast to neighboring West Asian states, which it portrays as violent and repressive.

The Iron Dome is not just a defense system but also a psychological construct designed to reinforce the image of an invulnerable entity under constant threat from less enlightened neighbors. Despite its reputation, the Iron Dome’s performance has often fallen short. Numerous videos have surfaced showing malfunctions – the Tamir missiles performing erratic maneuvers, exploding near civilian areas, or being triggered by false alarms and causing damage to infrastructure. These failures contrast starkly with Israel’s claims of a 90–99 percent interception rate. Professor Emeritus Theodore Postal of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) offers a vastly different assessment. “I would say that the intercept rate is at best 4 or 5 percent,” Postal said in an interview with the Boston Globe last October. In a 2018 study published in the Journal of Global Security Studies, Michael Armstrong also questions the Iron Dome’s touted “90 to 99 percent” interception rate.

For starters, he clarifies that “the interception rate is the percentage of rockets destroyed before they hit defended areas; it ignores rockets over undefended areas.” In other words, the defense system is, from the onset, only targeting a small portion of the rockets fired. For example, Israeli officials claimed that of the approximately 1,000 projectiles fired into Israel by Hamas during November 2012’s Operation Pillar of Defense operation, Iron Dome identified two-thirds as “not posing a threat” and only intercepted 90 percent of the remaining 300 rockets. Armstrong points out further holes in the calculations of Iron Dome proponents:

The empirical analysis suggests that Iron Dome batteries intercepted less than 32 percent of all hazardous rockets during Pillar of Defense, but between 59 and 75 percent during Protective Edge … The calculations further suggest the number of rockets hitting populated areas during Pillar of Defense may have been understated. The number of threats to populated areas, on the other hand, may have been overstated. This implies that Iron Dome’s effective interception rate may have been significantly lower than reported.

The situation is particularly dire in northern occupied territories, where the town of Kiryat Shmona – a settlement once believed to be under the Iron Dome’s protection – has seen its population flee from rising threats. Thousands of residents have abandoned their homes, exposing the vulnerabilities the Iron Dome was supposed to eliminate. With Hezbollah expanding its rules of engagement, the number of displaced persons is likely to rise, further exposing the system’s inadequacies. As Israel desperately scrambles to expand its defense options, the new solutions prove equally flawed, leaving the population vulnerable beneath a defense system that no longer lives up to its myth. The once-vaunted shield is crumbling, and with it, the carefully constructed narrative of invincibility that has long underpinned Israel’s security strategy.

Read more …

No-one ever mentions their ad monopoly.

FTC Hints Tech ‘Monopolist’ Google Should Be Broken Up (ZH)

The U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) filed an amicus brief in the Epic Games antitrust lawsuit against Google’s monopolistic behavior, suggesting that the court impose stringent actions against such practices. The lawsuit was filed in 2020 by developer Epic Games against Google. Epic claimed that Google violated antitrust regulations by monopolizing two markets: the market for distribution of mobile apps for Android users and the market for processing payments. In addition, Google benefits from gaining access to user data. “Google has thus installed itself as an unavoidable middleman for app developers who wish to reach Android users and vice versa,” Epic said. In December 2023, a district court jury in California ruled in favor of Epic, finding that the game developer proved that Google was in violation of antitrust laws. District Judge James Donato has yet to decide on what relief Epic should be provided.

Naveen Athrappully reports for The Epoch Times that on Aug. 12, the FTC filed an amicus brief in the case, suggesting how the court could consider remedies. Ensuring antitrust laws are strictly enforced “is essential for protecting and preserving economic freedom and the free-enterprise system,” the agency pointed out. “When a company engages in business practices that are found to violate the antitrust laws, courts are empowered to remedy those violations by ordering all relief necessary to restore competition in the affected markets,” it stated. This includes “identifying and requiring actions that the defendant must affirmatively take toward that end.” If companies violating antitrust laws reap the advantages secured through such actions, it will end up incentivizing other firms to engage in similar behavior, the agency warned. As such, the district court should ensure that the violating firm does not continue securing the benefits obtained via breaching antitrust rules, it stated.

