gerrymandering Archives - The Automatic Earth

BREAKING:

The new Fed Chair just signaled a major shift.
Kevin Warsh says QE is fueling inflation.

The Fed's massive balance sheet is part of the problem.

"The Fed should exit markets outside of crises."

This is not Powell talking.
This is a completely different philosophy.… pic.twitter.com/YIFbnESoAs
— Crypto Tice (@CryptoTice_) May 15, 2026

https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/2055411483526181048?s=20 https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2055645786923282637?s=20

The IRGC can bleed people profoundly before they squeal.

• Tehran Claims US Faces Escalating Economic Fallout From ‘War Of Choice’ (ZH)

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi warned Saturday that the United States would face mounting economic fallout from its “war of choice” against Iran, as both sides appear settled into a long game of waiting to inflict the most severe economic and political damage on the other. In a post on X, Araghchi said Americans would bear the escalating financial costs of the conflict with Tehran. “Put aside gas price hike and stock market bubble. Real pain begins when U.S. debt and mortgage rates start to jump,” he wrote in English. This isn’t the first time Iranian officials and state media have tried to directly appeal to the American public.

Araghchi also pointed to growing economic strain inside the United States, saying auto loan delinquencies had already climbed to their highest level in more than 30 years. “This was all avoidable,” he added, framing the start of the conflict as Trump’s ‘war of choice’ in the Middle East. Of course, the Pentagon has a big card to play too, as on Saturday US Central Command (CENTCOM) announced that four vessels in the Hormuz area were “disabled to ensure compliance.” In an official statement it said that that since the imposition of a naval blockade on Iranian ports, 75 commercial vessels have been redirected and four others disabled to “ensure compliance”. There is no doubt the US naval blockade is putting immense economic pressure on the Iranian government, society, and the energy sectors as crude shit-ins loom, or are in progress…

The internal Iranian regime narrative has shifted markedly in the past 72 hours. Multiple officials have now openly acknowledged Iran’s structural gasoline deficit, war-damaged energy infrastructure, and the urgent need for consumption management.

Fuel shortages and tightened…
— Miad Maleki (@miadmaleki) May 16, 2026

One Saudi-funded source alleges of the tightening hardship situation inside Iran: Fuel shortages and tighter rationing are pushing drivers across Iran into a growing gasoline black market, with citizens describing long lines at gas stations and sharply inflated prices in messages sent to Iran International. The accounts describe growing frustration over restricted access to subsidized gasoline and arbitrary limits imposed by operators, leaving many motorists dependent on costly unofficial sales.
…Iran uses a subsidized fuel quota system controlled through electronic fuel cards. Every private vehicle receives a monthly gasoline allocation at discounted prices, while extra consumption is charged at higher rates. One citizen was cited in the same report as complaining: “One day there’s quota left on your card, the next day it says your quota is finished. They even steal the few drops of gasoline they give people.” The standoff drags on, amid reports the Trump administration is mulling resumption of the bombing campaign:

"There is no military solution to anything related to Iran"

Iran’s FM Abbas Araghchi emphasizes that the country will resist any aggression or pressure.

Follow Press TV on Telegram: https://t.co/LWoNSpkJSh pic.twitter.com/YecgTUMuon
— Press TV 🔻 (@PressTV) May 15, 2026

However, US and Gulf media reports about the economic and political crisis inside Iran have often been somewhat exaggerated, in ‘hopes’ of anti-regime sentiment being stirred enough for some kind of new anti-government uprising. But that has yet to come, after months of war launched by the US and Israel. It seems Washington is still pinning its hopes on exactly this.

“Bahrain, Kuwait, and Oman joined Saudi Arabia and Qatar in rejecting the UAE plan.”

• Persian Gulf Countries ‘Refused’ UAE Call For Joint Attack On Iran (Cradle)

The UAE tried but failed to persuade neighboring states, including Saudi Arabia and Qatar, to take part in a coordinated military attack on Iran, Bloomberg reported Friday, citing sources familiar with the matter. UAE President Mohammed bin Zayed (MbZ) spoke by phone with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MbS) and other regional leaders to propose the coordinated attacks, shortly after the US and Israel launched the war on Iran on February 28, the sources said.

During the calls, MbZ argued that the states that formed the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) must act as a bloc to attack Iran alongside the US and Israel. However, his fellow Gulf leaders told him it was “not their war,” according to the report. When Saudi Crown Prince MbS refused to go along with the scheme, already shaky ties between the UAE and Saudi Arabia were further strained. The Saudi refusal also contributed to the Emirates’ decision to leave OPEC and OPEC+, the oil-producing cartel, and deepen its existing ties to Israel.
The UAE ultimately carried out several strikes against Iran without support from other Gulf states in early March and in April. Iran targeted US bases and oil facilities in Saudi Arabia with drones in the first days of the war. Yet the kingdom focused its efforts on promoting Pakistani-mediated negotiations between Washington and Tehran. Qatar considered joining the UAE in an attack after Iranian missile strikes hit Doha’s Ras Laffan Industrial City, the world’s largest liquefied natural gas (LNG) facility, causing extensive damage and major fires, a Gulf official said. However, Doha also ultimately chose to de-escalate and throw its support behind negotiations.
Bahrain, Kuwait, and Oman joined Saudi Arabia and Qatar in rejecting the UAE plan. One source said US officials were aware of the UAE effort and that Washington pushed Saudi Arabia and Qatar to join a coordinated military response. On Thursday, the Financial Times (FT) reported that Saudi Arabia had “floated” the possibility of reaching a “non-aggression pact” between Iran and neighboring states modeled on the 1975 Helsinki Accords, which eased tensions during the Cold War in Europe.
The Saudi-proposed pact for the day after the US-Israeli war on Iran ends reportedly has support from several European capitals, which view it as “the best way to avoid future conflict” and have urged Arab states to support it.The British daily cites an unnamed Arab diplomat who says that such a pact would be welcomed “by most Arab and Muslim states, as well as by Iran,” although severe concerns remain about Israel’s continued threats to reignite the war regardless of any deal.
Meanwhile, the two-day meeting of BRICS foreign ministers in New Delhi ended on Friday without a joint statement due to “differing views” on the US-Israeli war against Iran and the current situation in West Asia. The foreign ministers expressed “their respective national positions and shared a range of perspectives,” according to a statement issued by India.
The statement added that one member state had “reservations” about issues related to Gaza, as well as security in the Red Sea and the Bab al-Mandab Strait. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said during the meeting that “Iran is a country that cannot be divided. The era of American dominance is over.” He also singled out the UAE for blocking the ministerial BRICS statement, and pointed out its “own special relationship with Israel.”

Love the photo.

• China Confirms Boeing Deal, Will Cut Select Levies & Expand Agri Trade (ZH)

One day after President Trump left Beijing, following his multi-day summit with Chinese President Xi Jinping, China’s Commerce Ministry released new details about agreements it had reached to purchaseU.S.. planes and farm goods.

CHINA, US REACH ARRANGEMENTS ON BUYING US PLANES
The exact wording “reach arrangements”s in the Bloomberg headline is important because it suggests a framework, a commitment, or a negotiated understanding, not necessarily a finalized purchase contract for Boeing commercial jets. Based on earlier reports, Trump said China agreed to buy 200 Boeing planes, with the total potentially rising to 750 aircraft. The next set of headlines shows that the Trump team and Beijing have reached a partial trade de-escalation package following the summit:
CHINA, US AGREE TO REDUCE LEVIES ON A RANGE OF PRODUCTS
CHINA TO EXPAND BILATERAL TRADE W/ US ON AGR AND OTHER PRODUCTS
CHINA VOWS TO EXPAND BILATERAL AGRI TRADE WITH US
The headlines point to a U.S.-China trade détente that is constructive for American industry, exporters, and U.S. farmers. Now the larger question is what Trump and Xi agreed to behind closed doors regarding Tehran and the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz.

U.S. and China Agree To Establish Trade And Investment Boards As Trump-Xi Summit Delivers Modest Wins. U.S. and Chinese leaders agreed to establish a new “Board of Trade” and a parallel “Board of Investment” during President DonaldTrump’ss two-day visit to Beijing – a summit that ended much as it began: with significant pageantry, warm personal rapport between the leaders, and modest, incremental progress on trade. The new boards aim to oversee bilateral purchases, manage trade differences, facilitate deals in non-sensitive sectors (with roughly $30 billion in goods identified), and provide a standing channel to prevent future escalations without constant high-level intervention.
The boards were a pre-summit priority pushed by U.S. officials, including Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer. They build on preparatory talks in South Korea that produced what both sides described as “generally balanced and positive outcomes.” Chinese state media, including Xinhua, highlighted the agreements as part of efforts to expand practical cooperation and maintain stable economic ties.
This development aligns with Xi Jinping’s broader push to reframe the bilateral relationship as one of “constructive strategic stability” – a new guiding vision intended to provide predictability for the next three years and beyond, emphasizing cooperation as the mainstay while allowing for “moderate competition” and “manageable differences.” Xi described it as a positive, sound, constant, and enduring stability that should translate into concrete actions.

“The MAGA wing of the party is the party now. Neither Vance nor Rubio can distance themselves from that if they try.”

• Vance or Rubio in 2028 Have to Be ‘the Bridge to the Future’ (Tim O’Brien)

People have asked Secretary of State Marco Rubio if he plans to run for president in 2028, and his answer has been the same every time. Unequivocally, he endorses Vice President JD Vance, who is assumed to be the likely Republican standard-bearer. At the same time, given the way in which Rubio has been used, while rising to the occasion every time, you cannot ignore him. President Donald Trump has not shied away from praising both Vance and Rubio, but he has been substantially more effusive lately in his comments about Rubio. This has more than a few people in Washington, D.C., chattering.

Vance had the perfect response for now. But he won’t be able to say this a year from now. In addition to performing the duties of his office, Rubio has taken on any number of ad hoc jobs, knocking it out of the park every time. He knows how to demand and get every other country in the world to respect the U.S. once again. He’s seamlessly put an end to the massive grift that was USAID. Any one of his accomplishments is more than most who’ve run the State Department in recent memory, and he’s not done. Vance is in an even more unenviable position if you’re looking ahead to 2028. It’s the vice president’s job not to show up the president, while at the same time, he cannot wield power the way certain cabinet officials can. This makes it harder for Vance to remind Americans that he can be the alpha.
Over the past 250 years, only six vice presidents ran for and won the presidency. And only four won the highest office as an incumbent vice president. They were John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Martin Van Buren, and George H.W. Bush. Richard Nixon and Joe Biden both eventually were certified as the winners of presidential elections, but not as part of an incumbent administration. When Nixon was the incumbent, he famously ran against John F. Kennedy in 1960 and lost. Biden got pushed aside in 2016 for Hillary Clinton and never got the chance to use his office as a springboard for the presidency. Instead, he was “elected” in 2020 by getting roughly 20 million more votes than any other Democrat candidate before or after. And he did all that by campaigning from his basement, hugging children uncomfortably, and telling stories about “Corn Pop.”
If I were named head of elections, one of the first things I’d do is organize a search party for those missing 20 million voters. Kamala Harris could have used them in 2024. The last incumbent vice president to graduate directly into the Oval Office was Bush. To say that’s not easy to do is an understatement. Playing second-fiddle for four years prior to a run for the highest office in the land can allow voters to forget how strong you are as an independent candidate at the top of a ticket. These are the challenges Vance faces, specifically, but not just Vance. Both he and Rubio will have to be their own men and try to step out from under the long shadow that Trump has cast. Both will have to combat the baggage that the left has continually heaped on Trump and everyone associated with his administration.
Trump created the America First movement. He created and defined Make America Great Again (MAGA). The MAGA wing of the party is the party now. Neither Vance nor Rubio can distance themselves from that if they try. Quite frankly, it would be dumb to try. Contrary to what the legacy media and the left do to frame Trump’s years as “chaos” or a failure, he has been wildly successful, and Americans know it. If Trump can bring the Iran situation under control, get some sort of election integrity guardrails in place, energy prices would come down, inflation would stabilize, and the prospects for a Republican 2028 election victory would be easier to foresee. Who would want to distance themselves from that?
Still, neither Vance nor Rubio can be another Donald J. Trump. They have to carve their own niche, while maintaining some continuity between MAGA and the next Republican administration. Another factor to consider is Trump himself. While he would not want his underlings taking credit for what he did, he also would not want them distancing themselves from MAGA to create their own identity for 2028. That’s a delicate balance. The smartest thing a Vance or a Rubio or even a Vance-Rubio ticket could do in the run-up to 2028 is to map out a comprehensive narrative and progression from MAGA to what’s next. I mean, if you just finished making America great again between 2024 and 2028, you don’t want to use MAGA as your rallying cry now. You need something new and fresh, but you want to stay true to America First.
Former Republican Tennessee governor and U.S. senator Lamar Alexander is coming out with a new autobiography, and he’s making the book tour rounds right now. He recently talked to Politico about the book and his life in politics. To be sure, Alexander represents everything about the Republican establishment that we conservatives are working to get past. He represents a Republican era where the GOP allowed the Democrats to make the rules even when the Republicans won. Kind of like what Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) is doing right now.
Still, Politico asked him if he could have beaten incumbent President Bill Clinton had he gotten the GOP’s nomination instead of Bob Dole. Alexander’s answer is debatable on whether he could have beaten Clinton, but he observed something critical that can’t be overlooked when considering what Vance or Rubio would need to do to win in 2028.
He said, “It would have been hard. I thought I could do better than Dole. I said to Dole: ‘Don’t let [Clinton] have the bridge to the future.’ And Clinton took it and won it.” For either Vance or Rubio, that’s the challenge. To be a part of the Trump administration running for the presidency, you still have to come up with your own brand that’s new and different, while respecting the Trump political lineage and embracing the Trump record.
The rationale has to be: “We need more than four years” to accomplish all the things we set out to accomplish. We can’t go backward. Most importantly, they will need to take ownership of the whole “bridge to the future” brand (as a concept, not as a slogan) before any Democrat gets to it. Trump did just that with “Make America Great Again.” Vance or Rubio can do it and needs to do it pretty soon. The Republican nominee in 2028 must be perceived by the electorate as America’s bridge to a brighter future.

I thought about it, and I decided I’m NOT going to complain.

• Attractive Young Women Are Now The New Face Of The ‘Far-Right’ (ZH)

The Telegraph has published a piece so tone-deaf it reads like self-parody. According to the outlet, the “far-right” is no longer the domain of bald men in boots and tattoos. No, it’s now being led by “strikingly telegenic young women” who dare to look good on camera while warning about mass migration, grooming gangs, and cultural replacement. Three foreign activists – Ada Lluch, Valentina Gomez, and Eva Vlaardingerbroek – were banned from entering Britain for a Tommy Robinson rally, and the Telegraph can’t stop gushing over how “pretty” this makes the movement look. The government has banned at least seven foreign voices from attending the rally, including the women highlighted by the Telegraph.

Not so long ago, the stock image of someone from the far-Right was easily summoned: they’d be male, obviously, and very probably bald, and questionable tattoos.

The face of the far-Right, it seems, is changing – and it’s becoming a good deal prettier ⬇️https://t.co/K8xXWHSdgK pic.twitter.com/irtXPyGD9X
— The Telegraph (@Telegraph) May 15, 2026

Critics point out the blatant double standard: pro-Palestine marches with openly extremist rhetoric are often tolerated, while a native-focused demonstration drawing tens or hundreds of thousands draws preemptive visa blocks on speakers. Kier Starmer’s government waves in unvetted migrants and certain extremists but draws the line at articulate critics of mass migration. The Telegraph profiles the banned women in breathless detail. Catalan activist Ada Lluch has called out “complete invasion” of western democracies, American influencer Valentina Gomez warned about “rapist Muslims taking over,” and Dutch commentator Eva Vlaardingerbroek spoke of “the rape, replacement and murder of our people.”
All three were barred from the UK, along with several other activists. Meanwhile, the government continues to wave in the very people these women are warning about. The Telegraph also warns about attractive home-grown women, including British influencer Saskia Teague. With over 100,000 Instagram followers, she mixes “happy happy happy” selfies with calls for “England for the English,” mass deportations, and an end to shame-free multiculturalism. The Telegraph acts shocked that she also praises her “Anglo-Saxon hair” and rejects the idea she’s being “used” by men.
Of course the usual suspects are wheeled out to clutch pearls. Hope Not Hate researcher Alex MacKinnon calls it a “glamorisation” effort to shed the “violent thug image.” Institute for Strategic Dialogue’s Hannah Rose says looking desirable builds followers and fits the ideology that women should be “aesthetically pleasing.” The implication is that these women can’t possibly believe what they’re saying – they must be grifting or being manipulated. Because in the eyes of the legacy media, no normal young attractive woman could possibly notice what’s happening to her country.
This is the same media that files stories on “far-right” threat while ignoring grooming gang scandals, no-go zones, and skyrocketing violence against women and girls. The Telegraph even admits the shift comes from young people “profoundly disaffected with mainstream parties” and disillusioned with modern life. Yet instead of asking why that disillusionment exists, they obsess over Instagram filters and “zhuzhing” the image. Prime Minister Keir Starmer has today claimed he’s all about “championing peaceful protest” while simultaneously blocking entry to those he dislikes. Starmer declared:
“I’ll always champion peaceful protest. But the Unite the Kingdom march organisers are peddling hatred and division,” then admitting that “We’ve already blocked visas for far-right agitators who want to come here to spew their extremist views.”

