Menu Icon

Debt Rattle May 11 2025

May 112025
 
 May 11, 2025  Posted by at 9:53 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,  30 Responses »


Henri Matisse The terrace, St. Tropez 1904

 

• Trump Touts “Great Progress” In China Tariff Talks, Suggests “Total Reset” (ZH)
• India and Pakistan Agree To ‘Immediate Ceasefire’ – Trump (RT)
• Putin Proposes Direct Talks With Ukraine On May 15 In Turkey To End War (JTN)
• Zelensky Voices Demands To Russia After High-Profile Talks In Kiev (RT)
• Moscow Says It Won’t Be Pressured Over Ukraine 30-Day Truce (RT)
• Russia Is Not Afraid of Western Sanctions – Kremlin (RT)
• Ukraine Seeks to Reload, Not Negotiate Peace – US Army Vet (Sp.)
• Zelensky Will Reject Putin’s Proposal in Order to Stay ALIVE (Sp.)
• Ukraine’s Cause Is ‘Doomed’ – Bulgarian President (RT)
• George Galloway: UK Troops in Ukraine Would Constitute ‘National Suicide’ (Sp.)
• Ukraine’s European Backers Can’t Replace US Military Aid – NYT (RT)
• German Spies Grant AfD Reprieve (RT)
• Why History Is Alive In Russia But Dead In The West (SCF)
• The Soviet Union Defeated More Than Just The Nazis In 1945 (Ibrahim)
• Trump’s Houthi Deal Channels America First, Leaving Out Allies (JTN)
• Justice Roberts Admits It’s His Job to Rein in the Judicial Insurrection (O’Neil)
• Federal Judge Halts All Large-Scale Firings by Trump Administration (Turley)
• Trump Eyes Suspending Habeas Corpus In Border Invasion (Margolis)
• Trump Redirects Funds From Illegals to Homeless Veterans (Salgado)
• Deep State, Deep Church: Welcome to the New Pope! (Pacini)

 

 

 

 

Waltz


https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1921004517132304785

Greenwald RFK

RFK
https://twitter.com/itscarterhughes/status/1921021374300139910

Jolani

 

 

 

 

We await China’s response to Trump coming down to 80%.

• Trump Touts “Great Progress” In China Tariff Talks, Suggests “Total Reset” (ZH)

President Donald Trump said late on Saturday that “great progress” was being made in ongoing U.S.-China talks over tariffs menacing the global economy, and even suggested a “total reset” was on the table as tariff negotiations are set to continue Sunday in Switzerland.No major breakthrough was announced in discussions that lasted over 10 hours between U.S. officials, including Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer, and a delegation led by Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng. Still, Trump struck an upbeat tone.“A very good meeting today with China, in Switzerland. Many things discussed, much agreed to. A total reset negotiated in a friendly, but constructive, manner,” the president wrote on his Truth Social platform. “We want to see, for the good of both China and the U.S., an opening up of China to American business. GREAT PROGRESS MADE!!!”

He gave no further details, and officials at the White House also offered little information during and after the opening day of discussions. Trump’s post followed reports that talks would continue Sunday, after extending late into the day on Saturday. Talks have been shrouded in secrecy, and neither side made comments to reporters as they left. Several convoys of black vehicles left the residence of the Swiss ambassador to the UN in Geneva, which hosted the talks aimed at de-escalating trade tensions between the world’s two biggest economies. Diplomats from both sides also confirmed that the talks took place. The opening day of negotiations were held in the sumptuous 18th-century “Villa Saladin” overlooking Lake Geneva. The former estate was bequeathed to the Swiss state in 1973, according to the Geneva government.

Trump’s assessment aside, while prospects for a major breakthrough appeared dim when the talks opened there is hope that the two countries will scale back the tariffs they have slapped on each other’s goods, a move that would relieve world financial markets and companies on both sides of the Pacific Ocean that depend on US-China trade. Trump last month raised U.S. tariffs on China to a combined 145%, and China retaliated by hitting American imports with a 125% levy. Tariffs that high essentially amount to the countries’ boycotting each other’s products, disrupting trade that last year topped $660 billion. And even before talks got underway, Trump suggested Friday that the U.S. could lower its tariffs on China, saying in a Truth Social post that “80% Tariff seems right! Up to Scott” Bessent.

Sun Yun, director of the China program at the Stimson Center, noted it will be the first time He and Bessent have talked. She doubts the Geneva meeting will produce any substantive results: “the best scenario is for the two sides to agree to de-escalate on the … tariffs at the same time,” she said, adding even a small reduction would send a positive signal. “It cannot just be words.” Goldman Sachs expects both sides to cut tariffs by more than half when negotiations are over. Since returning to the White House in January, Trump has aggressively used tariffs as his favorite economic weapon. He has imposed a 10% tax on imports from almost every country in the world. But the fight with China has been the most intense. His tariffs on China include a 20% charge meant to pressure Beijing into doing more to stop the flow of the synthetic opioid fentanyl into the United States.

The remaining 125% involve a dispute that dates back to Trump’s first term and comes atop tariffs he levied on China back then, which means the total tariffs on some Chinese goods can exceed 145%. During Trump’s first term, the U.S. alleged that China uses unfair tactics to give itself an edge in advanced technologies such as quantum computing and driverless cars. These include forcing U.S. and other foreign companies to hand over trade secrets in exchange for access to the Chinese market; using government money to subsidize domestic tech firms; and outright theft of sensitive technologies. Those issues were never fully resolved. After nearly two years of negotiation, the United States and China reached a so-called Phase One agreement in January 2020. The US agreed then not to go ahead with even higher tariffs on China, and Beijing agreed to buy more American products. The tough issues – such as China’s subsidies – were left for future negotiations.

But China didn’t come through with the promised purchases, partly because COVID-19 disrupted global commerce just after the Phase One truce was announced. As a result, America’s trade deficit with China came to a staggering $263 billion last year. The fight over China’s tech policy now resumes.

Read more …

“He also hailed both sides for demonstrating “common sense and great intelligence.”

• India and Pakistan Agree To ‘Immediate Ceasefire’ – Trump (RT)

India and Pakistan have agreed to cease hostilities, US President Donald Trump has said, adding that a deal was reached following a “long night of talks” mediated by Washington. Pakistani Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar has confirmed that a deal was reached but did not mention US involvement. New Delhi has said the truce came into effect at 5 pm local time. “I am pleased to announce that India and Pakistan have agreed to a full and immediate ceasefire,” Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social on Saturday. He also hailed both sides for demonstrating “common sense and great intelligence.” US Secretary of State Marco Rubio also said that the two neighbors had decided to “start talks on a broad set of issues at a neutral site.”

According to Rubio, he and US Vice President J.D. Vance were involved in talks with senior Indian and Pakistani officials over the past 48 hours, including Prime Ministers Narendra Modi and Shehbaz Sharif, India’s top diplomat, Subrahmanyam Jaishankar, and Pakistani Chief of Army Staff Asim Munir.Shortly after the announcement, India’s Foreign Ministry said that the heads of military operations of the two nations had agreed to cease all hostilities in a phone call earlier on Saturday initiated by the Pakistani side. Pakistani Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar took to X to say that “Pakistan and India have agreed to a ceasefire with immediate effect.” The truce follows a brief but rapid military escalation between the two nuclear powers. Earlier this week, New Delhi launched ‘Operation Sindoor’, a series of strikes on suspected terrorist facilities in Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir. The strikes were in retaliation for a terrorist attack in April in the India Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir that claimed the lives of 26 civilians.

The attack was initially claimed by “The Resistance Front”, a group believed to be linked to the Pakistani-based jihadist organization Lashkar-e-Taiba. New Delhi said its investigators had been able to identify communication nodes of terrorists in and to Pakistan. Islamabad has vehemently denied that it had any role in the attack and has called for an impartial probe. Islamabad has condemned India’s actions as a “heinous provocation” and responded with shelling across the Line of Control, the de facto border between the countries in Kashmir, as well as with drone strikes. Late on Friday, Pakistan announced that it had launched a large-scale military operation against India called ‘Bunyan Al Marsoos’ (Unbreakable Wall) in what it called retaliation for the Indian strikes. Strikes targeting Indian military sites ensued.

Read more …

Ukraine will screw them up with demands it knows Russia will not meet.

• Putin Proposes Direct Talks With Ukraine On May 15 In Turkey To End War (JTN)

Russian President Vladimir Putin early Sunday proposed direct talks with Ukraine on May 15 in Turkey to end Europe’s longest military conflict since World War II. Putin’s offer came in response to requests from Kyiv and President Donald Trump for a 30-day ceasefire. The Russian president said there would be no conditions for the restart of negotiations. “We are committed to serious negotiations with Ukraine,” Putin said, adding it was possible Russia could agree to a ceasefire during the talks. There’s no immediate reaction from Washington, which has pressed for months for a peaceful solution to the three-year war between Russian and Ukraine.

Read more …

Haven’t seen a great write-up of this meeting in Kiev. We’ll make do.

“..a 17th package of EU sanctions, which will be coordinated with measures from the UK, Norway, and US..”

Hmm. Wonder what the US is doing there. Not clear.

Meanwhile, “the leaders of the UK, France, Germany, and Poland..” are all highly unpopular at home, and dead set on war with Russia. Which is why they went to Kiev. Where they can seem relevant.

• Zelensky Voices Demands To Russia After High-Profile Talks In Kiev (RT)

Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky has demanded that Russia agree to a full and unconditional ceasefire lasting at least 30 days starting May 12. Moscow has previously argued that such a truce would merely give Ukraine time to regroup its forces. On Saturday, the leaders of the UK, France, Germany, and Poland met with Zelensky in Kiev as part of the so-called “coalition of the willing.” “After the conclusion of the summit in Kiev, we all spoke with @POTUS [US President Donald Trump]. It was a good conversation – positive and concrete. I am grateful to President Trump,” Zelensky wrote on X following the meeting. “We share a common view: an immediate, full, and unconditional ceasefire is needed for at least 30 days,” he added. Zelensky said Kiev is ready to begin talks with Russia “in any format” once a full and unconditional 30-day ceasefire is in place.

He warned that if Moscow refuses the truce, stronger sanctions should be imposed on Russia’s energy and banking sectors. Preparations are already underway for a 17th package of EU sanctions, which will be coordinated with measures from the UK, Norway, and US, Zelensky claimed. Kiev has demanded an immediate 30-day ceasefire on numerous occasions over the past few months. Moscow has opposed the initiative, arguing that Ukraine would use the time to regroup its troops and restock weapons inventories. In an interview with ABC News on Friday, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Ukraine “will continue their total mobilization, bringing new troops to the front line. They will use this period to train new military personnel and give rest to their existing ones. So why should we grant such an advantage to Ukraine?” He added that arms shipments from the West would also need to stop during any ceasefire. “Otherwise, it will be an advantage for Ukraine,” he said.

Moscow has repeatedly stated its readiness to begin negotiations with Ukraine without any preconditions. In March, it agreed to a US-brokered 30-day partial ceasefire focused on halting strikes on energy infrastructure. However, according to the Russian military, Kiev repeatedly violated the truce. Last week, Vladimir Putin announced a unilateral 72-hour Victory Day ceasefire, describing it as a humanitarian gesture to mark the 80th anniversary of the Soviet victory over Nazi Germany. He said the gesture could also serve as a catalyst for “the start of direct negotiations with Kiev without preconditions.” The initiative was dismissed by Zelensky as “a manipulation.” Kiev even intensified drone strikes on Russian territory during the pause.

Read more …

The other side demands a full truce literally as per tomorrow morning.

• Moscow Says It Won’t Be Pressured Over Ukraine 30-Day Truce (RT)

The Kremlin has rejected what it describes as external pressure surrounding the 30-day truce demanded by Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky and supported by Western leaders. Speaking to CNN on Saturday, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said that Russia had already declared a three-day ceasefire earlier in the week, which was met with silence from Kiev. “Actually, a couple of days ago, Putin announced a ceasefire for three days,” Peskov said. “Did you hear any reaction from Kiev? No, we didn’t either. Did you hear any criticism of Kiev for not being able to respond or not willing to respond? No.” Leaders from the United Kingdom, France, Germany, and Poland gathered in Kiev on Saturday for high-level talks with Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky. According to him, the gathering also included virtual participation from more than 30 countries.