Though it should be said that at no point does the FTC outright say that Google should be broken up, Duncan Riley reports via SiliconAngle.com, that any lay reader with a knowledge of U.S. antitrust law and English can reasonably come to that conclusion. And there’s more. “Looking forward in cases like Epic v. Google often requires the consideration of network effects, data feedback loops, and other key features of digital markets,” the FTC writes. “This could help ensure that potential competitors can overcome the advantages established digital platforms often gain, which include network effects and data incumbency.” But the real kicker comes towards the end. “Google’s monopolistic behavior has significantly harmed millions of users in the United States,” the FTC adds. “Allowing monopolists to reap the rewards of illegal monopolization while avoiding the costs of restoring the competition that they unlawfully eliminated would undermine deterrence.” There is a strong possibility that the FTC is hinting at a possible breakup of Google as a negotiating tactic; nonetheless, it should be taken seriously.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

D*ck

 

 

Trump Roseanne
https://twitter.com/i/status/1823751458988167540

 

 

AI
https://twitter.com/i/status/1823742501884453312

 

 

Mark Jon
https://twitter.com/i/status/1823790299061030988

 

 

Lesson

 

 

Why?

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Dec 102020
 
 December 10, 2020  Posted by at 9:58 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , ,  39 Responses »


August Strindberg Alpine Landscape I 1894

 

No Drinking Alcohol For Two Months After COVID19 Vaccine – Russia (NYP)
Uni Of Pittsburgh Medical Center Won’t Require Staff To Take Vaccine (ZH)
‘95% Effective’ May Not Mean What You Think It Means (Neuburger)
Trump Campaign, 16 Other States Join Texas Motion To Supreme Court (JTN)
Trump To Meet With Ten State Attorneys General Backing Case To Overturn Election (F.)
Sen. Ron Johnson Does Not Rule Out Challenging Electoral College Results (JTN)
Hunter Biden Under Federal Investigation For Possible Tax Fraud (NYP)
Hunter Biden Criminal Probe Bolsters Claim About Beijing’s Influence In US (GG)
House Intel GOP Not Told About Eric Swalwell Relationship With Chinese Spy (NYP)
Secret Deal Gave Chinese Spies Free Rein In Switzerland (G.)
Clinton Associate 2016 Anti-Trump Dossier Claimed Russian FSB Source (JTN)
ECB To Unveil Yet Another Stimulus Package (R.)
Federal Trade Commission Calls For Breakup Of Facebook (NBC)

 

 

 

 

People with (auto-)immune issues were already not getting a vaccine. Now they add everyone with severe allergies; must be 25% of people?! Re: peanuts, asthma, hay fever. And you can’t travel etc., without proof of being vaccinated. While the CEO for Pfizer says they have no idea if even with the vaccine, you will not infect other people. Where’s the logic? Also, 4 people got facial paralysis after taking the Pfizer vaccine.

No drinkie, no problem!

No Drinking Alcohol For Two Months After COVID19 Vaccine – Russia (NYP)

Russian officials are warning citizens to avoid alcohol for two months after receiving the country’s COVID-19 vaccine — tough-to-swallow news for one of the world’s heaviest-drinking countries. The warning came from Russian Deputy Prime Minister Tatiana Golikova, who said in an interview that Russians will have to observe extra precautions during the 42 days it takes for the Sputnik V coronavirus vaccine to become effective. “[Russians] will have to refrain from visiting crowded places, wear face masks, use sanitizers, minimize contacts and refrain from drinking alcohol or taking immunosuppressant drugs,” Golikova told TASS News Agency. Anna Popova, the head of Rospotrebnadzor, Russia’s consumer safety watchdog, echoed the sentiments in an interview with Radio Komsomolskaya Pravda, as reported in the Moscow Times.


“It’s a strain on the body. If we want to stay healthy and have a strong immune response, don’t drink alcohol,” she said. According to the World Health Organization, Russia is the fourth-largest consumer of alcohol per person in the world. The average Russian consumes 15.1 liters (almost 4 gallons) of alcohol a year, according to the agency. Russia’s efforts to vaccinate its population began in earnest over the weekend in Moscow. Health authorities in the country estimate that 100,000 people have already been inoculated. “By the end of the week, all regions of the country will join this campaign,” Golikova said. Russian health officials say the Sputnik V vaccine is over 90 percent effective, but reports say medical workers who have taken the shot have come down with COVID-19. Russian President Vladimir Putin has reportedly refused to take it.

