Menu Icon

Debt Rattle July 1 2025

Jul 012025
 
 July 1, 2025  Posted by at 9:39 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , ,  52 Responses »


Cimabue Christ mocked c1280 (Photograph: Charles Platiau/Reuters)

 

• Trump’s Trip to ‘Alligator Alcatraz’ Could Boost ‘One Big, Beautiful Bill’ (DS)
• Elon Musk Pledges to Launch Third Party if Big Beautiful Bill Passes (CTH)
• Musk ‘A Wonderful Guy’ – Trump (RT)
• Kevin Hassett Outlines Importance of Big Beautiful Bill (CTH)
• America’s New Long War (Douglas Macgregor)
• NATO’s 5% Spending Demand ‘Absolutely Impossible’ – Spain (RT)
• Canada Scraps Digital Service Tax On US Tech Giants To Revive Trade Talks (ZH)
• Trump Says TikTok Buyer Is “Group Of Very Wealthy People” (ZH)
• When It’s Too Dirty For The CIA…” Benz On USAID’s Litany Of Corruption (ZH)
• Stay Sane (James Howard Kunstler)
• Bessent Slams Fed For Delay On Rate Decisions (ZH)
• HHS Head RFK Jr Tells Tucker Carlson all the Terrible Stuff HHS is Doing (CTH)
• CNN Promotes ICE App to Help Illegal Aliens Avoid Capture (CTH)
• Trump the Greatest American President in History? (Paul Craig Roberts)
• Stablecoins Are Becoming ‘Default Settlement Layer’ For Internet (CT)

 

 

vanJones

Benz

Pappé

Flynn

DOGE

 

 


Steve Keen

 

 

 

 

NOTE: From what I understand, Elon Musk’s problems with Trump’s Big Beautiful Bill policies are -to a large extent- about electricity generation. Trump claims it’s subsidies for Musk’s electric cars, but in reality it’s (AI) data centers. That’s where demand -growth- will be, and China gets that.

https://twitter.com/FrankLuntz/status/1938569426200096997
https://twitter.com/XH_Lee23/status/1932281167342121246

 

 

 

 

Alligator Alcatraz is a keeper as a label.

• Trump’s Trip to ‘Alligator Alcatraz’ Could Boost ‘One Big, Beautiful Bill’ (DS)

sPresident Donald Trump is visiting a detention center dubbed “Alligator Alcatraz” on Tuesday, which the White House contends backs up the need to pass the “One Big, Beautiful Bill.” A reporter on Monday asked White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt why Trump would travel to the detention center about 50 miles west of Miami while the fate of the key tax and spending legislation hangs in the balance in the Senate. “His trip to this detention facility underscores the need to pass the One Big, Beautiful Bill because we need more detention facilities across the country,” Leavitt said. “The last administration let in nearly 20 million illegal people from all over the world. This administration is focused on arresting and detaining them.” If the bill, which locks in the 2017 Trump tax cuts and includes new money for border and immigration enforcement, passes the Senate, it has to return to the House for final passage after narrow approval.

“In comparison to that 20 million illegal criminal population in our country, we only have 7,000 [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] agents in the interior who are doing this very important work,” the press secretary continued. “So obviously, we need more personnel, we need more resources. That’s why we need to pass the One Big, Beautiful Bill.” Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, and Rep. Byron Donalds, R-Fla., will also be at the detention center for the opening. “The facility is in the heart of the Everglades and will be informally known as Alligator Alcatraz,” Leavitt said. “There is only one road leading in. The only way out is a one-way flight. It is isolated and surrounded by dangerous wildlife and unforgiving terrain. The facility will have up to 5,000 beds to house, process and deport criminal illegal aliens. This is an efficient and low cost way to help carry out the largest deportation campaign in American history.”

The original Alcatraz was an island prison off the coast of California that was difficult to escape. The facility is shuttered, but continued to be a tourist attraction. She later stressed the facility is for criminal illegal aliens. “When you have illegal murderers and rapists and heinous criminals in a detention facility surrounded by alligators, yes I do think that’s a deterrent for them to try to escape,” Leavitt said. “We do know that some of these illegal criminals have escaped from other detention facilities like one in New Jersey. Of course we want to keep the American people safe. We want to remove these public safety threats from our streets and we want to effectively detain them as best as we can.”

Read more …

He’ll get attention alright. But how about votes?

• Elon Musk Pledges to Launch Third Party if Big Beautiful Bill Passes (CTH)

For those who have spent time in the lead up to this moment, you may remember our warning that Elon Musk would eventually take a position against President Trump and actively work to undermine the MAGA agenda therein. Tonight as the Senate debates the Big Beautiful Bill, that does not include subsidies for his electric vehicles and green energy initiatives, Elon Musk promises to organize a third party. This was all predictable.

The bill is imperfect, yes. However, the BBB contains the priorities of President Trump and those priorities are the goals and objectives of the people who voted to support his vision. Elon Musk is now actively working against the interests of the Make America Great Again movement, and he is intent on dividing the MAGA coalition.

Read more …

“..but I’m the boss..”

• Musk ‘A Wonderful Guy’ – Trump (RT)

Donald Trump has called Elon Musk a “wonderful guy,” despite the Tesla and SpaceX CEO’s renewed criticism of the US president’s so-called “big, beautiful” budget bill which would include a $5 trillion debt ceiling increase. Musk again lashed out at the legislation on Saturday, writing on X that it was “utterly insane” and predicting that it would hurl the US into “debt slavery” and destroy millions of jobs. However, his warnings did not prevent the Senate from narrowly voting to move forward on Trump’s bill a few hours later.

A war of words erupted between the two former allies after Musk stepped down as the head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) a month ago. Besides criticizing the budget bill, he attacked Trump personally, including linking the US president to deceased convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein. The world’s richest man later deleted the post on X, acknowledging that some of his comments “went too far.” When asked by Fox News on Sunday if he still keeps in touch with Musk, Trump replied: “I think he is a wonderful guy. I have not spoken to him much, but I think Elon is a wonderful guy, and I know he is going to do well always.”

“He is a smart guy. And he actually went and campaigned with me and this and that. But he got a little bit upset, and that was not appropriate,” the president added about his falling-out with the entrepreneur. Trump reiterated his claim that Musk had become upset not because of the “big, beautiful bill,” but because of the president’s plans to roll back electric vehicle (EV) mandates around the country. “Look, the electric vehicle mandate, the EV mandate, is a tough thing for him. I would, you know, I do not want everybody to have to have an electric car,” Trump explained. In mid-June, the president went on to sign three resolutions barring California from mandating EV sales and setting tailpipe emissions standards that had been used as a template by other US states to speed up the transition away from combustion engines.

Read more …

Hassett is White House National Economic Council Director.

• Kevin Hassett Outlines Importance of Big Beautiful Bill (CTH)

White House National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett appears on Fox News to outline some of the background details of the Big Beautiful Bill. Interestingly, after happy Hassett outlines the specifics of the benefits within the bill, he dodges a question about possibly becoming the next Fed Chairman.

Read more …

X post.

• America’s New Long War (Douglas Macgregor)

Wars frequently pick up where the last ones left off. World War II ended where World War 1 ended. Operation Iraqi Freedom (Gulf War II) began where Desert Storm (Gulf War I) concluded. Today there is every reason to expect the recent 12-day conflict between Iran on one side and Israel and the United States on the other to resume when the Israeli and U.S. Forces have replenished their stocks of missiles. No doubt, the Iranians will work hard to radically improve their integrated air defenses. For simplicity, let’s call the current conflict, the “New Long War.” As always, the New Long War continues with other means. GEN Erik Kurilla, the CENTCOM CDR is known for his close relationship with PM Bibi Netanyahu and his enthusiasm for the Greater Israel Project including seizure of Sinai and the Suez Canal.

Fully aware of the impossibility of rapidly conquering and seizing the Suez Canal without active American military support, General Kurilla may have received authority from President Trump to conduct joint planning. The presence of a newly established Russia phased array radar in Egypt suggests Moscow is aware of the possibility. The Russian phased array radar can reportedly track stealth aircraft and missile launches at long range. Further east, some 1,200 miles away in Azerbaijan, Israel’s Azeri-Turkish ally is allegedly preparing to attack Armenia and, potentially, northern Iran. GEN Kurilla also knows that Iran, like Russia, has a long history of cooperation with Orthodox Christian Armenia. Israel provided critical drone technology to Azerbaijan in its last victorious campaign against Armenia, and Azerbaijan likely provided support for Israeli operations against Iran.

GEN Kurilla is also acquainted with the MEK (Mojahedin-e-Khalq) an anti-Iranian Kurdish Force formerly aligned with Saddam Hussein’s government in Iraq. The MEK fights for regime change in Iran and is predictably now aligned with the Trump Administration. Azerbaijan’s goal is a greater Azerbaijan created by forcibly annexing Iran’s Turkic Azeri population centered on Tabriz in Northern Iran. The unspoken assumption in Washington, Jerusalem, and Baku is that the Azeri Turks in Northern Iran will welcome the opportunity to join with their Azeri neighbors. The national leaders in all three States view this operation as contributing to the breakup and destruction of Iranian national unity, as well as the desired regime changes in Tehran. These operations are in the planning stage but could be launched at any time. These may or may not wait for the U.S. and Israeli missile arsenals to be replenished.

A similar approach was employed in Ukraine against Russia. However, the operation to remove President Putin from power in Moscow, to foment unrest and violence against Moscow inside Russia, Kazakhstan and other neighboring states was botched. Washington’s gamble failed. Russia remains intact. Russia’s resources remain beyond the reach of Western financial power. The Russian State and its military power are stronger than ever. Ukraine is destroyed. The history of Washington’s military interventions is not encouraging. Washington’s interventions since 1953 failed to cultivate the emergence of any liberal democratic states. If anything, Washington’s near constant interventionism spread authoritarianism across North Africa and the Middle East. The new long war seeks to subvert and destroy Iran promising a similar outcome.

However, this time, the New Long War will invite broader participation from numerous Muslim states, Russia, and China. In contrast to past interventions, the new long war could also prove impossible to sustain inside American society. As seen during the Black Lives Matter (BLM)/Antifa riots in 2020 and, more recently, the appearance of Mexican flags during anti-ICE demonstrations in Los Angeles, American societal cohesion is low, with ominous connotations for American national power. Notwithstanding President Trump’s tariff offensive, the trade policies sponsored by both parties for at least 40 years encouraged de-industrialization. The problem is inseparable from immigration policy. Since 1965, America has admitted over 50 million legal immigrants, most from the developing world. Today, there may be as many as 50 million illegal immigrants inside the U.S., including 20 to 30 million illegals that arrived during the Biden administration.

Simultaneously, real wages for working-class Americans stagnated despite real increases in productivity and soaring corporate profits. At the same time, Washington’s financialization of the economy—a form of rent extraction, with profits earned through privileged access to new money created by the Federal Reserve—combined with the destruction of American manufacturing, supports a massive wealth transfer mechanism. Economic data collected between 1979 and 2018 shows that while productivity increased by 59.7%, hourly compensation for non-supervisory workers rose by only 17.5%. The difference went to capital owners and financial intermediaries. Wealth moved from America’s dying middle class to the top 10 percent of income earners.