Following the meeting, Zelensky wrote on X that participants agreed a full and unconditional ceasefire must begin on Monday, May 12, and last for at least 30 days. “Together, we demand this from Russia,” he stated. He warned that if Moscow refuses the truce, stronger sanctions should be imposed on Russia’s energy and banking sectors. Preparations are already underway for a 17th package of EU sanctions, which will be coordinated with measures from the UK, Norway, and US, Zelensky claimed. Peskov told CNN that the Kremlin was still evaluating the latest developments. “We have to think about that. We have our own position.” He also criticized what he described as an increasingly hostile posture from Western European states. “Yes, definitely we see that Europe is confronting us. We feel it, we know it, and we are quite accustomed to that.”

The Kremlin spokesman reiterated Moscow’s willingness to engage in talks. “We are open for dialogue. We are open for attempts to have a settlement in Ukraine,” he said, expressing appreciation for the mediation efforts coming from the Trump administration. “But at the same time, it’s quite useless to try to press upon us,” he added. Kiev has repeatedly called for an immediate 30-day ceasefire in recent months, framing it as essential for starting diplomatic efforts. Moscow argued that such a pause would primarily benefit Ukraine by allowing its forces to regroup and replenish weapons stockpiles. Speaking to ABC News on Friday, Dmitry Peskov also stressed that any truce would require a halt to Western arms deliveries, saying, “Otherwise, it will be an advantage for Ukraine.”

Read more …

“..a total of 28,595 sanctions were imposed on Russian companies and individuals in recent years..”

• Russia Is Not Afraid of Western Sanctions – Kremlin (RT)

Russia is used to Western pressure and is not concerned about new sanctions, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said. He was commenting on a new round of sanctions recently imposed by the UK. ”We already know what we will do once the sanctions are announced and how we will minimize their effect,” Peskov told journalist Pavel Zarubin on Saturday. Russia has learned effective ways to counteract Western pressure, he said. “Therefore, scaring us with sanctions is pointless.” On Friday, the British government announced what it called the “largest-ever” sanctions package against Russia, targeting its oil transportation network in order to deliver a blow to the country’s energy revenues. The new measures blacklisted up to 100 oil tankers that the West claims are part of a Russian ‘shadow fleet’, older vessels operating outside Western insurance systems.

Since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict over three years ago, successive British governments have introduced more than 2,000 sanctions on Russian individuals and entities. Moscow has said the move will not harm Russia’s economy and will instead increase energy costs and inflation in Europe. Earlier, US President Donald Trump called for an “unconditional ceasefire” between Moscow and Kiev, threatening punitive measures if the truce is not observed. “The US and its partners will impose further sanctions” if it is violated, he said. In March, Russian President Vladimir Putin said that a total of 28,595 sanctions were imposed on Russian companies and individuals in recent years – more than the total number on all other countries combined. According to the president, the West sought to eliminate Russia as a competitor but its economy has only grown more resilient under pressure.

Read more …

“..he’s got pressure from Western backers. Maybe not so much of the US, but definitely from France. Germany and the UK, primarily the UK on that. And he has pressures to continue this conflict from his ultra-nationalists within the Kiev government and military.”

• Ukraine Seeks to Reload, Not Negotiate Peace – US Army Vet (Sp.)

As Russian President Vladimir Putin proposes renewed direct peace talks with Ukraine—offered without preconditions and suggested to take place in Istanbul on May 15—Sputnik contributors are weighing in on Kiev’s likely response. Retired US Army Lieutenant Colonel Earl Rasmussen voiced strong skepticism about Ukraine’s willingness to engage in the peace process. “We’ve had one side—President Putin—open to negotiations all along,” says Rasmussen. “But it’s Ukraine that keeps walking away from the table and violating every ceasefire,” he stresses. “Putin’s latest offer is a counterstrike—not with missiles, but with diplomacy. But don’t expect Kiev or its NATO patrons to bite. They’re not looking for peace. They’re looking for an opening shot in the next round,” Rasmussen emphasizes.

Putin’s latest talks initiative follows several ceasefire proposals over the past month. According to Moscow, Ukrainian forces not only ignored the proposed truce but launched large-scale attacks on Russian territory. Nevertheless, Russia maintains that it is open to serious negotiations aimed at addressing the root causes of the conflict. When asked about Volodymyr Zelensky’s potential response, Rasmussen pointed to both internal and external pressure that might prevent any meaningful dialogue. “[Zelensky] is not going to accept this because he’s got pressure from Western backers. Maybe not so much of the US, but definitely from France. Germany and the UK, primarily the UK on that. And he has pressures to continue this conflict from his ultra-nationalists within the Kiev government and military.”

With the conflict grinding on, Rasmussen sees little chance of immediate diplomatic progress. “I do not picture him accepting a negotiation at all. Maybe I’m wrong. I hope I’m wrong, but I don’t think it’s going to happen.” He concluded with a direct appeal to American leadership, suggesting the United States could play a decisive role in halting the conflict. “President Trump needs to get involved. They need the US can end this. They need to cut support to Ukraine. And they need to get the Europeans on board.” As the world watches to see whether Ukraine will respond to Moscow’s latest proposal, skepticism remains high among some analysts about the willingness—or ability—of Kiev to pursue direct peace talks with no preconditions.

Read more …

“..this is where the Europeans are just absolutely nuts… that if they wanted to impose sanctions that would go after the oil deliveries by Russia, that will automatically, literally overnight, raise the prices that would actually benefit Russia and hurt the Europeans.”

• Zelensky Will Reject Putin’s Proposal in Order to Stay ALIVE (Sp.)

As Russian President Vladimir Putin publicly proposed renewed peace talks with Ukraine to be held in Istanbul on May 15, accompanied by an expressed willingness to negotiate without preconditions, a former senior US security analyst has offered a stark assessment of the political pressure facing Volodymyr Zelensky. “Zelensky will reject Putin’s proposal in order to stay alive,” warned Michael Maloof, a former senior security policy analyst at the Pentagon, in a blunt analysis of the Ukrainian leader’s predicament.Moscow’s latest offer comes in the wake of what it claims were several attacks by Ukrainian forces even during Russia’s proposed Victory Day ceasefire. Despite these incidents, Putin has insisted that Russia remains open to talks aimed at achieving a lasting peace and addressing the root causes of the conflict.

“Zelensky does not want to meet alone with Mr. Putin,” Maloof explained. “And I think that if he decides to go ahead and negotiate something, and first of all, I question whether he’ll be ALLOWED to do that because of internal politics… I think the Azov* group and his military will rebel,” he emphasized. “Putin has basically put Zelensky in a really tight position. Between that proverbial rock and hard place,” Maloof stressed. Moscow’s proposal has stirred debate globally, particularly in Europe, where the political appetite for reconciliation with Russia remains minimal. Maloof was sharply critical of the European approach, describing it as counterproductive and self-destructive.“Turn that down, because that’s not the way, the direction they wanted to go, because the Europeans are very anxious and interested in wanting to pursue their antagonistic approach toward Russia, not only in containing, but trying to overthrow the government and wanting to impose these even additional sanctions,” he said.

He argued that despite thousands of sanctions, Russia’s economy has adapted: “I think Russia is basically immune now because… they’ve had over 20,000 sanctions already imposed. And yet they want to impose some more that are not working.” According to Maloof, Western policies have backfired, particularly on energy: “And this is where the Europeans are just absolutely nuts… that if they wanted to impose sanctions that would go after the oil deliveries by Russia, that will automatically, literally overnight, raise the prices that would actually benefit Russia and hurt the Europeans.”

He did not hold back in his criticism: “They just want to continue a conflict with Russia that, frankly, particularly the UK, that has been going on for almost 250 years. Their antagonism toward Russia is historic.” Maloof pointed to recent international events to underscore Russia’s continued global standing: “If they thought that their new sanctions were going to isolate Russia, I think the Victory Day parade demonstrated, as well as the BRICS conference last October in Kazan, demonstrated that Russia is not isolated. In fact, it has drawn the support and the backing of more than half the people world, from the global south, all of Asia.” As the proposed date for talks nears, all eyes will be on Kiev and its Western allies, whose response—or silence—may define the next stage of the war.

Read more …

Keeping score: Hungary, Serbia, Slovakia and now Bulgaria.

• Ukraine’s Cause Is ‘Doomed’ – Bulgarian President (RT)

Bulgarian President Rumen Radev has openly criticized the EU’s continued military support for Ukraine, warning that Kiev’s path to victory against Russia is “doomed.” He made the remarks in a Facebook post on Friday, timed with Russia’s Victory Day celebrations in Moscow marking the 80th anniversary of the Soviet victory over Nazi Germany in World War II. Radev called it “the tragedy of our time” that decades after World War II, international disputes in Europe “are once again being resolved by military means.” “Europe does not have its own vision for the end of the [Ukraine conflict] and the establishment of peace, but continues to invest in a cause that, in my opinion, is doomed,” the Bulgarian leader wrote. He added that “pouring more weapons” into Ukraine would not bring peace closer, calling it a “utopian hope” that leads instead to “the opposite – even more victims, destruction and lost territory every day.”

Radev also questioned the EU’s goals in prolonging the Ukraine conflict. “Is Europe afraid of the return of peace? Because the return of peace also means returning public attention to the crises that are smoldering within our countries and societies,” he stated, stressing that Europe must learn the lessons of World War II, abandon its militaristic approach, and focus instead on diplomatic solutions. “Europe must remember that unity and prosperity were made possible by joint efforts to eradicate the rivalries, hatred, and disputes that led to the Second World War,” he said.

Radev has opposed sending military aid to Kiev and is one of the few EU leaders to speak out against Brussels’ hardline stance against Moscow. He previously warned against prolonging the conflict, dismissing the idea of Ukraine defeating Russia as “impossible,” while urging for peace. Russia has warned against Western military aid to Ukraine, saying it would only drag out the conflict. Moscow offered a 72-hour ceasefire from midnight May 8 to midnight May 11 to mark Victory Day, describing the offer as a humanitarian gesture aimed at paving the way for direct peace talks without preconditions. Ukraine dismissed the overture as “manipulation” and demanded a 30-day ceasefire instead. The Russian Defense Ministry said Ukraine launched multiple attacks of various kinds, including four attempted cross-border incursions into the Russian regions of Kursk and Belgorod, following Russia’s ceasefire declaration.

Orban

Read more …

“Now, Galloway says, London is talking about putting 20,000-30,000 troops in Ukraine, a move that would constitute “an act of war against Russia.” “That’s a declaration, literally, of national suicide…that presupposes a Russian nuclear response that would end the existence of the British people”.

“..that military-industrial complex is fine when it comes to selling unnecessary and very expensive kits, airplanes and so on, to countries, I won’t name them, who really don’t know how to use them, have no need for them and if they were ever forced to use them, they wouldn’t last for long…”

• George Galloway: UK Troops in Ukraine Would Constitute ‘National Suicide’ (Sp.)

From WWII’s forgotten heroes to the UK’s ‘suicidal’ Ukraine policy, seasoned politician, Workers’ Party of Britain leader and prolific political commentator George Galloway doesn’t hold back in his interview with Sputnik. Without the Soviet people, entire nations would have been wiped out, and survivors would be speaking German, Galloway said. The “extraordinary lengths” to which British leaders have been ready to go to drive a wedge between erstwhile WWII allies Russia and Britain comes down to rivalry and jealousy, Galloway says. The British government wrecked the 2022 Russia-Ukraine peace deal in Istanbul as the conflict was just getting started, and proved more than willing to freeze its own seniors to death to grant Zelensky 1.5 billion pounds in aid, the prolific commentator recalled. Now, Galloway says, London is talking about putting 20,000-30,000 troops in Ukraine, a move that would constitute “an act of war against Russia.”