Read more …

Common sense.

Uni Of Pittsburgh Medical Center Won’t Require Staff To Take Vaccine (ZH)

The University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC) won’t require its health care employees to take the upcoming COVID-19 vaccine, which the medical provider expects to begin offering as soon as this month, according to PennLive. The reason are several-fold, according to UPMC medical director of infection prevention and epidemiology, Dr. Graham Snyder. For starters, general uncertainty over the vaccine. And while the $21 billion nonprofit organization (which employs 89,000 people) has a mandatory flu vaccination policy, it’s “based on decades of experience with the influenza vaccine,” according to Snyder. “But there’s no comparable data for a COVID-19 vaccine, or on whether a mandate is the best way to get large numbers of people to become vaccinated, Snyder said on Tuesday.

The first COVID-19 vaccine, from Pfizer, is expected to soon receive emergency approval. A second vaccine, from Moderna, is also expected to soon receive emergency approval. Distribution of at least one vaccine is expected to begin this month. Snyder said UPMC is “very excited about the preliminary information we have about how safe the vaccine is and how it will work.” Still, he said UPMC will conduct its own review of the vaccines before injecting any of its employees.” -PennLive. “Until we learn more and build our own experience with this vaccine, plus, until we see the uptake of vaccine in our communities, and have an understanding about the role that vaccination has in ending this pandemic, it’s not the right thing to make it mandatory,” said Snyder – who added that UPMC’s independent review won’t slow down their plans to distribute the vaxx.

On Tuesday, UPMC outlined their plans for receiving and distributing shots of the vaccine – while planning to launch an information campaign ‘to persuade the public to get vaccinated’ – despite their own hesitance over the jab. Perhaps it has something to do with several UPMC employees having participated in vaccine trials, only to report fever, fatigue or arm pain, with some needing to take a day or two off from work. According to Snyder, this is “a normal and healthy immune response.”

Read more …

See my article Sunday: 95% Vaccine Efficacy? Not So Fast.

‘95% Effective’ May Not Mean What You Think It Means (Neuburger)

To a lay person, a phrase like “95% effective” means one of two things: either that she or he, upon exposure to the virus, is protected 95% of the time, or that 95% of the people who take the vaccine are protected 100% of the time. And this is where the mutual eagerness of the two highly motivated groups — the public; the profiteers — intersect. The public wants to hear “95% effectiveness” and think it knows what those words means. The drug companies want the same thing as the public; it wants the public to think it knows what those words mean. But in the world of drug advertising, the word “effective” does not mean what you think it means. The other way to look at effectiveness is this: Based on the numbers released from phase 3 trials, the Pfizer vaccine is 95% effective, but 1% of the time. In the same way, the Moderna vaccine is 94% effective, but 2% of the time.

To sort this out, let’s look at real numbers, thanks to Twitter friend David Windt. For the Moderna product, the phase 3 trial contained 30,000 individuals divided between those given the vaccine and those given a placebo. Let’s assume that individuals in each group were allowed to roam freely “in the wild” — that is, told to live their regular lives among the general population, including going out infrequently, staying masked, and practicing social distance — as opposed being proactively and aggressively exposed to the virus by the researchers, which would be highly immoral, to say the least. In the Moderna vaccinated group, 11 people out of 15,000 got the virus (by Moderna’s definition of what “got the virus means”) for an overall infection rate of 0.07%. (There’s disagreement about whether the drug company’s “got the virus” measurements are well chosen [..] But we’ll ignore that point for now.)