The implications of these developments for Washington’s global political, military, and economic power are profound. Why? There are multiple reasons, but three are of immediate importance:
First, in the five decades since Washington disestablished the gold standard, the debt-to-GDP ratio has grown from 40 percent to more than 120 percent of GDP and it continues to climb. Consequently, the Federal Reserve’s balance sheet expanded from $80 billion to well over $8 trillion. With spending levels and deficit trajectories that are not sustainable, the notion of a trillion-dollar defense budget is absurd.

Second, there is an undeniable shift in the global balance of economic power. A new intercontinental commercial trading and monetary system is rising. It’s called BRICS, an intergovernmental organization consisting of ten nation-states: Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, Egypt, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Iran and the United Arab Emirates. Together, these nation-states constitute more than a third of global GDP. A further 50 or more nation-states that want to join BRICS will push it to nearly 50 percent of global GDP. More important, China, Russia, India, and Iran are civilizational constructs—power centers that, after centuries of trailing in development behind the West (or enduring its exploitation), are now roaring back to life. In some ways, the world of the 21st century may be on track to resurrect the constellation of powers that dominated the world in the 11th century.

Third, the proliferation of technology across national borders combined with the growth of high human capital inside BRICS is conferring military capabilities on BRICS members that were previously unavailable to any but Western Powers. Put another way, the attempt to repeat a Desert Storm scenario anywhere on the Eurasian landmass would spell disaster for American military power. Finally, Washington’s political class manifests much less regard for the long-term strategic interests of its own citizens—their security and prosperity. As a result, Washington pays an exorbitant price in reputation and treasure for policies that confront Palestinians with the choice of death or expulsion from their homelands.

There are many moving parts in the regional strategy outlined at the beginning of this post. Assumptions of tacit acceptance or rapid capitulation are implicit and dangerous. When Hitler was briefed on the expected Soviet reaction to Operation Barbarossa, Major General Ernst Koestring, a Prussian officer fluent in Russian from a family that had lived in Moscow since the reign of Catherine the Great, advised: “Initially, German forces will advance rapidly. The various peoples on the Soviet periphery will likely welcome the German forces. Resistance will be weak. But when the Germans advance into Russian territory, the resistance will be tremendous. The Russian population will fight for every square meter of territory.” Hitler politely thanked him but remained convinced that poor Soviet military performance in Finland in 1939 suggested a different outcome in 1941. Koestring, of course, was right.

Diplomacy is the art of the possible. Warfare is always a gamble. A partial success in the diplomatic sphere is preferable to gambling on success in war that may turn into catastrophic failure. Unless the American electorate demands accountability for what the White House and Congress do in their name, Americans will face a grim reckoning with financial, political, and military reality at home and abroad.

Read more …

Only Spain is honest. EuroNATO doesn’t have the weapons nor the industry capacity.

• NATO’s 5% Spending Demand ‘Absolutely Impossible’ – Spain (RT)

NATO member Spain has roundly rejected demands by US President Donald Trump and military bloc chief Mark Rutte to increase its spending on militarisation to 5% of the country’s GDP. European members of the NATO are not capable of meeting the US demand, Spanish Defense Minister Margarita Robles insisted to Spanish lawmakers on Friday, dismissing the 5% target declared by Rutte at last week’s bloc summit as “absolutely impossible” to achieve. ”Everyone is absolutely convinced that right now there is no industry capable of absorbing 5%,” she told the country’s Senate Defense Commission. “We can say whatever we want, we can dress it up or disguise it, but no industry can take it on.”

Madrid pushed back against the target ahead of the summit in the Netherlands, proposing a more modest 2.1% spending level. Last year, Spain stood out as the NATO member dedicating the least percentage of its GDP (1.28%) to the military, compared to 4.12% in the case of Poland. Robles, however, claimed the comparison is misleading. According to Robles, European defense companies lack both the skilled workforce and access to raw materials needed to scale up production – even if governments managed to provide the necessary funding. Other NATO members privately acknowledge the same concerns and are stalling for time, she claimed.

Spain is “a serious, reliable, committed, and responsible ally, who speaks less and does more,” Robles told an event at Madrid’s Higher Center for Defense Studies. The national defense industry “does not need lessons from anyone,” she declared, suggesting Trump “should have used his influence to end the war in Ukraine” instead of pressuring Spain to boost military spending. Trump claimed during his presidential campaign last year that he could end the conflict between Russia and Ukraine “in 24 hours.” Since taking office, however, he has acknowledged the situation is more complicated than he initially believed. Moscow views NATO’s intention to grant membership to Ukraine as an existential threat and characterizes the ongoing conflict as a proxy war waged by the bloc “to the last Ukrainian.”

Read more …

Some people present this as positive for Carney. I still see the opposite.

• Canada Scraps Digital Service Tax On US Tech Giants To Revive Trade Talks (ZH)

Finance Minister François-Philippe Champagne wrote on X overnight that Canada has withdrawn its controversial Digital Services Tax (DST) on Silicon Valley tech giants, such as Alphabet and Meta, in order to restart stalled trade negotiations with the Trump administration. It’s another win for President Trump, as his ‘Art of the Deal’ tactics continue to bring far-left progressive countries back in line with his ‘America First’ agenda. “Canada is engaged in complex negotiations on a new economic and security partnership with the U.S.,” Champagne wrote on X late Sunday. He continued, “Rescinding the DST will allow the negotiations to make vital progress and reinforce our work to create jobs and build prosperity for all Canadians.”

https://twitter.com/justwannasayth2/status/1939508514587570182?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1939508514587570182%7Ctwgr%5Ecbab1c2016f9d159fc8bdd558138dcc17c934a65%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fpolitical%2Fcanada-scraps-digital-service-tax-us-tech-giants-revive-trade-talks

As a freser, Canada’s DST was a 3% tax on the revenue that big tech companies earn from Canadian users, specifically from online advertising, marketplaces, and user data. Canada’s move follows President Trump’s Friday afternoon announcement calling for all trade discussions with the country to be terminated. He also threatened to impose new tariffs within a week. Also last Friday, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told CNBC that U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer would investigate the tax to “determine the amount of harm to the U.S. companies and the U.S. economy in general.” The stakes are high for Canada, as three-quarters of its exports are shipped to the U.S.—including energy products, other commodities, and automobiles—so tariffs would be devastating to the local economy. Canada has taken the common-sense approach of returning to the negotiating table with Trump to work out a trade deal that benefits everyone.

UBS analyst Jason Cheng commented overnight on the developments: Canada has withdrawn its digital services tax on technology companies in a move to restart trade talks with the U.S. This came after the pause in talks last Friday when U.S. President Donald Trump called an end to discussions with Canada, in retaliation for the digital tax. USDCAD is trading lower post the headline. Daniel Béland, a political science professor at McGill University in Montreal, told AP News that Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney’s retreat was a “clear victory” for Trump. “President Trump forced PM Carney to do exactly what big tech wanted. U.S. tech executive will be very happy with this outcome,” Béland said. Moments ago, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick thanked Canada for removing the DST tax.

Read more …

“I was No. 1 on TikTok in its history. Can you believe that? … So I guess I like TikTok.”

• Trump Says TikTok Buyer Is “Group Of Very Wealthy People” (ZH)

President Donald Trump, in a pre-taped interview on Fox News’ Sunday Morning Futures with Maria Bartiromo, revealed that “a group of very wealthy people” is prepared to acquire TikTok’s U.S. operations. While he did not disclose the identities of the investors, Trump hinted that the names could be made public in the coming weeks. “We have a buyer for TikTok, by the way. I think I’ll probably need China approval, and I think President Xi will probably do it,” Trump told Bartiromo, noting, “It’s a group of very wealthy people.” TikTok’s future in the U.S. has been uncertain since the passage of the 2024 bipartisan law, the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act (PAFACA), which requires the platform’s Chinese parent company, ByteDance, to divest its ownership or face a nationwide ban.

The legislation was fueled by growing concerns over various national security threats, including foreign interference in elections and potential misuse of sensitive user data. Just weeks ago, Trump once again delayed enforcement of PAFACA through an executive order, pushing the deadline back to mid-September. The original implementation date had been set for his inauguration in January. Trump has been a supporter of TikTok, recently touting his popularity on the app: “I was No. 1 on TikTok in its history. Can you believe that? … So I guess I like TikTok.” Trump has tasked Vice President JD Vance with overseeing efforts to find a potential buyer, which could include Oracle’s Larry Ellison and firms like Perplexity AI and AppLovin.

Read more …

“I see a lot of bathwater and very little baby.”

• When It’s Too Dirty For The CIA…” Benz On USAID’s Litany Of Corruption (ZH)

For those who turned into the live debate last night, we apologize for the ”demonstration of Wirecast” mantra that played repeatedly. This was not a mass MK Ultra sleeper cell activation but a glitch with our streaming software. And, yes, we have an active Wirecast subscription. So… please direct your hate mail to support@telestream.net. That aside — Keith Knight, Mike Benz, and Cenk Uygur — respectively the abolitionist, reformist, and proponent — had a great debate. Here were the highlights for those who missed it: Responding to Cenk’s defense of USAID’s HIV programs with the phrase, “Keep the baby with the bathwater,” Benz retorted sharply: “I see a lot of bathwater and very little baby,” citing forced sterilizations in Peru and aggressive abortion campaigns in Latin America and Africa as evidence that USAID is sometimes involved in “the opposite of saving babies… USAID is taking the lives of babies.”

Benz further detailed covert operations masked as health aid, referencing a CIA-backed, USAID-funded fake vaccine program in Pakistan that collected blood and DNA under the guise of counterterrorism. “Nobody would think [HIV prevention] would be where they would establish a recruiting office for regime change,” he noted on a similar program in Cuba. Even massive charity efforts like Band Aid and Live Aid come under fire, with Benz alleging that “of the 100 million raised, 95 million went to purchase weapons for rebels in Somalia.” In sum, Benz urges scrutiny: “We have to look at what USAID is doing vs. what they say they are doing.”

https://twitter.com/JohnMcCloy/status/1939119325866000788

“When it’s too dirty for the CIA…” Benz’s view boiled down: USAID is a cover arm of U.S. foreign policy. “USAID at its heart is a CIA function.” Even seemingly benign programs—whether about “food security, public health, independent media, [or] rule of law”—are, according to Benz, “secretly accomplishing some goal the State Department wants to achieve.” These programs can also channel funds back home to prop up the “political apparatus” through kickbacks. Benz underscored the lack of oversight, warning that “USAID has only ONE METHOD OF ACCOUNTABILITY… The Inspector General,” and that it can “block Congress,” effectively bypassing legislative checks. Pointing to the Zunzuneo scandal—USAID’s secret attempt to incite an Arab Spring-style uprising in Cuba—Benz noted that when the operation was exposed, “Obama denied knowledge because he didn’t give a presidential finding & the Congress & Senate said we didn’t know this was happening.”

“Foreign aid has gone way too rogue,” he concluded, noting that USAID has now been expelled from eight countries. His prescription is one of reform: “USAID has to go into the shop for repairs before it is driven back out onto the road again.” For the abolitionist perspective — i.e. no foreign aid whatsoever — tune into the full debate below for remarks by Keith Knight, editor at Scott Horton’s Libertarian Institute. Knight is one of the brightest young thinkers among modern libertarians:

Read more …

“Betting against Donald Trump is usually a bad idea.” —Insurrection Barbie on “X”

• Stay Sane (James Howard Kunstler)

What apparently riles the credentialed political Left — the “gay / race communists” in the apt new phrase — more than anything, is that most of the country has opted to not be insane. This follows a decade-long attempt to drive the country insane, of course, to believe in things that are patently untrue and absurd, and to utilize falsehood and absurdity to garishly destroy the nation.