“Tina Peters, a 73-year-old woman with cancer, was given a nine year jail sentence in Colorado because she caught the Democrats CHEATING..”

• Colorado Governor Commutes Whistleblower Tina Peters’ Sentence (Salgado)

Colorado 2020 election whistleblower Tina Peters finally received some good news. Peters ended up at the epicenter of national controversy when she reportedly allowed an unauthorized person to access voting equipment in Mesa County in order to expose apparent election irregularities. Gov. Jared Polis (D-Colo.) granted Peters a commutation and parole as of June 1, based on a May 15 press release. Peters is a Gold Star Mother who lost her son, a Navy SEAL, in 2017.

It appears that the commutation might be due to her backing down somewhat from her previous allegations and efforts to expose apparent election fraud in Colorado back in 2020, when she was an election clerk. It is worth noting that a Democrat who tried to forge a thousand ballots in New Jersey received a sweetheart deal, sparing him any prison time, while Peters received almost a decade in prison as her sentence for trying to call attention to voting irregularities.
A statement on X posted on Peters’ account thanked Polis, expressed hopes for the future, and criticized people who had tried to storm the jail in support of her case. It said: I made mistakes, and for those I am sorry. Five years ago I misled the Secretary of State when allowing a person to gain access to county voting equipment. That was wrong. I have learned and grown during my time in prison and going forward I will make sure that my actions always follow the law, and I will avoid the mistakes of the past…
Upon release, I plan to do my best through legal means to support election integrity and based on my own personal experiences to elevate the cause of prison reform to help ensure the detention system is more fair and equitable for people of all ages. My experiences have given me a perspective that plan to share with others to improve Colorado’s corrections system. I am grateful for a second chance and an earlier release, and I look forward to doing good in the world.
Tina Peters https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2055393588754727270?s=20
President Donald Trump, who has repeatedly called for Colorado to let Peters go altogether, reacted to the news on Truth Social with just two words: “FREE TINA!” In March, he strongly condemned the sentence Peters received for challenging the 2020 election. “Tina Peters, a 73-year-old woman with cancer, was given a nine year jail sentence in Colorado because she caught the Democrats CHEATING on the Presidential Election of 2020. FREE TINA!” he insisted.
A couple of days after that, Trump reflected again on the double standard Democrats impose, letting truly dangerous criminals go free while aggressively targeting their political opponents. “For years, Democrats ignored Violent and Vicious Crime of all shapes, sizes, colors, and types. Violent Criminals who should have been locked up were allowed to attack again. Democrats were also far too happy to let in the worst from the worst countries so they could rip off American Taxpayers,” he wrote.
“Democrats only think there is one crime – Not voting for them!” Trump continued. “Instead of protecting Americans and their Tax Dollars, Democrats chose instead to prosecute anyone they can find who wanted Safe and Secure Elections. Democrats have been relentless in their targeting of TINA PETERS, a Patriot who simply wanted to make sure that our Elections were Fair and Honest. Tina is sitting in a Colorado prison for the ‘crime’ of demanding Honest Elections. FREE TINA!”

And now for something completely different.

• A Society Without God Is a Society Without Truth (Josh Hammer)

Next Thursday evening, Jews will celebrate the holiday of Shavuot. This holiday, which occurs seven weeks and one day after Passover (hence the name Shavuot, which literally means “weeks”), commemorates perhaps the most transformative event in all of human history: the revelation of the Word of God to the ancient Israelite nation. It was at Mount Sinai, congregated at the base of the smoking and trembling mountain, that God promised the Israelites they would be a “kingdom of princes and a holy nation” if they accepted and maintained fidelity to His covenant. In unison, before they had even received the Ten Commandments, the Israelites responded, “All that the Lord has spoken we shall do!”

The Divine Revelation at Sinai fundamentally changed the relationship between mankind and truth. Before Sinai, mankind had understood truth as inherently subjective, subject to the ever-changing whims of the volatile gods. Now, after Sinai, there could be no such moral confusion. The one, true God — He who had created the universe and fashioned mankind in His image — had revealed His Will. Moral relativism and idolatry were now out. Moral objectivity and monotheism were now in. For the first time, there was a fixed barometer by which to judge man’s moral conduct, devise laws and political institutions, and live one’s day-to-day life more generally.
Because of the breadth and depth of its impact and lasting influence, the Divine Revelation at Sinai was the logical starting point for what we now call Western civilization. Writing thousands of years later at another inflection point in human history, Alexander Hamilton wrote in The Federalist No. 31: “In disquisitions of every kind, there are certain primary truths, or first principles, upon which all subsequent reasonings must depend.” In the United States specifically, and in Western civilization more generally, it was long obvious what those “primary truths” and “first principles” actually meant: the Word of God Himself. Such a properly anchored and oriented society is uniquely suited to improve mankind’s lot and advance human flourishing.
Crucially, only such a properly anchored society can claim to comprehend the truth — let alone assert that certain truths are “self-evident,” as we recall every Independence Day. Because when God falls by the wayside, truth does as well. Recent events underscore the point.
In a Washington Post op-ed earlier this month, Gregory Conti, a politics professor at perennially top-ranked Princeton University, lamented: “Several years ago, one of my colleagues at Princeton University hosted a lecture on religion and free speech. The talk didn’t seem to be landing with the students. Finally, he realized why: The speaker had made repeated reference to the Ten Commandments, and several students didn’t know what they were.” Conti noted that Princeton students are often smart and driven, but they lack basic religious literacy — even the difference between the Old and New Testaments. In short, many of America’s future leaders do not even recognize the “primary truths” and “first principles” upon which our civilization rests.
There is a clear casualty of this ignorance: our ability to accept reality and the truth. Consider, for example, the shocking inability to do precisely that among far too many members of America’s more avowedly secularist political party, the Democrats. A whopping 42% of Democrats believe the attempted assassination of Donald Trump in Butler, Pa., in July 2024 was staged. A similarly galling 34% of Democrats believe the same about the recent attempted assassination of Trump and his Cabinet members at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner in Washington, D.C. There is, of course, zero evidence to support either belief. One might as well believe in Bigfoot, or that Neil Armstrong’s moon landing was fake.
Nor is this merely a left-leaning sociological phenomenon. There are plenty of Americans who have heterodox or perhaps even nominally right-leaning political views who have also lost touch with basic reality, allowing their brains to be rotted by mass consumption of delusional conspiracies and AI-driven online slop. We call them Candace Owens and Tucker Carlson fans.
There can be nothing good down this road. Only a society that is rooted in, and oriented toward, the eternal and the transcendental can ever hope to cultivate decent, truth-seeking citizens. When a free people loses the ability to discern between truth and fiction, rightness and wrongness, justice and injustice, there can only be only misery, despair and destruction. We’re losing that because, for far too long, we’ve been missing God. There is no better time than the run-up to America’s semiquincentennial — when we will celebrate the assertion of the self-evident truths that birthed the nation — to find Him once again. Frankly, America’s survival for another 250 years depends on it.

“..enforce the law, arrest people who commit crimes, get the crackheads off the streets, and make sure firefighters are funded and ready to do their jobs. Once upon a time, these weren’t partisan issues.

• Everything Is Awesome About This Spencer Pratt Ad (Matt Margolis)

Admittedly, I haven’t been paying much attention to the Los Angeles mayoral race, but a LEGO-animated campaign ad caught my attention, and I just had to write about it. The ad, published this week in support of Spencer Pratt’s 2026 campaign for mayor of Los Angeles, is making the rounds online, and for good reason. It’s a parody of “Everything Is Awesome” from The Lego Movie, set against a LEGO-animated cityscape that tells the dirty truth about the city under Karen Bass’s leadership. It opens with a scene that cuts straight to the truth: a man assaulting a police officer on a city street.

Everything is awful; everything is hell when you’re part of the scene. Karen Bass is awful and burning down our streets. Welcome to Los Angeles, where the criminals have more protections than the cops. Then there’s the drug crisis, which the ad renders in haunting, almost absurd LEGO detail: drug zombies shambling through city streets, needles and feces littering the sidewalks, and not a city official in sight to do anything about it. And Bass herself? The ad shows the incumbent mayor flying over her burning city — laughing.
And if you know anything about Bass, you know that’s not an exaggeration for effect. It’s a pretty accurate metaphor for her tenure. While neighborhoods smoldered during the January 2026 wildfires, Bass was abroad on a “diplomatic” trip. The city she governs has deteriorating public safety, a growing homeless population, and a drug crisis that officials have been dancing around for years. The “root cause” crowd keeps hunting for some undiscovered reason people are living on the streets surrounded by needles, as if the answer isn’t staring them in the face every morning on their commute.
I don’t know much about Pratt, but he lost his own home in the Palisades Fire. He’s not running for mayor as part of a vanity campaign; he is running because he has personally experienced the consequences of Bass’s leadership. While Bass lives in a city-owned mansion insulated from the consequences of her decisions, Pratt lives in a trailer, making the case that those in charge don’t have to deal with the mess they’ve created. The second half of the ad flips the script, painting Pratt as the man who will actually do something to save the city. And the best part is that his platform isn’t complicated: enforce the law, arrest people who commit crimes, get the crackheads off the streets, and make sure firefighters are funded and ready to do their jobs. Once upon a time, these weren’t partisan issues.

This may be the song of the summer. pic.twitter.com/bxdB1eVCsy
— Adam Scheidler (@Scheidsa) May 14, 2026

You don’t need to be a Lego Movie fan to appreciate the video. Does Pratt have a chance? He might. A new Emerson College poll shows Bass at 30% support, with Pratt surging to 22% just weeks before the June 2 primary, up 12 points since March. The top two finishers advance to a November runoff, which means Pratt is very much in this race. Honestly, this is a race worth watching. Karen Bass failed her city, and if she can still get reelected, it will tell you everything about Democrat voters.

“Heavy missiles of this class are specifically designed to launch even under conditions of an incoming nuclear strike on their deployment area.”

• Sarmat: The Missile Meant To Make Any Enemy Think Twice (Kornev)

On May 12, 2026, Russia carried out the second successful launch of its newest heavy liquid-fueled intercontinental ballistic missile, the Sarmat. The launch marked another major milestone in the flight-testing program for Russia’s next-generation strategic missile system. Following the test, Russian President Vladimir Putin announced that the first regiment equipped with Sarmat ICBMs would officially enter combat duty by the end of 2026.

A ballistic missile of this class is being developed in modern Russia for the first time. The Sarmat is intended to replace the Soviet-era Voevoda missiles, which until now have remained the most powerful ICBMs ever deployed. Thanks to the immense power of its liquid-fuel rocket engines, the Sarmat is expected to carry an unprecedented payload – between 10 and 14 medium-yield thermonuclear warheads, each with an estimated yield of around 700 kilotons, or potentially up to five maneuverable hypersonic glide vehicles similar to those used in the Avangard system.
Conventional ballistic warheads can be deployed together with penetration aids designed to overwhelm missile defense systems. However, maneuverable hypersonic glide vehicles present an entirely different challenge. Modern missile defense systems are effectively incapable of intercepting such weapons, making the Sarmat a uniquely formidable retaliatory strike platform. In 2022, Vladimir Degtyar, CEO of the Makeyev Design Bureau, announced that serial production of the fifth-generation RS-28 Sarmat ICBM had officially begun in Russia. “The missile system has already entered serial production and is fully supplied with the necessary materials and manufacturing equipment,” he stated.
According to Russian officials, the new ICBM will significantly strengthen the country’s strategic deterrent capability for the next 40 to 50 years. The Sarmat is believed to have a range of at least 12,000 kilometers while carrying roughly 10 tons of payload, including its post-boost vehicle and warheads. However, the missile is also reportedly capable of striking targets by approaching from the opposite direction – flying over the South Pole and effectively circling the globe. While such a trajectory would reduce the missile’s payload capacity, it would still allow for multiple nuclear warheads to reach their targets. The missile is also expected to achieve exceptional accuracy, with a probable circular error measured at no more than roughly 150 meters.
Preparations for deploying the first operational Sarmat missiles began back in 2023 at the missile division in Uzhur, located in southern Krasnoyarsk Krai. The process of replacing the aging Voevoda missiles with Sarmat systems is expected to continue for at least four to five years, if not longer. In addition to Uzhur, Sarmat missiles are also expected to be deployed near Dombarovsky in the Orenburg region.
In total, Russia is expected to field at least 50 hardened silo launchers for the Sarmat system, making it the most powerful and lethal component of the country’s nuclear retaliatory forces – a true weapon of retaliation. Heavy missiles of this class are specifically designed to launch even under conditions of an incoming nuclear strike on their deployment area. In theory, dozens of Sarmat missiles could leave their silos while under nuclear attack, carrying a combined total of roughly 500 warheads capable of devastating any potential adversary.
Over the coming years, the Sarmat is expected to complete its full flight-test program and receive multiple payload configurations. One variant will reportedly carry traditional MIRVed ballistic warheads similar to those used on the Voevoda system. Another, more advanced configuration would deploy hypersonic maneuverable glide vehicles developed by NPO Mashinostroyenia. At present, no existing missile defense system is considered capable of reliably intercepting such weapons.
What makes these glide vehicles so difficult to defeat is their flight profile. Unlike traditional ballistic warheads, they travel along a relatively low, flattened trajectory at hypersonic speeds near the edge of the atmosphere while retaining the ability to maneuver both in altitude and direction. As a result, they are detected much later than conventional reentry vehicles and are extraordinarily difficult to intercept due to their unpredictable maneuvering. The Sarmat may be able to carry more than a dozen standard warheads, but likely no more than three to five hypersonic glide vehicles. Nevertheless, such payloads would presumably be reserved for the highest-priority strategic targets – and, according to Russian military doctrine, those targets would be struck with near certainty.

RINOs trying without Trump endorsement are having a hard time.

• Trump Blasts Lauren Boebert for Campaigning with DeceptiCON Thomas Massie (CTH)

Thomas Massie is cut from the same Republican cloth as his dear friend, Ron DeSantis and his recent advocate Tucker Carlson. Like DeSantis and Carlson, Massie is a master manipulator who uses carefully crafted wedge points to divide the electorate and position himself for maximum benefit. Colorado Representative Lauren Boebert has been campaigning and trying to support Massie as the potential for him to lose a primary race is very real. This puts Boebert on the opposite side of President Trump on a very important matter of principle. Massie has accused President Trump of protecting Jeffrey Epstein’s enablers.

PRESIDENT TRUMP – “Is anyone interested in running against Weak Minded Lauren Boebert in Colorado’s Fourth Congressional District? You remember Lauren moved to the District when it became obvious that she couldn’t win in her original Congressional District (The Third!) — A Carpetbagger, indeed! Boebert is campaigning for the Worst “Republican” Congressman in the History of our Country, Thomas Massie, of the Great Commonwealth of Kentucky, and anybody who can be that dumb deserves a good Primary fight! Even though I long ago endorsed Boebert, if the right person came along, it would be my Honor to withdraw that Endorsement and endorse a good and proper alternative. Just let me know, or announce your Candidacy, and I will be there for you!” ~ President DONALD J. TRUMP

Trump-endorsed competition.

• Incumbent Senator Bill Cassidy Loses His Senate Seat in Primary (CTH)

–Unless something remarkable changes drastically, it looks like incumbent Republican Senator Bill Cassidy has come in third place, which means he has lost his Senate seat in the primary race. The runoff will be between Trump-endorsed Julia Letlow and State Treasurer John Fleming (June 27th).

Senator Bill Cassidy has lost his seat.

Changing maps seems to be Democrats’ only option.

• Supreme Court Delivers Devastating Blow to Democrats Gerrymandering (Margolis)

The Supreme Court rejected Virginia Democrats’ emergency appeal to revive their gerrymandered Virginia congressional map on Friday, delivering a final, fatal blow to their efforts in the state. The justices issued a brief order with no explanation. Still, the outcome was hardly surprising — the federal courts don’t typically wade into rulings made by state courts on state constitutional matters, and that’s exactly what happened here.

Virginia Democrats had passed new congressional maps through the General Assembly and pushed through a ballot referendum to lock those maps in. Voters narrowly approved it in April. But the Virginia Supreme Court ruled that Democrats violated the state constitution’s process for referring amendments to voters, specifically an “intervening-election requirement” that the General Assembly simply ignored. The result? Null and void. “This violation irreparably undermines the integrity of the resulting referendum vote and renders it null and void,” Justice D. Arthur Kelsey wrote in the majority opinion.
https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2055421432411123879?s=20

Had the maps survived, they would have been a huge boon for the Democrats in the redistricting wars, giving the party a potential net gain of 4 seats. Democrats lost because they couldn’t be bothered to follow the rules they wrote. The attempt to appeal to the United States Supreme Court was a desperate Hail Mary bound to fail, and even Gov. Abigail Spanberger saw the writing on the wall and revealed she was no longer pushing to gerrymander the state.
None of this happened in a vacuum. Democrats spent years redrawing maps in blue states, systematically eliminating Republican-held districts wherever they could. For a long time, Republicans largely played defense. That changed last year when Texas made its move, redistricting mid-decade and sparking the current national battle. California Gov. Gavin Newsom, auditioning for the 2028 Democratic presidential primaries, decided to respond by getting California to pass its own new map. Democrats tried to do the same in Virginia, but they cut constitutional corners and paid for it.
Overall, the redistricting wars have not gone well for the Democrats, and making matters worse for them, last month, the high court ruled that racial gerrymandering was unconstitutional, clearing the way for red states in the South to eliminate majority-minority districts that had long served as reliable Democratic strongholds. Democrats have now lost on multiple fronts simultaneously, and they’ve spent — I mean, wasted — millions of dollars in the process.