In the Moderna placebo group, 185 people of 15,000 got the virus, for an overall infection rate of 1.23%. Do you see where this is headed? If you divide 0.07% by 1.23%, you get a 5.7% infection rate — or inversely, a 94% protection rate, which is what’s claimed. But that’s a percentage of a percentage, a ratio of a ratio, something called the “relative rate” in the medical profession. What this really means is that, of the 1.23% of people who would have gotten the virus in the vaccinated group, 94% of them didn’t. But Moderna isn’t testing 30,000 people who are infected with the virus, or even 15,000 people. Only 185 people “got the virus” (by their definition) in the placebo group. That population was reduced to 11 people with vaccination. These are very small numbers. As stated above, the Moderna vaccine is 94% effective — but only 1.23% of the time.

[..] For comparison, let’s look at the absolute numbers from the Moderna test. In the unprotected population, 1.23% of the people who could have been exposed to the virus, got it. In the vaccinated population exposed to the same conditions, a little less than 0.07% got the virus. Subtracting the two, the absolute gain in protection was 1.16% — that is, taking the vaccine bought you a little over 1% in absolute protection. The numbers for the Pfizer vaccine are similar. According to Windt, “the infection rate was reduced slightly, from 0.75% to 0.04% – that’s “95% efficacy” [but] these results do NOT mean that 95% of those vaccinated are protected.” In absolute terms, taking the Pfizer vaccine reduced the risk of getting the virus by just 0.71%.

Read more …

No matter how much people dump on this, it was always going to go this route.

Trump Campaign, 16 Other States Join Texas Motion To Supreme Court (JTN)

The Trump campaign and seventeen states have now joined a motion filed in Texas asking the Supreme Court to delay the conclusion of the election in four key states based on concerns of potentially unconstitutional voting systems and procedures. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton late Monday asked the country’s highest court to invalidate the Nov. 3 election results in Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, arguing officials in those four battleground states violated the Constitution by making changes to how ballots were cast and counted without legislative approval. Paxton’s suit asks the justices to issue a temporary restraining order preventing the states “from taking action to certify presidential electors or to have such electors take any official action including without limitation participating in the Electoral College.”

The Supreme Court as of Wednesday afternoon had yet to publicly say whether it will hear the case. In the meantime, 17 other states have signed on as amici curiae, signaling their support of the suit’s efforts. Missouri, Arkansas, Nebraska and others announced that they mutually hold “several important interests in this case.” On Wednesday, the Trump campaign also announced that it was intervening in the suit on the side of Texas. The campaign said in an announcement that President Trump’s “rights as a candidate are affected by the Defendant States’ failure to follow and enforce state election laws during the 2020 election.” “After reviewing the motion filed by Texas in the U.S. Supreme Court, I have determined that I will support the motion in all legally appropriate manners,” Arkansas Attorney General Leslie Rutledge, a Republican, tweeted late Tuesday.

“The integrity of our elections is a critical part of our nation and it must be upheld.” Also late Tuesday, Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt said on Twitter that his state is “in the fight” after Texas announced its election challenge. The court deciding to hear the case would be a huge victory for President Trump’s lawyers and others trying to get the courts to investigate voter fraud, states’ last-minute changes to voting laws and numerous other issues, all in hope of having the certification of the 2020 presidential race delayed and potentially overturned.

Read more …

17 now. That’s a sizeable chunk of America.

Trump To Meet With Ten State Attorneys General Backing Case To Overturn Election (F.)

President Donald Trump is scheduled to meet with a group of Republican state attorneys general at the White House on Wednesday – most of whom are engaged in or supporting an effort to overturn the results of the presidential election – as he still refuses to concede just days before the electoral college is set to vote. Trump is scheduled to have lunch with the attorneys general in the cabinet room of the White House at 12:45pm EST, according to a public schedule released by the White House Wednesday evening. The list of attendees, provided to Forbes by White House spokesperson Judd Deere, includes Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who is spearheading the lawsuit, which is aimed at overturning the results in Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Georgia. Also on the list are the attorneys general of Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Indiana, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, South Carolina and Utah, all of whom signed an amicus brief released Wednesday supporting the Texas case.


Also expected to attend is Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich – who represents a state Biden won and who filed a separate amicus brief “respecting” the Texas lawsuit – and Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron, who did not join either brief. The case – which Trump called “the big one” and said he would be “intervening” in – seeks to invalidate electors in the four key states based on allegations the states expansions of mail-in voting due to Covid-19 resulted in substantial fraud. The fraud claims pushed by the lawsuit have continuously been rejected by courts, with one election law expert deriding the case as, “utter garbage. Dangerous garbage, but garbage.”