“That’s a declaration, literally, of national suicide…that presupposes a Russian nuclear response that would end the existence of the British people” and effectively put an end to “our island’s story,” Galloway emphasized, when asked what would happen if Britain used a Ukraine troop deployment as a nuclear tripwire. The UK can’t even be sure that it’s in control of its own deterrent, Galloway said, much less rely on support from the US. “I remind you that Britain no longer has even a steel industry,” the veteran statesman said, commenting on the glaring gap between the government’s loud ‘bark’ and its actual military ‘bite’. “The only piece of manufacturing that you could readily identify on the British industrial landscape is the military-industrial complex and that military-industrial complex is fine when it comes to selling unnecessary and very expensive kits, airplanes and so on, to countries, I won’t name them, who really don’t know how to use them, have no need for them and if they were ever forced to use them, they wouldn’t last for long.

That is the kind of racket that we are involved in. But when it comes to the production of shells, when it come to the protection of tanks, comes to production of drones that we discussed earlier, we’re not at the races.” “It’s as obvious as the nose on your face when you think about it that without the Americans there is no NATO, without the American army there is no military threat,” the veteran statesman said. A US withdrawal from Europe would force “a reckoning” in Western Europe and Ukraine, resulting in a speedy negotiated settlement. As long as the US remains, and the root “fundamental causes of the conflict remain unresolved” (NATO expansion), the meatgrinder will continue, Galloway laments.

Read more …

They still count on Trump.

• Ukraine’s European Backers Can’t Replace US Military Aid – NYT (RT)

Ukraine’s European sponsors lack the manufacturing capacity to replace US arms supplies to Kiev, the New York Times wrote on Saturday. The administration of US President Donald Trump has shifted from spending billions on supporting Ukraine to focusing on domestic issues. It has also signaled to its European NATO allies that Washington has no interest in propping up the military bloc alone. The NYT noted that the US has not announced a new arms package for Ukraine for more than 120 days. While the Pentagon still has $3.85 billion in armaments earmarked for Kiev under the previous administration, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth declined to answer when asked if the arms would be sent to Ukraine, the newspaper wrote.

Kiev is running low on long-range missiles, artillery and, most of all, ballistic aid defense systems – which are mostly manufactured in the US – the NYT wrote, citing a Ukrainian official. While European leaders and investors appear willing to pump more funds into arms manufacturing, “industry executives and experts predict it will take a decade to get assembly lines up to speed,” according to the newspaper. This comes on the backdrop of European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen’s proposal to mobilize up to €800 billion for military spending in the EU, citing threats from Russia and the inability to rely on long-term US support. The Trump administration has consistently demanded that the European NATO states increase their annual military spending to 5% of GDP, calling the longstanding 2% target insufficient.

Russian officials have condemned the steps being taken in Europe toward militarization, and dismissed claims that Moscow intends to attack either the EU or NATO. Moreover, Russia has expressed concern that, rather than supporting the US peace initiatives for the Ukraine conflict, the EU is instead gearing up for war with Russia. Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov previously noted that the EU is “becoming militarized at a record pace,” and said that there was now “very little difference” between the EU and NATO.

Read more …

“..incoming Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt warned against banning the AfD. Dobrindt has argued that the party should be made irrelevant through good governance rather than drastic measures. He also insisted on a discussion over the reasons that the AfD has risen to prominence..”

• German Spies Grant AfD Reprieve (RT)

Germany’s domestic intelligence agency has temporarily suspended its classification of the Alternative for Germany (AfD) party as a “confirmed right-wing extremist” group, pending the outcome of a legal appeal. The Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV) suspended the label on Thursday and removed a press release about the designation from its website. The classification, which was announced by the BfV last week, was based on a comprehensive report alleging that the AfD promotes policies excluding individuals with migrant backgrounds, particularly Muslims, from full societal participation. The BfV claimed that the party “disregards human dignity” and uses terms such as “knife-wielding migrants” to ascribe violent tendencies to non-European ethnic groups.

The AfD leadership condemned the decision as “a severe blow to German democracy” and filed a lawsuit in a Cologne court, arguing that the classification was politically motivated and lacked sufficient evidence. As a result, the BfV temporarily withdrew the classification, but said it would monitor the party as a “suspected case” of an extremist organization. The suspended designation would have empowered the BfV to carry out broad surveillance of the AfD’s activities. The lower-level designation also allows surveillance, but under stricter judicial oversight. AfD co-leaders Alice Weidel and Tino Chrupalla welcomed the temporary suspension, calling it “a first important step” that will help “counter the accusation of right-wing extremism.”

The ‘extremist’ label was met with skepticism by many German politicians. Then-German Chancellor Olaf Scholz and incoming Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt warned against banning the AfD. Dobrindt has argued that the party should be made irrelevant through good governance rather than drastic measures. He also insisted on a discussion over the reasons that the AfD has risen to prominence, referring to recent polls indicating that it has become the most popular party in Germany, reaching 26% support. The AfD’s surge has often been attributed to public frustration over the immigration policies of the mainstream parties, as well as economic challenges and perceived government ineffectiveness.

Read more …

“In the West, history is dead because it is used to bury crimes past and present..”

• Why History Is Alive In Russia But Dead In The West (SCF)

Eighty years after the defeat of Nazi Germany, this week the world witnessed a spectacular, solemn and joyous event to commemorate that historic achievement. The victory parade in Moscow’s Red Square was a glorious pageant incomparable to anywhere else. Rightly so, because the defeat of Nazi Germany on May 9, 1945, was largely the result of heroic sacrifices of the Soviet and Russian people. The annual commemoration remains as poignant and proud to Russians as ever. Russian President Vladimir Putin was accompanied by many international dignitaries this year to observe the parade. Significantly, with honorable exceptions, Western leaders were absent, prohibited by their toxic Russophobic propaganda and historical contradictions. China’s President, Xi Jinping, was prominent in the Red Square tribune. Again, rightly so.

The Russian and Chinese nations suffered the most in the Second World War. The worst military conflagration in human history is estimated at a death toll of around 80 million. More than half of all those victims were among the Soviet and Chinese people. Victory Day on May 9 is usually commemorated as signifying the end of World War II. But Nazi Germany’s Axis partner Imperial Japan was not defeated until August 1945. Imperial Japan’s war in China was conducted with the same genocidal barbarity as Nazi Germany’s in the Soviet Union. It is profoundly revealing that the end of World War II is largely now a muted event in the Western nations of the United States, Britain, and the rest of Europe. It is eerie that such a world-shattering episode has become an increasingly non-descriptive date in the official Western calendar. By contrast, in Russia, the anniversary of the Great Patriotic War’s victory is more relevant and revered than ever.

The difference is explicable. The so-called “Allied victory” over Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan was always something of a charade. Eighty years on, the charade is exposed more than ever to the point where it has become untenable and embarrassing for the Western states. The Soviet Red Army and the Russian people won the war against the Nazi Third Reich with great human sacrifice. The defeat of Japan was brought about by the United States in a cowardly and despicable act of genocide when it dropped two atomic bombs on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The United States and Britain, the Soviet Union’s nominal allies during World War II, made a marginal contribution to defeating Nazi Germany. The indisputable facts that the Nazi Wehrmacht lost 80 per cent of its total casualties fighting against the Soviet Union, and the raising of the Hammer and Sickle over Hitler’s Berlin bunker are testaments to who were the pivotal victors.

No sooner had the Nazi regime been vanquished than the Western powers began their acts of treachery against the Soviet Union. World War II immediately transitioned into the Cold War with the United States and Britain rehabilitating remnants of the Nazi regime. The dropping of the atomic bombs on Japan was not so much about crushing the Japanese enemy as committing a calculated act of terror to intimidate the Soviet Union. As author Ron Ridenour recounts in his book, The Russian Peace Threat, the Americans and British had covert, diabolical plans to attack the Soviet Union with atomic weapons in the aftermath of World War II. However, the subsequent development of the bomb in 1949 by the Soviets prevented the Western powers from carrying out their annihilation of Russia.

[..] This week, at its pale imitation of a “victory parade” in London, the British royals, politicians and military were joined by Ukrainian NeoNazi forces waving their odious Wolf Hook flags. In essence, the four-year proxy war in Ukraine against Russia, fully instigated and weaponized by the Western powers, is but a continuation of World War Two. This time, however, there is no pretense about whose side the Western powers are on. In the West, history is dead because it is used to bury crimes past and present. For Russia and other people who seek the truth and genuine international peace, history is very much alive and worth fighting for.

Read more …

The end of Nazism in Africa took quite a bit longer. And the Nazism there was not German.

“If a system as monstrous as Nazism could be crushed, then surely the British, French, Portuguese, and Belgian empires—those well-dressed relatives of fascism—could be kicked out too..”

• The Soviet Union Defeated More Than Just The Nazis In 1945 (Ibrahim)

Victory Day, marked every year in May, is remembered for the defeat of Nazi Germany by the Red Army of the Soviet Union and its allies in 1945. The world saw fascism crumble under the weight of mass resistance, both military and moral. But while Europe swept its streets and held its parades, across the African continent, colonized peoples watched with a different kind of hope. For them, Victory Day was not just about the fall of Hitler. It was about the idea that brutal regimes could fall at all. That whitewashed myths of European superiority, fortified by tanks and treaties, could be buried in the rubble of Berlin. Africa in 1945 was still largely in chains. From the deserts of North Africa to the forests of Central Africa, Europeans governed through coercion, racial hierarchy, and theft dressed in the language of “civilization.” And so, when fascism lost, Africa’s revolutionaries leaned in.

If a system as monstrous as Nazism could be crushed, then surely the British, French, Portuguese, and Belgian empires—those well-dressed relatives of fascism—could be kicked out too. Victory Day planted a powerful seed: the idea that no system, however armored in ideology or bullets, is eternal. Colonialism and fascism were not just neighbors on the historical timeline. They were ideological cousins who often shared the same tailor. Both relied on military terror, racial supremacy, and the economic logic that some people existed to be ruled, and others to rule. In Algeria, France perpetuated forced labor, mass internments, and massacres. In Egypt, the British occupation entrenched inequality and racial hierarchy until the 1952 Free Officers Revolution ended King Farouk’s reign. In the Congo, Belgian rule left a legacy of mass violence and extraction so extreme that a UN report in 2020 called it a “colonial genocide.” Mozambique, Kenya, and Angola were ruled by the gun, not by consent.

African leaders like Kwame Nkrumah, Julius Nyerere, Samora Machel, Gamal Abdel Nasser, and the National Liberation Front (FLN) in Algeria didn’t need textbooks to define fascism. They lived it. Nkrumah declared in 1960: “The colonial territories are not free… unless we consider colonialism a form of democratic rule. But colonialism is the rule of a foreign minority over the majority.” Victory Day helped ignite African resistance in very real and practical ways. It wasn’t long after the Nazi defeat that uprisings, protests, and movements surged across the continent. In 1947, the West African National Secretariat was formed in London, pushing for decolonization. In 1952, Egypt exploded with revolution, as young officers led by Gamal Abdel Nasser overthrew the British-controlled monarchy. In 1954, the FLN launched its full-scale revolt against France. Ghana gained independence in 1957 under Kwame Nkrumah, declaring not just Ghana’s freedom, but that of all Africa.

“The independence of Ghana is meaningless unless it is linked to the total liberation of Africa,” Nkrumah famously declared. His words were not mere rhetoric—they were a blueprint. That same year, thousands of Kenyans were locked in British detention camps during the Mau Mau uprising. In 1960, 69 unarmed protestors were gunned down in Sharpeville, South Africa. In 1961, South African communists, African nationalists, and Pan-Africanists formed Umkhonto we Sizwe. In 1963, the Organization of African Unity was born in Addis Ababa with a charter committed to the total liberation of the continent. While the so-called “free world” supported colonial powers—France in Algeria, Britain in Kenya and Malaya, Portugal in Mozambique and Angola—the USSR made its position clear: the war against fascism did not end in 1945. It had merely shifted geography.

Moscow supported African and Arab liberation movements with military training, arms shipments, medical aid, diplomatic backing at the United Nations, and ideological education. The Soviet Union trained fighters at military academies in Tashkent, Odessa, and Moscow. Cuba, a close Soviet ally, sent over 36,000 troops to Angola between 1975 and 1988 to help defeat South African apartheid forces during the Angolan Civil War. Soviet arms were sent to Algeria, Mozambique, Angola, Guinea-Bissau, and Zimbabwe. Leaders like Agostinho Neto, Amílcar Cabral, Samora Machel, and Oliver Tambo were all beneficiaries of Soviet logistical and ideological support.