“The Supreme Court of the United States has affirmed what we always knew: you cannot violate the Constitution to change the Constitution..”

• Supreme Court Rejects Attempt To Revive Virginia Congressional Map (ZH)

Hammering the last nail in the coffin of what could have been a significant midterm factor, the US Supreme Court on Friday rejected Virginia Democrats’ request to use a new congressional district map, which was drawn to flip four House seats into Democratic control. As is typical in this kind of “emergency” ruling, the court provided no legal rationale or vote count — however no dissents were noted. The new map was expected to dramatically alter the composition of Virginia’s US House delegation, boosting Democrats from their current slim 6-5 edge to 10-1 domination. For context, in 2024 presidential balloting, Virginia voters were split 52% for Democrat Kamala Harris and 46% for Donald Trump.

On May 8, the Virginia Supreme Court denied a request from Democrats and state officials to lift a lower-court order blocking certification of the April 21 redistricting referendum. Voters approved the Democrat-accommodating map by a 52-to-48 margin, but a Virginia circuit court declared the referendum null and void, saying Democrats had run afoul of state constitutional measures that exist to fend off partisan gerrymandering. After that setback, Democrats sought to salvage their new map with an appeal to the US Supreme Court, which has now failed. Two days earlier, Gov Abigail Spanberger had already waved a white flag of sorts, implying that Virginia’s May 12 deadline for map changes made the emergency request to the US Supreme Court something of a moot point.
“What needs to happen is we need to focus on the task at hand, which is winning races in November,” she said. “I believe, somewhat doggedly, that we will [gain] two to four seats in the House of Representatives. … That is my goal. That is what I know is possible.” However, after the ruling, she opportunistically lashed out at the Supreme Court: Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger, a Democrat, criticized the decision, which she said had the effect of nullifying “the votes of more than three million Virginians.” “As Governor, I will make sure voters know when and how to cast their votes this year. Because our votes are how we choose the representation we deserve,” she wrote on X.

The Supreme Court of the United States has now joined the Supreme Court of Virginia in choosing to nullify an election and the votes of more than three million Virginians.

These Virginians made their voices heard — casting their ballots in good faith to push back against a…
— Governor Abigail Spanberger (@GovernorVA) May 16, 2026

The lead respondent, Virginia state Sen. Ryan McDougle, a Republican, who is also legislative commissioner for the Virginia Redistricting Commission hailed the new ruling. “The Supreme Court of the United States has affirmed what we always knew: you cannot violate the Constitution to change the Constitution,” the state lawmaker wrote on X.
The Virginia battle was part of a nationwide saga that started last year, when Texas Republicans redrew their congressional map to gain seats, straying from what had been a fairly (but not thoroughly) universal norm that saw states refrain from redistricting that wasn’t driven by once-a-decade census results. Following the lead of California Democrats who undertook their own maneuvers to offset the Texas map, the Virginia leftists who gained full control of state government in 2025 responded with a constitutional amendment allowing the General Assembly to temporarily redraw congressional districts outside the normal 10-year cycle — specifically to “restore fairness” if other states gerrymandered (bases on the convoluted implication that varied wrongs against the citizenry of multiple states can add up to a national right).
Despite the implosion of the Virginia Democrats’ scheme, and the view that the net result of the redistricting war will flip seats to the GOP column, prediction-market participants lean heavily toward Democrats wresting control of the House from Republicans, who currently have a 217-212 edge over the Democrats. (One representative is an independent and there are five vacant seats owing to deaths and resignations.)

It was mostly a Dem game in the past.

• Republican Lead In Redistricting Race is About To Get Bigger (Ben Whedon)

The Supreme Court’s decision in Louisiana v. Callais saw the justices narrow Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and disallow race-based congressional districts. With the dust on redistricting mostly settled, Republicans appear poised for a double-digit swing of House seats in their favor in the 2026 midterms, at least if all goes according to plan. The Supreme Court’s decision in Louisiana v. Callais saw the justices narrow Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and disallow race-based congressional districts. The move triggered map redraws across the South and is expected to result in more than a dozen seats moving toward the GOP, at least in time for 2028.

Democratic countermeasures, meanwhile, have hit a judicial brick wall, with the Virginia Supreme Court striking down that state’s ambitious redraw, saving four Republican seats. The U.S. Supreme Court refused Friday to intervene, leaving Democrats out of legal options. The collective shifts are poised to move the needle rightward and put the House in play for November, potentially handing the White House an opportunity to defy historical trends and retain control of Congress. Here’s a look at where the midterm situation stands:

Louisiana
The state’s maps have been the subject of legal scrutiny for years, leading to a challenge that culminated in the recent Supreme Court decision. Gov. Jeff Landry, R-La., has suspended elections in the meantime to allow the legislature to implement a new slate. The state Senate passed a redraw earlier this week with five Republican-leaning districts and one Democratic-leaning seat, though the House has yet to approve it.
South Carolina
Several Republican state senators joined with Democrats to vote down a redistricting plan that would have eliminated the state’s sole Democratic-leaning congressional district, which longtime Rep. Jim Clyburn represents. The measure needed a two-thirds majority to pass. GOP Gov. Henry McMaster subsequently called a special session of the legislature to reconsider the matter. At most, the state lawmakers could add a single Republican-leaning district to the state’s delegation. South Carolina now sends six Republicans and one Democrat to the lower chamber.
Alabama
Lawmakers appear poised to approve a slate of House maps that would eliminate one of the state’s two Democratic-leaning districts. GOP Gov. Kay Ivey called the legislature into special session for the redraw, despite initially indicating that she would not do so. The proposed redraw stopped shy of the clean Republican sweep that activists sought, though a later redraw could result in that outcome. Though Republicans have yet to fully approve the new slate, Ivey has also called special primaries for the districts she expects will be affected.
Mississippi
GOP Gov. Tate Reeves appeared this week to pour cold water on the prospect of the state redrawing its maps in time for the 2026 midterms, saying repeatedly that he expected the legislature to redraw the maps sometime “between now and 2027.” Prior to the Supreme Court ruling in Callais, he had called a special session of the legislature to consider redistricting, but he canceled it this week. Mississippi currently has three Republicans in Congress and one Democrat. Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., currently represents a district that includes much of the Mississippi River delta and a large portion of the state’s black population.
Georgia
Gov. Brian Kemp has called a special session of the legislature, though he expects the state will only change its maps in time for 2028 and therefore not impact control of the GOP-controlled House in November. Georgia boasts 14 House seats, five of which are under Democratic control. Depending on the redraw, the state could likely see a swing of two seats toward the GOP in the long term.
Tennessee
State lawmakers successfully passed a new set of maps this month that eliminated the last Democratic-leaning district, which was centered on Memphis. Democratic Rep. Steve Cohen on Friday announced an end to his reelection campaign, citing the redraw and the changes to his district.
Texas
The Texas redraw ostensibly kicked off the redistricting fight and represented the single-largest gain for Republicans, with as many as five seats shifting toward the GOP as a result. With the court challenges to the new map largely settled, the GOP is expected to make those gains in the Lone Star state in November.
Florida
Florida passed a redrawn House map within days of the Callais ruling, shifting its 20-GOP and eight-Democrat-seat lineup to 24 GOP and four Democrats. The state has skewed heavily toward Republicans since President Donald Trump first won the battleground in 2016. It is now regarded as a reliably Red state.
Missouri
The state Supreme Court this month permitted Missouri to use its maps, which include seven Republican districts and one Democratic seat. State lawmakers managed to eliminate a second Democratic seat with the redraw.
North Carolina
North Carolina lawmakers approved a revised set of maps in late 2025 that netted Republicans one seat in their delegation. Democrat Gov. Josh Stein did not have the authority to veto the legislation. In the 1990s, Republicans struck a deal with Democrats that exempted redistricting from the governor’s authority, Politico reported.
Ohio
In October 2025, the state’s redistricting commission approved a redraw in which Republicans gain an edge in 12 districts, while Democrats led in three. Republicans now have 10 seats and are expected to gain up to two in 2026 as a result of the redraw, according to the Ohio Capital Journal.
Virginia
The state Supreme Court struck down a redistricting referendum that would have seen the state shift from six Democrats and five Republicans, to 10 Democrats and one Republican. The court found that the process for advancing the referendum violated the state constitution, without ruling on the maps themselves. Though Democrats appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, opponents of the redraw were confident the Supreme Court would not take the case. Speaking on the “Just the News, No Noise” television show this week, former GOP Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli opined that the justices would speedily knock it down.
“I think the chief justice has really just asked for briefs as a courtesy. This is going nowhere,” he said. “They have no jurisdiction. And I don’t think you will even see. I don’t think you will literally get a word out of a single justice. I think it will just be summarily rejected with no comment or anything else.”He was proven right on Friday evening, when the Supreme Court declined to hear the matter.
Utah
Utah’s maps became the subject of legal scrutiny at the state level, resulting in a court order that created a Democratic-leaning district in the otherwise, reliably Republican state. Though state lawmakers have explored revisions, including a statewide referendum, to their own laws to allow for eliminating the new district, it is likely that Democrats will secure a pickup in November.
California
State Democrats reacted furiously to Texas’s redraw and organized a statewide referendum to change their congressional maps with the aim of countering Texas. The referendum was successful and Democrats are expected to gain a total of five seats from redistricting, representing their single largest gain this cycle.
The bottom line
Republicans have already approved maps accounting for a gain of 14 seats over the 2024 maps. And three states in the South may each add one in the near future. With Democrats gaining six from California and Utah, the GOP appears poised for a net swing of at least eight but as high as 11, which could prove decisive to holding the House.

https://twitter.com/Real_RobN/status/2055337924527624296?s=20 https://twitter.com/JoshHall2024/status/2055428011638575195?s=20

SNOWDEN SET TO CRUSH COMEY, CLAPPER & BRENNAN! Trump Delivers FULL Pardon & Hero’s Welcome

Breaking from Washington — Edward Snowden is coming home as a HERO!

Under President Trump’s leadership, the legendary NSA whistleblower is finalizing a game-changing clemency deal.… pic.twitter.com/Avsr1Y7wDF
— QThestorm (@17QStorm) May 15, 2026

BREAKING: Our autopsy study, which found that 100% of published myocarditis deaths following COVID-19 vaccination were CAUSED BY THE VACCINE, just WON Wiley’s Top-Viewed Article Award.

An IMMEDIATE FDA Class I Recall of mRNA injections is REQUIRED. https://t.co/wQj5oZ5Ah6 pic.twitter.com/4YwLvPTMm4
— Nicolas Hulscher, MPH (@NicHulscher) May 15, 2026

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

Debt Rattle May 6 2026

May 062026

May 6, 2026 Posted by Raúl Ilargi Meijer at 10:07 am Finance Tagged with: AI, Amsterdam, battlefield, cancer, gerrymandering, Hormuz.mediator, ivermectin, John Roberts, Ketanji Brown Jackson, Mebendazole, Palantir, Samuel Alito Brutally 24 Responses »

Gustav Klimt Lady with a fan 1917-18
(sold for $108.4m June 27 2023)

• Trump Pauses Project Freedom (ZH)

• Strait of Hormuz Standoff Exposes Tehran’s Weakness (JTN)

• It’s Official: The Climate Scam Was a Scam All Along (Stephen Green)

• Canadian Prime Minister is Playing a Very Dangerous Game (CTH)

• Palantir Touts Record Expansion and ‘Battlefield’ AI Value (RT)

• How A Musk Victory Vs. Altman Would Reset America’s AI Roadmap (ZH)

• EU Slammed Over Multi-Billion AI Infrastructure Splurge Plan (RT)

• Elon Musk Reaches $1.5 Million Settlement With SEC Over Twitter Stake (ET)

• Russia Disregards EU As Possible Mediator In Negotiations On Ukraine (TASS)

• Colorblind Constitution: The Roberts Court Ends a ‘Sordid Business’ (Turley)

• Supreme Court Clears Way for Louisiana Immediate Redistricting (CTH)

• Samuel Alito Brutally Destroyed Ketanji Brown Jackson (Matt Margolis)

• Amsterdam Bans Advertisements Featuring Meat and Fossil Fuels (Turley)

• Ivermectin + Mebendazole In Cancer Patients (Nicolas Hulscher, MPH)

Mike Davis Warns The Grand Conspiracy Probe Has The Potential to Bring DOWN Big Names.

-Barack Obama
-Joe Biden
-Hillary Clinton
-James Comey
-James Clapper
-John Brennan.

Davis predicts “presidential immunity” will NOT be an adequate defense..

“Barack Obama worked with the… pic.twitter.com/EyBZhFYbPs
— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) May 4, 2026

New York Post columnist Miranda Devine reveals that old Twitter leadership worked with the FBI so closely to suppress the Hunter Biden Laptop story, that they classified all links to the story as “child porn” to stop it from being shared

“It was completely blacklisted on Twitter… pic.twitter.com/M5xjObJbND
— Wall Street Apes (@WallStreetApes) May 4, 2026

https://twitter.com/JDVance_News/status/2051094917544316977?s=20

This is:

Stephen Miller, White House Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy and United States Homeland Security Advisor, CONFIRMS:

It’s worse — it’s not 20 to 30, but over 40 House seats.

Democrats extorted over 40 House seats by counting illegal aliens in the Census.

“The… pic.twitter.com/1YorSZzM55
— 🇺🇸RealRobert🇺🇸 (@Real_RobN) May 5, 2026

Some of the confusion is deliberate. But not all of it. Trump doesn’t want to waste time with debates on/in Congress, where plenty folk are against anything he does just because it’s him.

• Trump Pauses Project Freedom (ZH)

There is a knee-jerk wave of optimism across assets with WTI crude futures lower, US equity contracts and Treasury futures higher after President Trump said Project Freedom will be paused.Trump also said there is progress toward a final agreement with Iran which is what investors really want to see as it could potentially mean a reopening of Hormuz. Trump statement on his TruthSocial feed (emphasis and spacing ours):

“Based on the request of Pakistan and other Countries, the tremendous Military Success that we have had during the Campaign against the Country of Iran and, additionally… …the fact that Great Progress has been made toward a Complete and Final Agreement with Representatives of Iran……we have mutually agreed that, while the Blockade will remain in full force and effect, Project Freedom (The Movement of Ships through the Strait of Hormuz) will be paused for a short period of time to see whether or not the Agreement can be finalized and signed.” WTI crude futures are testing back below $100…
Polymarket odds of Hormuz traffic returning to normal has jumped to better than a coin-flip… Don’t hold your breath though as there have been several false starts of this kind before, and traders will soon lose faith unless there are more details from the Iranian side. Additionally late Tuesday, a French cargo ship was confirmed hit in a missile attack, injuring crew members: A cargo ship in the Gulf region was hit by a possible land-attack cruise missile, causing several injuries among the ship’s Filipino crew, two U.S. officials told CBS News.
The hit on the CGM San Antonio — which is owned by a French firm — took place late Tuesday evening local time, the officials said. The ship was near Dubai as of midday on Tuesday, but it is not clear whether the vessel has moved since then, according to public ship tracking data.
Rubio Declares Conflict in New Stage
Secretary of State Marco Rubio has announced Tuesday afternoon that offensive stage of Iran war is ‘over’. He further said that ships stranded in the Strait of Hormuz are facing a humanitarian crisis and accused Iran of holding the world hostage by closing the Strait of Hormuz. Iran is denying that it attacked the United Arab Emirates, with the foreign ministry saying its ‘defensive actions’ were ‘exclusively directed at the U.S.’ Operation Epic Fury is over, now Project Freedom. The remarks were issued just as a new attack is unfolding on a foreign cargo ship in the strategic waterway:

UKMTO WARNING 055-26

Click here to read the full warning⤵️https://t.co/J5B2EilFQE #MaritimeSecurity #MarSec pic.twitter.com/EGcKTpsHtN
— UKMTO Operations Centre (@UK_MTO) May 5, 2026

…as the goalposts keep shifting:

BREAKING: REPORTER: But 10 weeks in, are we any closer to get rid of Iran's nuclear materials?

RUBIO: They no longer have a conventional shield. They have no Navy left. They don't have an Air Force. That's a very substantial achievement. That was the purpose of this. pic.twitter.com/bD33XPARVH
— Sulaiman Ahmed (@ShaykhSulaiman) May 5, 2026

Trump Asked Whether Ceasefire is Dead
A revealing exchange in the Oval Office strongly suggests that even amid a second Iranian attack wave on the UAE Tuesday, the White House is unwilling to say that the ceasefire has collapsed – also given there’s yet been no direct exchange of fire between US and Iranian forces: President Trump, taking questions from reporters in the Oval Office on Tuesday, would not specify what Iran would need to do to violate the cease-fire.
Asked by a reporter what would constitute a violation, considering that the country has fired on U.S. ships several times, Trump said: “Well, you’ll find out, because I’ll let you know.” He added that “they know what to do,” and “they know what not to do, more importantly.” Earlier the Pentagon clearly indicated that the ceasefire is still active, from Washington’s point of view. The Iranian government is meanwhile trying to bat down rumors of a division between the presidency and the IRGC/military apparatus.[..]

The ceasefire with Iran is not over, according to U.S. Secretary of War Hegseth.