Read more …

“The only way to resolve suspicions is with full transparency and public awareness. That will be the goal of the hearing.”

Sen. Ron Johnson Does Not Rule Out Challenging Electoral College Results (JTN)

Sen. Ron Johnson is not ruling out the possibility of challenging the Electoral College results in January when Congress is slated to certify the vote. “I would say it depends on what we found out,” the Wisconsin Republican said to reporters when he was asked about whether he plans on challenging election results, according to The Hill. “The American people need more information. I’m not ready to just close and slam the book on this thing and go ‘OK, let’s walk away from it.'” Republican Rep. Mo Brooks of Alabama has indicated that he intends to object to some states’ Electoral College votes. Johnson, who chairs the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, announced Wednesday that the committee will hold a hearing next week about election irregularities.


“Today I gave notice for a hearing for next Wednesday titled ‘Examining Irregularities in the 2020 election,'” the senator said in a statement. “I am mindful that many of the issues that have been raised have been, and will continue to be, appropriately resolved in the courts. But the fact remains that a large percentage of the American public does not view the 2020 election result as legitimate because of apparent irregularities that have not been fully examined. That is not a sustainable state of affairs for our country. The only way to resolve suspicions is with full transparency and public awareness. That will be the goal of the hearing.”

Ron Johnson

Read more …

I wonder about the timing here. The probe started in 2018, and he says he only learned about it yesterday? He had zero idea for over 2 years?

Hunter Biden Under Federal Investigation For Possible Tax Fraud (NYP)

President-elect Joe Biden’s son revealed Wednesday that he’s under federal investigation for possible tax fraud, with a report saying the Justice Department is examining his overseas business dealings. The probe also reportedly involves a laptop that belonged to Hunter Biden, the existence of which was first reported by The Post, and which contains communciations and documents detailing some of his business dealings in China and Ukraine. Hunter Biden, 50, disclosed the probe in a statement released by his father’s presidential transition office. “I learned yesterday for the first time that the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Delaware advised my legal counsel, also yesterday, that they are investigating my tax affairs,” Hunter Biden said in the statement.

“I take this matter very seriously but I am confident that a professional and objective review of these matters will demonstrate that I handled my affairs legally and appropriately, including with the benefit of professional tax advisors.” A statement attributed to “the Biden-Harris Transition” said, “President-elect Biden is deeply proud of his son, who has fought through difficult challenges, including the vicious personal attacks of recent months, only to emerge stronger.” The probe began in 2018, sources told Fox News and CNN. Investigators are looking into whether Hunter and his business associates violated various tax and money laundering laws, CNN said. The probe is focused on Hunter’s business dealings in China and other countries and invovles transactions with people who posed counterintelligence concerns, CNN said.

The investigation was put on hold during the run-up to the November election due to Justice Department guidelines that prohibit activity that could influence a political race, CNN said. But it’s since resumed and is entering a new phase, with the FBI and IRS issuing subpoenas and seeking interviews, CNN said. Fox News reported that the probe includes examining the Hunter Biden laptop exposed by The Post, citing two sources familiar with the investigation. The probe is before a grand jury, and involves so-called “Suspicious Activity Reports” from banks flagging transfers of funds from China and other nations, Fox News also said.

In September, Republican senators released a report on Hunter’s business affairs that said he “and his family were involved in a vast financial network that connected them to foreign nationals and foreign governments across the globe.” Some of those ties “raise criminal financial, counterintelligence and extortion concerns,” the report said. Wednesday’s surprise disclosure of the federal probe came exactly one year after FBI agents seized a laptop from a Delaware computer shop whose owner claims it was left there by Hunter and never retrieved.

Read more …

Greenwald. “We have our old friends who are at the top of America’s core inner circle of power and influence.”