Read more …

[t]he United States isn’t required to get permission from Israel to make some type of arrangement that would get the Houthis from firing on our ships.”

• Trump’s Houthi Deal Channels America First, Leaving Out Allies (JTN)

President Donald Trump’s recent ceasefire agreement with the Yemen-based Houthis exempted U.S. ships from their strikes in the Red Sea, but excluded U.S. allies, a provision that has many nations that refused to support Washington’s efforts livid. The Houthis are one of three main combatants in the ongoing Yemeni Civil War and occupy a sliver of highly strategic territory on the Red Sea coast near the Bab al Mandeb, called the “Gate of Tears” in the Arab world. Their forces have, since the outbreak of the Israel-Gaza War, conducted missile strikes and seizures against vessels traveling the Red Sea in support of Hamas. The Houthis, also called Ansarallah, famously withstood joint operations from the U.S. and UK under the Biden administration. President Joe Biden tried but failed to organize an international coalition to keep the Red Sea open. Upon taking office,

Trump vowed decisive action against the Houthis and the U.S. largely acted unilaterally, albeit with some Israeli support. Israel destroyed the Sanaa Airport in Yemen on May 7, leaving burning aircraft and cratered landing strips in two days of retaliation for a ballistic missile attack by the Houthis that landed near Ben-Gurion Airport in Tel-Aviv. Trump announced this week that he had reached a separate agreement with Yemen’s Houthi rebels to end their attacks on American-flagged vessels in the Red Sea after intense U.S. and Israeli bombing raids led them to reach out.”They just don’t want to fight, and we will honor that,” Trump said. “We will stop the bombings, and they have capitulated. But more importantly, we will take their word. They say they will not be blowing up ships anymore.”

But the agreement between the United States and the Houthis does not include any provisions requiring that the Houthis stop their attacks on Israel itself, an omission that has led a bipartisan group of lawmakers to warn Trump that it “sends the wrong message to both our allies and adversaries: that U.S. resolve is negotiable and that aggression against our allies will go unpunished by the United States,” according to Jewish Insider. U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee, a strong supporter of that country, pushed back on such criticisms and told Israeli news outlets that “[t]he United States isn’t required to get permission from Israel to make some type of arrangement that would get the Houthis from firing on our ships.” “There’s 700,000 Americans living in Israel. If the Houthis want to continue doing things to Israel and they hurt an American, then it becomes our business,” he added.

“This is the President that leads by example, and he leads by force, and he knows when to use American strength and American power to secure deals for peace and for not just for us, but for the world and so absolutely, I think again, this is a stunning example of the President’s leadership on the world stage, delivering for the American people,” said White House press secretary Kush Desai on the Just the News, No Noise television show on Friday. Israel struck a defiant tone after Trump eased out of the conflict, with Netanyahu saying “Israel will defend itself by itself.” The Houthis, however, called it a “victory that separates American support for the temporary entity and a failure for Netanyahu, who must resign.”The Omani foreign minister confirmed the details of the ceasefire, which appears limited entirely to the Houthis and the United States.

“In the future, neither side will target the other, including American vessels, in the Red Sea and Bab al-Mandab Strait, ensuring freedom of navigation and the smooth flow of international commercial shipping,” Omani Foreign Minister Badr Albusaidi said. The Omani announcement appeared to confirm that the UK, which assisted efforts against the Houthis in earlier operations, as well as Israel, would not benefit from the Houthi agreement. Previously leaked messages between members of the administration from Signalgate seem to suggest that Vice President JD Vance got his way by leaving out the Europeans and other American allies in the cold. “@Pete Hegseth if you think we should do it let’s go,” Vance wrote in the chat. “I just hate bailing Europe out again.” Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth appeared to share a similar sentiment toward America’s European allies, but highlighted their inability to contribute in a meaningful way.

“VP: I fully share your loathing of European freeloading. It’s PATHETIC,” Hegseth replied. “But Mike is correct, we are the only ones on the planet (on our side of the ledger) who can do this. Nobody else even close. Question is timing. I feel like now is as good a time as any, given POTUS directive to reopen shipping lanes. I think we should go; but POTUS still retains 24 hours of decision space.”

Read more …

“Lee said the judges “have presumed to run the military, the civil service, foreign aid, and HR departments across the Executive Branch—blatantly unconstitutional overreach.”

• Justice Roberts Admits It’s His Job to Rein in the Judicial Insurrection (O’Neil)

The deep state and its allies have launched a judicial insurrection against President Donald Trump, and Chief Justice John Roberts effectively just admitted he’s not doing his job to stop it. Roberts made a rare public statement back in March, criticizing Trump and other Republicans who have suggested impeaching judges to prevent them from taking it upon themselves to make national policy through injunctions. Yet Roberts refused to address the underlying issue, and he dodged again in public remarks Wednesday.“What do you think of these calls for impeachment of judges based on the decisions that they’ve made?” Judge Lawrence Vilardo asked Roberts in an interview in Buffalo, New York. “Impeachment is not how you register disagreement with decisions,” the chief justice said, repeating the substance of his comments in March.

“That’s what you’re there for,” Vilardo responded. “That’s what we’re there for,” Roberts agreed. Again, Roberts overlooked the underlying issue. Republicans aren’t calling for the impeachment of justices because they disagree with one particular decision—they’re exasperated because judge after judge after judge is effectively usurping the president’s authority by issuing so many nationwide injunctions. When woke bureaucrats stared down the barrel of a second Trump term, they strategized about how best to tie the new president’s hands. Public-sector unions made new collective bargaining agreements to protect work-from-home perks. Employees changed their titles to hide “diversity, equity, and inclusion.” Perhaps most importantly, bureaucrats and their allies outside the administration geared up to sue the Trump administration, targeting friendly judges.

Sure enough, the ink was barely dry on the president’s executive orders rooting woke ideology out of the government before public-sector unions (which represent federal bureaucrats) and leftist groups had taken the new administration to court. Many of these groups also hand-picked jurisdictions with judges more likely to give them the injunctions they seek. According to the Congressional Research Service, judges issued 86 nationwide injunctions against President Trump in his first administration, with 36 of them involving immigration and 10 involving federal funding related to immigration. By contrast, judges issued only 28 nationwide injunctions against Biden. Between Jan. 20 and March 27 of this year, judges issued 17 injunctions—more than half of the number in Biden’s entire term.

Many of the unions and leftist groups filing these lawsuits also staffed and advised the Biden administration, as I expose in my book, “The Woketopus: The Dark Money Cabal Manipulating the Federal Government.” The ACLU, for instance, pushed the Biden administration to open the border, and now the ACLU is filing lawsuits to block Trump’s border policies. The judges—many of them appointed by Democrats, surprise surprise!—have taken the opportunity to issue “nationwide injunctions.” While temporary injunctions allow a judge to protect one of the parties in a case from harm while the court considers the case, judges have weaponized this power, claiming to protect people across the country who aren’t parties to the suit.This practice of “judge shopping” enables activist groups to succeed in early stages of litigation before ultimately failing when the case reaches the Supreme Court.

This gives judges a chance to carry out a judicial insurrection. It also gives the case the appearance of success, motivating the leftist groups and their supporters, while tying up the government in the meantime—all in pursuit of a vain claim. For instance, judges blocked Trump’s order removing gender ideology from the military and ordered the government to re-hire probationary employees after they had been fired.The Supreme Court rightly struck down these injunctions, but the judges only handled them on a case-by-case basis. Judges have blocked the State Department’s move to restructure the U.S. Agency for International Development, ordered the administration to halt its freeze on federal spending, demanded the government restore deleted websites, and more. This deluge of injunctions calls for a robust response from the nation’s highest court—or, at the very least, direction from the man who heads the entire U.S. judicial system, Chief Justice Roberts.

Roberts only got involved after Trump expressed exasperation over the injunctions. Trump has pledged to comply with the judges’ orders, though he has rightly contested them in court. He responded angrily to a judge’s order directing him to turn around planes carrying alleged members of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua, however. The president noted that he won the 2024 presidential election in part by promising to oppose illegal immigration.“I’m just doing what the VOTERS wanted me to do,” Trump wrote. “This judge, like many of the Crooked Judges’ I am forced to appear before, should be IMPEACHED!!!” Rep. Brandon Gill, R-Texas, introduced articles of impeachment against the judge in question, but Trump and other Republicans have taken efforts to address the systemic issue, as well.

The House Judiciary Committee held a hearing on the injunctions last month. Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, introduced the Restraining Judicial Insurrectionists Act of 2025, establishing a three-judge panel to swiftly review injunctions or other forms of declaratory relief against the president and the executive branch, with a quick appeal process to the Supreme Court. Lee said the judges “have presumed to run the military, the civil service, foreign aid, and HR departments across the Executive Branch—blatantly unconstitutional overreach.” Meanwhile, Trump issued a memo in March directing the heads of executive agencies to request that judges follow the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(c), which requires the party requesting an injunction to put up “security in an amount that the court considers proper to pay the costs and damages sustained by any party found to have been wrongfully enjoined or restrained.” Rule 65(c) may not apply to every legal case, however.

Each of these efforts addresses one aspect of the problem, and Lee’s bill would likely address the issue most effectively. However, there is one person who has authority over the U.S. judiciary and could direct judges to be more circumspect before they issue nationwide injunctions that effectively make policy. His name is… drumroll please… John Roberts. When Roberts says reversing lower court mistakes is “what we’re there for,” he’s exactly right. In fact, as head of the judiciary, addressing major nationwide issues like the judicial insurrection is what he’s there for, specifically. Perhaps, instead of complaining about Trump’s call to impeach judges, Roberts could solve the underlying problem himself by outlining how judges should act when considering temporary injunctions. If he wants Trump and others to stop talking about impeaching judges, maybe he should step up and address the root problem.

Read more …

Roberts!

• Federal Judge Halts All Large-Scale Firings by Trump Administration (Turley)

Many of us have been waiting for the arguments on May 15th before the Supreme Court in the birthright citizenship case to see if the justices will put long-needed limits on district courts issuing national injunctions. Critics object that Democratic groups are going to blue states in open forum-shopping to secure such injunctions from favorable judges — a record number of injunctions for an Administration that only just passed its 100th day mark. Those complaints are likely to only increase after the new order by District Judge Susan Illston in San Francisco. It is arguably the most expansive yet in its scope and assertion of judicial power. At the request of unions and other groups, Judge Illston (a Clinton appointee) imposed a temporary restraining order (TRO) for 14 days to stop the Trump administration from carrying out large-scale layoffs and program closures across two dozen agencies. For those calling for district courts to be restrained, Judge Illston’s TRO (which often leads to a preliminary injunction) will seem like another court ruling with total abandon.

Trump is carrying out his pledge to dramatically downsize the government, including targeting waste and unnecessary or superfluous programs. One can certainly disagree with that judgment. The unions and Democrats opposed the pledge during the campaign. However, after the public elected him, the question is whether a single district judge has the ability to stop a president from implementing such policies. Unions insist that Congress set up a specific process for the federal government to reorganize itself and that that process is not being followed. Specifically, Illston is arguing that the process includes consultation with Congress. The law, 5 U.S.C. § 903 states in part: (a) Whenever the President, after investigation, finds that changes in the organization of agencies are necessary to carry out any policy set forth in section 901(a) of this title, he shall prepare a reorganization plan specifying the reorganizations he finds are necessary. Any plan may provide for—

(1) the transfer of the whole or a part of an agency, or of the whole or a part of the functions thereof, to the jurisdiction and control of another agency;
(2) the abolition of all or a part of the functions of an agency, except that no enforcement function or statutory program shall be abolished by the plan;
(3) the consolidation or coordination of the whole or a part of an agency, or of the whole or a part of the functions thereof, with the whole or a part of another agency or the functions thereof;
(4) the consolidation or coordination of part of an agency or the functions thereof with another part of the same agency or the functions thereof;
(5) the authorization of an officer to delegate any of his functions; or
(6) the abolition of the whole or a part of an agency which agency or part does not have, or on the taking effect of the reorganization plan will not have, any functions.