So, it fits that Donald Trump, the uber-realist of political game-playing, pushes what remains of the Democratic Party into a rapture of impotent rage. They’ve got nothing left but the empty acting-out of lunatics in an asylum of their own making. The wrathful grass-widows choking on their chardonnay in Martha’s Vineyard, the furious nose-rings steaming under their keffiyehs in the summer heat, the “Transtifas” storming police lines with their ridiculous umbrellas, the doddering Boomer-hippies reenacting the festive protest marches of 1968, minus a single coherent principle, the wigged-out congresspersons storming the ICE detention centers, the Covid vaccine victims duped into multiple organ failure (their hearts and brains especially), the “allies” of every loser group from Bangor to Brentwood in a frenzy of baffled grievance — these poor, lost wretches so far gone that even the likes of David Axelrod, James Carville, and Frank Luntz can’t stand to be associated with them anymore, is all the Democrats have left in their manure-stuffed donkey stable.

The abiding mystery remains: what exactly set in motion this fantastic cascade of political madness, especially among the highly educated demographic. The seemingly obvious answer is higher education itself, infested since the 1960s with Marxist zealots, sexual malcontents, and resentment-filled diversity hires. And while that has surely played its part, it doesn’t sufficiently explain the ugly dynamic.

Another explanation runs toward a plot by international “oligarchical” corruptniks to corner all the goodies of the world and either turn the rest of us into their slaves, or just kill us off — and to do it in such a way as to rub it in our faces, so as to provide the corruptniks with some mirthful entertainment as they go about their dastardly business. For instance, the recent weekend wedding of Huma Abedin and Alex Soros on the very day that the moiling minions whom they sponsor held their nationwide “No Kings” rallies inn the streets.

Huma, the bride, you recall, was Hillary Clinton’s sidekick back in Hillary’s glory days, especially the time of her glorious and inevitable rise (her regal “turn”) to occupy the White House, thwarted inconceivably by the preposterous showman, Mr. Trump. Hillary, you also might recall, left the White House broke-ass-broke in 2001 only to agglomerate a stupendous multi-hundred-million-dollar fortune working as a US Senator and then Secretary of State (salaries $170,000 and $260,600 respectively). That is, Hillary acquired her great fortune in about the same way that the royalty-of-old acquired theirs — by grift and theft.

And Huma, former wife of disgraced congressman and convicted Internet pervert Anthony Weiner, is now wed to decade-younger financial royalist Alex Soros, son of George, who made the bulk of his fortune (estimated $7.2-billion) shorting the British pound sterling in 1992 and went on to found a vast array of NGOs and so-called philanthropies (the Open Society Foundations) that specialize in influencing elections worldwide, conducting regime-change campaigns, and lately financing seditious movements within the United States. Heir-apparent Alex is reported to have taken over the day-to-day operations of that network — but, we must have no kings, you understand.

Read more …

The next Fed chief?

• Bessent Slams Fed For Delay On Rate Decisions (ZH)

US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent on Monday criticized Federal Reserve policymakers for what he described as their hesitant posture on interest rates, while signaling that the U.S. Treasury is unlikely to alter its current strategy on debt issuance by increasing long-term bond sales. In a wide-ranging interview, Bessent said that recent yields on long-duration Treasurys make it a poor time to lengthen the government’s debt profile. “Why would we do that?” Bessent said on Bloomberg Television. “The time to have done that would have been in 2021, 2022.” Ten-year Treasury yields currently stand at about 4.26%, well above the levels of shorter-term instruments such as the two-year note (3.73%) and 12-month bills (3.81%). Bessent suggested issuing more long-term bonds at these rates would be counterproductive, especially given his expectation that inflation will continue to moderate and pull interest rates lower across the maturity spectrum.

“As we see inflation come down, I think the whole curve in parallel can shift down,” he said, referencing the Treasury yield curve, a key barometer for economic sentiment. Bessent, who succeeded Janet Yellen as Treasury chief, has retained much of his predecessor’s issuance strategy, despite having previously criticized her for over-reliance on short-term borrowing. At the time, he argued the policy was politically motivated to suppress long-term borrowing costs ahead of the 2024 election. But Bessent emphasized that now is not the moment to pivot. “Why would we do it at these rates, if we are more than one standard deviation above the long-term rate?” he asked rhetorically.

While expressing confidence in the direction of fiscal policy and trade strategy, Bessent leveled pointed criticism at the Federal Reserve’s rate-setting stance. They “seem a little frozen at the wheel,” he said of Fed officials. “My worry here is that, having fallen down on the American people in 2022, the Fed’s now looking at their feet,” rather than looking ahead. The Treasury Secretary cited the Fed’s delayed response to rising prices in 2022 as a pivotal misstep and warned that similar inertia could hinder the central bank’s ability to respond to changing economic conditions. “The Fed made a gigantic mistake in 2022,” he added.

Bessent also pushed back against the idea that recent tariffs have stoked inflation. “We have seen no inflation from tariffs,” he said, calling such effects “transitory” and suggesting they result in only a one-time price adjustment. He hinted at more trade activity on the horizon, saying he expects a “flurry of trade deals” in the days leading up to the July 9 negotiating deadline. The U.S. has already reached agreements with the United Kingdom and China, with ongoing talks still underway.

Meanwhile, as speculation mounts over who might succeed Fed Chair Jerome Powell when his term ends in May 2026, Bessent acknowledged that discussions are already underway. “Obviously there are people who are currently at the Fed who are under consideration,” he said, adding that the administration is eyeing the January 2026 seat opening as a potential stepping stone for the next chair. Observers have noted Governor Christopher Waller – a Trump-era appointee who has recently called for possible rate cut – as a likely contender. Bessent also mentioned that current Governor Adriana Kugler’s term concludes in January, providing another possible opening for strategic appointments. He downplayed speculation about his own interest in the job. “I’ll do whatever the president wants,” he said, but added that he already has the “best job in DC”

Looking forward, Bessent expressed optimism about the direction of U.S. fiscal strategy. He voiced support for the Republican budget bill currently advancing in Congress, describing it as a “start” in the effort to bring U.S. debt under control while promoting economic growth. Bessent also suggested that we could see a lowering of rates, as inflation is “very tame,” adding that he is confident the fiscal policy bill will progress in the coming hours.

Read more …

“..terrible vaccines, dangerous food additives, horrible health effects from toxic food chemicals, along with corruption, bribery and pay-to-play schemes..”

“..someone ought to tell him he’s the Health and Human Services Secretary now..”

• HHS Head RFK Jr Tells Tucker Carlson all the Terrible Stuff HHS is Doing (CTH)

As Robert F Kennedy Jr outlines all the bad things the Health and Human Services agency is doing, terrible vaccines, dangerous food additives, horrible health effects from toxic food chemicals, along with corruption, bribery and pay-to-play schemes within the medical advisory system, someone ought to tell him he’s the Health and Human Services Secretary now. Secretary RFK JR sits down with Tucker Carlson to outline all the deleterious impacts from the processes that flow out of the healthcare system he now controls.

Chapters:
0:00 The Organized Opposition to RFK’s Mission
6:46 Uncovering the Reason for Skyrocketing Rates of Autism
13:41 How Big Pharma Enslaves Doctors and Profits off Sickness
24:22 Is It Possible to End the Corrupt Relationship Between Big Pharma and Corporate Media?
33:35 Will RFK End Vaccine Company’s Lawsuits Immunity?
38:37 The Most Damaging Vaccine in History
47:49 Will There Be Compensation for the Vaccine-Injured?
53:47 Did the Covid Vaccine Kill More People Than It Saved?
57:50 RFK’s Firing of So-Called “Experts”
1:01:58 How Big Pharma Makes Billions off the Vaccine Schedule
1:05:08 The Real Reason Fauci Got a Pardon
1:10:42 When Will We See the Declassification of the JFK, RFK, and MLK Files?
1:20:51 How Trump Is Transforming Washington

Read more …

“Apparently the Apple and Google stores have authorized the ICE Block app to be downloaded from their services.”

• CNN Promotes ICE App to Help Illegal Aliens Avoid Capture (CTH)

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt was asked about this earlier today during her press briefing. CNN is promoting an early warning system for cell phone users that alerts them to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) activity. In response, DHS Secretary Kristi Noem said, “This sure looks like obstruction of justice. Our brave ICE law enforcement face a 500% increase in assaults against them. If you obstruct or assault our law enforcement, we will hunt you down and you will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.”

Apparently the Apple and Google stores have authorized the ICE Block app to be downloaded from their services. There are a lot of vested financial interests in the human trafficking and illegal alien business. This ICE Block app, is part of the system that perpetuates the exploitation and criminal illegal activity. Given the nature of the national security interests involved, one has to wonder how this type of technology does not run afoul of the law. UPDATE: As noted, there could be positives. Download the App., and if you encounter a long checkout line at WalMart, Home Depot, DMV or Post Office etc., activate the ICE alert and watch what happens.

Read more …

“Trump seems to be saying that instead of war let’s go into business together.”

• Trump the Greatest American President in History? (Paul Craig Roberts)

The violence that has been the primary characteristic of the 21st century has reached a level of recklessness that threatens life on our planet. It was only the other day that some unidentified person or agency green-lighted an attack on Russia’s strategic triad. According to Russian war doctrine, this attack, of which President Trump says he was unaware, requires a Russian strategic response. Putin, being a humane and reasonable person averse to war , side-stepped the issue by declaring the attack to be an act of terrorism and not of war. It is extraordinary that no one is interested in identifying who so irresponsibly green-lighted an attack that could have initiated nuclear war. How can Washington and the Kremlin be so insouciant and uninterested in a provocation that could have resulted in nuclear war? Whoever green-lighted the attack did not know that Putin would simply not acknowledge that such an attack took place. Whoever green-lighted the attack was OK with launching a nuclear war. What is to prevent such a thing again happening?

We must be thankful that Putin side-stepped the issue. But we must also consider the effect of Putin’s side-stepping the attack. The person or agency that authorized the attack must be confident that Russia will never respond to any provocation, and, therefore, the provocations will increase in their intensity. At some point, it won’t be possible for Putin to side-step the provocation. Thus, Putin might be bringing on the war he hopes to avoid by side-stepping provocations. In addition to the conflict with Russia, there is the conflict with Iran. Netanyahu, using the powerful influence of the Israel Lobby over Washington, pressured President Trump to bomb Iran’s uranium enrichment sites, claiming without evidence that Iran was producing a nuclear weapon.

Trump in what might be an act of brilliance dropped the bombs on the Iranian sites and declared them obliterated whether they were or not, thereby removing Netanyahu’s only argument for war with Iran. With the nuclear facilities destroyed, there can be no bomb. Thus, Trump removed Netanyahu’s case for preemptive war against Iran, thereby removing the reason for wider conflict in the Middle East. Let’s hope Iran understands what has really happened, and cooperates with President Trump in removing the conflict from the agenda. There still remains anger caused by Israel’s merciless destruction of Gaza and its people. How a people who claim to be victims of a holocaust can submit Palestinians to one is difficult to comprehend. But the Arab states that could protest have all been destroyed by American presidents for Israel.