Project Freedom is "separate and distinct” from Operation Epic Fury, Hegseth added.

The Iranian fire is recent days was described as "harassing" and "below the threshold of restarting major combat…
— Trey Yingst (@TreyYingst) May 5, 2026

“It is just complete, systematic dismantlement of the Iranian economy. And they have days, not weeks, left in terms of their oil storage. That’s 90% of their economy. They’re about to lose that. And their currency has lost 98% of its value over the last 10 years.”

• Strait of Hormuz Standoff Exposes Tehran’s Weakness (JTN)

Iran launched missiles at U.S. military ships and the United Arab Emirates, and American forces returned fire amid a fragile ceasefire. But Monday’s volley exposed the increasingly limited options Tehran faces with a severely diminished military and economy as it tries to counter the U.S. Navy’s assistance to commercial ships passing through the Strait of Hormuz. While Tehran managed to damage a South Korean tanker and an oil facility in UAE, it suffered the loss of seven gunboats sunk by U.S. return fire and faces increasingly dire circumstances as its drilling wells are near bursting because there is nowhere to ship its oil, experts said.

“This is all sort of coming down to, I believe, the final days here,” former Deputy National Security Advisor Victoria Coates told Just the News. “…Iran is obviously still trying to lash out, but the farthest they can get their missiles at this point is UAE. They’re looking for proximate targets. They don’t even try and shell Israel anymore.” “Their ability to strike others may be very limited, and then they’re really out of cards,” she added. Admiral Brad Cooper, the commander of U.S. Central Command, revealed Monday the U.S. military launched an effort to clear the way for dozens of commercial ships trapped in the Arabian Gulf to transit through the Strait of Hormuz off the Iranian coast.
The Iranians had responded to this effort by attempting to attack both the commercial ships and the U.S. naval vessels protecting them, he said. “The cruise missiles were going after those U.S. Navy ships, but mostly after commercial shipping. We defended both ourselves consistent with our commitment,” Cooper explained. “We defended all the commercial ships. We’ve had drone launches against commercial ships, all of which were defended against, consistent with our commitment. “And then the small boats were all going against commercial ships, and all were sunk by Apaches and Seahawk helicopters,” he added.
The admiral said that “there’s been no U.S. military ships hit” and that “there have been no U.S. flagships that have been hit.” The CENTCOM leader declined to say whether Iran’s attempted strikes were a violation of the weeks-old ceasefire struck between the Trump administration and the remaining Iranian leaders. “I wouldn’t go into details of whether the ceasefire is over or not. I think the key thing for us is we are merely there as a defensive force and in force to give a very thick layer of defense for commercial shipping to proceed out of the Arabian Gulf,” he said. “That is what we are focused on,” the admiral said.
Operation Epic Fury, launched just over two months ago, eliminated a raft of Iranian political and military leaders and did extensive damage to Iranian military capabilities, but the Iranians responded by seeking to control the strait. President Donald Trump had announced in a Truth Social post on Sunday that the U.S. military would be launching the “Project Freedom” effort to increase freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz. The president had also said there would be consequences if the Iranians tried to interfere.
“Countries from all over the World, almost all of which are not involved in the Middle Eastern dispute going on so visibly, and violently, for all to see, have asked the United States if we could help free up their Ships, which are locked up in the Strait of Hormuz, on something which they have absolutely nothing to do with — They are merely neutral and innocent bystanders!” Trump said. The president said that “for the good of Iran, the Middle East, and the United States, we have told these Countries that we will guide their Ships safely out of these restricted Waterways, so that they can freely and ably get on with their business.”
The president also warned that “if, in any way, this Humanitarian process is interfered with, that interference will, unfortunately, have to be dealt with forcefully.” Cooper revealed Monday that the Iranians had indeed sought to interfere with this effort. Mike Waltz, a former Republican congressman and now the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, tweeted Sunday that “regardless of how you feel about the conflict over their nuclear program, Iran laying sea mines indiscriminately in international waters and attempting to ‘toll’ civilian commercial shipping is illegal and unacceptable.” He promised that “the U.S. and our Gulf partners will lead the way to defend global freedom of navigation.”
Admiral says blockade continues — and Project Freedom will pursue freedom of navigation Cooper explained Monday the U.S. naval blockade of Iran was continuing, and that the new Project Freedom effort to help guide commercial ships safely out of the Strait of Hormuz was purely defensive.n“Today, the U.S. military is taking two separate actions in two separate bodies of water. First, we are enforcing the blockade in the Gulf of Oman. There is no commerce going into and out of Iran, and we will be sustaining this effort,” the admiral said. “Second, we have now opened a passage through the Strait of Hormuz to allow for the free flow of commerce to continue.”
The ongoing blockade “is going exactly as designed, and in fact exceeding my expectations,” Cooper added. That blockade, experts said, is putting Iran’s oil industry in an existential crisis because it will soon have to cap overflowing oil wells with nowhere to export the fuel. “The second front of this war is economic,” Coates told the Just the News, No Noise television show on Monday evening. “It is just complete, systematic dismantlement of the Iranian economy. And they have days, not weeks, left in terms of their oil storage. That’s 90% of their economy. They’re about to lose that. And their currency has lost 98% of its value over the last 10 years.”

“The first is whether the American news media will follow the BBC’s lead and stop scaring people with end-of-the-world stories. The second is what the Left will use to scare us with next.”

• It’s Official: The Climate Scam Was a Scam All Along (Stephen Green)

It’s nice when something you knew was a fraud all along turns out to be a fraud, but it’s even nicer when the people perpetrating the fraud admit it was a fraud all along. “The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has just published the next generation of climate scenarios,” science policy analyst Roger Pielke Jr wrote late last week, and in what he called “big news,” the new framework “eliminated the most extreme scenarios that have dominated climate research over much of the past several decades.” So the oceans aren’t about to boil off or freeze over or whatever the current scare story is?

Exactly: “The IPCC and broader research community has now admitted that the scenarios that have dominated climate research, assessment and policy during the past two cycles of the IPCC assessment process are implausible. They describe impossible futures.” This is important because the IPCC’s changes resulted in “an update to the Science Based Targets initiative’s rules eliminates the need for steep emission cuts by 2030,” Trellis reported on Friday. In other words, even the people committed to radically reduced carbon emissions now say we don’t need to radically reduce carbon emissions to save the world or whatever.
Without getting too technical — you can read Pielke’s full report for that, should you feel the need to go shoulder-deep in the weeds — the upshot is that the previous frameworks lacked “any systematic effort to evaluate plausibility of scenarios.” Now, however, “the new HIGH scenario is exploratory — a thought experiment, not a projection.” My guess is that the IPCC still includes the non-scientific, scary-sounding “HIGH scenario” because otherwise the money might dry up. Pielke added that “users of climate models and model output based on legacy scenarios will now face decisions about if and how they’d like to realign with the latest scientific understandings versus continuing to rely on outdated research.”
We’ll see how that works out. The new IPCC framework actually dates back to 2021, but is only now becoming “news” because a bunch of slow-moving pieces have finally lined up. That’s just how science works. But Pielke’s analysis is a week old, and the only way I learned about it was thanks to a Toby Young post on X — he’s editor-in-chief of the UK’s Daily Sceptic — that PJ Media’s own Charlie Martin found. Why, it’s almost as though the mainstream media doesn’t want to cover stories like this one. But for once, I don’t digress.
Even though it might be “purely anecdotal, the Daily Sceptic’s Chris Morrison believes that even the notoriously scaremongering BBC “seems to have moderated its wilder climate stories of late, with the ‘Climate’ topic on its News site relegated to the second tier of subjects,” effectively demoting climate scares to “rubbing shoulders with the picture gallery and the dumbed-down ‘Newsbeat’ offering.” So while today’s news is good — maybe even great — it does leave me with two questions. The first it whether the American news media will follow the BBC’s lead and stop scaring people with end-of-the-world stories. The second is what the Left will use to scare us with next.

Carney is the no.1 WEF pawn against Trump. But not the only one. It’s Trump vs the world.

• Canadian Prime Minister is Playing a Very Dangerous Game (CTH)

Anyone who has ever dealt with a toxic narcissist understands the psychology behind their manipulative language, words and intents. What Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney is doing here is very dangerous, particularly for the Canadian people. After a year of increased provocative language intended to confront President Trump for U.S. nationalist policy changes on economics, trade and security, Prime Minister Carney travelled to Europe where he again delivered strong remarks saying that Europe is now the center of the “rules based international order,” the western government control mechanisms that have maintained economic and security relationships for the past one-hundred years.

Essentially, Carney, after saying the USA was no longer a reliable or obedient partner, emphasized the opposition to state nationalism must come from a collective decision to retain the old geopolitical structures. President Trump must be opposed, and Europe -according to Carney- represents the assembly that will not permit state government nationalism (sovereignty) to replace their long-constructed globalist systems. Today, Prime Minister Carney faced questions about those remarks. I don’t want to influence the audience, but with the context in mind, watch and listen closely to his response. [Prompted]

[NOTE: The question comes from the Toronto Star, the only ‘conservative’ media outlet permitted under the rules of the Canadian regime to ask questions. All other outlets who might challenge the government viewpoints are strictly controlled and not permitted audience. Notice how Carney divides the world of opposition to President Trump, indicating the 5-Eyes nations of Canada, Great Britain, Australia, New Zealand are in opposition to Trump and in alignment with the old control mechanisms. Adding to this grouping, Carney pulls in the entire European continent and boldly proclaims his position as lead diplomat and representative for their effort against the USA.
This is a very dangerous game that Prime Minister Carney is choosing to play here. This is the behavior of a person who is toxically narcissistic and prepared to claim victim status as soon as his target hits back. Carney has carefully and purposefully deceived his domestic audience, and things are about to get very ugly. I must say something of a personal frustration…. In the bigger picture, expanding on the ancillary aspects that pertain to the geopolitical landscape that surrounds us, Carney is able to push this line this far because we have internal friction driven by people like Tucker Carlson, Candace Owens and other short-sighted “influencers, who do not recognize the scale of the moment.
President Trump is standing up to a globalist system that weakened the United States over several generations. The same voices who understand how toxic the United Nations, NATO, USAID and other international influences are to what remains of U.S. sovereignty, are the same voices attempting to divide Trump’s base of support while our President battles multinational influence operations; all because they have the same traits as Mark Carney underpinning their psychology. You either affix your bayonet against these forces, or in our lifetime there will be nothing left to fight over.

“CEO Alex Karp casts the surveillance giant as “sentinels of the inner sanctum, against the assault of AI slop”.

‘Battlefield’ AI value’? What does that mean?

How do we react when AI is utilized to kill people? What becomes the winner in the AI field? The system that can kill most people?

• Palantir Touts Record Expansion and ‘Battlefield’ AI Value (RT)

Palantir Technologies reported a blowout first quarter, saying revenue rose 85% year on year to $1.63 billion as its US business more than doubled, driven by rapid growth across both commercial and government customers. The company said in its Q1 report, published Monday, that US revenue jumped 104% to $1.28 billion, with commercial revenue up 133% to $595 million and government revenue up 84% to $687 million. The results beat Wall Street estimates, and the company also raised its full-year guidance, saying it now expects 2026 revenue of up to $7.66 billion, implying annual growth of about 71%. CEO Alex Karp, who has increasingly framed Palantir’s AI tools as central to Western military and industrial power, said the “twin pistons of our US business are now firing in sync.”

“Palantir reports Q1 ‘26 U.S. revenue growth of 104% Y/Y and revenue growth of 85% Y/Y; raises FY ’26 revenue guidance to 71% Y/Y growth and U.S. comm revenue guidance to 120% Y/Y, crushing consensus expectations.Q1 U.S. commercial revenue grew 133% y/y and adjusted operating… ” “We believe it is not hyperbolic to say that nearly all AI workflows that actually create value – especially on the battlefield – are built on Palantir,” Karp wrote in an accompanying letter to shareholders, stating that the company “was founded to strengthen US national security, to protect Americans and their freedom.”
Palantir – named after the obsidian seeing-stones from Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings, through which the dark lord Sauron keeps watch on his underlings – is a software firm primarily serving the defense and intelligence sectors. Palantir’s flagship product is a system called Gotham, which pulls together and analyzes satellite footage, human intelligence from the CIA, signals intelligence from the NSA, and other data that might otherwise take days to sift through. Gotham and MOSAIC – another Palantir target-identification program that pulls digital data, including surveillance footage and IP addresses, from a target area – use AI to label the most effective targets for military strikes.
The US has acknowledged using these programs to select targets during its ongoing war on Iran, but insists that humans make the final decision to fire. Abroad, Palantir’s technology is used by the British Ministry of Defence, the Israel Defense Forces, and the Armed Forces of Ukraine. The company’s earnings update came weeks after Palantir drew criticism for a 22-point manifesto summarizing themes from Karp’s book The Technological Republic. The manifesto argued that Silicon Valley has an “obligation” to participate in national defense, that “hard power” will be built on software, and that AI weapons are inevitable. Critics labeled it a blueprint for “technofascism.”

A lot hangs on this. If Musk doesn’t win, we get uncontrolled AI.

• How A Musk Victory Vs. Altman Would Reset America’s AI Roadmap (ZH)

A courtroom victory for Elon Musk in his high-stakes federal trial against Sam Altman and OpenAI would deliver one of the most disruptive blows to the artificial intelligence sector in its brief but explosive history – potentially forcing the $850-billion-plus company to unwind its for-profit empire, ousting its top leaders, and handing Musk a symbolic and financial hammer to reshape the global race for AGI while weakening one of its fiercest competitors.

The case is now being argued in a federal courtroom in Oakland, before Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers. The trial opened on April 28 and entered its second week on Monday, when OpenAI president Greg Brockman took the stand and confirmed his personal stake in the company is worth roughly $30 billion. Musk’s counsel returned to the figure more than a dozen times in two hours of questioning.
The Case
Musk co-founded OpenAI in late 2015 as a nonprofit and contributed roughly $38 million in its early years. He left the board in 2018. The following year, OpenAI created a capped-profit subsidiary to attract the capital that frontier AI now requires; Microsoft has since invested more than $13 billion. ChatGPT launched in November 2022. By 2025, OpenAI was preparing for what would have been one of the largest initial public offerings in history.
Musk sued in 2024. The original complaint contained twenty-six claims; only two survive – breach of charitable trust and unjust enrichment – while the fraud claims were dismissed before trial. Microsoft is named as a co-defendant for allegedly aiding and abetting the breach, a detail often elided in summary coverage.The remedies sought are unusually sweeping. Musk wants OpenAI’s for-profit structure unwound and its assets returned to the nonprofit foundation. He wants Sam Altman and Brockman removed from leadership. And he is seeking up to $150 billion in damages from OpenAI and Microsoft combined, with any award flowing directly to OpenAI’s charitable arm rather than to Musk personally.
Structure of the Trial
Judge Gonzalez Rogers has bifurcated the proceedings into a liability phase, expected to conclude around May 21, and a separate remedies phase that would follow only if the defendants are found at fault. A nine-person jury sits during liability alone, and its verdict is advisory. Structural remedies – including any order to dissolve the for-profit subsidiary – fall solely to the judge. This procedural detail matters more than it may appear. Coverage that casts the jury as the decisive actor misreads the case. The jury can shape narrative momentum and offer a finding the judge may weigh, but it cannot order OpenAI to unwind anything. Whatever the verdict, Gonzalez Rogers writes the remedy.
What a Musk Win Would Actually Mean
Setting aside the $150 billion headline – which is a ceiling, not a floor, and is divided across defendants – three concrete consequences would follow a substantive ruling against OpenAI.
The first is restructuring. A finding that the 2019 capped-profit conversion and its 2025 successor breached a charitable trust would, at minimum, force a reorganization placing the nonprofit foundation back in unambiguous control. The IPO would be delayed indefinitely, if not foreclosed. Investor returns would be capped or rewritten. Microsoft’s roughly $13 billion stake, and the larger commitments that followed from Amazon, SoftBank, and Nvidia, would all face revaluation.
The second is leadership. Musk’s complaint seeks the removal of Altman and Brockman. Whether the court orders that remedy in full is uncertain; partial governance reform is the likelier outcome. Either way, the result would be destabilizing for an organization whose competitive position rests substantially on the people at the top of it.
The third is precedent, and it may prove the most durable. A ruling for Musk would establish that nonprofit-to-commercial transitions in American technology can be reversed years after the fact, once the entity has grown large enough to be worth reversing. Founders, donors, and investors in mission-driven labs would have to reckon with a previously hypothetical risk: that the structure they signed up for is the structure they will be held to, indefinitely.
The Defense
OpenAI’s response, articulated by lead counsel William Savitt, is that Musk himself supported a for-profit restructuring as early as 2017 – as long as he was placed in charge of it. When the other founders declined, he left, predicted the company’s failure, and later launched a competitor. The obvious angle here is that the lawsuit is a delayed instrument of competitive harm rather than a vindication of charitable principle. The defense will lean on contemporaneous evidence: Musk’s own emails proposing for-profit structures; his instruction to associates to register a for-profit corporation in OpenAI’s name; and Brockman’s private journal, which Musk’s team has used to suggest financial motive but which also records the founders’ resistance to handing OpenAI to Musk.
What Remains
Several witnesses are still to come. Altman has not yet testified. Microsoft chief executive Satya Nadella is expected. Stuart Russell, the Berkeley computer scientist, will appear as Musk’s expert on AI risk; the judge has already declined a request from Musk’s counsel that Russell be permitted to range beyond his written report into extinction scenarios. Two days before the trial began, Musk texted Brockman to gauge interest in settlement. When Brockman proposed mutual dismissal, Musk replied that he and Altman would be the most hated men in America by week’s end. The judge declined to admit the exchange. No settlement has materialized.= The trial is expected to run another two to three weeks. The remedies phase, if it comes, will follow.