Hunter Biden Criminal Probe Bolsters Claim About Beijing’s Influence In US (GG)

Hunter Biden acknowledged today that he has been notified of an active criminal investigation into his tax affairs by the U.S. Attorney for Delaware. Among the numerous prongs of the inquiry, CNN reports, investigators are examining “whether Hunter Biden and his associates violated tax and money laundering laws in business dealings in foreign countries, principally China.” Documents relating to Hunter Biden’s exploitation of his father’s name to enrich himself and other relatives through deals with China were among the cache published in the week before the election by The New York Post — revelations censored by Twitter and Facebook and steadfastly ignored by most mainstream news outlets. That concerted repression effort by media outlets and Silicon Valley left it to right-wing outlet such as Fox News and The Daily Caller to report, which in turn meant that millions of Americans were kept in the dark before voting.

But the just-revealed federal criminal investigation in Delaware is focused on exactly the questions which corporate media outlets refused to examine for fear that doing so would help Trump: namely, whether Hunter Biden engaged in illicit behavior in China and what impact that might have on his father’s presidency. The allegations at the heart of this investigation compel an examination of a fascinating and at-times disturbing speech at a major financial event held last week in Shanghai. In that speech, a Chinese scholar of political science and international finance, Di Donghseng, insisted that Beijing will have far more influence in Washington under a Biden administration than it did with the Trump administration.

The reason, Di said, is that China’s ability to get its way in Washington has long depended upon its numerous powerful Wall Street allies. But those allies, he said, had difficulty controlling Trump, but will exert virtually unfettered power over Biden. That China cultivated extensive financial ties to Hunter Biden, Di explained, will be crucial for bolstering Beijing’s influence even further. Di, who in addition to his teaching positions is also Vice Dean of Beijing’s Renmin University’s School of International Relations, delivered his remarks alongside three other Chinese banking and development experts. [..] The centerpiece of Di’s speech was the history he set forth of how Beijing has long successfully managed to protect its interests in the halls of American power: namely, by relying on “friends” in Wall Street and other U.S. ruling class sectors — which worked efficiently until the Trump presidency.

Referring to the Trump-era trade war between the two countries, Di posed this question: “Why did China and the U.S. use to be able to settle all kinds of issues between 1992 [when Clinton became President] and 2016 [when Obama’s left office]?” He then provided this answer: “No matter what kind of crises we encountered — be it the Yinhe incident [when the U.S. interdicted a Chinese ship in the mistaken belief it carried chemical weapons for Iran], the bombing of the embassy [the 1992 bombing by the U.S. of the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade], or the crashing of the plane [the 2001 crashing of a U.S. military spy plane into a Chinese fighter jet] — things were all solved in no time, like a couple do with their quarrels starting at the bedhead but ending at the bed end. We fixed everything in two months. What is the reason? I’m going to throw out something maybe a little bit explosive here. It’s just because we have people at the top. We have our old friends who are at the top of America’s core inner circle of power and influence.”

Read more …

Swalwell needs to be investigated for real.

House Intel GOP Not Told About Eric Swalwell Relationship With Chinese Spy (NYP)

House Intelligence Committee Republicans were surprised to learn this week that a member of their panel, Democratic Rep. Eric Swalwell, was targeted by a suspected Chinese spy who slept with US politicians as a tactic to elicit information. Swalwell, who represents a California district south of Oakland, received an FBI “defensive briefing” in 2015 on operative Fang Fang, but most if not all Republicans on the elite committee weren’t told that a colleague had been targeted by China. Fang, also known as Christine Fang, returned to China in mid-2015 as US officials heightened their scrutiny of her string of honey-trap seductions. She reportedly fundraised for Swalwell’s 2014 re-election campaign before he joined the Intelligence Committee in 2015.

A congressional Republican source told The Post that Intelligence Committee Republicans had not been informed of the relationship. The committee is supposed to have access to some of the nation’s most sensitive information to fulfill its oversight role of shadowy government programs. If the Chinese operation occurred as described in a bombshell Tuesday article in Axios, it’s unclear why lawmakers aside from Swalwell were kept in the dark, especially since Fang may have targeted Swalwell due to his proximity to sensitive information. The Post asked Swalwell’s 12 Democratic colleagues on the Intelligence Committee, including Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), about when they learned of Swalwell’s association with Fang, but they did not immediately reply.