The President shall transmit the plan (bearing an identification number) to the Congress together with a declaration that, with respect to each reorganization included in the plan, he has found that the reorganization is necessary to carry out any policy set forth in section 901(a) of this title. The law has always occupied a gray area since a president has the authority under Article II to run the executive branch and remove individuals. Judge Illston recognizes that inherent authority as a “prerogative of presidents to pursue new policy priorities and to imprint their stamp on the federal government. But to make large-scale overhauls of federal agencies, any president must enlist the help of his coequal branch and partner, the Congress.” The lawsuit was filed last week, and the court issued its order not long after arguments.

Judge Illston did acknowledge that two courts of appeal recently rendered decisions against jurisdiction in such cases in Widakuswara v. Lake, No. 25- 5144, 2025 WL 1288817 (D.C. Cir. May 3, 2025) and Maryland v. U.S. Dep’t of Agriculture, No. 25- 1248, 2025 WL 1073657 (4th Cir. Apr. 9, 2025). The court notes that those decisions are not binding on a San Francisco district court and rejects their value as “persuasive authority.” Judge Illston declared that “Tthe [sic] Fourth Circuit offers no reasoning for its conclusion that the district court lacked jurisdiction, and this Court finds the dissenting opinion in that case more robust and more persuasive. ” It similarly embraced the dissent in the D.C. Circuit case.

Danielle Leonard, a lawyer representing the challengers, told the court that Trump is destroying the government, insisting, “It’s an ouroboros: the snake eating its tail.” For critics, it may look more like Article III devouring Article II. The order will only heighten the pressures leading into the May 15th arguments in Washington. It will also increase pressure on Congress to move forward with legislation designed to rein in district courts in the use of national or universal injunctions.

Read more …

Shake AND stir.

• Trump Eyes Suspending Habeas Corpus In Border Invasion (Margolis)

Joe Biden inherited a secure border in 2021—and by the time President Trump returned to office this January, he was handed a full-blown crisis. In just a few months, Trump has made remarkable strides in restoring order, ramping up deportations, and plugging the holes Biden left wide open. His administration has already developed innovative, cost-effective strategies to speed up removals. And now, it appears the next move could be the boldest yet—one that’s almost guaranteed to trigger a full-scale political meltdown on the left.

Speaking with reporters this week, Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy Stephen Miller confirmed that the Trump administration is actively considering invoking the Constitution’s allowance for suspending habeas corpus — the right to challenge unlawful detention — in the context of the ongoing border invasion. “Well, the Constitution is clear and that, of course, is the supreme law of the land,” Miller began. “The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus can be suspended in a time of invasion. So, it is an option we’re actively looking at.”

Miller made clear that the move is not being taken lightly, but it may be necessary to protect national security and uphold the rule of law. “A lot of it depends on whether the courts do the right thing or not,” he said, referencing the frequent obstruction from activist judges who have long interfered with immigration enforcement. He pointed to a key piece of legislation, the Immigration and Nationality Act, which includes what’s known as “jurisdiction stripping.” “At the end of the day, Congress passed a body of law known as the Immigration and Nationality Act, which stripped Article III courts — that’s the judicial branch — of jurisdiction over immigration cases,” Miller explained.

Many Americans, he noted, are unaware of just how far Congress has gone to prevent judicial overreach in immigration matters. “Congress actually passed what’s called jurisdiction stripping legislation. It passed a number of laws that say that the Article III courts aren’t even allowed to be involved in immigration cases,” he said.Miller offered a concrete example involving the Temporary Protected Status (TPS) program. “By statute, the courts are stripped of jurisdiction from overruling a presidential determination or a secretarial determination on TPS,” he said. “So, when Secretary Noem terminated TPS for the illegals that Biden flew into the country — when the court stepped in, they were violating explicit language that Congress had enacted saying they have no jurisdiction.”

The broader issue, Miller argued, is not merely an executive-judicial conflict, but a judicial rebellion against Congress itself. “The courts aren’t just at war with the executive branch, the courts are at war—these radical rogue judges—with the legislative branch as well,” Miller stated. All of this, Miller said, will factor into President Trump’s final decision on whether to suspend habeas corpus for illegal aliens—a move certain to ignite a firestorm on the left. As the border crisis continues to spiral, the administration appears increasingly determined to push back—not only against illegal immigration itself, but against the institutional forces that have helped sustain it. Will Democrats defend national sovereignty, or once again side with the chaos? That question may soon be answered.

Read more …

Makes sense. Though not sure the new Pope agrees.

• Trump Redirects Funds From Illegals to Homeless Veterans (Salgado)

Donald Trump has redirected taxpayer money from housing illegal aliens to housing homeless veterans, again putting Americans first. The president signed an executive order Friday establishing a center for housing homeless veterans in the Los Angeles area, and whatever funding has been used by the federal government to house illegal aliens is now to go to this center for veterans. Trump also started a voucher program and announced reform at the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), expanding medical services for vets and investigating corruption and misconduct from the previous administration. Finally, our veterans are a priority for the federal government. “Our Nation’s security, prosperity, and freedom would not be possible without our veterans. Many service members paid the ultimate sacrifice. Many others bear visible and invisible wounds from their service,” Trump’s executive order stated. “Too many veterans are homeless in America. Each veteran deserves our gratitude.”

Unfortunately, Trump continued, “The Federal Government has not always treated veterans like the heroes they are.” The Biden administration, in particular, “treated them shamefully, failing veterans when they needed help most and betraying the taxpayers who rightfully expect better,” by prioritizing lawbreaking foreigners instead. The EO specifically cited the West Los Angeles Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Center, once a thriving community for housing disabled veterans, but gradually leased off to various entities, including a private school and the baseball team of the University of California, Los Angeles. Speaking of Democrat-run LA, it topped the list of American cities with the largest homeless veteran populations, with 3,000 last year.

But no more. Trump is establishing the National Center for Warrior Independence on that LA campus and is coordinating with multiple agencies to try to ensure that not only California veterans but also homeless veterans from other areas will be able to move to and live there. Significantly, the Health and Human Services and Housing and Urban Development secretaries are to help “ensure that funds that may have been spent on housing or other services for illegal aliens are redirected to construct, establish, and maintain this National Center for Warrior Independence.”

The EO also announced an initiative to “restore self-sufficiency and the warrior ethos among homeless veterans through any guidance, requirements, or services needed to ensure that homeless veterans can access housing, receive substance abuse or addiction treatment, and return to productive work and community engagement.” Furthermore, the Biden administration’s decision to rehire the VA employees who were previously fired for misconduct is to be rectified, and an investigation is to be made into any unaddressed misconduct. This executive order from Trump is a prime example of America First policies, and hopefully will provide much-needed help for our brave veterans who were disabled and/or have fallen on hard times.

Read more …

“I was a young theology student, and he was a superior of the Religious Order of St. Augustine..”

• Deep State, Deep Church: Welcome to the New Pope! (Pacini)

The author of this article personally knew the newly elected Pope Leo XIV, formerly Robert Prevost. Those were different times: I was a young theology student, and he was a superior of the Religious Order of St. Augustine. I have fond memories of him, of pleasant moments spent together and activities we did together. I can only wish him all the best. Now, however, let us move on to serious matters.

The first US pope and a member of the Order of Saint Augustine, he is the second American pontiff after Francis. He was born on September 14, 1955, in Chicago, Illinois, to Louis Marius Prevost, of French and Italian descent, and Mildred Martínez, of Spanish descent. He has two brothers, Louis Martín and John Joseph. He spent his childhood and adolescence in the United States, studying first at the Minor Seminary of the Augustinian Fathers and then at Villanova University in Pennsylvania, where he graduated in mathematics in 1977 and studied philosophy. On September 1 of the same year, he entered the novitiate of the Order of Saint Augustine in Saint Louis, continuing his studies at the Catholic Theological Union in Chicago, where he graduated with a degree in Theology. At the age of 27, he was sent by his superiors to Rome to study Canon Law at the Pontifical University of Saint Thomas Aquinas (Angelicum). He was ordained a priest in Rome on June 19, 1982, at the Augustinian College of Santa Monica.

He obtained his licentiate in 1984 and the following year, while preparing his doctoral thesis, he was sent to the Augustinian mission in Chulucanas, Piura, Peru (1985-1986). In 1987, he defended his doctoral thesis and began his career in the Order to which he belongs, living half his time in the missions and half in the Roman Curia. In 1999, he was elected provincial prior of the Augustinian Province of Chicago, and two and a half years later, his confreres elected him prior general of the Order, confirming him in 2007 for a second term. On December 12, 2014, called by Bergoglio to take up pastoral duties, he was appointed bishop and began his mandate in Peru. His episcopal motto is “In Illo uno unum,” words that St. Augustine uttered in a sermon, Exposition on Psalm 127, to explain that “although we Christians are many, in the one Christ we are one.”

After several years of activity and assignments in South America, on January 30, 2023, Pope Bergoglio called him to Rome as prefect of the Dicastery for Bishops and president of the Pontifical Commission for Latin America, promoting him to archbishop. In the consistory of September 30 of the same year, he created and proclaimed him cardinal, assigning him the diaconate of Santa Monica. In the meantime, he was counted among the members of the Dicasteries for Evangelization, Section for First Evangelization and New Particular Churches; for the Doctrine of the Faith; for the Eastern Churches; for the Clergy; for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life; for Culture and Education; for Legislative Texts; and the Pontifical Commission for the Vatican City State. On February 6 of this year, he was promoted to the order of bishops by the Argentine pontiff, obtaining the title of the suburbicarian church of Albano. Who knows what remains of dear old Father Robert.

Cardinal Robert Francis Prevost, we recall for the record, was involved in controversies concerning the handling of allegations of sexual abuse during his episcopate in the diocese of Chiclayo, Peru. In 2024, three women accused two priests of the diocese of Chiclayo, Eleuterio Vásquez González and Ricardo Yesquén, of sexual abuse suffered when they were minors. The victims claim that Cardinal Prevost did not open an adequate canonical investigation and sent incomplete documentation to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, thus hindering effective action. It has also emerged that in 2000, while he was provincial superior of the Augustinians in Chicago, Prevost authorized the transfer of priest James Ray, who had already been accused of child abuse, to a residence located near a Catholic elementary school, a decision that has raised further criticism of his handling of abuse cases.

Incidentally, as I write this article, many websites that reported on the allegations and scandals are being shut down. The real truth must never be discovered, right? It will be equally curious to see what positions he will take on the most burning issues for the Catholic world, those where Bergoglio has destroyed millennial doctrine. On issues such as climate change or migrants, he takes progressive positions, even though he has been considered a moderate by the press, as he is more cautious on social issues and LGBT rights. The choice of the name Leone is perhaps a sign of continuity with the figure of Leo XIII, Vincenzo Gioacchino Raffaele Luigi Pecci, Pope from 1878 to 1903, who distinguished himself for his strong social openness, so much so that he was given the nickname “Pope of the workers.” Even more interesting will be to observe his geopolitical position. He is a man from the hegemonic country, who has worked extensively in the southern hemisphere, creating a liaison with Rome, but without ever turning to the East.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Soon-Shiong

Bamboo

Chapelle
https://twitter.com/iAnonPatriot/status/1921069989513081326

https://twitter.com/buitengebieden/status/1921249743805563317

https://twitter.com/hussmanjp/status/1921245440583798938

Starship

0-100

Bouncer

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle May 8 2025

May 082025
 
 May 8, 2025  Posted by at 8:00 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,  54 Responses »


Edouard Vuillard The two sisters 1899

 

• Russia’s 72-hour ‘Victory Day’ Truce Begins (RT)
• Trump Warns of ‘Decisions’ on Russia-Ukraine Talks (RT)
• Von der Leyen Calls On EU To Speed Up Ukrainian Entry (RT)
• EU Parliament Head Threatens To Sue von der Leyen (Sp.)
• ‘Absolute Insanity’ – Hungary Slams EU Plan To Halt Russian Energy Imports (RT)
• Slovakia’s Fico Calls EU’s Refusal of Russian Fuel ‘Economic Suicide’ (Sp.)
• New German Chancellor Tells US To ‘Stay Out’ of Berlin’s Affairs (RT)
• Who der Leyen: EU’s Major, Unfixable Problem With Its Foreign Policy (Marsden)
• Proof That Polls Showing Trump Underwater Are Bogus (Margolis)
• President Trump’s Most Loyal Supporters: Hispanics (Victor Davis Hanson)
• Yemen – US Concedes Maritime Defeat (MoA)
• Canadian PM Asks Trump To Rein In His Taunts (RT)
• Trump Administration Asks for Help in Uncovering Big Tech Censorship (Stepman)
• Confirming Trump’s Court Nominees ‘Priority’ for Judiciary Committee (DS)
• Pete Hegseth: Today’s Decisions and Tomorrow’s Military (Zito)
• Pakistan Closes Airspace For 48 Hours, Authorizes Response To Indian Attack (ZH)
• The Russia-Ukraine Lesson India Must Learn From Its Pakistan Standoff (Suchkov)
• ‘Prince Andrew Was F*ing Underage Girls’ – James O’ Keefe (ZH)

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/Rainmaker1973/status/1920144368599552162

https://twitter.com/DD_Geopolitics/status/1919787566317908125

https://twitter.com/BRICSinfo/status/1919770832135491818
https://twitter.com/BellaVLiberman/status/1919896141505737188
https://twitter.com/SMO_VZ/status/1919902855655293265

https://twitter.com/DD_Geopolitics/status/1919745461730078828

https://twitter.com/SMO_VZ/status/1920032150537056657

Ritter

Bondi

https://twitter.com/ricwe123/status/1919814308180926622

 

 

 

 

Predictable: Putin declares a truce. Zelensky refuses. Ukraine violates the truce terms. Ukraine and the entire western press claim Russia itself broke the truce.