“Brussels is set to announce plans to build massive computing hubs while critics stress there is almost no domestic artificial intelligence industry to use them”

The cart and the horse. They will have the infrastructure. But nothing and nobody to use it. Oh well, ask Santa.

• EU Slammed Over Multi-Billion AI Infrastructure Splurge Plan (RT)

The EU’s plan to spend over €20 billion ($23.5 billion) on AI gigafactories has drawn sharp criticism ahead of its formal launch as lawmakers and experts question whether there is any real demand for the facilities. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen first outlined the plan in February 2025 as the EU’s answer to large-scale US computing projects. It involves building four or five mega facilities with a formal call for proposals set for this spring. However, the project has been met with pushback from lawmakers. “Nobody could explain to me what is the business case they are planning with these gigafactories,” German Greens MEP Sergey Lagodinsky has said.

“I talked to some who are saying: ‘we just need more compute in Europe.’ But then, when I ask them, ‘what for?’ They say ‘it doesn’t matter, we just need more compute.’” Lagodinsky was quoted as saying by Politico. It is also unclear who the facilities would be used by, according to Nicoleta Kyosovska, a research assistant at a Brussels-based think tank. She described the planned datacenters as “cathedrals in the desert,” noting that Europe has only one AI company capable of using such infrastructure – the French startup Mistral, which is already building its own data centers. A Commission spokesperson has defended the plan by arguing that Europe requires computing sovereignty to avoid dependence on other continents.
The skepticism comes amid broader concerns over global AI overspending. Alphabet, Amazon, Meta, and Microsoft reportedly plan to spend a combined $725 billion this year on AI infrastructure. However, Gary Marcus, a professor emeritus at New York University, has described the planned spending as the “greatest capital misallocation in history.” Tech analyst Ed Zitron has also noted that the economics of data centers “do not make sense” given that most AI startups are unprofitable and the majority of data center credit deals are rated junk grade.
Meanwhile, consumers have also been venting their anger over the global chip crisis sparked by overzealous AI development plans. “The reason why RAM has become four times more expensive is that a huge amount of RAM that has not yet been produced was purchased with non-existent money to be installed in GPUs that also have not yet been produced, in order to place them in data centers that have not yet been built, powered by infrastructure that may never appear, to satisfy demand that does not actually exist and to obtain profit that is mathematically impossible,” software engineer Jatin K Malik surmised.

A $44 billion purchase and a $1.5 million settlement of the lawsuit the SEC hung on it. What percentage of it is that? 1% of $44 billion is $440 million, I think. You take it from there.

• Elon Musk Reaches $1.5 Million Settlement With SEC Over Twitter Stake (ET)

Tech billionaire Elon Musk on May 4 agreed to pay $1.5 million to resolve a Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) lawsuit alleging he violated securities laws over the delayed disclosure of his Twitter stake. A filing dated May 4 states that Musk’s revocable trust will pay a civil penalty of $1.5 million to the commission as part of the settlement, subject to approval by the court. According to the filing, once the proposed settlement is approved by the court, the SEC will “file a stipulated dismissal of Elon Musk in his personal capacity, which will resolve this case in its entirety.”

The SEC filed the lawsuit in January 2025, alleging that Musk violated federal securities laws by delaying disclosure of his stake in Twitter before his bid to buy the platform in 2022. The regulator said Musk crossed the 5 percent ownership threshold in March 2022, triggering a 10-day deadline to make the holding public. Musk did not disclose his holdings until April 2022, when he had already acquired a more than 9 percent stake in Twitter, according to the filing. The SEC said the delay had allowed Musk to buy shares at “artificially low prices” and enabled him to underpay by at least $150 million for his shares after his beneficial ownership report was due.
Musk had previously sought to have the SEC suit dismissed. In August 2025, his lawyers argued that the SEC targeted Musk over his outspoken criticism of the regulator and “government overreach.” Separately, in March, a federal jury held Musk liable for misleading Twitter shareholders by driving down the social media platform’s stock price months before acquiring it. The decision followed a civil class action lawsuit filed by Twitter investors in October 2022. Musk agreed to buy Twitter at $54.20 per share in April 2022 but later sought to back out of the deal, prompting the company to take legal action to enforce the deal. He ultimately completed the acquisition in October 2022 and rebranded Twitter as X.
In a verdict on March 20, jurors found Musk liable for misleading investors through two social media posts he shared in 2022. The first post said the deal was “temporarily on hold” pending verification that bots accounted for less than 5 percent of users on the social media platform. In the second post, Musk suggested that the percentage of bots could exceed 20 percent and said the buyout of Twitter could not go forward until he received confirmation that it was less than 5 percent. Musk’s legal team has said they plan to appeal the verdict.

The EU is a direct participant in the conflict. They also want to be a mediator.

• Russia Disregards EU As Possible Mediator In Negotiations On Ukraine (TASS)

Russia does not see the European Union as a potential mediator in the negotiations on Ukraine, as it has become a direct participant in the conflict, said Russian Ambassador-at-Large Rodion Miroshnik.

“The European Union has made a lot of efforts to avoid being considered a neutral party in any capacity. And this is the main requirement for conducting or mediating the negotiation process. The EU has today taken over financial and military support for the continuation of hostilities and bloodshed in Ukraine. This is why, in this case, it is completely illogical to even raise the question that the direct participants, sponsors and stimulators of the process can act as intermediaries for dialogue,” the diplomat told Izvestia newspaper.
Miroshnik noted that Brussels has never proposed any specific ways of settlement, but if in theory it publicly expresses a unified position, Moscow will study it.

“He holds the quaint idea that when the drafters of the 14th Amendment barred discrimination on the basis of race, they meant it.”

• Colorblind Constitution: The Roberts Court Ends a ‘Sordid Business’ (Turley)

The Supreme Court’s decision in Louisiana v. Callais, barring racial gerrymandering, has many on the left feigning vapors, despite the predictions of many of us that this result was likely. While figures such as Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) declared that the court itself has been “gerrymandered” to rig the upcoming elections, this decision is actually the culmination of decades of jurisprudence by various justices — particularly Chief Justice John Roberts.

Indeed, the decision will cement the legacy of the Roberts Court in moving the country toward a colorblind system of laws. Like most Americans, Roberts abhors racial discrimination in any form. He holds the quaint idea that when the drafters of the 14th Amendment barred discrimination on the basis of race, they meant it. This is why, in 2006, Roberts famously wrote, “It is a sordid business, this divvying us up by race.” Roberts sees no difference between such discrimination when it disfavors one or another race. It is all a sordid business, and he has spent decades writing eloquent arguments for the court to abandon its conflicted and hypocritical approach to racial discrimination.
The court has struggled to rationalize using race to discriminate when it serves a higher purpose, such as greater equity or affirmative action. Some of those opinions were constitutionally incomprehensible. For example, in 2003, in Grutter v. Bollinger, the court divided five to four on whether to uphold racial admissions criteria used to achieve “diversity” in a class at the University of Michigan Law School. However, in her opinion with the majority, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor stated that she “expects that 25 years from now, the use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary to further the interest approved today.”
Few of us could understand how O’Connor found a type of expiration date on permissible racial criteria in the Constitution. Throughout that period, however, certain justices held firm that there is a bright-line rule against such racial criteria. That includes the author of the court’s Callais decision, Justice Samuel Alito, but also Roberts, who in 2007, put it succinctly: “The way to stop discriminating on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.” One can certainly disagree with this interpretation and the low tolerance for racial criteria. However, this had nothing to do with the midterm elections. It is the result of dozens of opinions building up to this point.
From college admissions to gerrymandering, the court has created the bright line that figures like Roberts have long sought. In doing so, they have moved this country closer to a colorblind jurisprudence than at any time in our history. The Biden administration was found repeatedly to have violated the Constitution through racial discrimination in federal programs. Democratic leaders have fought this trend and have pledged to reverse these decisions. Some even demand that Democrats pack the Court with a liberal majority as soon as they retake power.
Last year, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services that whites cannot be placed under additional burdens when bringing discrimination lawsuits. Much of the coverage of the Callais decision is long on rhetoric and short on substance. The court did not “gut” the Voting Rights Act. It also did not strike down Section 2 of the act. Rather, the court held that neither the act nor the Constitution gives legislators authority to manipulate districts so as to effectively guarantee the race of the elected representatives — any race.
For decades, the courts have faced endless litigation over district configurations designed to elect minority representatives. It is a system that gave candidates an advantage based solely on their race. The court held that such racial gerrymandering is unlawful. The Voting Rights Act will now be read to prevent intentional racial discrimination. Courts will still bar any districts designed “to afford minority voters less opportunity because of their race.” That does not mean that racial discrimination has been eliminated in our nation, or that we do not need to commit ourselves wholly to its eradication. The stain of slavery and segregation remains with us, as does the lingering scourge of racial prejudice.
African Americans and other minorities still face invidious discrimination that cannot be tolerated in our system. We still have much work to be done. In the area of voting rights, the courts have and will continue to strike down any rules designed to suppress or block minority voters. Despite this ongoing struggle with racism, there are reasons to be hopeful. As the Rev. Martin Luther King put it, “The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.” Non-whites are now powerful players in American politics. White voters are expected to be a minority in this country within two decades.
We have now elected a black president and a black vice president. Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (who declared the Court “illegitimate” after the Callais opinion) expects to be the next Speaker of the House of Representatives. This progress was hard-fought, and both the Voting Rights Act and the Civil Rights Act played important roles in achieving greater racial diversity in our society. And the Callais decision is also part of that progress. We are moving into a new era where racial criteria and discrimination are neither rationalized nor tolerated. There is now reason to hope that we will indeed end “this sordid business, this divvying us up by race.”

Gerrymander your heart out.

• Supreme Court Clears Way for Louisiana Immediate Redistricting (CTH)

The Supreme Court ruled Monday its prior ruling on race-based congressional districts takes immediate effect. The order {SEE HERE} speeds up the normal 32-day timeline and puts the State of Louisiana on notice their current districts are not constitutional.

Effectively the Louisiana Governor and legislature have delayed the election to address the districts. However, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson was not happy with the immediacy ruling and wrote a dissent that was so ridiculous none of the other minority justices would sign on to it. Jackson said the majority “unshackles itself” from “constraints.” The court should follow the default rule, she insisted.
As noted by Politico, Justice Samuel Alito responded to Jackson’s accusation of political bias in a concurring opinion supported by Justices Clarence Thomas and Niel Gorsuch. Alito wrote that by suggesting that “running out the clock” by following the court’s default procedures may indicate bias “on behalf of those who may find it politically advantageous to have the election occur under the unconstitutional map.”
Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry has delayed the primary so state Republicans could get to work on a new map.

“The dissent accuses the Court of ‘unshackl[ing]’ itself from ‘constraints.’ It is the dissent’s rhetoric that lacks restraint.”

• Samuel Alito Brutally Destroyed Ketanji Brown Jackson (Matt Margolis)

Last week, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that Louisiana’s congressional map with a second gerrymandered majority-minority district was unconstitutional. That ruling put Louisiana officials on the clock — they need to redraw their congressional maps before this year’s midterms. On Monday, the court issued an order immediately putting last week’s Louisiana redistricting ruling into effect.
https://twitter.com/scotus_wire/status/2051442579430834263

And, of course, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson decided to make a scene about it. Justice Samuel Alito made sure she regretted that decision. Normally, the Supreme Court waits 32 days after issuing a ruling before formally sending the case back to a lower court. Challengers to Louisiana’s map asked the justices to skip the wait — and the court agreed, issuing an unsigned order to accelerate the timeline so the lower court could oversee an orderly map-drawing process before elections.
Jackson couldn’t let that stand without throwing a hissy fit. She called the order “unwarranted and unwise,” and claimed the court was “unshackling” itself from procedural “constraints.” Her central argument was that the court should stick to its default 32-day rule, and that by moving faster, the majority was essentially sanctioning chaos in Louisiana’s election calendar. It was a sweeping condemnation of her colleagues — rhetorical and forceful.The only problem? Nobody signed onto it with her.
Not one other justice — not even the two liberals who dissented in the underlying ruling — attached their name to Jackson’s dissent. That’s a remarkable fact. When you write a fiery dissent accusing your colleagues of abandoning judicial restraint, and even the justices who agree with you on the merits don’t want their names on it, something has gone wrong. This is par for the course with Jackson; even her fellow left-wing justices think that she’s a moron.
But the best part is that Alito wasn’t about to let the accusations stand. He issued a sharp written response, joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, firing back with surgical precision. “The dissent in this suit levels charges that cannot go unanswered,” Alito wrote, rejecting Jackson’s framing and pointing out that her approach would force Louisiana to hold elections under a congressional map that the Supreme Court had already ruled unconstitutional.
Think about what that would mean in practice. A state holds an election. The map used to conduct that election has been struck down by the highest court in the land. Jackson’s answer to that problem is essentially: wait the 32 days anyway. Alito closed by turning Jackson’s own language against her: “The dissent accuses the Court of ‘unshackl[ing]’ itself from ‘constraints.’ It is the dissent’s rhetoric that lacks restraint.”

Justice Alito has officially had enough of Justice Jackson. pic.twitter.com/6U6RhkUmoe
— Greg Price (@greg_price11) May 5, 2026

In short, that’s Alito telling Jackson, in print, that her writing lacks the basic discipline she claims to be defending. Unlike her dissent, Alito was joined by two colleagues who clearly felt the response was necessary. Now that’s a humiliating public rebuke. Jackson consistently positions herself as the court’s conscience — the justice willing to call out her colleagues for breaking norms. But, ultimately, she just positions herself as the court’s jester, who isn’t even that funny. It’s actually kind of frightening that she’s in such a powerful position.

Amsterdam is the capital of Holland, but it’s not where the government is. That’s The Hague.

• Amsterdam Bans Advertisements Featuring Meat and Fossil Fuels (Turley)

In “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage,” I write about how censorship often becomes an insatiable appetite once countries go down the road of speech regulation. There is no better example than the Dutch and their recent ban on public ads for meat and fossil fuels. Activists have imposed similar limitations on advertising for products in the United States, from alcohol to tobacco. However, the Dutch law reflects how this tendency can metastasize into shielding citizens from unhealthy choices or influences. It appears that Dutch painters such as Pieter Aertsen (with his work A Meat Stall with the Holy Family Giving Alms, above) were promoting harmful imagery in their work. As for Rembrandt’s “Slaughtered Ox,” the Dutch master is now little more than a climate change denier.

Starting on May 1, the ban on such images became part of Amsterdam’s push to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050. While purportedly neutral on carbon, it is manifestly negative on free speech. As with other anti-free speech measures in Europe, this push again came from the left. The GreenLeft Party’s Anneke Veenhoff explained “I mean, if you want to be leading in climate policies and you rent out your walls to exactly the opposite, then what are you doing?” The answer is engaging in free speech. This is, of course, commercial speech, which is often subject to a lower level of protection. However, this shows the danger of using the differential standard to target products or industries viewed as unhealthy or ill-advised for consumers.
In Amsterdam, the ban will cover industries such as airlines, including KLM Royal Dutch Airlines, one of the largest employers and revenue generators in the country. Notably, activists compare this to cigarette advertising bans, confirming the very slippery slope danger that those companies raised when they were targeted. Hannah Prins, a paralegal at Advocates for the Future, is quoted as saying, “I don’t think it’s normal to see murdered animals on billboards. So I think it’s very good that that’s going to change.”bOther Dutch cities are now following suit, including Haarlem, Utrecht, and Nijmegen.
Of course, prostitutes still advertise live in Amsterdam and marijuana is a major industry for tourists. If you want drugs, there are ample choices. However, if you want a steak, you will have to rely on word-of-mouth directions.

I saw Paul Craig Roberts post it, so I will too. It’s important. Even if I can’t give it the space it needs.

• Ivermectin + Mebendazole In Cancer Patients (Nicolas Hulscher, MPH)

Largest Real-World Analysis of Shows 84.4% Clinical Benefit — Nearly HALF Report Cancer Disappearance or Regression After just 6 months, 48.4% of cancer patients taking ivermectin and mebendazole reported no evidence of disease (32.8%) or tumor regression (15.6%), while 36.1% reported disease stabilization.

We have completed the largest real-world human analysis to date evaluating ivermectin and mebendazole in cancer patients—and the results represent one of the most compelling clinical signals ever documented for repurposed anti-parasitic therapies in oncology. The manuscript is now available as a preprint on the Zenodo research repository, operated by the European Organization for Nuclear Research, while undergoing peer review at leading oncology journals: “Real-World Clinical Outcomes of Ivermectin and Mebendazole in Cancer Patients: Results from a Prospective Observational Cohort.”
In this real-world prospective clinical program evaluation, a diverse population of cancer patients (n=197) were prescribed compounded ivermectin–mebendazole, with each capsule containing 25 mg ivermectin and 250 mg mebendazole. At approximately six months post-treatment initiation, we observed an 84.4% Clinical Benefit Ratio (CBR), with nearly half of cancer patients (48.4%) reporting either no evidence of disease (32.8%) or tumor regression (15.6%). An additional 36.1% reported disease stabilization. This means more than four out of five patients reported either improvement or stabilization of their cancer.