Swalwell has not said if he had a romantic relationship with Fang, who allegedly seduced two Midwest mayors as part of her operation from 2011 to 2015. He claimed in a Wednesday CNN appearance that he “can’t talk too much about the details of the case” because the information should be kept secret. The issue is likely to dog Swalwell as Republicans demand more information. “Did Schiff and [House Speaker Nancy] Pelosi know? Why did no one take any steps to keep sensitive intel, at least as it relates to China, far away from a member who is at best potentially compromised?” a Republican close to the White House told The Post.

Read more …

Lots of China stories all of a sudden.

Secret Deal Gave Chinese Spies Free Rein In Switzerland (G.)

The full text of a secret deal between Switzerland and China that allowed Chinese security officials access to the country at Swiss taxpayers’ expense has been revealed for the first time as the government pushes to renew it. The five-year “readmission agreement”, which was signed in 2015 and expired on Monday, lay out terms for Chinese agents to travel to Switzerland and interview suspected Chinese nationals that Swiss authorities wished to deport. Unlike more than 50 similar deals Switzerland has signed with other countries, it was never published by the government and was not even publicly acknowledged until August. The official English translation of the agreement has been obtained by Safeguard Defenders, an Asia-focused human rights campaign group.

It reveals an extraordinary commitment to secrecy within an agreement that had itself been concealed from the public, the group says. The “experts” from the ministry of public security (MPS) had to be invited on the two-week “missions”, but once the invitation had been issued China could choose its agents without Swiss approval. They could enter the country without official status, and Switzerland committed to keeping their identity confidential. The reports they produced for Swiss authorities were also kept secret. Readmission deals are a regular part of international law, but Safeguard Defenders said the 2015 arrangement with Beijing, which was not reciprocal, was of “an entirely different character” from others signed by Switzerland.

The secrecy surrounding both the agreement itself and the work of Chinese agents, the choice of partner – a security super-ministry with extensive remit including police and intelligence services – and even the presence of agents were unusual. “In only a minority of cases [do other readmission] deals allow for the other party to send representatives to accompany the individual to be returned, and in those cases [the representatives] are limited to that specific activity, and it is a public, official duty being carried out,” Safeguard Defenders said. The deal was extremely favourable to the Chinese and went above and beyond normal migration information-sharing arrangements, said Margaret Lewis, a law professor at Seton Hall University in the US.

Read more …

If Crossfire Hurricans is not thoroughly and indepenndently investigated, how will the FBI ever recover?

Clinton Associate 2016 Anti-Trump Dossier Claimed Russian FSB Source (JTN)

Evidence released by the Senate this month reveals that longtime Hillary Clinton associate Cody Shearer received anti-Trump dirt in 2016 from a Russian intelligence source and got it into the hands of the FBI through the ex-British spy Christopher Steele. Shearer’s claim that his information came from a Russian FSB source, experts say, should have alerted senior US officials that the FBI’s investigation of the Trump campaign’s ties Russia was compromised by its sources, Clinton surrogates and alleged Russian spies. The documents also indicate the State Department played a much larger role than previously reported in shaping the media narrative, and eventually the official Obama administration intelligence assessment that Vladimir Putin wanted Trump to win in 2016, lawmakers said.

“Clinton confidantes and campaign surrogates repeatedly sought information from individuals with links to known or suspected Russian intelligence officers and assets,” Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee Chairman Ron Johnson, R-Wis, told Just the News. “This demonstrates the double standard and bias of the FBI’s investigation of only Trump campaign officials for their contacts with Russian agents. Americans deserve equal justice, and the FBI has a long way to go before its integrity and credibility is restored.” The new documents released jointly by Johnson’s committee and the Senate Finance Committee chaired by Chuck Grassley sheds significant new light on the extensive network of Clinton associates who participated and exerted influence on the 2016-17 effort to falsely portray Trump as the agent of a hostile power.