Washington’s bombs have turned Iraq, Libya, and Syria into non-functioning states, and Hezbollah has been decapitated and cut off from supplies. The only remaining Arab country is Saudi Arabia, the military ability of which is marginal. Washington sicced the Saudis on Yemen, and it was unsuccessful. The Houthis are the only remaining Arabs, other than the remains of Hamas, who continue to oppose Israel. They are dependent on Iran, who are Persians, not Arabs, and if Trump has succeeded in removing Netanyahu’s justification for war with Iran, it seems likely that Iran will call off the Houthis. This opens a chance for peace in the Middle East after a quarter century of America’s wars against Arabs for Israel, wars disguised as a “war on terror” and “bringing democracy” in order to deceive the American people about the expenditure of trillions of American taxpayers’ dollars for the exclusive benefit of Israel, while American veterans who were deceived into fighting the wars for Greater Israel are left to live on the streets.

Previously, in a joint news conference with Netanyahu, Trump declared Gaza as a US possession that would be the anchor of an American reconstructed Middle East. In place of Greater Israel–an aspiration, not a reality–which with its recent Israeli additions now extends from the Nile to include Pakistan and half of Saudi Arabia, Trump indicated that there would be a profit-sharing American colony, unlike the colonial extractive colonies of prior times. Trump has talked it up with the Saudis, and there are indications that he wants to add Iran to the deal. Trump seems to be saying that instead of war let’s go into business together. This plan requires the Zionists to give up their agenda for Israeli hegemony over the Middle East. Can the Zionists help to save the world from war?

If Trump can pull this off, assuming that he is thinking along this line–he is so changeable that it is hard to know–Trump would go down as the greatest president in American history. Instead of Muslims and Israelis exhausting themselves in wars, they would be making money together. There is no better outcome. Can we get there?

Read more …

“Tether holds more US Treasurys than Germany.”

Don’t know enough about this yet.

• Stablecoins Are Becoming ‘Default Settlement Layer’ For Internet (CT)

Stablecoins have become the backbone of internet payments, with adoption now outpacing major traditional card networks in onchain volume, according to Noam Hurwitz, head of engineering at Alchemy.
Hurwitz told Cointelegraph that stablecoins have seen “explosive” adoption, adding that they are “becoming the default settlement layer for the internet.” Companies like PayPal and Stripe are integrating stablecoins to leverage onchain infrastructure, enabling faster and cheaper transactions. “They’ve already surpassed Visa and Mastercard in onchain volume by 7%,” Hurwitz noted, signaling a decisive shift in how money moves online. Alchemy, which provides infrastructure to some of the largest stablecoin ecosystems, is at the center of this transformation. Hurwitz said Alchemy is “the onchain provider for Robinhood Wallet” and powers stablecoin flows for fintech giants like Visa, Stripe, Circle, and PayPal.

Hurwitz said that stablecoins make money “cheap, fast, global, and secure to transfer.” These features have made them popular for various purposes, with broad adoption emerging across cross-border payments and prediction markets like Polymarket. He added that stablecoins have become massive buyers of US Treasurys, with Tether alone generating $13 billion in profits last year while holding around $113 billion in US debt. “Tokenized money is the base of the tokenized financial system,” Hurwitz said, calling recent financial innovation built on this foundation “exciting.” Hurwitz said stablecoins are already functioning as the “default rails” for internet payments in many respects but flagged challenges stemming from the fragmented blockchain landscape.

Institutions, he explained, want to move quickly but must assess provider reliability and counterparty risks, especially in a nascent industry. “Can a small startup really support enterprise-grade operations while building and scaling the services they need?” he asked. Hurwitz pointed to Kinexys, a tokenized bank deposit launched by JP Morgan, as a major milestone. The permissioned deposit token enables institutional clients to access yield-bearing deposits on a public blockchain with “24/7 settlement, near real-time liquidity and the potential ability to pay interest to holders.” Last week, the US Senate passed the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for US Stablecoins, or GENIUS Act, a landmark bill establishing federal guardrails for stablecoins.

“With the recent passage of the Genius Act, the regulatory landscape is becoming clearer and more structured, which benefits established financial players while also encouraging innovation,” Hurwitz said. Meanwhile, Hurwitz pointed out key technical bottlenecks in improving developer and end-user experience despite strong growth. “Companies benefit immensely from settling on crypto rails, but want to decouple the user experience from the underlying technology — and doing so takes deep technical expertise,” he explained. Looking ahead, Hurwitz expects most financial services to deploy their own blockchains, especially layer 2 networks, to better scale and monetize their ecosystems.

He predicted that infrastructure improvements would drive “seamless crosschain interoperability” between these networks, enabling a more connected and efficient financial system built on stablecoins. Despite Hurwitz’s optimistic view of stablecoins, a new Bank for International Settlements (BIS) report challenges the notion that they can serve as money in a modern financial system. The BIS Annual Economic Report 2025 claims stablecoins fail critical singleness, elasticity, and integrity tests. The organization described stablecoins as “digital bearer instruments” that resemble financial assets more than actual money.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Marik

Pfizer

RFK
https://twitter.com/DiedSuddenly_/status/1939468926708298061
Scott
https://twitter.com/AutismCapital/status/1939363439971021280

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle April 5 2025

Apr 052025
 
 April 5, 2025  Posted by at 9:57 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  41 Responses »


Salvador Dali Paranoiac Woman-Horse (Invisible Sleeping Woman, Lion, Horse) 1930

 

• Trump: This Is A Great Time To Get Rich (RT)
• Why Are People So Angry About Trump’s Tariffs? (Victor Davis Hanson)
• Trump’s Tariffs Will Turn EU Economy Into ‘Decaying Corpse’ – Medvedev (RT)
• You Wouldn’t Want to Be Him on That Dreadful Day (Kunstler)
• John Roberts Needs to Do His Job Already (Skeet)
• Trump Nemesis Judge Muses: Who to Hold in Contempt in Deportation Case? (Adams)
• Supreme Court Shuts Down Activist Judge (ZH)
• Canada Will Lead The World – PM (RT)
• Trump HHS Slashes Hundreds of Millions in Woke LGBTQ Grants (DS)
• The DOGE Emperor (Spencer)
• Trump’s Inner Circle Opposes New Putin Call – NBC News (RT)
• Zelensky Contradicts Trump On NATO Membership (RT)
• ‘Free Le Pen’ – Trump to France (RT)
• Yes, Trump Could Serve a Third Term. Law Professor Explains How (Allen)
• Larry Fink Believes He Will Win Over Control Of The Panama Canal (Gasparino)
• Trump Extends TikTok Deadline 75 Days, As He Tries To Close Deal (JTN)
• EU Could Fine Elon Musk’s X $1B Over Illicit Content, Disinformation (CT)

 

 

 

 

My job

Yield

Gracias
https://twitter.com/KanekoaTheGreat/status/1908220062496133399

Crash

Ratna

O’Leary

Dmitriev

Fall in Line
https://twitter.com/Jules31415/status/1907857369586901222

 

 

 

 

Amazing to see how many people claim to know Trump’s tariffs will lead to utter disaster. Nobody knows, it’s never been tried before. Give it time. He’s had decades to actively think about, and he’s convinced it will be fine. Why else would he do it?

Why does the press never report that the end of income tax is also part of the plan?

• Trump: This Is A Great Time To Get Rich (RT)

US President Donald Trump has defended his controversial decision to impose sweeping tariffs on the majority of America’s trading partners. The move announced earlier this week has shocked global markets and sparked a backlash from world leaders. “To the many investors coming into the United States and investing massive amounts of money, my policies will never change. This is a great time to get rich, richer than ever before!!!” Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform. The president remained defiant, even as the US stock market suffered its worst crash since the Covid-19 pandemic in 2020, with the Dow plunging 2,231 points on Friday, according to CNN. US Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell said that it was “now becoming clear that the tariff increases will be significantly larger than expected.”

“While tariffs are highly likely to generate at least a temporary rise in inflation, it is also possible that the effects could be more persistent,” Powell added. White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt denied that the restrictions would hurt US businesses. “There’s not going to be any pain for American-owned companies and American workers, because their jobs are going to come back home, and again, as for prices, President Trump is working on tax cuts to put more money back into the pockets of Americans,” she told NewsNation on Thursday. On April 2, Trump announced a 10% baseline tariff on all imports and additional “reciprocal” duties on dozens of countries he said had an unfair trade imbalance with the US. The president argued that many nations were “ripping off” American citizens through “harmful policies like currency manipulation and exorbitant value-added taxes.”

China has reacted by imposing a 34% tariff on American goods, matching Trump’s levy on Chinese products. The EU has condemned the US tariffs and vowed to adopt “further countermeasures” in response. Canada said it would counter Trump’s “series of unwarranted and unjustified tariffs” with a 25% levy on cars imported from the US. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, the head of the World Trade Organization, said that an all-out trade war would be “destructive for the global economy.” She warned that the tariffs lead to a contraction of around 1% of global merchandise trade.

Read more …

“..don’t you find it very ironic that Wall Street is blaming the Trump tariffs for heading us into a recession, if not depression, when the only great depression we’ve ever had was not caused by tariffs but by Wall Street?

• Why Are People So Angry About Trump’s Tariffs? (Victor Davis Hanson)

Hello, this is Victor Davis Hanson for The Daily Signal. April 3, President Donald Trump announced it as “Liberation Day.” And by that he meant we were going to be liberated from asymmetrical tariffs of the last 50 years. And it was going to inaugurate a new what he called “golden age” of trade parity, greater investment in the United States, but mostly, greater job opportunities and higher-paying jobs for Americans. And yet, the world seemed to erupt in anger. It was very strange. Even people on the libertarian right and, of course, the left were very angry. The Wall Street Journal pilloried Donald Trump. But here’s my question. China has prohibitive tariffs, so does Vietnam, so does Mexico, so does Europe. So do a lot of countries. So does India. But if tariffs are so destructive of their economies, why is China booming?

How did India become an economic powerhouse when it has these exorbitant tariffs on American imports? How did Vietnam, of all places, become such a different country even though it has these prohibitive tariffs? Why isn’t Germany, before its energy problems, why wasn’t it a wreck? It’s got tariffs on almost everything that we send them. How is the EU even functioning with these tariffs? I thought tariffs destroyed an economy, but they seem to like them. And they’re angry that they’re no longer asymmetrical. Apparently, people who are tariffing us think tariffs improve their economy. Maybe they’re right. I don’t know. The second thing is, why would you get angry at the person who is reacting to the asymmetrical tariff and not the people who inaugurated the tariff?

Why is Canada mad at us when it’s running a $63 billion surplus and it has tariffs on some American products at 250%. Doesn’t it seem like the people who started this asymmetrical—if I could use the word—trade war should be the culpable people, not the people who are reluctantly reacting to it? Sort of like Ukraine and Russia. Russia invaded Ukraine. Do we blame Ukraine for defending itself and trying to reciprocate? No, we don’t. We don’t blame America because it finally woke up and said, “Whatever they tariff us we’re gonna tariff them.” Which brings up another question: Are our tariffs really tariffs? That is, were they preemptive? Were they leveled against countries that had no tariffs against us? Were they punitive? No. They’re almost leveled on autopilot. Whatever a particular country tariffs us, we reciprocate and just mirror image them.