These results indicate that the inexpensive and safe off-label applications of these medications could be an important complement in the treatment of cancer. The groundbreaking analysis was made possible through a unique collaboration between The Wellness Company, the McCullough Foundation, and the Chairman of the President’s Cancer Panel—uniting real-world clinical data, frontline medical experience, and high-level epidemiologic expertise to deliver urgently needed insights in oncology.

PROJECT DESIGN: REAL-WORLD DATA, PROSPECTIVE FRAMEWORK
We analyzed a prospective observational cohort of 197 cancer patients, with 122 completing structured follow-up at approximately six months (61.9% response rate). Patients were prescribed a compounded ivermectin–mebendazole protocol by licensed U.S. providers, and outcomes were collected through standardized digital surveys assessing cancer status, adherence, and safety. Each capsule contained 25 mg ivermectin and 250 mg mebendazole, with dosing individualized by clinicians—most commonly 1–2 capsules per day, though a subset of patients used higher daily dosing or cyclic regimens depending on disease status and tolerance.
Importantly, this was a prospective, structured clinical program evaluation, capturing longitudinal patient-reported outcomes rather than retrospective recall alone—strengthening the internal consistency of the findings.

PATIENT POPULATION: ADVANCED, DIVERSE, AND CLINICALLY RELEVANT

Our cohort represents a broad and clinically meaningful cross-section of cancer patients, including prostate (27.9%), breast (18.3%), lung (8.6%), colon (5.1%), and a wide range of additional malignancies. This was not a population limited to early-stage or low-risk disease.
At baseline:
• 37.1% of patients reported actively progressing cancer

• Nearly half were within one year of diagnosis, while others had long-standing disease

• Many had already undergone standard therapies:
• •Chemotherapy (31.5%)
• •Radiation (28.9%)
• •Surgery (42.1%)

This reflects a real-world oncology population, including patients with treatment exposure, ongoing progression, and complex clinical histories.

Filmmaker and director of the Plandemic documentary series Mikki Willis says after all the research he’s done he believes Covid was forced to be released earlier than they wanted, and that was what saved us

“What we've deduced from all of our research — was that this was planned… pic.twitter.com/hH7CDpII8P
— Wall Street Apes (@WallStreetApes) May 4, 2026

They didn't just smear Donald Trump, they committed TREASON, weaponizing the FBI, CIA, and U.S. intelligence to steal an election by running a coup on a sitting president.

Obama, Hillary, Comey, Brennan, Clapper, Rice, Mueller, and Steele thought they built the perfect Deep… pic.twitter.com/hMxcweLFqz
— The SCIF (@TheSCIF) May 4, 2026

https://twitter.com/GuntherEagleman/status/2051374459940946031?s=20

He gets better and better. https://t.co/eABK9747Yo
— Catturd ™ (@catturd2) May 4, 2026

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

Debt Rattle August 12 2025

Aug 122025

August 12, 2025 Posted by Raúl Ilargi Meijer at 9:54 am Finance Tagged with: color of law, corruption, DC Home Rule Act, gerrymandering, Mamdani, National Guard, nazi leaflet, private money, warring country, Zelensky 51 Responses »

James Proudfoot Sun on a House, Dieppe 1937

• Trump Must Take Out Deep State Now – Larry Klayman (USAW)

• Trump Invokes DC Home Rule Act, Set To Deploy National Guard (ZH)

• Trump Slaps Down Zelensky Land Swap Excuses (RT)

• Russia is a Warring Country – Trump (RT)

• Western Europe Wants Ukraine War To Continue, Even Without The Americans (RMX)

• ‘Another Nazi Leaflet’ – Moscow Slams Western Europe’s Ukraine Statement (RT)

• Trump Tempers Expectations Ahead Of Alaska “Feel-Out Meeting” With Putin (ZH)

• NATO Secretary General, Mark Rutte, Discusses Upcoming Trump-Putin Summit (CTH)

• Zelensky Cronies Transfer $50Mln ‘Corruption Money’ to UAE Every Month, (Sp.)

• Kiev’s Forces Face Catastrophe In Donbass – Ukrainian Ex-Commander (RT)

• Gerrymandering Makes Hypocrisy a Political Punch Line (Turley)

• Top DOJ Lawyer Warns Feds Could Face Criminal Charges For Weaponization (JTN)

• Former NYPD Commissioner Ray Kelly Warns About Mamdani as NYC Mayor (CTH)

• Putin-Trump Meeting: The Triumph of Delusion Over Reality (Paul Craig Roberts)

• Under Color of Law (James Howard Kunstler)

• Trump: The President for Peace (Sierra Knoch)

• The Return Of Private Money: American Dream Meets European Nightmare (Kolbe)

https://twitter.com/MAGAVoice/status/1954703389419532435

Whoever wrote this is spot on. pic.twitter.com/EJKgZzQ3Kb

— Mila Joy (@MilaLovesJoe) August 10, 2025

Poro

Here’s what the Western mainstream media won’t tell you:

Did the war suddenly start in February 2022?
Hell no.
The conflict kicked off back in 2014 when Poroshenko declared Russian a banned language, turned Donbas into a war zone by bombing ethnic Russians to dust, and cut off… pic.twitter.com/acxdEcPm7c

— Richard (@ricwe123) August 10, 2025

kids
https://twitter.com/MAGAVoice/status/1954221805289537766

“It’s obvious Trump and his team have come to the conclusion that they have to get the Left and the Deep State before they get them.”

• Trump Must Take Out Deep State Now – Larry Klayman (USAW)

Renowned attorney Larry Klayman says the coming indictments of the Deep State traitors who tried to frame President Trump as a Russian spy in his first term are all in serious trouble. Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Tulsi Gabbard charges that Obama Administration officials politicized intelligence and laid the groundwork for a “years-long coup” against President Donald Trump after he won the 2016 election. Gabbard first uncovered a mountain of documents implicating many in the so-called Deep State. Gabbard claimed in a post on X that former President Barack Obama and key members of his national security team, including then-CIA Director John Brennan and then-DNI James Clapper, fabricated a narrative about Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election to “subvert” Trump’s presidency.

They even made up evidence, such as the so-called Steele Dossier paid for by Hillary Clinton. They were all lies to make President Trump look bad. If these people are not stopped now while Trump is in office, and in control of the DOJ, then they will come after him when he is out of office and no longer in power. Klayman says, “Why is this different from the past? . . .. President Trump and the people around him, including Tulsi Gabbard, Pam Bondi, Kash Patel, Dan Bongino and others, have learned what they are up against. They’ve tried now to assassinate the President twice. I believe the Left and the Democrats were behind it. I think they wanted him dead. They did not want him (Trump) to be elected. There was also all the lawfare (like warfare) over the last many years.

It’s obvious Trump and his team have come to the conclusion that they have to get the Left and the Deep State before they get them.” Klayman says President Trump is at greater risk now than anytime in the past. Klayman explains, “Because President Trump has been so successful thus far, he is at great risk. There will likely be other assassination attempts and on the lives of other people in the cabinet. There will be attempts of assassination of anybody who supports him. I was in California recently, and I was wearing my Trump inauguration jacket from 2017, and some guy starts screaming I was a Nazi and this and that. I did not respond because I was in the middle of a bank. There is so much hatred out there, and this is why they have to take these people out legally and peacefully.”

Klayman points out people have the right to defend themselves, especially in the home, and Klayman urges people to use their Second Amendment rights if and when there is a need to do so. As the indictments come down in the not-so-distant future, expect violence. Klayman says, “The Left has its back up against the wall. They are a drowning man, so to speak. . .. There will be violence. They will try to foment violence. Who is likely to be indicted? Klayman names a few for starters. This list includes John Brennan, James Clapper, Peter Strzok and Mark Elias. Then Klayman predicts, “They will first go for the low hanging fruit before they get to Hillary Clinton and other higher ups. They will see if they can flip them. This time it’s different, and this time I believe there will be some accountability.”

“..the “D.C. Safe and Beautiful Task Force…”

• Trump Invokes DC Home Rule Act, Set To Deploy National Guard (ZH)

President Trump told reporters at the White House that he plans to deploy the D.C. National Guard and place the Metropolitan Police Department under direct federal control as part of a massive push to restore law and order in the nation’s capital. Trump told reporters that he is officially invoking the D.C. Home Rule Act to place the Metropolitan Police Department under direct federal control and deploy the National Guard, stating, “This is Liberation Day in D.C. — and we’re going to take our capital BACK.”

https://twitter.com/RapidResponse47/status/1954916584176443592?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1954916584176443592%7Ctwgr%5E7a39315104c09c99906eda244f17fdad58c8abbc%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fpolitical%2Ftrump-invokes-dc-home-rule-act-set-deploy-national-guard-restore-law-order

Earlier, President Trump fired off a Truth Social post around 8:00 a.m. ET: “Washington, D.C. will be LIBERATED today! Crime, savagery, filth, and scum will DISAPPEAR. I will MAKE OUR CAPITAL GREAT AGAIN!” “The days of ruthlessly killing or hurting innocent people are OVER! I quickly fixed the border (ZERO ILLEGALS in the last 3 months!), and D.C. is next!!!” the president said. Trump’s Truth Social post was followed by a report from The Wall Street Journal, which cited a U.S. official saying the White House was preparing to activate hundreds of National Guard troops across the metro area, pending a final order. Earlier this year, the president signed an executive order establishing the “D.C. Safe and Beautiful Task Force,” calling for increased law enforcement presence in public areas and launching initiatives to beautify parks and other public spaces.

[..] And last week, 19-year-old Edward Coristine, a former staffer at the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) whose LinkedIn handle earned him the nickname ‘Big Balls,’ was badly hurt in an attack in the crime-ridden metro area. Similar crime trends have been seen in lawless Baltimore City, controlled by far-left politicians who have zero accountability for their failed social justice policies that have backfired.

https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/1954922736834511175

“I mean, he’s got approval to go into war and kill everybody, but he needs approval to do a land swap[.]”

• Trump Slaps Down Zelensky Land Swap Excuses (RT)

US President Donald Trump has again said that a land swap for peace will be discussed at the upcoming summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska. The statement clashes with Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky’s earlier refusal to consider any territorial concessions. “They’ve [Russia] occupied some very prime territory. We’re going to try and get some of that territory back for Ukraine,” Trump said, implying that some areas might remain under Russian control in a future settlement. The Lugansk People’s Republic, Donetsk People’s Republic, Zaporozhye and Kherson regions became part of Russia following referendums held in 2022. Crimea voted to join the country in 2014, following the armed Western-backed Maidan coup in Kiev.

Trump previously also suggested that upcoming negotiations could involve “some swapping of territories to the betterment of both.” However, on Saturday, Zelensky rejected any land-swap proposals, citing limitations imposed by Ukraine’s constitution. During his press conference, Trump expressed frustration over Zelensky’s insistence that any territorial concessions to Russia would require constitutional approval. The US president questioned how Zelensky had the legal authority to wage war but could cite legal constraints against trading land.

“I was a little bothered by the fact that Zelensky was saying, well, I have to get constitutional approval,” Trump said, adding, “I mean, he’s got approval to go into war and kill everybody, but he needs approval to do a land swap[.]” In a post on X on Sunday, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrey Sibiga also wrote: “No rewards or gifts to the aggressor to appease him,” adding that “every concession invites further aggression.” Russian officials have repeatedly said that any peace deal must address the root causes of the conflict and reflect the realities on the ground.

As is obvious from his own words, Russia is not a warring country. It has been invaded, and successfully defended itself, though always at a very steep -human-price. Find a map of US battles and invasions in the past century to see a “warring country”.

• Russia is a Warring Country – Trump (RT)

US President Donald Trump has described Russia as a “warring country,” saying Moscow has been engaged in conflicts for centuries and “just keeps on fighting.” Trump made the remarks on Monday at a press conference, where he talked about his upcoming meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin in the US state of Alaska to discuss a possible settlement of the Ukraine conflict. “Russia is a warring nation. That’s what they do – they fight a lot of wars,” he said. “A friend of mine said, Russia is tough because they just keep on fighting,” Trump added. “They beat Hitler – so did we. And they beat Napoleon. You know, they’ve been doing this for a long time.”

Trump was referring to two of Russia’s military triumphs – the defeat of Napoleon’s Grand Army two centuries ago and the Soviet Union’s victory over Nazi Germany in World War Two. The two European dictators – Napoleon Bonaparte and Adolf Hitler – sent their armies into Russia in 1812 and 1941, respectively, only to suffer crushing defeats.

Look at the state their countries and economies are in and you understand.

“The issue, however, is that “Zelensky does not want to sign because he is afraid of being held responsible for losing the war.”

• Western Europe Wants Ukraine War To Continue, Even Without The Americans (RMX)

A Polish political scientist and journalist, Prof. Adam Wielomski, has taken to social media to claim Western European leaders do not seek a ceasefire in Ukraine at all, while the U.S. and Russia have their terms set and ready to go. According to Wielomski, Trump and Putin have already made an agreement and will simply use their Aug. 15 meeting in Alaska to announce it “with great pomp and circumstance.” Meanwhile, talk of Zelensky being present at the meeting is in no way related to Zelensky having any say on the negotiated terms, he continues, but to show that Zelensky is on board and to have him sign the pre-arranged agreement. The issue, however, is that “Zelensky does not want to sign because he is afraid of being held responsible for losing the war.”

And Western Europe stands behind him “because it wants the war to continue despite the withdrawal of the Americans, as this will give it fuel and an excuse to eliminate American control over it in the form of NATO and give it a reason to create either a European Defense Union or to federalize the EU with a common foreign and defense policy.” Wielomski then asks the “intelligentsia” who will benefit the most, Kyiv or Moscow, from the Americans withdrawing, leaving Zelensky only with the U.K. and the EU to support it. News portal Do Rzeczy reported on a document signed over the weekend by European leaders, committing to continued support of Ukraine and financing its ongoing needs. President Macron, Prime Minister Meloni, Chancellor Merz, Prime Minister Tusk, Prime Minister Starmer, President von der Leyen, and President Stubb all signed the statement regarding “peace for Ukraine in connection with the planned meeting between President Trump and President Putin.”

Included in the document was their concern that serious negotiations can only take place under conditions of a ceasefire or a reduction in military operations and that Ukraine’s participation in any talks was critical to any peace being achieved. Both the White House and the Kremlin accepted President Zelensky’s request to join the talks, although no formal invitation was issued. Meanwhile, a senior member of Putin’s inner circle, Investment Envoy Kirill Dmitriev, has said that many countries are making “titanic efforts” to hinder an agreement between Russia and Trump. Dmitriev did not name specific countries but indicated that critics of the upcoming talks may attempt to sabotage the summit through diplomatic maneuvers and disinformation via the media.

“The relations between Kiev and the bureaucracy in Brussels have “begun to resemble necrophilia, and it is distinguished by the fierce reciprocity on both sides..”

• ‘Another Nazi Leaflet’ – Moscow Slams Western Europe’s Ukraine Statement (RT)

A statement issued by Ukraine’s Western European backers on the upcoming talks between Russian President Vladimir Putin and his US counterpart Donald Trump is just “another Nazi leaflet,” Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has said. On Sunday, the leaders of France, Germany, the UK, Poland, Italy and Finland, as well as European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, issued a joint statement “on peace for Ukraine” dedicated to the upcoming Alaska summit between Putin and Trump scheduled for August 15. They welcomed the US president’s efforts to find a diplomatic solution to the conflict between Moscow and Kiev, but claimed that “only an approach” that includes “pressure on the Russian Federation” can be successful.

Zakharova commented on the statement later in the day, calling it “another Nazi leaflet claiming that success in achieving peace in Ukraine can allegedly only be achieved by putting pressure on Russia and supporting Kiev.” The cessation of hostilities requested by Ukraine’s backers in the EU and UK does not include stopping the supply of weapons to “Kiev terrorists,” she pointed out. The relations between Kiev and the bureaucracy in Brussels have “begun to resemble necrophilia, and it is distinguished by the fierce reciprocity on both sides,” the spokeswoman added.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov stressed previously that “Western Europe has once again found itself under a Nazi flag by committing to a completely misguided, disastrous venture of inflicting a strategic defeat on Russia” by backing Ukraine. Moscow has repeatedly said it is interested in a peaceful resolution to the Ukraine conflict, but insists that it must address its root causes in order to bring a permanent and stable peace. According to Russian officials, any deal must also reflect the realities on the ground, including the status of Crimea, which reunified with Russia in 2014, as well as the People’s Republics of Donetsk and Lugansk and Zaporozhye and Kherson regions, which joined Russia after referendums in 2022.

“The fact that Trump is even meeting with Putin is being felt as a huge slap in the face in Kiev.”

• Trump Tempers Expectations Ahead Of Alaska “Feel-Out Meeting” With Putin (ZH)

During President Donald Trump’s wide-raning news conference held at the White House on Monday, he was asked about the much anticipated Alaska summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin, which is of course stirring much controversy given European fears that he’ll do a deal which sidelines Ukraine’s interests. “This is a war that should never have happened,” Trump began in this section of the presser. “This is a war that wouldn’t have happened if I were president, it would never have happened.” These statements are nothing new, but what followed is a first. Trump then interestingly for the first time used language about the Friday planned summit which appears aimed at greatly tempering expectations. This is after several rounds of US-backed Russia-Ukraine peace talks in Istanbul failed to produce any breakthroughs.