One of Shearer’s reports, alleging that Trump was compromised by Russian intelligence, made its way to the FBI shortly before the 2016 election through a series of Clinton allies. It included Steele, the British ex-spy who authored a now-debunked dossier tying the Trump campaign and associates to Kremlin officials. Steele submitted the Shearer memo, titled “FSB Interview,” to the FBI as a supplement to his own Trump-Russia reporting funded by the Clinton campaign. In a prefatory note to the Shearer memo, Steele wrote to his FBI handlers that “some of the reporting is remarkably similar” to his own, especially regarding “TRUMP’s compromise by the FSB,” and the “funding of the TRUMP campaign.” Steele dated Shearer’s memo Oct. 19, 2016. Two days later, the FBI obtained a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant on Trump adviser Carter Page based on some of the information from Steele’s dossier.

Read more …

For the banks.

ECB To Unveil Yet Another Stimulus Package (R.)

The European Central Bank will unveil fresh stimulus measures on Thursday to prop up the recession-hit currency bloc long enough for a coronavirus vaccine to be deployed and its devastated economy to start to heal. With fresh support measures already promised, only the details of the package remain up in the air. But the bottom line is clear: borrowing costs will be kept close to zero for years so that governments and firms can spend their way out of the biggest recession in living memory. The ECB’s challenge will be to balance a growing range of short-term risks against improving long term prospects, indicating that its move will be big but lack the “shock and awe” impact of previous crisis-fighting measures.

“With the positive news in terms of vaccine development, Europe is now starting to see the light at the end of the tunnel,” Oxford Economics said in a note. “However, the short-term outlook remains extremely challenging, with euro zone GDP likely to contract in the fourth quarter.” For now, the 19-country euro zone is facing a triple shock: a lingering second wave of the pandemic, the prospect of a hard Brexit and political stalemate over the European Union’s 750 billion euro ($908 billion) recovery fund. But all three are seen as temporary shocks, with the political strife likely to be resolved and the pandemic easing by the spring, leaving the ECB with the task of getting the bloc through a difficult winter.

The economy also recovered surprisingly quickly after the first wave of coronavirus lockdowns, suggesting more resilience than is built into economic models. Fresh projections could thus point to lower growth in 2021 but better prospects in 2022, leaving the overall growth path little changed.

Read more …

This is supposed to happen under Biden?

Federal Trade Commission Calls For Breakup Of Facebook (NBC)

The Federal Trade Commission sued to break up Facebook on Wednesday, asking a federal court to force the sell-off of assets such as Instagram and WhatsApp as independent businesses. “Facebook has maintained its monopoly position by buying up companies that present competitive threats and by imposing restrictive policies that unjustifiably hinder actual or potential rivals that Facebook does not or cannot acquire,” the commission said in the lawsuit filed in federal court in Washington, D.C. The lawsuit asks the court to order the “divestiture of assets, divestiture or reconstruction of businesses (including, but not limited to, Instagram and/or WhatsApp),” as well as other possible relief the court might want to add.

The announcement is a major step that has been years in the making, with Facebook and several other major U.S. technology companies having grown quickly in the past 10 years with little government oversight. But the lack of scrutiny has changed recently, with a series of lawsuits that now threaten to rein in the dominance of big American tech firms that have grown to be among the world’s most valuable companies. Attorneys general from 48 states and territories said they were filing their own lawsuit against Facebook, reflecting the broad and bipartisan concern about how much power Facebook and its CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, have accumulated on the internet. Facebook’s share price fell by as much as 4 percent after the news, before paring its losses.

“Breakup Facebook” has become a rally cry for the company’s critics — from Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., to one of Facebook’s wealthy founders, Chris Hughes, who last year wrote a 6,000-word case for a break-up. But the idea has never been truly attempted in court. Facebook said it was reviewing the two lawsuits, and pointed out that the FTC approved the Instagram and WhatsApp acquisitions at the time. “Years after the FTC cleared our acquisitions, the government now wants a do-over with no regard for the impact that precedent would have on the broader business community or the people who choose our products every day,” Facebook said in a statement, adding that it would have more to say soon.

Read more …

 

 

We try to run the Automatic Earth on donations. Since ad revenue has collapsed, you are now not just a reader, but an integral part of the process that builds this site.

Click at the top of the sidebars for Paypal and Patreon donations. Thank you for your support.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Support the Automatic Earth in virustime, election time, all the time. Click at the top of the sidebars to donate with Paypal and Patreon.