And they go off anytime that country says, “It was a mistake. We’re sorry. You’re an ally. You’re a neutral. We’re not going to tariff this American product.” And we say, “Fine.” Then the autopilot ceases and the automatic tariff ends. In other words, it’s their choice, not ours. We’re just reacting to what they did, not what we did. Couple of other questions that I’ve had. We haven’t run a trade surplus since 1975—50 years. So, it wasn’t suddenly we woke up and said, “It’s unfair. We want commercial justice.” No. We’ve been watching this happen. For 50 years it’s been going on. And no president, no administration, no Congress in the past has done anything about it. Done anything about what? Leveling tariffs on our products that we don’t level on theirs.

It was all predicated in the postwar period. We were so affluent, so powerful—Europe, China, Russia were in shambles—that we had to take up the burdens of reviving the economy by taking great trade deficits. Fifty years later, we have been deindustrialized. And the countries who did this to us, by these unfair and asymmetrical tariffs, did not fall apart. They did not self-destruct. They apparently thought it was in their self-interest. And if anybody calibrates the recent gross domestic product growth of India or Taiwan or South Korea or Japan, they seem to have some logic to it.

There’s a final irony. The people who are warning us most vehemently about this tariff quote the Smoot-Hawley Act of 1930. But remember something, that came after the onset of the Depression—after. The stock market crashed in 1929. That law was not passed until 1930. It was not really amplified until ’31. And here’s the other thing that they were, conveniently, not reminded of: We were running a surplus. That was a preemptive punitive tariff, on our part, against other countries. We had a trade surplus. And it was not 10% or 20%. Some of the tariffs were 40% and 50%. And again, it happened after the collapse of the stock market. In conclusion, don’t you find it very ironic that Wall Street is blaming the Trump tariffs for heading us into a recession, if not depression, when the only great depression we’ve ever had was not caused by tariffs but by Wall Street?

Read more …

Seems a likelier prediction than mayhem in the US.

• Trump’s Tariffs Will Turn EU Economy Into ‘Decaying Corpse’ – Medvedev (RT)

The US imposition of “reciprocal” tariffs on EU exports has doomed the bloc’s economy, former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has said. This week, US President Donald Trump announced sweeping tariffs in an attempt to improve America’s balance of trade, accusing the country’s economic partners of exploiting access to its consumer market through protectionist policies and currency manipulation. Medvedev, now deputy chairman of the Russian Security Council, remarked on Thursday that while the move seriously disrupts global commerce, Russia will be largely unaffected, as its trade with the US is virtually nonexistent.

“No need for knee-jerk reactions,” he posted on social media. “We should take a seat on the shore and wait for the enemy’s corpse to float by. In this case, the decaying corpse of the EU economy.” The expression, which advises patient inaction, has been attributed by Western authors, including Umberto Eco, to various Eastern sources and may be a misinterpretation of a remark by Chinese philosopher Confucius, which does not mention dead bodies. Outgoing German Economy Minister Robert Habeck has compared the potential impact to the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022. Then too, “something new was happening, and we were not prepared in Europe to cope with the challenge,” he said during a press conference on Thursday. Many other European politicians and media outlets have described the economic fallout from the tariffs as disastrous for member states. Washington, however, has warned that any retaliatory steps would be met with further measures.

Medvedev has previously called out Brussels for being incompetent and irrationally hostile toward Russia. In an effort to punish Moscow over the Ukraine conflict, Brussels has sought to cut off energy imports from the country entirely. The economic bloc has also imposed sweeping sanctions, significantly reducing direct trade. Critics of the policy, including Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban and his Slovak counterpart, Robert Fico, argue that it has led to a dramatic decline in the competitiveness of EU products, inflicting substantial economic damage.

Read more …

If Trump must fight Roberts, he will.

• You Wouldn’t Want to Be Him on That Dreadful Day (Kunstler)

Do you see the pattern? Populist party leaders all over Western Civ getting undone by the law courts —Calin Georgescu in Romania, election cancelled; Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil, de-railed by President Lula’s stooge judges (with CIA help); Prime Minister Robert Fico of Slovakia shot-up with five bullets in May last year (survived miraculously); the Alternative-for-Deutschland Party de-platformed by the Scholz-Merz ruling junta; then, this week, Marine Le Pen, leading candidate (by far) for President of France, defenestrated on Mickey Mouse charges in the Paris court. And, of course, since 2015, Mr. Trump, hounded relentlessly, but not yet overthrown, due to sheer pluck and testosterone (the official hated hormone of the Left).

International lawfare is about the last remaining tool in the “Globalist” kit-bag for “color revolution,” which means regime change by underhanded means, election interference being the favorite device. The poster child, of course, was the US CIA / DOD State Department regime change operation in Ukraine, 2014, that ousted Russian-leaning elected President Viktor Yanukovych, eventually leading to the installation of coke-head Volodymyr Zelensky, and ultimately to the Ukraine War that has killed over a million people. These days, astroturf (i.e., fake) street revolution (e.g., Maidan in Kiev 2014) is out; lawfare is in.

By Globalist, let’s just say the broad alliance of the EU, the European Central Bank & friends, the WEF-and-cronies in the global corporatocracy, the US Democratic Party, billionaires such as George Soros and Reid Hoffman, and sundry residual mass-formation world-savors of the crypto-communist-green-bullshit persuasion. The situation in our own country has grown particularly acute with the DC and other regional federal court judges lately arrogating the Article II executive powers of the president. You can see what the furthest strategic end-point is: the Democratic Party wants to induce President Trump to invoke a national emergency against this legal insurrection in order to force him to play the role of “fascist dictator.” Mr. Trump has been very careful to stay as much within-the-guardrails of the law as possible throughout this long campaign to destroy him and his MAGA movement to purge corruption from the government.

The hinge on the conflict now is the US Supreme Court (SCOTUS), which is led by Chief Justice John Roberts. A whole lot of troubling info about CJ Roberts has blown up in recent days, much of it not exactly new, but buried and ignored by the likes of The New York Times, and its kindred blob mouthpieces. You’ve read in this blog recently how CJ Roberts’s chief factotum at SCOTUS, Sheldon Snook, is married to Mary McCord, involved officially in every lawfare prank against Mr. Trump since RussiaGate, when she was U.S. Assistant Attorney-General for National Security — and who then went on as counsel for Jerrold Nadler’s House Committee Trump Impeachment No. 1, and the J-6 House Committee, both actions of stupendous bad faith.

Turns out that CJ Roberts has been “besties” with Lawfare field marshal Norm Eisen, and for quite a long time, as far back as 2005. Eisen was special counsel on Impeachment No. 1, and chief strategist behind the janky cases staged last year against Mr. Trump by New York AG Letitia James, Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg, and Fulton County (GA) DA Fani Willis. You can bet that Eisen was at least an unofficial strategic advisor in the Special Counsel Jack Smith prosecutions, too, along with Mary McCord and Andrew Weissmann of Mueller Commission infamy — Eisen, McCord, and Weissmann, the three Nosferatus of Lawfare. Eisen is coordinating most of the current lawsuit action against Mr. Trump in the federal courts.

Several alt-news outlets are reporting that CJ Roberts made two trips to visit Norm Eisen in Prague between 2011 and 2014 when Eisen was Barack Obama’s ambassador to the Czech Republic. The longest visit, a week, entailed a global conference on “American and European rule-of-law issues.” Hmmmm. . . what could that possibly mean? Revolver News, Mike Benz on “X”, and a character styled as “The Researcher” on “X” have all reported on the Roberts-Eisen close friendship. Also turns out that CJ Roberts is a club member at an elite, invite-only club for legal poohbahs called the Edward Bennett Williams Inn of Court, which is indirectly associated with an international Inns of Court network centered in London. (“Rule-of-law,” anyone?) Other members of the EBW Inn of Court in DC. include Judges James (“Jeb”) Boasberg, Beryl Howell, Amit Mehta, all of the DC District — all involved in current lawfare suits — and SCOTUS Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. Do you suppose they have discussed any of these matters at their meet-ups, especially after the pass-around of legal beverages? Perhaps even strategized about them?

Doesn’t that make you a little queasy about CJ Roberts’s role presiding over cases coming any day before SCOTUS that have been designed and propelled by his good pal, Norm Eisen? Should CJ Roberts consider recusing himself from any of these pending cases on the SCOTUS docket? Oh, yes, one other interesting sidelight: John Roberts has been found listed on the Jeffrey Epstein flight logs of the “Lolita Express” bound for Little St. James Island in the US Virgin Islands, Epstein’s supposed party shack for the celebrity elite. The allegation that the “John Roberts” listed in the flight log is the same as the Chief Justice is officially unsubstantiated. But here it is FWIW. Of course, no flight log would be required for a jaunt to Epstein’s New York City townhouse, in case CJ Roberts ever ventured up there from our nation’s capital, an easy car trip.

It is established fact that Epstein was busy recording the various doings in the many bedrooms of these establishments, arguably not merely for his private entertainment. Is CJ Roberts perhaps under blackmail for any such activity recorded? Lord only knows, just now. But it’s possible that FBI Director Kash Patel and his Deputy Director Dan Bongino know the answer to this abiding mystery, since weeks ago they assigned a thousand agents in the New York City FBI office to sort out the thousands of pages and other articles of evidence that the office had been suppressing for years until US AG Pam Bondi fired the top agent there, James Dennehy, for withholding it so long. It’s been awfully quiet over at the FBI and DOJ home office in DC since then. Of course, if any referrals are being considered, or any grand jury bound cases being prepared, you wouldn’t want that to leak out, would you?

Read more …

Roberts can try to wait out the clock 677 times, but the Trump team are not fools.

• John Roberts Needs to Do His Job Already (Skeet)

We are in the midst of a judicial coup. In the past three months, there have been at least 79 nationwide injunctions issued by lower courts against the legal orders issued by President Trump. That’s more than half the total number of nationwide injunctions ever issued. Furthermore, these injunctions can ignore and overrule rulings on the same issue made by other district judges. If 50 district judges rule that a presidential order is constitutional, and the 51st district judge rules that it isn’t, that single district judge can overrule and violate the separation of powers not only of the president and Congress, but also of the rest of the judiciary. Just in the past couple of weeks, a federal judge blocked President Trump from firing federal probationary workers. Bosses and managers in every company in America, including unionized companies, have the right to fire probationary workers at any time for any reason.

But Judge James K. Bredar unilaterally declared that President Trump cannot. In the same vein, District Judge Anthony Trenga blocked President Trump from firing 19 CIA and DNI employees. District Judges Benjamin Settle and Ana Reyes, handling different cases on opposite sides of the country, both blocked Trump’s transgender military ban. Boston Municipal Court Judge Mark Summerville declared an ICE agent in contempt for taking an illegal into custody during the latter’s criminal trial (for charges of falsifying information on a government document, a charge the judge dismissed). Judge Summerville then ordered the local district attorney’s office to investigate the ICE agent. District Judge Paula Xinis ordered the American government to somehow force the return of an MS-13 gang leader from a prison in El Salvador. The judge said he must be returned before this upcoming Monday before midnight. (Or?)

District Judge Edward Chen blocked President Trump from revoking deportation protections from Venezuelan illegals, decrying Trump’s order as racist and blathering on about the “social and economic contributions” of the 350,000 illegals flooding the labor market and straining social services, as if their economic impact (even if it were positive) should have any bearing whatsoever of the constitutionality of Trump’s order. As Bonchie over at RedState pointed out, this case is particularly egregious in that Judge Chen disregarded the ruling of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which had previously ruled that the Temporary Protection Status (which Judge Chen ordered reinstated) is not subject to judicial review. This is the appeals court under whose jurisdiction Judge Chen operates. So, he basically just told his supervisors that they’re wrong, he’s right, and they can go pound sand.