Trump described the talks with Putin as merely a “feel-out meeting” and said that Putin “wants to get involved”. He then voiced his belief that Putin wants to get the war “over with”. “I’ve said that a few times and I’ve been disappointed because I’d have a great call with him and then missiles would be lobbed into Kyiv or some other place,” Trump stated. He futher pledged that he’ll tell Putin “you’ve got to end this war, you’ve got to end it”. And he sought to once again reassure European leaders -“who I get along with very well” – saying they will be the first phone call after the talks are over. As for whether a final deal could be achieved in Alaska, Trump emphasized that “it’s not up to me”. Again choosing language which seeks to manage expectations, Trump casually said: “I got a call to say they’d like to meet, and I’m going to see what they want to meet about.”

“I’d like to see a ceasefire, I’d like to see the best deal that could be made for both parties, it takes two to tango,” he added, which could be interpreted as a jab toward Ukraine. Trump at one point in his comments mistakenly said: “We’re going to Russia. That’s going to be a big deal.” He perhaps has a future trip to Russia in mind, as a return gesture for Putin coming to American soil to talk. But then near the end of the remarks he offered a corrective, saying “I thought it was very respectful that the president of Russia is coming to our country, as opposed to us going to his country, or even a third, third party place.” Such warm words said of Putin will likely make Zelensky nervous, hearkening back to the opening months of Trump taking office, when Trump’s relations with Zelensky hit a low-point, and criticisms aimed at Kiev came weekly.

Some analysts have already pointed out that these Monday statements from Trump don’t bode well for Ukraine and a favorable settlement on its terms. Meanwhile, Zelensky in fresh statements has highlighted Russia has only stepped-up aerial attacks on Ukraine of late. He talled that in just the past week, Russia sent more than 1,000 air bombs, nearly 1,400 drones and several missile strikes on Ukraine. But Ukraine has also been hitting Russian oil refineries on a weekly basis at this point, as both sides continue to target energy infrastructure. Ukraine’s position has been to accuse Russia of simply trying to buy time, and that it’s not actually interested in negotiating peace. The fact that Trump is even meeting with Putin is being felt as a huge slap in the face in Kiev.

In Rutte’s dreams, Trump goes to Alaska to “test” Putin, Putin fails the test, and Trump will then support a full-blown NATO war against Rusia.

• NATO Secretary General, Mark Rutte, Discusses Upcoming Trump-Putin Summit (CTH)

The ever-dramatic Margaret Brennan is in full pearl-clutching mode as she questions NATO Secretary General, Mark Rutte, about the upcoming meeting between horrible President Trump and even more horrible President Putin. It is simply unfathomable to allow a U.S. President to create a strategic reset with a Russian President. As Brennan acts out the role, she highlights how it is unimaginable, terrible, and just a no good bad thing. Horrid. NATO Secretary Rutte is quite happy with the new funds flowing into the NATO alliance as organized by President Trump. Rutte sits atop a new cache of taxpayer funded treasure for the alliance to organize; from his perspective Trump is gold, and Brennan gnashes her teeth throughout. Funnily, Brennan attempts to spin a Trump-Putin agreement for a ceasefire with Trump triggering World War III by getting the beginning of a peace deal over the finish line. If Trump creates peace, the world will explode or something. Rutte missed the opportunity to ask Mrs Brennan if she can hear herself. lol

[Transcript] – MARGARET BRENNAN: Good morning. Well, Mr. Secretary General, big picture here; is Russia’s Vladimir Putin still a direct threat to the Western alliance, or is he showing some signs of dropping his aggression?

SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE: He is still the main threat to the Western alliance, there’s no doubt. And I think it is very good that President Trump will test him, and we’ll see how far he can get on Friday, starting this process. He basically broke the deadlock, President Trump, in February, starting the dialogue with Putin. I think that was crucial. We had a great NATO Summit under his leadership, committing to 5% defense spending, so that there is a clear signal to our main threat, which is Russia, that we are serious. And then he opened the floodgates, three weeks ago, of American lethal weapons to be delivered into Ukraine, coordinated by NATO and, of course, the secondary sanctions. He started them with putting them on India, which is one of the biggest buyers of Russian oil and gas.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, that is certainly the groundwork being laid. The concern is, of course, as you know, among some critics, that in this conference room in Alaska, we’re going to see a 1938 moment. Where, in an attempt to immediately halt a war, the groundwork is laid for an even bigger conflict because of concessions that are made. Are you comfortable with Ukraine being excluded from these negotiations on Friday?

SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE: What will happen on Friday is testing Putin by President Trump. And I commend him for the fact that he organized this meeting. I think it is important. And, obviously, when it comes to peace talks, the cease-fire and what happens after that on territories, on security guarantees for Ukraine, Ukraine will have to be, and will be, involved. But on Friday, it is important to see how serious Putin is. And the only one who can do that is President Trump. So, it’s really crucial that a meeting takes place. It will not be the final say on this. There will not be the final deal on this. Of course, Ukraine will have to be involved in Europe, but it is important to start the next phase of this process, putting pressure on the Russians exactly as President Trump has been doing over the last six months.

It takes a Turkish newspaper to report on this. You try find a western report on it. And mind you, this is just one stream of “corrupt money”. $50 million? We’re talking billions.

• Zelensky Cronies Transfer $50Mln ‘Corruption Money’ to UAE Every Month, (Sp.)

Turkish newspaper Aydinlik published on Monday the bank accounts of companies based in the UAE involved in the corruption scheme of Volodymyr Zelensky’s cronies, about $50 million are transferred to the Middle Eastern country every month. Since last year, Ukraine has been rocked by allegations of corruption, which can “strike the Kiev government in the very heart,” the newspaper reported, adding that the main problem for Zelensky is that his inner circle is also involved in the corruption case. Zelensky’s closest circle transfers about $50 million a month to the accounts of two companies linked to Andrei Gmyrin, the alleged disposer of funds obtained through corruption, the newspaper reported.

Both companies are based in the United Arab Emirates — GFM Investment Group LLC (UAE No. 967369, No. 11707266, Emirates NBD bank account number: AE 210260001015792940701) and Gmyrin Family Holding Limited (UAE No. ICC20210636, No. 11664590), the newspaper reported. Gmyrin, who is a former consultant to the State Property Fund of Ukraine (SPFU), is under international investigation in connection with his complex network of companies and a portfolio of luxury goods in France, the UAE and Europe, the newspaper reported.

The defense line is literally broken.

• Kiev’s Forces Face Catastrophe In Donbass – Ukrainian Ex-Commander (RT)

The situation in southwestern Donbass is rapidly deteriorating for the Ukrainian troops that are now facing two major encirclements, former chief of staff of the Azov Brigade, Lieutenant Colonel Bogdan Krotevich, has claimed. The frontline between Pokrovsk (Krasnoarmeysk), the largest city under Ukrainian control in the southwest of Russia’s Donetsk People’s Republic, and Konstantinovka, a major stronghold some 45km to the northeast of the city, has effectively ceased to exist, Krotevich claimed. “I honestly don’t know what exactly you are being told, but I can tell you: the Pokrovsk-Konstantinovka line is, without exaggeration, a complete f**k up. And this f**k up has been growing for a long time, getting messier every day,” he wrote in an open letter to Vladimir Zelensky which he posted on X late on Monday.

The city of Pokrovsk has been de-facto surrounded by Russian troops, while Konstantinovka is facing semi-encirclement, he claimed. The former Azov commander shared a map purporting to show the situation in the area, which corroborates media reports of a major Russian breakthrough to the north of Pokrovsk that emerged earlier in the day. “The systemic problem began with the thinning out of reserves, widespread fragmentation of units along the entire front line, reports about a ‘taken village’ touted as a victory despite failures in entire operational directions,” Krotevich wrote, accusing “parts” of the military leadership of a “complete lack of a strategic and even operational vision of the theater of operations.”

A similar alarmist message was produced by Taras Chmut, the head of the pro-military charity Come Back Alive. The crisis in Donbass has been brewing for about a year and a half, he wrote on X earlier in the day, predicting the Ukrainian military was about to begin losing land “by tens, hundreds of square kilometers” daily. “First, we failed at the platoon level. Then the company. Then it’s the turn of the battalion level. When it comes to brigades, the enemy will put into action its armored groups, which have been actively accumulating for a year, and will go to the rear, to the operational space,” he claimed.

“Pritzker had just declared gerrymandering a threat to democracy. He followed up by making a joke of his own unparalleled gerrymandering. The New York audience cheered both statements…”

• Gerrymandering Makes Hypocrisy a Political Punch Line (Turley)

Former diplomat and Democratic senator Adlai Stevenson once remarked that “a hypocrite is the kind of politician who would cut down a redwood tree, then mount the stump and make a speech for conservation.” If so, this week in politics was nothing but the worst form of stump speeches. In New York, Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) declared that the move by Texas Republicans to redistrict mid-decade was a “legal insurrection of our U.S. Capitol.” In Texas, Democratic State Rep. Jolanda Jones (D) must have felt “insurrection” did not quite capture the infamy. Instead, she insisted, “I will liken this to the Holocaust.” Others repeated the Democratic mantra that it was the death of democracy. That includes former President Barack Obama, who had said nothing when Democrats made his own state the most gerrymandered in the union.

In Illinois, surrounded by Texas legislators who had fled their state to prevent a legislative quorum, Gov. JB Pritzker (D) bellowed that gerrymandering was an attempt to “steal” congressional seats and to “disenfranchise people.” It did not matter that the stump Pritzker and Texas Democrats were standing on in Chicago is located the most gerrymandered state in the country. The redistricting law, signed by Pritzker left Republicans with just three of the state’s 17 congressional seats, even though they won nearly half the votes in the last election. What is missing in any of this is any sense of shame. The most telling moment came when Pritzker went on the Stephen Colbert’s show on CBS — a show that offered him a reliably supportive audience and a long track record of 86 percent of jokes slamming conservatives or Republicans.

Pritzker received roaring cheers when he said that he was protecting democracy from Texas gerrymandering. Colbert then showed him the map of Illinois, which features ridiculously shaped, snaking districts that stretch across the state — all drawn to maximize Democratic performance in elections. Pritzker just shrugged and joked how they had kindergarteners design it. Colbert and the audience laughed uproariously. So let’s recap. Pritzker had just declared gerrymandering a threat to democracy. He followed up by making a joke of his own unparalleled gerrymandering. The New York audience cheered both statements. Some of the outrage by Democrats seemed part of a comedy routine. In Massachusetts, Gov. Maura Healey pledged to retaliate by gerrymandering her heavily gerrymandered state. The problem?

It is already so badly gerrymandered that there are no Republican House members in the state — there haven’t been any since the 1990s. We have reached the point in our age of rage where one’s hypocrisy can be openly acknowledged but then dismissed with a chuckle. It is not cheap to lock Republicans out completely in heavily Democratic states. California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) quickly pledged to order a new round of gerrymandering in a state where Republicans constituted roughly 40 percent of the congressional vote in 2024 but received only about 17 percent of the House seats. To reduce the Republicans to near zero would require passage of a ballot proposition, costing more than $200 million, even as California faces a budget crisis and a deficit greater than $20 billion. And that may prove to be just a fraction of the true cost.

JB Pritzker talking about “democracy.”…..

In Illinois, 43.5% voted for Trump and 54.4% for Harris. Democrats hold 82.4% of the U.S. House seats. Republicans have just 17% despite nearly 44% of the vote.

Look at that little pinky looking district in this video. Created purely… pic.twitter.com/JM3lFztrwZ

— Jeffery Mead (@the_jefferymead) August 11, 2025

“..federal agents and intelligence officers who weaponized their government powers for political purposes could face criminal charges under civil rights laws..”

• Top DOJ Lawyer Warns Feds Could Face Criminal Charges For Weaponization (JTN)

A top Justice Department lawyer is warning that federal agents and intelligence officers who weaponized their government powers for political purposes could face criminal charges under civil rights laws created to fight injustices during the Jim Crow era more than a half-century ago. Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Harmeet Dhillon cautioned in an interview with Just the News that she could not discuss any specific investigations or potential suspect. But she said recent reports that one or more grand juries were probing the weaponization of government powers against President Trump and his associates or followers might have given good reason for current and former FBI and CIA officials to hire lawyers.

“This, again, goes back to those Reconstruction Era statutes that sought to remedy the vestiges of racism, and we had some terrible incidents in our country’s history of law enforcement officials conspiring to deprive African Americans of their civil rights,“ she said in a wide-ranging interview with the “Just the News, No Noise” television show. “And that is where some of these laws stem from.” “But they’re broader than that, and so it can be a crime for government officials, either together or in conspiring with non-government officials, to violate people’s civil rights,” she explained. “That’s also a civil violation. I’ve actually sued over that in California for pro-life activists. And you know, we have long-standing cases involving these issues, and so I think, you know, government officials may think, because nobody ever bothers to enforce these statutes, that they’re immune, and they can do whatever they want.”

“Not so, and I think that’s why you’re seeing some people tongue-in-cheek saying that in DC, every lawyer is being retained …. as these investigations have begun to hit the newswires,” she added. Dhillon’s comments come as FBI Director Kash Patel has opened at least one criminal conspiracy case looking at whether DOJ, FBI, and intelligence community officers were engaged in a long-running conspiracy to violate the rights of Donald Trump and his followers from the Russiagate scandal to the raid on Mar-a-Lago. In addition, CIA Director John Ratcliffe and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard have referred current and former officials to the Justice Department for possible prosecution for alleged abuses.

Last week, the Justice Department issued subpoenas to New York Attorney General Leticia James seeking any evidence of whether she sought to violate the civil rights of President Trump when she filed a civil lawsuit against his company for alleged fraud. Section 241 of Title 18 of the U.S. Code makes it “unlawful for two or more persons to conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person of any state, territory or district in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him/her by the Constitution or the laws of the United States.” Such conspiracy statutes are derived from the Civil Rights Acts of 1960 and 1964, which were enacted to protect black citizens from police abuses in the South and from prohibitions in public places. Those laws were complemented by a series of voting rights laws as well.

The laws were seldom successfully used against police officers during the 1960’s, but have been more commonly used against police misconduct over the last three decades, starting most notably with the infamous 1993 Rodney King case where four LAPD officers involved were captured on videotape beating King. The four were initially acquitted on state charges in May of that year, which led to five days of rioting. Fifty-three people (including 28 African-Americans, 19 Hispanics, 14 whites, and 2 Asians) were killed: the greatest death toll in any American civil disturbance since the 1863 Draft Riots in New York City. Looting and fires had inflicted more than one billion dollars in property damage. The four officers were retried under federal civil rights laws in February 1993, with two of them being acquitted, and the remaining two found guilty and sentenced to two and a half years in prison. In a civil lawsuit, King won a $3.8 million verdict from the City of Los Angeles.

More recently, former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin was convicted of violating George Floyd’s civil rights in 2020 by kneeling on his neck and suffocating Floyd. The Justice Department said in a press release that Chauvin pleaded guilty to willfully depriving Mr. Floyd of his constitutional right to be free from the use of unreasonable force by a police officer, resulting in Mr. Floyd’s bodily injury and death. In the plea documents, Chauvin agreed that the sentencing for this crime should be based on the sentence for second-degree murder because he acted willfully and in callous and wanton disregard of the consequences on Floyd’s life. He was sentenced to a term in prison of more than 20 years.

Elsewhere, a law enforcement officer was tried and convicted on similar charges related to violating the civil rights of Breonna Taylor in Kentucky during the execution of a search warrant in March 2020 that, according to the Justice Department, led to the death of Taylor in her home. Although his shots did not strike Taylor, the use of deadly force was unjustified. Taylor was killed during the botched raid when police rammed the door open and Taylor’s boyfriend, believing that intruders were breaking in, fired his handgun one time at officers, two of whom fired back, hitting and killing Taylor. A federal judge dismissed the felony charges against the other police officers in August of last year, although the other officers are still facing ongoing criminal litigation, according to a local TV station.

Silly me, I figured Mamdani was far too far out in left field to get any votes. Now everyone’s saying woke’s wet dream is a shoe-in for mayor. And New York is fully dependent on Trump to come save it.

• Former NYPD Commissioner Ray Kelly Warns About Mamdani as NYC Mayor (CTH)

Former New York City Police Commissioner, Ray Kelly, is warning about what will happen if Zohran Mamdani wins the mayor race in New York City. However, at this point the Mamdani victory is almost assured. Mamdani is supported by both the professional political left and the professional political right. Essentially supported by establishment Democrats and establishment Republicans. Also, supported openly by the DNC and supported passively by the fundraising arm of the RNC. Mamdani represents the opportunity for both parties to fundraise billions of dollars in support and opposition. This is the UniParty at work. Zohran Mamdani is essentially a shoo-in for Mayor. He hits a very unique niche spot, fulfilling the role needed for the left and the right.

The left will promote the unaffordability of things and target the Gen-z audience for branding. The DNC will do their social/econ experiments again and fundraise. On the other side of the UniParty, the “conservatives” within the traditional GOPe will have their new foil. Conservatives will have the opportunity for thousands of hours of punditry, lots of column inches and, of course, fundraising. An argument can be made that Andrew Cuomo, financed by those who construct political distractions, entered the NYC race to ensure a Mamdani victory. Republicans, Democrats, communists, leftists, controlled right media, Palestinian supporters and Israel-First strategists all prefer both a beacon and a foil to keep the coliseum crowd occupied.