• Russia’s 72-hour ‘Victory Day’ Truce Begins (RT)

A 72-hour ceasefire proposed by Russian President Vladimir Putin has officially come into effect, with Russian forces halting offensive operations from midnight on Thursday, despite a surge in Ukrainian drone attacks in the hours before the truce. The pause in fighting, set to last until midnight on May 10–11, is described as a humanitarian gesture marking the 80th anniversary of the Soviet victory over Nazi Germany. The Kremlin says the ceasefire also aims to create space for direct peace talks with Ukraine, without preconditions. ”Yes, this is an initiative by the Russian side, by President Putin. It remains in force,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov confirmed on Wednesday, stressing that Moscow is committed to honoring the truce despite Ukraine’s record-breaking drone assault ahead of its start.

Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky has refused to back the ceasefire, denouncing it as an “attempt at manipulation” and accusing Russia of using humanitarian overtures for tactical advantage. Instead of pausing hostilities, Kiev intensified its drone campaign, with high-ranking Russian diplomat Rodion Miroshnik stating that Ukrainian UAV strikes over the past week caused a record number of civilian casualties — 15 killed and 142 injured. Earlier in the week, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova accused Zelensky of engaging in “classic terrorist behavior” by threatening civilians in Russia while soliciting additional funding from Western donors.

Peskov condemned the continued attacks, accusing the “Kiev regime” of revealing “its essence and inclination toward terrorist actions.” He noted that Russian special services and the military are taking all necessary measures to ensure Victory Day events proceed safely across the country. Despite calls from some lawmakers for an “asymmetrical” response to the drone strikes, the Kremlin has reiterated its position: “All instructions have been given, there are no new elements here,” Peskov said when asked about potential retaliation during the ceasefire window. Victory Day, celebrated on May 9, commemorates the defeat of Nazi Germany in 1945 and remains one of the most significant public holidays in Russia.

Read more …

Vance and Trump may claim that Russia asks for too much, but this didn’t start today. The situation is the culmination of three years of fighting. Which itself was the culmination of over 10 years of mostly violent ‘provocations’. Now, Russia wants to stop these provocations once and for all. Incorporating Crimea and the 4 regions into Russia is part of that. In the first peace talks 3 years ago Russia never talked about land. Only when it became clear the talks were fake, did it become an issue. And now there’s no going back. Russia can’t give away parts of its own territory.

Vance should do his homework.

• Trump Warns of ‘Decisions’ on Russia-Ukraine Talks (RT)

President Donald Trump has expressed displeasure over the pace of the US-brokered negotiations with Russia and Ukraine regarding the current conflict, stating that decisions need to be reached soon. According to US Vice President J.D. Vance, Washington currently considers Russia’s demands for ending the conflict unacceptable. “The Russians are asking for a certain set of requirements, a certain set of concessions, in order to end the conflict. We think they’re asking for too much,” he said at a Munich Leaders Meeting in Washington, D.C., on Wednesday. Trump was asked to comment on Vance’s statement in a press briefing in the White House later in the day. “It’s possible that he’s right,” the US president replied. “I’m not happy about it,” Trump said.

Senior figures in the current US administration, including the president himself, have stated that Washington may have to step back from trying to mediate talks over the Ukraine conflict if sufficient progress is not made. “At some point in time, it either has to be something that can happen or we all need to move on. That’ll be a decision the president will have to make,” Secretary of State Marco Rubio told Fox News last week. Washington has reportedly prepared a fresh set of economic sanctions targeting Russia’s energy and banking sectors, as potential leverage in the talks.

Moscow has repeatedly declared that it remains open to peace talks with Kiev. Last week, Russian President Vladimir Putin has announced a 72-hour ceasefire around the upcoming Victory Day celebrations. Ukraine rejected the initiative, demanded an unconditional 30-day truce and increased UAV and missile attacks on Russia. Despite this, the ceasefire offer is still on the table, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said. Russia’s demands for ending the conflict have remained stable: Ukraine must demilitarize, denazify, abandon ambitions to join NATO, stay neutral and remain free of nuclear weapons. In addition, Kiev needs to recognize the Russian regions of Crimea, Kherson and Zaporozhye as well as the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics, Moscow has stated.

Read more …

Either she goes, or the EU is finished. And she won’t go voluntarily.

• Von der Leyen Calls On EU To Speed Up Ukrainian Entry (RT)

Ukraine EU accession talks should be launched in 2025, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen stressed on Wednesday. She argued that such a step would enhance Kiev’s negotiating position against Moscow while also opening the door for more investments in the country’s military industry. Kiev has repeatedly expressed its desire to join the EU. However, Ukraine’s “immediate” accession has been consistently opposed by several member states. Hungary has voiced concerns over corruption, the treatment of ethnic minorities, and economic competition, particularly in agriculture. Other EU nations, including Slovakia, France, and Germany, have also expressed reservations, emphasizing that Kiev must meet existing reform benchmarks before talks proceed. Speaking at a Europe Day event on May 7, von der Leyen said that the EU’s current task is to “help Ukraine stand strong, defy Putin’s intimidations.”

“Today, I would like to focus on how we can do so, and on three priorities for our action. First, support Ukraine’s defense. Second, complete the phase-out of Russian fossil fuels. And third, accelerate Ukraine’s accession path to our Union.” She added that Brussels is “working hard with Ukraine to open the first cluster of accession talks, and to open all clusters in 2025.” While Russia has consistently rejected the idea of Ukraine joining NATO, its position on EU accession has been more restrained. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has stated that the country has a “sovereign right” to join the bloc, provided that it remains a matter of economic integration and not military alignment.

At the same time, Russian officials have increasingly warned that the EU is losing its purely civilian character. Peskov has accused the bloc of actively working to prolong the Ukraine conflict by repeatedly expressing its intention to keep supporting Kiev in its desire to “continue the war.” He has also criticized Brussels for undermining peace efforts by consistently portraying Russia as the bloc’s primary adversary. Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov had previously also stated that the EU was “becoming militarized at a record pace,” and claimed there was now “very little difference” between the EU and NATO.

Read more …

“..adoption of the Commission’s plan without a proper legal basis would end up “putting at risk democratic legitimacy by undermining Parliament’s legislative and scrutiny functions..”

• EU Parliament Head Threatens To Sue von der Leyen (Sp.)

The European Parliament has warned the European Commission (EC) that it could take it to court if it bypasses EU lawmakers to create a €150 billion ($170 billion) loan program to boost defense spending across the bloc. In March, EC head Ursula von der Leyen unveiled a plan to raise €800 billion to expand military potential across the EU in response to what she described as “a threat coming from Russia” – a claim rejected by Moscow. To raise the money, the Commission used Article 122 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), which allows member states in emergencies to approve proposals from the executive branch in Brussels without going through the usual process.

On Monday, European Parliament President Roberta Metsola sent a letter to von der Leyen, urging her to change the legal basis for the initiative, threatening to sue the EC if it fails to comply. The adoption of the Commission’s plan without a proper legal basis would end up “putting at risk democratic legitimacy by undermining Parliament’s legislative and scrutiny functions,” the letter read. The EC “will always be available to explain why Article 122 has been chosen as the appropriate legal basis,” its spokesman Thomas Regnier told Euronews. “[Western] Europe faces an unprecedented security threat.

As stated by President von der Leyen in her Political Guidelines, Article 122 will only be used in exceptional circumstances, as the ones we are currently living in,” Regnier stated. The €150 billion loan program is seen by the Commission as a cornerstone of its ‘Readiness 2030’ proposal to invest over €800 billion into defense across the bloc by the end of the decade when – as Brussels claims – Russia would be in a position to attack an EU-member country. Russian President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly rejected allegations that Moscow harbors aggressive intentions toward EU countries, calling it “nonsense” designed to alarm Western Europeans and legitimize major increases in defense budgets.

Read more …

“..uphold the right to source energy from where it reliably arrives and where it arrives at a low cost.”

• ‘Absolute Insanity’ – Hungary Slams EU Plan To Halt Russian Energy Imports (RT)

The European Commission’s plan to completely phase out Russian fuel imports violates the sovereignty of EU member states by depriving them of the right to choose their energy sources, according to Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto. Brussels has outlined plans to end the bloc’s energy reliance on Moscow by completely eliminating imports of oil, gas, and nuclear fuel in the coming years. Hungary obtains over 80% of its gas from Russia via pipeline, with LNG playing a supplementary role. Budapest has continued to strengthen its energy ties with Moscow despite the sanctions introduced by the EU in the wake of the Ukraine conflict.

“The forced, artificially ideological-based exclusion of natural gas, crude oil, and nuclear fuel originating from Russia will lead to severe price increases in Europe, seriously harming the sovereignty of European countries, and cause major difficulties for European companies,” Szijjarto said in a video he shared on his Facebook page on Tuesday, adding that “what was announced is absolute insanity.” “Everyone in Brussels has lost their common sense,” the foreign minister exclaimed, emphasizing that Budapest would not allow the European Commission (EC) to violate Hungary’s sovereignty and would “uphold the right to source energy from where it reliably arrives and where it arrives at a low cost.” Earlier in the day, the EC published a “roadmap” outlining its ambitious strategy to end reliance on Russian energy by the end of 2027.

The bloc’s executive branch said it would propose legislation in June requiring all member states to draft “national plans” to terminate their imports of Russian gas, nuclear fuel, and oil. Slovakia’s Prime Minister Robert Fico also criticized the plan, calling the proposal “economic suicide.” He added that Slovakia would push for changes in the legislative process. Brussels announced its intention to wean EU members off Russian energy shortly after the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022. Supplies of US liquefied natural gas (LNG) have since replaced much of the cheaper pipeline gas previously delivered by Russia. Although Russian pipeline gas supplies to the EU have plummeted, the bloc has been increasing its imports of LNG from the sanction-hit nation. Last year, Russia still accounted for around 19% of the EU’s total gas and LNG supply, according to the EC.

Read more …

“This is an economic suicide: to come to the point where [there is] no gas, no oil, no nuclear fuel, nothing [from Russia] just because some new iron curtain is being set up..”

Several EU countries denied Orban and Fico permission to use their airspace to go to Moscow tomorrow. EU countries!

• Slovakia’s Fico Calls EU’s Refusal of Russian Fuel ‘Economic Suicide’ (Sp.)

Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico said on Wednesday that the European Union’s desire to completely abandon Russian energy resources was economic suicide. On Tuesday, the European Commission presented the REPowerEU roadmap for ending Russian energy imports. It proposed a halt to all remaining Russian gas contracts by the end of 2027, as well as restrictions on imports of enriched uranium from Russia. “This is an economic suicide: to come to the point where [there is] no gas, no oil, no nuclear fuel, nothing [from Russia] just because some new iron curtain is being set up between the Western world and perhaps Russia and other countries,” Fico told a news conference.