And of course there is District Judge Boasberg, who infamously ordered planes carrying foreign terrorists to turn around midair and return them to American soil, where they’d be freed to rape, murder, and vote Democrat. Any common-sense reading of the Alien Enemies Act clearly demonstrates that President Trump is well within his rights in deporting foreign terrorists and gang members. But Boasberg singlehandedly and arbitrarily claimed authority to negate the law. Boasberg’s blatant disregard of the law and his usurpation of executive authority led to calls from conservative circles, Congress, and the president himself for Boasberg’s impeachment. But shortly after these calls for impeachment, Chief Justice John Roberts issued an unprecedented statement denouncing such an approach. Roberts’ statement read, “For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision. The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose.”

Justice Roberts is not so dumb as to confuse “disagreement concerning a judicial decision” with a blatant usurpation of authority and the willful violation of the separation of powers as enumerated in the U. S. Constitution. Roberts’ intention is to protect and expand the unchecked power of the judiciary at the expense of the other co-equal branches of government. The abuse of legislative and executive power regularly leads to censure, party expulsion, and impeachment. The abuse of judicial power suffers from no such checks, limitations, or consequences. And when such constitutionally documented remedies are pondered by members of the supposedly coequal branches, Justice Roberts harangues them for their audacity.

Justice Roberts is also not so dumb as to not realize exactly what the Left is doing. It’s obvious to everyone that they’re trying to jam Trump up in the red tape of a judicial bureaucratic nightmare to slow down or stop his agenda. It doesn’t matter if every single case reaches the Supreme Court and every single case results in the Supreme Court siding with Trump. Such a process can take months or years to adjudicate each case. That’s the point. The process is the punishment, and the Left is using it as an unconstitutional veto. They’re hoping to string Trump along until the midterms, where they hope to regain control of Congress and launch a few dozen or so impeachment proceedings against him (about which Roberts will make zero statements about the abuse of impeachment powers).

His defense of the integrity of the court system, or against the abuse of impeachment, is quite selective. Did he speak out during the first two sham impeachments against President Trump? Did he speak out when President Biden brazenly ignored and defied the Supreme Court ruling on student debt? On a side note, John, any progress on that internal investigation as to which justice’s aide leaked the Dobbs decision to the press? To the extent that Justice Robert concedes that there is a blatant judicial coup being attempted in real time at district level (for which there have been no consequences and, hence, no incentives to refrain from such abuse, which has clearly accelerated in recent weeks), the legal and constitutional solution must be wide ranging and comprehensive.

[..] Suppose a rogue judge ordered the New York Times and the Washington Post to cease operations based on that judge’s twisted understanding of the First Amendment. Would Justice Roberts tell everyone to calm down and go through the appeals process? Would these newspapers be expected to abide by the ruling for the months and years it would take to reach the Supreme Court?

If police across the country started entering whatever homes they wanted to conduct warrantless searches, and a rogue judge passed a nationwide injunction giving them legal cover to do so, would Justice Roberts expect this abuse to continue while the appeals courts heard the cases? Would American citizens be expected to submit to warrantless searches at the whim of the authorities until SCOTUS finally got around to reviewing them?

Justice Roberts, you have judges ordering how the executive is to administer the military. You have justices acting as de facto air traffic controllers, demanding the executive branch order aircraft maneuvers over other nations’ airspace without any regard or knowledge of the safety and logistics thereof. You have judges handcuffing executive action based not on the constitutionality of said action, but on how that particular judge thinks its economic impact would be. You have judges ordering district attorneys’ offices to launch investigations. You have judges ordering our government to tell other governments what to do.

Read more …

“Judge Boasberg’s politically motivated ruling overstepped his authority, compromised the impartiality of the judiciary, and created a constitutional crisis,”

• Trump Nemesis Judge Muses: Who to Hold in Contempt in Deportation Case? (Adams)

“How should I determine who the contemner or contemners are?” federal District Court Judge James Boasberg asked Deputy Assistant Attorney General for Immigration Litigation Drew Ensign. A contemner is someone said to be in contempt of court. In an at-times contentious hearing on Thursday, the chief judge for the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia told the Justice Department lawyer that he thought the Trump administration had disobeyed his verbal court order to turn around three planes heading to El Salvador carrying more than 238 illegal migrants accused by the Trump administration of being members of the Tren de Aragua and MS-13 gangs. “It seems to me there’s a fair likelihood that that is not correct; in fact, that the government acted in bad faith throughout that day,” Boasberg, an appointee of President Barack Obama, said in court.

The Trump administration, for its part, maintained that it had followed the judge’s written order on 7:27 p.m. on March 15 that halted what the administration viewed as the enforcement of the 1798 Alien Enemies Act. However, Boasberg also gave an oral order earlier in the day that is the subject of the dispute between the judge and the Trump administration. The Trump administration contends that the judge’s verbal command to turn the planes around “did not amount to a binding injunction.” The 1798 Alien Enemies Act was passed during the administration of John Adams, the second president. The law stipulated that when the United States is at war or facing “any invasion or predatory incursion,” the president can remove males who are 14 years of age or older from the United States “as alien enemies.”

Boasberg asked who had made the decision to not turn the planes back or not disembark the illegal immigrants, for which the government lawyer did not have an answer. “You, standing here, have no idea who made the decision to not to bring the planes back or have the passengers not be disembarked upon arrival? As we proceed with potential contempt proceedings, that may become relevant,” the judge said. Members of Congress have taken issue with Boasberg’s actions, and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, has vowed to hold hearings on some of the judicial rulings against the Trump administration. Rep. Brandon Gill, R-Texas, and five other House Republicans have introduced articles of impeachment in the House against Boasberg.

“Chief Judge Boasberg usurped the executive’s constitutional authority, going so far as to order midair flights to turn around and return violent foreign gangsters back to American soil. Judge Boasberg’s politically motivated ruling overstepped his authority, compromised the impartiality of the judiciary, and created a constitutional crisis,” Gill said in a press statement. To remove a federal judge from office would require some Democrats’ support in the Senate, which House Republicans are unlikely to get. Boasberg is expected to rule on whether to hold Trump administration officials in contempt of court next week. The federal D.C. appeals court denied the Trump administration’s request to lift Boasberg’s order, and the administration has subsequently appealed the decision to the Supreme Court.

Read more …

Not complete.

• Supreme Court Shuts Down Activist Judge (ZH)

The Supreme Court on Friday overruled an activist judge in Boston, allowing the Trump administration to slash $250 million for more than 100 teacher training grants for DEI and other woke programs. In a 5-4 decision nine days after the request, the Supremes sided with the Trump administration’s emergency request to stay the court order by judge Myong J. Joun of the federal District of Massachusetts – who had ordered the Trump administration to “immediately restore” the “pre-existing status quo prior to the termination.” According to the ruling – which is likely to narrow the ability of district courts to halt agency actions involving grant function, Joun lacked authority to order the Trump admin to restore the funding.

https://twitterr.com/bykatiebuehler/status/1908255070291996992?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1908255070291996992%7Ctwgr%5Ee5efef6d959ddcbb739d9a2382749cea9bba9ea0%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fpolitical%2Fsupreme-court-shuts-down-activist-judge-lets-trump-cut-250-million-dei-training-teachers

In his ruling, Myong sided with California and eight other blue states that argued that the cuts were likely driven by efforts by the Trump administration to gut DEI programs (duh). The cuts were announced on Feb. 17, following findings by DOGE that taxpayer funds were being used to “train teachers and education agencies on divisive ideologies” that were “inappropriate and unnecessary,” including “critical race theory,; diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI); social justice activism; ‘anti-racism’; and instruction on white privilege and white supremacy.” And of course, dissenting in the Supreme Court decision were Justices Jackson, Sotomayor, Kagan, and Chief Justice Roberts.

Read more …

“Carney said the move was bound to “rupture the global economy,” which has already become “fundamentally different today than it was yesterday.”

That is the idea, yes.

• Canada Will Lead The World – PM (RT)

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney has condemned US President Donald Trump’s new slate of tariffs, declaring that Ottawa stands ready to become the global economic leader in place of Washington. He delivered the remarks on Thursday as he unveiled retaliatory measures for Trump’s claimed “reciprocal” tariffs, which include an additional 25% automobile industry tariff on Canada. Ottawa has responded by tariffing all cars and vehicle content imported from the US that is not compliant with USMCA, a cornerstone free trade pact between the US, Canada, and Mexico. The sweeping new wave of tariffs ranging from 10% to 49%, affecting most countries in the world, was rolled out by Trump on Wednesday on what he called “liberation day” in an effort to rectify America’s import-export imbalance. Carney said the move was bound to “rupture the global economy,” which has already become “fundamentally different today than it was yesterday.”

“The system of global trade anchored on the US [is one] that Canada has relied on since the end of the Second World War. A system that, while not perfect, has helped to deliver prosperity for our country for decades is over. Our old relationship of steadily deepening integration with the US is over,” the prime minister announced. Carney described the development as a “tragedy” that has become “the new reality,” but claimed that Ottawa was ready to take “global economic leadership” instead of Washington. “Canada must be looking elsewhere to expand our trade, to build our economy, and to protect our sovereignty. Canada is ready to take a leadership role in building a coalition of like-minded countries who share our values,” he said. “And if the United States no longer wants to lead, Canada will.”

Canada has become one of the prime targets for Trump’s attacks on the global trade status quo, with the US president alleging that Washington has been “subsidizing” Ottawa in the amount of about $200 billion a year. The best way to resolve their economic disagreements would be for Canada would be becoming the “cherished” 51st state of the US, he has suggested on multiple occasions. While Canadian leaders have firmly rejected the annexation idea, opinion polls have indicated it is also extremely unpopular among the public as well. A recent YouGov poll suggested that up to 77% of Canadians firmly oppose it, with only around 15% in favor of a merger with the US.

Read more …

We escaped this at the last minute.

• Trump HHS Slashes Hundreds of Millions in Woke LGBTQ Grants (DS)

The Trump administration’s Health and Human Services Department has canceled hundreds of millions of dollars in grants dedicated to researching illegal sexual behavior in children, pregnancy prevention for “transgender boys,” and so-called sleep inequality affecting black sexual-minority men. In March, HHS canceled at least $530 million of funding for LGBTQ+ health research programs, according to a grant tracker from Noam Ross of rOpenSci and Scott Delaney of Harvard’s T.H. Chan School of Public Health. HHS previously provided more than $990 million of grant funding to LGBTQ+ health research programs, according to the tracker. The National Institutes of Health’s newly sworn-in director, Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, said that under his tutelage, the agency would shift its priorities toward “research aimed at preventing, treating, and curing chronic conditions like cancer, diabetes, heart disease, obesity and many others that cause so much suffering and deaths among all Americans, LGBTQ individuals included.”