Yeah, politics in the post-Obama era is about seeing the other hand in slow motion now, feeling that intuitive sense of history repeating, and noticing the same tripwires are being triggered. Wash, rinse, repeat. ‘NEW YORK – Ex-NYPD Commissioner Ray Kelly on Sunday warned it would be a “tragedy of major proportions” if city voters elect socialist mayoral nominee Zohran Mamdani, who is “totally unqualified” for the office. Kelly — the longest-serving police commissioner in Big Apple history with stints under Democratic Mayors Mike Bloomberg and David Dinkins — said he is especially worried Mamdani will gut the Police Department while trying to usher in “a whole list of wacky things.”

“It’s a tragedy of major proportions if Mamdani is elected mayor of the greatest city in the world,” Kelly said on WABC 770 AM’s the “Cats Roundtable” program. (more)” The guy is straight from central casting for the UniParty. A proud socialist, Muslim supporter of Hamas, progressive wealth spreader who hears and understands the voices of the Starbucks crowd. A NYC version of Barry Soetero. Professional Democrats and Republicans will benefit financially.

“The entire point of Washington’s orchestrated conflict in Ukraine was to destabilize Russia. Has Washington abandoned this policy goal?”

“How does the military/security complex see the loss of its Russian enemy?”

• Putin-Trump Meeting: The Triumph of Delusion Over Reality (Paul Craig Roberts)

A couple of days ago Trump said it wasn’t worthwhile meeting with Putin, but suddenly ordered his aides to arrange a meeting with Putin in a week. The explanations we have been given for this is that Putin said Trump’s negotiator Witcoff had made an acceptable proposal. Putin’s negotiator Kirill Dmitriev declared “a historic meeting in which dialogue will prevail.” One dreamer proclaimed that Putin and Trump “may reconfigure the world order.” These premature declarations of agreement and success have led to further romantic theorizing. One Russian commentator declared that Alaska was chosen for the historic meeting because it “so clearly embodies the spirit of neighborliness and mutually beneficial cooperation lost during the Cold War.” The Russian Atlanticist-Integrationists whose hearts and interests are in the West are hopeful that their declarations of bliss, even if involves Russian surrender, will prevail over Russian nationalism.

For example, Putin’s negotiator is Kirill Dmitriev, nominally a Russian, but in fact a graduate of Stanford University and Harvard Business School–entrances into the American Establishment–who began his career at Goldman Sachs, an establishment member. He is a Young Global Leader of the World Economic Forum. His long list of honors and directorships of Russian companies is provided by the WEF. Currently he is chief of the Russian Direct Investment Fund and Putin’s Special Envoy on International Economic and Investment Cooperation. Could Putin have chosen a more conflicted person to negotiate with Washington? Among these and other highly hopeful statements, what is the reality of the situation? Does it conform to the expressed expectations? No. As far as I can tell, Trump is headed into a “historic meeting” with his Russian counterpart and still has no idea what Putin’s position is.

Trump most recently spoke of a peace deal based on a “swapping of territories,” which Zelensky’s European supporters say must be a “reciprocal” swap of territory. Zelensky’s position is that all territory must be returned to Ukraine. Putin’s position is that all territory now incorporated into the Russian Federation must be accepted as Russian by Ukraine and the West. Otherwise, Russia has to repudiate its military victories in a war that was provoked by Washington. But the main problem with Trump’s approach is that he is thinking of the meeting in a very limited context of ending the military conflict with a land swap, whereas Putin wants a mutual security agreement with Washington and NATO that gets NATO off of Russia’s borders. The war that Putin wants to end is the West’s hostility toward Moscow. The war in Ukraine Russia can take care off.

Putin’s objective is a highly desirable goal, because the worsening provocations of Moscow will eventually result in nuclear war. But how realistic is Putin’s goal? I would say it is not realistic. First, the Wolfowitz Doctrine is in the way. The Wolfowitz doctrine declares the principal goal of US foreign policy to be to prevent the rise of any power that can serve as a constraint on American unilateralism. The neoconservatives who originated this doctrine are still very influential in US policy-making circles. No US president or Secretary of State has repudiated this doctrine. Trump himself recently declared the policy when he said “I rule America and the world.” That is a hegemonic statement.

Indeed, the current military conflict in Ukraine is entirely the product of Washington’s hegemonic foreign policy. Washington orchestrated the “Maidan Revolution” in order to overthrow a Russian-friendly democratic government and to install a Russophobic puppet. The puppet government then attacked the people in the Russian territories of Ukraine until they forced a Russian intervention after the West used the Minsk Agreement to deceive Putin and after the West refused the Kremlin’s request for a mutual security agreement during December 2021-February 2022. At this point Putin was forced to intervene in order to prevent the slaughter of the Russians in the independent Donbas republics by a large Ukrainian army trained and equipped by Washington.

If Putin had had the foresight to accept the Donbas republics’ request in 2014 to be reunited with Russia like Crimea, the war would have been avoided. But Putin, badly advised, confused a defense of Russian people with a provocation to the West. In 2014 the Atlanticists-Integrationists, whose interests are in the West, not in Russia, still intended for the Kremlin to crawl on its belly back into Western acceptance by being a good subject of Washington’s hegemonic rule.. The entire point of Washington’s orchestrated conflict in Ukraine was to destabilize Russia. Has Washington abandoned this policy goal?

Second, there is the interest of the US military/security complex. The power and profit of the military/security complex depends on having enemies. The collapse of the Soviet Union led to the creation of the “Muslim Threat” used to sustain the military/security’s profits and powers with Washington’s 21st century wars that destroyed, so far, five Muslim countries, while supporting with money, weapons, and diplomatic cover Israel’s genocide of Palestine, and Washington is now being aligned with Israel to destroy Iran.

A few days ago President Trump bragged that he had negotiated a deal with the EU to purchase hundreds of billions of dollars of US weapons to send to Ukraine. What happens to this deal if peace comes to Ukraine? How does the military/security complex see the loss of its Russian enemy? Has Trump promised them an Iranian war and/or a war with China as replacements? Third, if Trump favors peace with Russia, why did he just reinstall in Europe the US intermediate-range nuclear missiles that President Reagan had removed, and in addition deploy two submarines with nuclear missiles closer to Russia?

“The second-order and third-order damages of RussiaGate are incalculable. A murder of American democracy was committed.” — Mike Benz on “X”

• Under Color of Law (James Howard Kunstler)

Surely you’ve noticed the ominous cone of silence around the DOJ and the FBI as rumors of “accountability” mount against well-known figures who used government to make war against its own citizens. That is exactly what happened, by the way, in case you’re baffled by the news. The agencies aren’t leaking this time, especially not to the mendacious scribes that infest The New York Times and The WashPo, who function as vanguard to the corps of traitors in the rogue fourth branch of government called the Blob. So, the silence begs you to ask: Are they doing anything in there?

Yes, they are making cases. And they are not yapping idly about it in the news, legacy or alt. They are preparing evidence for grand juries that will decide if probable cause exists to indict those well-known figures — several of whom have become cable news performers, foolishly, if obliquely, advertising their own culpability for years now. You’ll just have to wait, though perhaps not for long. It is August, after all, the horse latitudes of the year when things go still.

You are lectured incessantly and sanctimoniously by these same suspects about the rule of law (in “our democracy”). Many of these characters are maestros in the dark arts of lawfare, which, paradoxically, is the practice of using law to pervert and dishonor the rule of law. Lately, you are introduced to a similar sounding phrase, under color of law, with a related meaning. Understand it and you will see what has been behind virtually all the mischief in our public affairs this past, vicious decade. Under color of law has deep roots in Anglo-American jurisprudence because law, by its nature, lends itself to abuse and nefarious misuse. The law’s “nature” is that it is a set of rules to decide matters of consequence, both personal and public, where much is at stake: ownership of property, liberty, life itself. At times, actions are taken in the name of the law to unjustly deprive persons of life, liberty, and property, usually for the benefit of other persons.

The phrase, life, liberty, and property, derives from John Locke’s Two Treatises on Government (1689), which argued that these are natural rights, God-given, and that it is government’s duty to protect these rights, government being the practical application of law. The phrase life, liberty, and property deeply influenced America’s founders. Thomas Jefferson changed it up a bit in the Declaration of Independence as “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” with a eudaimonian twist to inspire America to flourish on its own, off England’s leash. It was also Jefferson’s way of detaching the Declaration from the issue of slavery, where “property” could refer to human beings.

But the Lockean original, life, liberty and property, reappears in the Bill of Rights to the Constitution. It is in the Fifth Amendment, protecting persons from the arbitrary deprivation of these rights without due process by the federal government, and in the Fourteenth Amendment applying the same principle of law to state governments. Where lawfare comes in is under due process. Lawfare’s aim is to pervert due process, to use officers of the courts to act unfairly and unjustly in the name of the law, and thus, under color of law.

“As an American with Armenian heritage, I am particularly optimistic about the opportunities this deal will create for economic partnerships. And I am thankful to have a president who is paying attention to this region..”

Note: this is Russia’s backyard.

• Trump: The President for Peace (Sierra Knoch)

On Aug. 8, President Donald Trump hosted the leaders of Armenia and Azerbaijan for the signing of an historic peace deal between the two countries and the U.S. The deal is aimed at normalizing relations between the two nations which have been at odds for decades over a border dispute. This is another diplomatic win from the Trump administration that shows that many of these long-standing global conflicts that were ignored or even fueled by the Biden administration and deemed “unsolvable” are in fact solvable. Of course, nothing can get resolved overnight, and there is still work to be done in many of these instances, but the initial steps have been taken which are often the most important as they stop fighting and unnecessary killing.

Many may be wondering why the Trump administration bothers to focus on such relatively small conflicts, such as the Armenia-Azerbaijan dispute, or the Democratic Republic of Congo-Rwanda dispute or the Thailand/Cambodia dispute when we have larger conflicts still ongoing in Russia/Ukraine and Israel/Gaza. But the Trump administration is showing wisdom that the so-called “adults in the room” in the Biden administration lacked. These small conflicts offer opportunities for larger states such as Russia that benefit from conflict that keeps smaller states weak and dependent. Ending small conflicts not only saves lives, it eliminates opportunities for Russia, China, or other global bad actors to gain a foothold in these places and cause more trouble.

As an American with Armenian heritage, I am particularly optimistic about the opportunities this deal will create for economic partnerships. And I am thankful to have a president who is paying attention to this region and bringing both Azerbaijnis and Armenians closer to peace. The details of the deal include two separate agreements that Azerbaijan and Armenia signed with the United States. The agreements include points on energy, technology, economic cooperation, border security, infrastructure and trade. Additionally, the two countries signed a historic declaration together brokered by the U.S. and centered on ending conflict. The deal creates a shared transit corridor dubbed the “Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity” which will no doubt bring economic success for the U.S. and the South Caucasus region. One needs only to look to the Armenian diaspora in America to see the work ethic, ingenuity, and craftsmanship that Armenian culture can contribute when given the opportunity.

According to several articles the corridor is going to run through a mountainous region between Armenia and Azerbaijan. In the agreement Armenia has agreed to award the U.S. exclusive special development rights on the Zangezur Corridor land for 99 years. The U.S. would sublease the land to a consortium that will develop rail, oil, gas and fiber optic lines and possibly electricity transmission along the 27-mile corridor. The joint declaration is the first-ever declaration signed between the two countries, which were both previously states of the former Soviet Union and regained their freedom when the USSR was disbanded in 1991. There are still issues to be worked out between the two nations, such as alleged human rights abuses by Azerbaijan toward ethnic Armenians, but in order to address any of these concerns the two nations must first stop the fighting and resume relations.

Although this agreement may not address every issue right now, I believe it is better to take the first step than to stall progress completely. This opportunity may not be around forever. With Vladimir Putin’s ongoing battlefield adventures in Ukraine pulling his focus and economic resources completely to that conflict, Russian influence is finally waning in Azerbaijan, which created an opening for the U.S. to facilitate this deal. The significance of these agreements extends beyond mere signatures; they represent a tangible investment in the future stability and prosperity of the region.

According to statements from the leaders of both Azerbaijan and Armenia this deal wouldn’t have been possible without Trump. For those who are concerned about tariffs or Trump’s global trade policy potentially driving away partners, it is clear that Trump’s reputation as the peacemaker is far more valuable to small states around the world than unbalanced trade. The relationships that are formed when Trump is able to achieve deals like this in Asia, Africa, and now the South Caucasus region are real and lasting because they show the benefit of American strength and leadership.

Additionally, these efforts send a clear message to adversarial powers that the era of unchecked influence in strategically sensitive zones may be coming to an end. By inserting American expertise and oversight, and by empowering local stakeholders, the deal lays a foundation for sustainable development and mutual benefit. Such diplomatic achievements demonstrate that when the United States leads with resolve and creativity, even seemingly intractable disputes can give way to hope and renewed partnership. While we may never see the cliché “World Peace” that some dream of, the Trump administration is showing that there is a real benefit to trying anyway. Balancing America First policies and strength with fast-paced action that takes advantage of opportunities for diplomacy when they arise is a winning approach for America in the Golden Age.

“Europe is heading inexorably towards centralism. The question remains: Will the monetary coup succeed, or will the eurozone collapse first?”

• The Return Of Private Money: American Dream Meets European Nightmare (Kolbe)

EU Europe and the USA are drifting further apart. In the shadow of the Ukraine war and Brussels censorship policies, a political hiatus is opening up even at the monetary policy level. Monetary policy is often treated as a stepchild in the media. Except during sovereign debt crises, when central banks step in as rescuers, politics and media mostly focus only on interest rate decisions. These are stylized as media highlights to help politics anchor inflation expectations and influence market activity. In short: this remains a superficial view that does not do justice to the complexity of monetary policy. It is regrettable—and perhaps no coincidence—that monetary policy is dealt with so hastily.

Money is the central good in economics. Its value development, dilution, and manipulation by political actors is a hot potato that remains largely untempered. Yet, since US banks withdrew from the London LIBOR contract and the national reference rate (SOFR) was introduced, monetary policy has evolved into a geopolitical key issue deserving serious discussion. Behind the artificially generated monetary background noise about interest rates and inflation control, a strategic drift is taking place that will redefine the economic future. EU Europe and the USA are taking separate monetary policy paths. Media censorship, climate socialism, and now the debate over the digital euro—one might say, Brussels and the ECB bankers spare no effort to turn the EU into a closed fortress of power.

With the digital euro, they would take a major step towards consolidating this power. It is programmable, fully transparent money on a centralized blockchain that would transform money into a morally and politically charged commodity. Climate targets, individual CO2 consumption, meat consumption, and travel activities—the coupling of individual behavior to the emissions-based control complex seems tangible. And sanctioning citizens and companies in cases of dissident behavior could become routine bureaucratic work.Following the line of reasoning of ECB President Christine Lagarde, it is clear what awaits Europeans: algorithmic surveillance of economic activity and moralistic control of individual behavior.

Is Money a Public Good? For Lagarde, money is a public good. Naturally, under the control of the state or state-like surrogates such as the ECB. The digital euro project is to start small, with limited wallets managed by the ECB, marketed ironically by the muted commercial banks that would become obsolete in case of full conversion—a strange understanding of banking revealed here. A digital euro is supposed to offer new choices, complement cash, and promote inclusion, according to Lagarde. But here again, one of those political slogans is revealed: “Inclusion” remains a hollow phrase without substantive content. In reality, the ECB aims to secure control over central capital flows and, in the next eurozone debt crisis, to prevent capital flight to avoid collapse and drying up of financial flows.

Everything else is whitewashing written for the disinterested reader of the business section. Europe is heading inexorably towards centralism. The question remains: Will the monetary coup succeed, or will the eurozone collapse first? The legal framework is supposed to be in place by early 2026 before rollout begins. Realistically, a start is expected earliest in 2028, perhaps only in 2029. There is hope that such large projects usually fail due to bureaucratic inertia. So let’s stay optimistic. Meanwhile, across the Atlantic, an astonishing turnaround is taking place. The monetary policy direction of President Trump’s administration aims at the partial reactivation of the private money system. The legal framework currently being set up (GENIUS Act) gives commercial banks the possibility to issue their own stablecoins, i.e., digital dollars, thereby expanding the booming market currently dominated by Tether. Worldwide, over 500 million people already use this new form of money—a movement that seems unstoppable, regardless of how Europeans view it.

Every dollar stablecoin is backed by an equivalent amount of short-term US Treasury bonds as well as gold or Bitcoin, giving the US Treasury a convincing argument to actively participate in the spread of this technology—American government debt is literally being sold to the private sector.

His voice has improved crazy much

RFK Jr shares his diet secrets: “It's mainly meat and anything fermented” pic.twitter.com/MhuA3IctjR

— Chief Nerd (@TheChiefNerd) August 10, 2025

10000 Vaccines at once

CBS Report by Sharyl Attkisson & Katie Couric on Paul Offit who says Babies can take 10000 Vaccines

CBS report by Sharyl Attkisson and Katie Couric on corruption in the vaccine industry from almost 2 decades ago.

Dr. Paul Offit states that a baby can receive up to 10,000… pic.twitter.com/hTcPACPca6

— Camus (@newstart_2024) August 10, 2025

shiong
https://twitter.com/FredsFarm247/status/1954651790588432783

https://twitter.com/buitengebieden/status/1954925041402912925
https://twitter.com/buitengebieden/status/1954619712047919306

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