The European Union’s desire to reject Russian energy resources is an “extremely dangerous game,” the prime minister said, adding that Slovakia would work to draw the European Commission’s attention to the risks associated with the decision. Earlier in the week, Fico said that by insisting on cutting off energy supplies from the east, the EU was creating conditions for further gas price hikes for political reasons. Slovak National Council Deputy Speaker Tibor Gaspar had previously told RIA Novosti that Bratislava was interested in further purchases of Russian energy resources, and this was due, among other things, to the orientation of capacities towards Russian raw materials.

Read more …

Double tongue: “Ten million AfD voters, you cannot ban them..” And then do it anyway…

• New German Chancellor Tells US To ‘Stay Out’ of Berlin’s Affairs (RT)

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz has told the US government to “stay out” of his nation’s domestic politics. It comes after Trump administration officials slammed the designation of Germany’s second-largest party, Alternative for Germany (AfD), as an “extremist” organization. Following the move last week by Berlin’s domestic intelligence agency, the BfV, US Vice President J.D. Vance said the “German establishment” had “rebuilt” the Berlin Wall. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, in turn, declared that the EU’s largest economy has become “a tyranny in disguise” and called upon the German authorities to change course. Merz, who was elected chancellor only after failing his first confirmation vote in parliament, told the broadcaster ZDF on Tuesday that “absurd observations” were emanating from Washington regarding the treatment of the right-wing party AfD by German authorities.

The chancellor stressed he “would like to encourage the American government… to largely stay out of” German domestic politics. The 69-year-old politician noted that he “did not interfere in the American election campaign” last year, which ended with Trump winning a second term in the White House. He also expressed his belief that US politicians should not support AfD because they “can clearly distinguish between extremist parties and parties of the political center.” Merz said he is planning a phone call with Trump on Thursday, with their first face-to-face meeting set for the NATO summit in the Hague on June 24 and 25.

When asked about the possibility of AfD being outlawed in Germany altogether, the chancellor said the German government needed to show restraint on the issue. “Ten million AfD voters, you cannot ban them,” Merz argued. He said the ruling CDU/CSU alliance should instead focus on addressing the causes pushing people to vote for the right-wing party. AfD demands tighter immigration and asylum laws and opposes the “woke agenda.” It achieved its best ever result in February’s election, clinching 20.8% of the vote and finishing second after CDU/CSU, which got 28.5%. The party filed a lawsuit on Monday challenging the BfV’s decision to classify it an “extremist” organization.

Read more …

“Her unity-at-any-cost talk really just means that dissent from countries that disagree is quashed. And those dissenters are typically those with ideological views and approaches similar to Trump’s..”

• Who der Leyen: EU’s Major, Unfixable Problem With Its Foreign Policy (Marsden)

This one stings. When asked how the EU might dodge US President Donald Trump’s tariff hammer, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent replied, “My observation… goes all the way back to [former US Secretary of State] Henry Kissinger’s statement: ‘When I call Europe, who do I call?’ So, we’re negotiating with a lot of different interests.” Translation: You can’t sit with us until you stop fighting at your own lunch table. Sure, the continent is tripping over its own policies and tumbling down an economic staircase, but at least everyone’s falling in sync. Brussels tightens the “unity” straitjacket, and they all cheer, or risk getting whacked back into line. Unity is the brand. Unity is the product. Unity is the hashtag. “Only together can we address the grave challenges we face,” unelected European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said in January 2024.

“It is thanks to all this that in the last five years, Europe has weathered the fiercest storm in our economic history. And we overcame an unprecedented energy crisis. We did this together, and we can do it again. And we have the political will. Because when Europe is united, it gets things done,” she said in an address earlier this year at the Davos World Economic Forum, explaining how solidarity will help the EU weather the problems created by its own policies. “The EU’s strength lies in its unity, including when confronted with major health crises. European solidarity, in sharing medical supplies, treating patients or helping repatriate citizens, and in the reconstruction of our economies, helped us to protect our citizens together and overcome the most difficult phases of the pandemic,” she said in 2023 about the Covid fiasco, during which she brokered a non-transparent deal for jabs with her pal, the CEO of Pfizer, via text messages that have since vanished.

Contracts which ultimately left EU member states on the hook even after they had no use for the jabs. “This 4th Ukraine meeting was another demonstration of European unity,” Queen Ursula posted a month ago on social media. Of course it was. What isn’t? Even just this week, in evoking fires in Israel and EU assistance, she wrote on social media that it was “EU solidarity in action.” Unity and solidarity are important to the EU in the same way that the concept of family is important to evoke every time two toddlers want to poke each other’s eyes out with crayons. As in, “you’re supposed to be brothers, so play nice!” All that helps to paper over the unfortunate history of family infighting and battlefield beatdowns. Enter Scott Bessent, politely suggesting that he’s not impressed by the EU’s unity thirst traps.

And that hits deep. It’s like telling someone that what they think is their very best feature is really their worst. Say, for example, you really love your own butt, have been spending years in the gym doing every kind of squat, lunges, hip thrusts, and you’re so proud of your butt – and then one day, someone you’re interested in is like, “You know, you should really work on those glutes more.” That’s exactly what Bessent’s comment is when he says that the problem with the EU is their lack of unity.

Nothing the US can do about it, he implies – just a little friendly feedback. Back to the gym, Brussels. And Queen Ursula must be fuming since she talks like it’s her best feature and she already spends all day and night obsessing over it. How is she possibly supposed to do more when she’s already maxed out on her unity obsession? Which is all superficial by the way. Her unity-at-any-cost talk really just means that dissent from countries that disagree is quashed. And those dissenters are typically those with ideological views and approaches similar to Trump’s that place their own country’s interests above those dictated by a supranational institution of global governance.

Read more …

“..while Trump’s critics continue to spin, exaggerate, or dismiss his rhetoric, voters are seeing something entirely different: results.”

• Proof That Polls Showing Trump Underwater Are Bogus (Margolis)

While the corporate media keeps pushing the narrative that Donald Trump’s approval ratings are sinking, we’ve seen this act before. Remember 2024? Pollsters swore up and down that Kamala Harris was going to win in a landslide. But anyone who scrutinized the data knew those numbers were bogus. Now that Trump is back in office, the same game is playing out. The media’s obsession with tearing him down hasn’t faded one bit. So we’re flooded with polls from the same discredited pollsters who got 2024 so wrong — polls that claim Trump is “underwater” while simultaneously showing broad public approval of how he’s handling the issues that matter. Case in point: even CNN’s Harry Enten was forced to admit on Wednesday that Trump’s law-and-order message is hitting home with voters in a way Joe Biden never could, and the numbers back it up.

“It speaks to one of Trump’s best issues, right? The idea of Alcatraz — you think law and order, you think Donald Trump,” Enten said, driving home a point that’s almost too obvious to require analysis. On CNN, of all places, Enten presented data showing Trump with a positive net approval rating on crime, something that eluded Biden for his entire presidency. “Look at that,” Enten said. “At plus two points, far better than Joe Biden who was so far underwater. My goodness, he was setting records at minus 26 points. You rarely ever see it.” Yes, you read that correctly — while Biden sank to historic lows, Trump is now in positive territory. Not only that, but Trump’s crime approval is stronger now in his second term than it was during his first.

“We compared Donald Trump’s first term to now his second term,” Enten explained. “We see that Donald Trump’s net approval rating on handling crime is far better now at plus two points… than back in March of 2024 in which he was underwater at minus 13 points.” That’s a stunning 15-point improvement. In typical fashion, Trump’s messaging — often mocked by the media as outlandish or theatrical — is connecting with voters. Enten referenced Trump’s remarks about Alcatraz, saying, “Yes, I know it’s late-night fodder for a lot of different folks, but what it actually speaks to is Donald Trump focusing the American people’s attention on an issue in which they actually do like what he’s doing.”

Even more telling? The American public’s concern about crime is decreasing under Trump’s leadership. “It was 53% last year and look at where we are now. We’re at 47%,” Enten noted. “It’s the first time in about five years in which the percentage of Americans who worry a great deal about crime has actually dropped under the 50% mark.” That kind of drop isn’t just statistically significant; it’s politically potent. Enten emphasized that crime is one of just two issues where public concern declined by five points or more from 2024 to 2025, and it happened among both Democrats and Republicans.

So while Trump’s critics continue to spin, exaggerate, or dismiss his rhetoric, voters are seeing something entirely different: results. “I think Donald Trump is gonna continue on this law and order issue,” Enten concluded, “because the bottom line is, it is working for him.”Just as it was obvious during the campaign that Trump’s support far exceeded what the polls claimed, it’s clear now that his approval ratings are higher than what those same discredited pollsters were pushing last year.

Read more …

“Gulf of Arabia” and “Arabian Gulf” are predominately used in Middle Eastern countries.”

• Trump To Announce US Will Call The Persian Gulf The Arabian Gulf (JTN)

President Trump is reportedly planning to announce the U.S. will refer to the Persian Gulf as the Arabian Gulf or the Gulf of Arabia during his trip to Saudi Arabia next week. Two U.S. officials told the Associated Press of Trump’s plan on condition of anonymity, according to a report Wednesday. The White House and the National Security Council didn’t immediately respond to the wire service’s requests for comment. Iran has claimed it has historic ties to the gulf that is off its southern coast, while Arab nations have pushed for a change to the geographic name of the body of water. The U.S. military has unilaterally referred to the Persian Gulf as the Arabian Gulf in statements and images it releases for years. The Persian Gulf name has been widely used since the 16th century, but “Gulf of Arabia” and “Arabian Gulf” are predominately used in Middle Eastern countries.

The government of Iran, previously called Persia, in 2012 threatened to file a lawsuit against Google for its decision to not label the body of water at all on its maps. In the U.S., Google Maps labels the body of water as the Persian Gulf (Arabian Gulf), while Apple Maps only says the Persian Gulf. Iran’s foreign minister took issue with the possible renaming of the gulf. “[P]olitically motivated attempts to alter the historically established name of the Persian Gulf are indicative of hostile intent toward Iran and its people, and are firmly condemned,” Iranian Foreign Minister Seyed Abbas Araghchi wrote in a post on X on Wednesday. “Such biased actions are an affront to all Iranians, regardless of their background or place of residence.

Read more …

“..they have a more realistic, as all immigrant communities do, a realistic appraisal of what’s important and what’s peripheral. And right now, the Democratic Party is peripheral to the Hispanic community in general.”

• President Trump’s Most Loyal Supporters: Hispanics (Victor Davis Hanson)

At the end of President Donald Trump’s first 100 days, there were a number of polls that came out. Most of them were liberal and most of them were negative. And as we have mentioned in the past, some of them who have a much more reliable history—such as the Rasmussen poll, the Insider Advantage poll, the Trafalgar poll—they all had Donald Trump, at the end of 100 days, with either roughly 50-50 approval ratings or even slightly above that, 48-46, 50-49. But my point is, in one of the daily Rasmussen polls, they had an astonishing figure, that they broke down Donald Trump’s support by ethnic category. And there were 39% of black Americans that expressed support for Donald Trump. That’s an astonishing number. Given that 95% of the news coverage, according to the Media Research Center, has been negative.

And yet here is a traditional Democratic constituency where 4 out of 10 people like what’s been going on. But even more astonishing is the ethnic constituency that expressed the highest approval of Donald Trump’s first 100 days was the Hispanic community. In fact, far above the so-called white community. How can that be possible? The Democratic Party had told us that closing the border and stopping the illegal entry of 10 to 12 million illegal aliens during the Biden administration—that was deeply unpopular to the Hispanic community. And then, the deportations of illegal aliens like Kilmar Abrego Garcia, for example, or Eduardo Flores-Ruiz that was in Judge Hannah Dugan’s courtroom, whom she tried to hide. He was the assaulter of three people, including women. This was supposed to be deeply unpopular. But it actually has the opposite effect.