The shift “away from politicized DEI and gender ideology studies” is in “accordance with the president’s executive orders,” HHS spokesman Andrew Nixon told The Daily Signal. The priority shift included cutting funding for studies focused on radical gender ideology, critical race theory, and other topics that polls show to be wildly unpopular with Americans, according to The Daily Signal’s review of terminated grants. For instance, the Trump administration cut off $10,000 of promised funding to a conference Feb. 25-27 at the University of Oklahoma called “Be Curious Not Judgmental: The 4th National Symposium on Sexual Behavior of Youth.” “Professionals and parents continue to use myths and misunderstandings as the base of decisions on problematic and illegal sexual behavior of children and adolescents,” the symposium’s website reads. “Adults worry about addressing sexual topics, and yet youth continue to be inundated with graphic sexual images and messages.”

“We need to better equip professionals and parents to understand and support healthy sexual development and to identify problematic sexual behavior early and intervene with all children and caregivers impacted,” the description continues. One breakout session at the conference focused on “The Help-Wanted Prevention Intervention for Minor Attracted Individuals,” a euphemism for pedophiles. On March 21, Trump’s NIH terminated a $2.9 million grant to the University of Minnesota for research on “adolescent health at the intersections of sexual, gender, racial/ethnic, immigrant identities and native language.” The study aimed to determine “what positive and negative experiences are particularly relevant to the overlapping, simultaneous production of inequalities by [sexual and gender minority] identity, race/ethnicity, immigration experiences, and native language?”

The pre-Trump NIH promised the Research Triangle Institute $100,507 to study “social influences on sexual health among Latinx adolescents and emerging adults who identify as LGBTQ+ in an agricultural community.” NIH ended a $1.5 million grant to Urban Health Partnerships for “leveraging a community-driven approach to address the impact of social determinants of health on structural inequities among Miami-Dade County’s intergenerational LGBTQ+ Community.” Hunter College lost its $211,100 grant to study “development and feasibility of a psychosocial intervention for sexual and gender minority autistic adults.” On March 18, NIH cut off Virginia Commonwealth University’s $205,308 grant focused on “using youth-engaged methods to develop and evaluate a measure for disordered eating behaviors in transgender and gender-diverse youth.”

“Transgender, nonbinary, and gender-diverse (TNG) youth face stigma due to the marginalization of their gender identities,” the study says. “TNG youth also have increased vulnerability to body dissatisfaction due to pubertal changes and development of secondary sexual characteristics that might be misaligned with their gender identity, which may be exacerbated by a youth’s inability to access gender-affirming medical care (i.e., puberty blockers, gender-affirming hormones).” Yale University lost government funding for a program, “Training in Behavioral Design Interventions to Address Stigma Among Men Who have Sex with Men.” “This study will explore relationships of different discrimination experiences and sexual health among young Black men who have sex with men (YBMSM),” the project narrative says. “This study aims to better the sexual health of YBMSM throughout their lives by informing future interventions that help decrease new cases of HIV and other poor sexual health outcomes.”

The NIH terminated its $2,368,492 contract with Brown University to study “improving mental health among the LGBTQ+ community impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic.”NIH had committed more than $1.3 million to Princeton University to study “Views of Gender in Adolescence.” “Gender diverse children often experience disparities in mental health and well-being,” the project narrative says. “Further questions concern the stability of their gender, as that has implications for medical transitions. The proposed work would examine the role of gender beliefs and self-categorization in predicting mental health and well-being, as well as provide better estimates of rates of stability and change across time in the identities of both cisgender and gender-diverse youth.” Trump’s HHS terminated a $1.3 million grant to the Center for Innovative Public Health Research to study “Adapting an LGB+ inclusive teen-pregnancy prevention program for transgender boys.”

Read more …

Publius Helvius Pertinax.

“There is no doubt, however, that those who have fattened at the public trough in the U.S. for so many decades are not giving up easily..”

• The DOGE Emperor (Spencer)

See if any of this sounds familiar: a great nation, indeed, the world’s only superpower, is beset by turmoil, as a corrupt political class grows more interested in enriching itself than in performing any actual public service. Finally, a new leader emerges who has a long and distinguished record in other fields, but is not a career politician. Citizens who are deeply concerned about the direction of the country put their faith in this unlikely reformer and manage to secure the top spot for him, but the corrupt elements are supremely powerful and deeply entrenched. They refuse to accept the new leader and fight back fiercely against his efforts to restore competence and honesty to the government. I am, of course, speaking about Publius Helvius Pertinax, who was the emperor of Rome from Jan. 1, 193, to March 28, 193. In his all too brief reign at the helm of the magnificent empire, Pertinax tried to turn around the mighty ship of state and draw it out of the morass of corruption into which he had fallen.

One of his contemporaries, the historian and Roman Senator Cassius Dio, said that Pertinax was “an excellent and upright man” and a fine emperor as well, who during his three-month tenure demonstrated “not only humaneness and integrity in the imperial administrations, but also the most economical management and the most careful consideration for the public welfare.” Writing over thirteen centuries later, Niccolò Machiavelli wrote in his notorious manual of power politics, “The Prince,” that Pertinax was one of three Roman emperors of his time who were “men of modest life, lovers of justice, enemies to cruelty, humane, and benignant.” This did not, however, play well in the empire of his day. The soldiers of the Roman Empire, “being accustomed to live licentiously under Commodus,” who was Pertinax’s free-spending predecessor, “could not endure the honest life to which Pertinax wished to reduce them.”

This was understandable. The thing about corruption is that it, well, corrupts. Once soldiers get accustomed to getting lavish amounts of money under the table for various favors, it is difficult to compel them to be content with their relatively meager official salary alone. And it wasn’t just the soldiers. The Roman Emperors site notes that “Pertinax’s reign was characterized by his attempts to reverse the excesses and corruption of Commodus’ rule. He immediately set about reforming the administration, cutting down on the extravagance that had characterized the previous regime.” Shades of DOGE. Pertinax also “sought to restore discipline within the Praetorian Guard and the broader military, which had become increasingly unruly under Commodus. Pertinax also attempted to implement financial reforms, aiming to replenish the depleted imperial treasury through austerity measures and the sale of Commodus’ extravagant possessions.”

While anyone who was aware of the empire’s former glory welcomed these reforms, the beneficiaries of the corruption were less happy: “Pertinax’s reforms were met with resistance from multiple quarters. The Praetorian Guard, in particular, had grown accustomed to the bribes and favors they had received during Commodus’ reign. Pertinax’s attempts to impose discipline and reduce their influence were deeply unpopular. The Guard, which had played a key role in the assassination of Commodus, was now wary of any emperor who might threaten their privileged position.” Making matters even worse was the fact that “Pertinax’s efforts to restore financial discipline alienated many in the Roman elite. His attempts to collect overdue taxes and recover state property from wealthy individuals who had benefitted under Commodus made him enemies among the Senate and the aristocracy. These powerful groups saw Pertinax as a threat to their wealth and influence and began plotting against him.”

Yeah, you’re right, this could be a terrific movie. Cast Trump as Pertinax, Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi as his enemies among the Senate and aristocracy, Old Joe Biden (or maybe Barack Obama) as Commodus, and Mark Milley as the angry head of the Praetorian Guard. The worst part, however, is that Pertinax did not succeed; the Praetorian Guard assassinated him on March 28, 193, and the empire descended into chaos. The imperial throne was sold off to the highest bidder, Didius Julianus, who was himself murdered on June 2, 193. Of course, the effort to reform the American government may not have the same sad ending. There is no doubt, however, that those who have fattened at the public trough in the U.S. for so many decades are not giving up easily, and will continue trying to throw every possible roadblock in Trump’s path as he attempts to restore honest government. May he succeed where Pertinax failed.

Read more …

He’ll make the call.

• Trump’s Inner Circle Opposes New Putin Call – NBC News (RT)

US President Donald Trump’s advisers are urging him to not call his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, before Moscow commits to a full ceasefire in the Ukraine conflict, NBC News reported on Thursday citing two anonymous officials. The US leader previously told the media outlet that he intends to talk with Putin again, potentially as soon as this week, following their previous conversation on March 18. Trump, who is trying to mediate a truce between Moscow and Kiev after more than three years of hostilities, stated on Tuesday that Putin and Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky are “ready to make a deal” thanks to his efforts.

Putin has said he supports a full suspension of the fighting, but is concerned with the specifics of how it would be arranged. He has suggested that a pause would become possible if the US ensures comprehensive monitoring along the frontline and if Kiev suspends mobilization of reinforcements. During his previous call with Trump, the Russian president agreed to a moratorium on attacks against energy infrastructure, which Zelensky also publicly endorsed. However since then the Russian Defense Ministry has regularly reported Ukrainian strikes breaching the partial ceasefire, including against internationally-owned infrastructure on Russian soil. Moscow has said that it remains committed to its end of the bargain. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov confirmed on Friday that no contacts between Putin and Trump are scheduled for the “next several days” and downplayed the NBC report, warning about “speculation and outright lies” in the press.

This week, Russian negotiator Kirill Dmitriev, who advises President Putin on international economic cooperation, visited the US to meet White House officials. Following the talks, he said more progress has been made towards resolving the Ukraine conflict, but that third parties are seeking to derail the normalization of US-Russian relations initiated by Trump in February, when he phoned Putin for the first time since assuming office.Politico has reported an expectation in the UK and Germany of a third Putin-Trump call within days, following Dmitriev’s visit.

Read more …

Putin will demand a final solution.

• Zelensky Contradicts Trump On NATO Membership (RT)

Ukraine could still become a member of NATO despite opposition to the idea from the administration of US President Donald Trump, Vladimir Zelensky has insisted. Trump lashed out at the Ukrainian leader earlier this week, saying “he wants to be a member of NATO. Well, he was never going to be a member of NATO. He understands that.” However, during a meeting with the heads of territorial communities of Chernigov Region, Zelensky made it clear that he has not yet given up on his long-standing ambitions of joining the US-led bloc. “You know who does not support Ukraine’s membership in NATO so far, but in any case, no one is removing this issue from the table for the future,” Zelensky said, as cited by the Ukrinform news agency.

“At least, we are talking about the fact that even if now someone does not want to support [Kiev joining the bloc], we will see what happens in the future,” Zelensky added. According to the Ukrainian leader, until Kiev becomes a member of the bloc it should be provided with “NATO-like security guarantees” by its Western backers. Ukraine will be able to achieve “a just peace” with Russia, but in order to do so “it has to be strong when getting to the negotiating table,” he insisted. Russia cited Kiev’s ambitions to join NATO, which Moscow views as a hostile bloc, as among the main reasons for launching its military operation in February 2022.

Ukraine’s neutrality remains one of the key demands by Moscow for achieving a diplomatic settlement of the conflict, along with the demilitarization and denazification of the country and recognition by Kiev of the People’s Republics of Donetsk and Lugansk as well as Kherson and Zaporozhye regions as Russian territory. Last month, NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte said “yes” when asked by Bloomberg if Trump had already taken the question of Kiev joining NATO off the table in efforts undertaken by the US and Russia to achieve peace in the Ukraine conflict. Rutte also suggested that once the fighting stops, the West could “step by step… restore normal relations with Russia.” However, he added that “we are absolutely not there yet, we have to maintain the pressure” on Moscow.

Read more …

“It is the same ‘playbook’ that was used against me by a group of Lunatics and Losers, like Norm Eisen, Andrew Weissmann, and Lisa Monaco,”

• ‘Free Le Pen’ – Trump to France (RT)

US President Donald Trump has accused the French political establishment of employing lawfare against right-wing figure Marine Le Pen, urging Paris to “free” her. On Monday, a Paris court sentenced Le Pen to four years in prison and imposed a five-year ban on her eligibility for public office, effectively preventing her from running in the 2027 presidential election. In a post on Truth Social late Thursday, Trump declared Le Pen a victim of a “witch hunt.” He asserted that the prosecution of Le Pen was orchestrated by “European Leftists using Lawfare to silence Free Speech, and censor their Political Opponent.”

“It is the same ‘playbook’ that was used against me by a group of Lunatics and Losers, like Norm Eisen, Andrew Weissmann, and Lisa Monaco,” he remarked, referring to attorneys who were involved in litigation against him since his first term as president. Trump claims those proceedings were politically-driven. Although Trump admitted he did not personally know Le Pen or the specifics of her case, which he assumed stemmed from a “bookkeeping” error, he expressed admiration for her resilience. He concluded, “It is all so bad for France, and the Great French People, no matter what side they are on. FREE MARINE LE PEN!” Le Pen and several other senior members of her National Rally (RN) party were found guilty of misappropriating EU funds intended to support European Parliament members for domestic party activities.

The offenses occurred between 2004 and 2016, when she was the leader of RN. Several foreign political leaders criticized the ruling as a blow to democracy in France. Trump previously described it as “a very big deal.” Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni contended that the sentence “takes away representation from millions of citizens,” while her Hungarian counterpart, Viktor Orban, expressed his solidarity with Le Pen by posting “Je suis Marine!” Le Pen characterized the ruling as “political,” asserting that it reflected a “lower court judge” depriving French voters of the opportunity to back their preferred presidential candidate.

Read more …

Can’t get elected three times, but you can serve.

• Yes, Trump Could Serve a Third Term. Law Professor Explains How (Allen)

President Donald Trump could not run for a third term, but he could be president a third time, according to Cornell law professor Bill Jacobson. The 22nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is clear that no one can be elected to the office of the president “more than twice.” “But there’s nothing in the Constitution that prohibits someone from serving a third term,” said Jacobson, founder and publisher of Legal Insurrection. If another candidate won the presidential election, and Trump was his or her vice presidential running mate, that candidate could step aside after winning the race and allow Trump to take over, according to Jacobson, who was quick to add he doesn’t endorse such an action. While a deal made with a running mate for Trump to serve a third term “does not violate the Constitution,” Jacobson says, it “might violate the spirit of the Constitution.”

The intent of the 22nd Amendment is “that we not have a permanent president,” Jacobson said, adding that because of that, serving a third term “might be subject to challenge,” adding: “It might be subject to what was the original meaning of these terms. But on its face, there’s no barrier. “The conversation of Trump serving a third term recently landed in headlines when a number of reporters started asking the president if he wanted a third term. “I’m not looking at that, but I’ll tell you, I have had more people asking me to have a third term,” Trump said while speaking with reporters on Air Force One at the end of March. This isn’t the first time the idea of a former two-term president serving another term has been floated.

In October 2023, Howard J. Klein of Lakewood Ranch, Florida, wrote in a letter to the editor of The Wall Street Journal that former President Barack Obama could run as the vice presidential candidate with then-President Joe Biden. “Mr. Obama would constitutionally succeed to the presidency—without election—if Mr. Biden were to vacate the office,” Klein wrote. The 22nd Amendment was added to the Constitution in 1951 in the wake of President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s election to four terms in 1932, 1936, 1940, and 1944. Congress approved the 22nd Amendment on March 21, 1947, then submitted it to the state legislatures for required ratification. The ratification process was completed on Feb. 27, 1951, when the required 36 of the then-48 states (before Hawaii and Alaska joined the union) had ratified the amendment.

Read more …

Buy TikTok, Larry.

• Larry Fink Believes He Will Win Over Control Of The Panama Canal (Gasparino)

Larry Fink is playing the long game. With a little time, a possible nudge from President Trump and some on-the-ground lobbying of his contacts in mainland China, BlackRock’s billionaire boss believes he will win approval from the Mainland’s apparatchiks to take control of the Panama Canal, On The Money has learned.Specifically, Fink is looking to close a $23 billion deal with Hong Kong-based CK Hutchison to buy 43 ports worldwide — including the two ports that are strategically located on the Atlantic and Pacific sides of the Panama Canal.Until recently, most people didn’t know much about CK Hutchison, which is headed by the mercurial, 96-year-old billionaire Li Ka-shing, Hong Kong’s richest tycoon.

That was until The Donald began talking up the strategic importance of the Panama Canal, one of the busiest waterways for global trade because it easily connects both oceans through a 51-mile deepwater runway. Hutchison holds long-term leases there and at dozens of others including on the Suez Canal. Its stock traded cheaply, and when Trump began to mouth off about the need to exert US eminence at the Panama Canal (the US, after all, built it and controlled the zone until the 1970s), Blackrock saw a way to make some money and get into Trump’s good graces. The other side of the deal wasn’t so happy. And I’m not talking about Hutchison, but its overlords in the Chinese Communist Party who began to “investigate” the tie-up for God knows what other than to prevent the US from gaining a foothold at this vital waterway. The CCP is now threatening to throttle the entire deal.

The people at BlackRock are at least posturing in private conversations that they’re not too worried. They tell On The Money to ignore reports that the deal was set to be officially signed by Wednesday. The real due date is the 145-day “due diligence” period that began when the buyout was announced on March 4. The grace period was designed to ensure a complicated buyout involving dozens of ports in many different countries comported with various laws, including getting buy-in from the Chinese President Xi Jinping. Yes, the people at BlackRock said they saw the potential for trouble from China Inc., and they built that into the closing schedule. They believe that over this time, they can get the deal approved by the CCP overlords and put American flags back up in the canal zone.

“We are proceeding as if this deal will happen,” a BlackRock executive told On the Money as this column went to press. Of course, things could change given the volatile nature of the relations between China and the US and the frenemy dynamic between Trump and Xi. Trump is said to admire the Chinese strongman (and the feeling seems to be mutual), but wary of his obvious global ambitions. Part of Trump, I am told, will never forgive the Chinese for unleashing COVID on the planet, which on top of all the misery it caused, doomed his re-election chances in 2020. But the BlackRock deal is something Trump covets. He mentioned it in the State of the Union address, no less as proof of an American global renaissance.

And people at BlackRock believe the deal will get folded into negotiations with the Chinese over Trump’s plan to save the China-owned short-video app TikTok from being banned from US app stores as early as this weekend, and our overall trade negotiations with the Mainland. Barring some last-minute deal implosion (or a realistic new competing bid, which at this stage is unlikely), the White House is scrambling to unveil a plan for a newish US-investor-controlled TikTok any minute now, a structure, as On The Money reported, that the Trumpers believe will comport with a US law that demands the end of Chinese control.

But the Chinese will have some buy-in, as I also reported. That includes possibly a minority stake in the new company and it won’t have to part with its algorithm, the important part of TikTok that gins up user engagement and some say, has allowed the Chinese to spy on US users. To get around the ban legislation, tech giant Oracle will be part of the planned new ownership group, but more importantly, monitor the algo in its cloud. To get Xi’s buy-in, the Chinese remain a part of the app’s infrastructure, which can operate in the US and retain its value estimated in the tens of billions of dollars.

Read more …

Panama and TikTok.

• Trump Extends TikTok Deadline 75 Days, As He Tries To Close Deal (JTN)

President Donald Trump announced Friday that he would sign an executive order to keep the social media app TikTok running for 75 days. Trump insisted his administration had made great progress on a deal to keep the social media app running in the U.S., but that it needed more time to finalize it. “The Deal requires more work to ensure all necessary approvals are signed, which is why I am signing an Executive Order to keep TikTok up and running for an additional 75 days,” Trump wrote on TRUTH Social. “We hope to continue working in Good Faith with China, who I understand are not very happy about our Reciprocal Tariffs (Necessary for Fair and Balanced Trade between China and the U.S.A.!).”

April 6 was the deadline for the China-based ByteDance to either sell the app or face a ban on U.S. operations. The founder of OnlyFans and Amazon made offers to buy the app earlier this week. “We do not want TikTok to ‘go dark.’ We look forward to working with TikTok and China to close the Deal. Thank you for your attention to this matter!” Trump’s post concluded.

Read more …

They risk the wrath of Trump. He’ll protect Elon.

• EU Could Fine Elon Musk’s X $1B Over Illicit Content, Disinformation (CT)

European Union regulators are reportedly mulling a $1 billion fine against Elon Musk’s X, taking into account revenue from his other ventures, including Tesla and SpaceX, according to The New York Times. EU regulators allege that X has violated the Digital Services Act and will use a section of the act to calculate a fine based on revenue that includes other companies Musk controls, according to an April 3 report by the newspaper, which cited four people with knowledge of the plan. Under the Digital Services Act, which came into law in October 2022 to police social media companies and “prevent illegal and harmful activities online,” companies can be fined up to 6% of global revenue for violations.

A spokesman for the European Commission, the bloc’s executive branch, declined to comment on this case to The New York Times but did say it would “continue to enforce our laws fairly and without discrimination toward all companies operating in the EU.” In a statement, X’s Global Government Affairs team said that if the reports about the EU’s plans are accurate, it “represents an unprecedented act of political censorship and an attack on free speech.” “X has gone above and beyond to comply with the EU’s Digital Services Act, and we will use every option at our disposal to defend our business, keep our users safe, and protect freedom of speech in Europe,” X’s global government affairs team said.

Along with the fine, the EU regulators could reportedly demand product changes at X, with the full scope of any penalties to be announced in the coming months. Still, a settlement could be reached if the social media platform agrees to changes that satisfy regulators, according to the Times. One of the officials who spoke to the Times also said that X is facing a second investigation alleging the platform’s approach to policing user-generated content has made it a hub of illegal hate speech and disinformation, which could result in more penalties.

The EU investigation began in 2023. A preliminary ruling in July 2024 found X had violated the Digital Services Act by refusing to provide data to outside researchers, provide adequate transparency about advertisers, or verify the authenticity of users who have a verified account. X responded to the ruling with hundreds of points of dispute, and Musk said at the time he was offered a deal, alleging that EU regulators told him if he secretly suppressed certain content, X would escape fines.

Thierry Breton, the former EU commissioner for internal market, said in a July 12 X post in 2024 that there was no secret deal and that X’s team had asked for the “Commission to explain the process for settlement and to clarify our concerns,” and its response was in line with “established regulatory procedures.” Musk replied he was looking “forward to a very public battle in court so that the people of Europe can know the truth.”

Read more …

 

 

 

 

mRNA
https://twitter.com/NicHulscher/status/1908173339677397118

 

 

BlackRock

 

 

Adams
https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/1907868704622198948

 

 

Payne

 

 

Effects

 

 

Golden Fish
https://twitter.com/AMAZlNGNATURE/status/1907951899489227188

 

 

The King

 

 

Arthur C. Clarke

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle February 28 2025

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


Giovanni Bellini Pietà 1505

 

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

 

 

 

 

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

Lutnick

Malone

 

 

 

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

He just wanted to get rid of Macron?!

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

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

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

Read more …

Starmer and Macron want war. Trump does not.

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

The talks will continue. Without EU and Ukraine.

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

USAID

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Baby

 

 

Nose

 

 

Bull dog

 

 

Wait

 

 

Dog baby

 

 

Ladder

 

 

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

 

 

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