And why would that be? The reason is that when 12 million people come in illegally and they gravitate to certain constituencies or enclaves, they usually feel more at home with fellow Spanish-speaking Americans. And where is that? That is along the Rio Grande Valley. That is in Texas. That is in parts of New Mexico. That is in the San Joaquin Valley. What am I getting at? What I’m getting at is that a group of elites in the Biden administration, for particular political purposes—and I’ll be frank here—I think they did want people to come in, both to serve as future constituents under the lax rules and protocols of early and mail-in voting, and also to grow the government and have more constituencies on welfare. But in any case, the price, the cost, the toll fell most heavily on Hispanic communities. These were the ones that were trying to get competitive Advanced Placement programs in their schools.

And suddenly they have English as a Second Language programs again. They were the ones at dialysis clinics, at emergency rooms that were swarmed with people who in some cases had never been to a doctor. And so, they bore the greatest brunt of it. They were in cities where the Biden administration flew people in at night from Mexico and then dispersed them in Hispanic communities. And so they were very angry. And why would so-called white people poll much more negatively against Trump’s first 100 days than Hispanics? It’s because the white elite had created an agenda under the Biden and Obama administration that was elitist. By that I mean—let’s face it—Sen. Bernie Sanders had to take out the word “millionaires” from his usual castigation of millionaires and billionaires. And it wasn’t just because he’s a millionaire now.

That is the trademark of the professional bicoastal classes. And they’re interested in issues that are not existential—at least not everyday existential. By that I mean global warming, the Green New Deal, transgendered men in women’s sports, international organizations—the U.N. But they’re not interested in what the Hispanic working classes are interested in. And that’s affordable gasoline, affordable power bills, good-paying jobs, schools that allow their children to be competitively educated, safety in their neighborhoods. And the idea that they should have some natural antipathy for illegal aliens just because they share the same language and maybe ethnic background—they don’t.

They’re just like anybody else that’s trying to make a living and has been ignored and shunned by the grandees of the Democratic Party. And so, they’re expressing support for an administration that is trying to get affordable energy prices, that is damning the high rise in crime, that is seeking to close the border and secure it, that is calling to account the elite universities that gouge the federal government. All of that appeals to people who have to work with their muscles. And many of the Hispanic community, they’re contractors or small business people. Many of them are professionals. But they have a more realistic, as all immigrant communities do, a realistic appraisal of what’s important and what’s peripheral. And right now, the Democratic Party is peripheral to the Hispanic community in general.

Read more …

“Houthi officials and supporters swiftly portrayed the deal as a major victory for the militia and a failure for Mr. Trump, spreading a social media hashtag that read “Yemen defeats America.”

• Yemen – US Concedes Maritime Defeat (MoA)

Just two days ago I stated that the U.S. had lost its war against Ansar Allah in Yemen: The Houthi can not be defeated. Soon a U.S. ship will get hit. From there the war could easily escalate into a war against Iran. There is a good chance that the U.S. would lose it. It is high time for the Trump administration to pull back from its Yemen campaign. Last night Trump conceded that the campaign was lost. He order the U.S. fleet to retreat:
“Trump Says the U.S. Will Cease Strikes on Houthi Militants (archived) – NY Times, May 6 2025″. It was unclear whether the Houthis were going to stop impeding international shipping, which was the objective of the American bombing campaign. The United States and Houthis in Yemen reached a deal to halt American airstrikes against the group after the Iranian-backed militants agreed to cease attacks against American vessels in the Red Sea, President Trump and Omani mediators said Tuesday.
…
“They just don’t want to fight,” Mr. Trump said. “And we will honor that and we will stop the bombings. They have capitulated, but more importantly, we will take their word. They say they will not be blowing up ships anymore.” But despite his claim of success, it remained unclear whether the United States had achieved its objective of stopping the Houthis from impeding international shipping after a costly seven-week bombing campaign.” There is nothing ‘unclear’ about the objective which the U.S. has obviously not achieved. The Houthi will continue to attack Israel related shipping as well as the Zionist entity itself: “The Houthis themselves stopped short of declaring a full cease-fire, saying that they would continue to fight Israel. And Houthi officials and supporters swiftly portrayed the deal as a major victory for the militia and a failure for Mr. Trump, spreading a social media hashtag that read “Yemen defeats America.”

The U.S. Navy has long run out of military targets in Yemen. Its ships have emptied their magazines. They can not replenish at sea and need to go to a friendly harbor that has the appropriate equipment (Crete, Bahrain).
“Three F-18 Fighter Jets And Some 20+ Reaper Drones Were Lost During Fighting The Houthi:“
“A Navy fighter jet failed to land on an aircraft carrier and plummeted into the Red Sea on Tuesday, marking the fourth major mishap involving the vessel and the third loss of a fighter jet deployed with it since the warship left home last year … The latest incident, reported earlier by CNN, followed the loss of another jet, an F/A-18E, in an accident aboard the Truman last week in which the aircraft tumbled overboard after sailors aboard lost control of it while towing it in the ship’s hangar bay. A third fighter jet from the Truman was shot down accidentally over the Red Sea in December by another Navy warship, the USS Gettysburg, in an incident that triggered concerns about communication among warships and fighter jets in the region.

The Truman also was involved in a collision in the Mediterranean Sea in February, prompting the service to fire its commanding officer, Navy Capt. Dave Snowden. The U.S. Navy has spent over a billion dollar on ammunition on Yemen. It lost more than half a billion in flying equipment and managed to achieve nil. Others will take note of that record. The U.S. could have made this deal a month ago:

“A senior leader of Ansar Allah, commonly known as the Houthis, told Drop Site News that if the U.S. ends its campaign of air strikes against Yemen, Houthi forces will commit to halting all attacks on U.S. ships in the region. “We do not consider ourselves at war with the American people,” said Mohammed al-Bukhaiti, a member of Ansar Allah’s political bureau and a longtime spokesperson for the Houthis. “If the U.S. stops targeting Yemen, we will cease our military operations against it.” Oman was, as usual, moderating talks between the U.S. and the Houthi. Iran was helpful in that it pressed for a deal. Trump claims that Ansar Allah will stop shooting at U.S. shipping. There was no civilian U.S. shipping in the Red Sea in the first place:

There are fewer than 200 U.S. commercial vessels. Only about 80 are engaged in global trade. The small U.S. commercial fleet compares to 5,500 active Chinese-flagged vessels. U.S. military shipping in the area is of no interests for the Houthi unless it is used to attack them. How much other shipping in the area will revive to its previous levels remains to be seen: Shipping volumes in the Red Sea continue to be depressed, currently around 50% lower than 2023 figures, according to data from SEB, a Swedish bank.

“The prospect of a ceasefire agreement and enhanced security suggests a likely resurgence in commercial shipping operations in the region,” shipping analysts at SEB suggested in a note to clients this morning, arguing that car carrier and container markets are projected to experience the most significant rebalancing. There is a lot of ambiguity as the Houthi will continue to target Israel related ships. Some might be owned by Israeli entities but are sailing under some other countries flag. Other ships may be held up or fired at because they carry goods designated for Israel. Until the war on Gaza ends, and the Houthi campaign stops, international insurance companies are likely to ask for higher premiums for any ship that wants to sail through the Red Sea. It will take months of quietness before insurance premiums and traffic through the Red Sea will come back to a normal level. Egyptian income losses from a lack of Suez Canal crossings will continue.

Read more …

“When you get rid of that artificially drawn line… when you look at that beautiful formation when it’s together, I’m a very artistic person,” Trump said, recalling his real estate developer background.”

• Canadian PM Asks Trump To Rein In His Taunts (RT)

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney has claimed he asked US President Donald Trump to stop taunting his country as the 51st state during their first meeting at the White House on Tuesday. Trump has repeatedly floated the idea of acquiring Canada and described its border with the US as “artificial.” During the meeting with Carney in the Oval Office, Trump reiterated that sentiment and said that a union between Canada and the US would be a “wonderful marriage” and could bring “tremendous” benefits. “When you get rid of that artificially drawn line… when you look at that beautiful formation when it’s together, I’m a very artistic person,” Trump said, recalling his real estate developer background.

Carney interjected by stating that “there are some places that are never for sale,” likening Canada to the Oval Office and Buckingham Palace. “Having met with the owners of Canada over the course of the campaign the last several months, it’s not for sale, it won’t be for sale, ever,” the PM said, adding that the two nations could nevertheless work toward building a strong partnership together. Speaking to reporters after the meeting, Carney said he had asked Trump to stop using the term 51st state and described the comments as “not useful.” At the same time, he acknowledged that Trump is the US president and “he’ll say what he wants to say.” The meeting came days after Carney’s election victory, in which his Liberal Party secured a fourth consecutive term. Carney centered his campaign on attacking Trump over tariffs and his insistence on acquiring Canada.

At the beginning of their meeting, Trump congratulated the new prime minister and joked, “I think I was probably the greatest thing that happened to him.” Despite ongoing tensions over tariffs, which Trump said would stay in place regardless of what Carney said, both sides ultimately described the talks as positive. “Regardless of anything, we’re going to be friends with Canada,” the US president told reporters. Meanwhile, Carney called the discussions “wide-ranging” and “very constructive” and stated that trade negotiations would continue, including during the upcoming G7 summit in Canada’s Alberta province.

Read more …

Google runs an ad monopoly. A judge has confirmed as much. So yes, demonetized and shadow banned Right here, right this site.

Start there. Stop writing reports, do something. Then take it from there.

• Trump Administration Asks for Help in Uncovering Big Tech Censorship (Stepman)

The Trump administration has vowed to root out Big Tech censorship that was openly practiced under former President Joe Biden. In 2021, Biden administration press secretary Jen Psaki—now a host for MSNBC—admitted that the government coordinated with Big Tech to weed out “misinformation” on social media platforms. “We are in regular touch with these social media platforms, and those engagements typically happen through members of our senior staff, but also members of our COVID-19 team,” Psaki said at a 2021 press conference. “We’re flagging problematic posts for Facebook that spread disinformation.” Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg has since said that the Biden administration pressured Facebook to censor Americans.

“Basically, these people from the Biden administration would call up our team and, like, scream at them and curse,” Zuckerberg told podcast host Joe Rogan in January. “It just got to this point where we were like, ‘No, we’re not gonna, we’re not gonna take down things that are true. That’s ridiculous.’” While government coordination with Big Tech companies to censor Americans may be gone under President Donald Trump, the censorship problem remains. In early February, the Federal Trade Commission launched an investigation into Big Tech. FTC Chair Andrew Ferguson announced that the agency would be looking into attempts by tech companies to censor on their platforms. “Big Tech censorship is not just un-American, it is potentially illegal. The FTC wants your help to investigate these potential violations of the law,” he wrote.

Big Tech companies should not be “bullying their users,” Ferguson said, “this inquiry will help the FTC better understand how these firms may have violated the law by silencing and intimidating Americans for speaking their minds.” Ferguson asked for public cooperation “from anyone who has been a victim of tech censorship (banning, demonetization, shadow banning, etc.), from employees of tech platforms, or from anyone else who can shed light on these practices and the ways in which they may violate the law.” The FTC said in a statement that the agency is interested in “understanding how consumers—including by potentially unfair or deceptive acts or practices, or potentially unfair methods of competition—have been harmed by the policies of tech firms.”

The FTC directed Americans with a complaint about Big Tech censorship to submit a comment to the agency by May 21. Heritage Action for America created a portal to direct a comment to the agency that can be accessed here. Once the comment period is over the comments will be posted at Regulations.gov. Heritage Action included some helpful tips for what to include in a comment to the FTC.
What platform censored you?
• How were you censored? (E.g., Labeled as misinformation? Content removed? Shadow banned? Demonetized? etc…)
• What was the impact on you, your family, employees, friends, or followers/clients?
• Did the platform tell you about their action to censor you? And did they provide a reasonable and specific explanation?
• Did the platform give you the option to appeal the censorship? What was the result?

Last week, Trump made an additional move to quash the censorship of Americans. He proposed in his budget request eliminating the disinformation offices and programs at the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. “CISA was more focused on cooperating with Big Tech to target free speech than our nation’s critical systems,” the White House said in an “Ending Weaponization of the Federal Government” fact sheet, adding the agency’s disinformation offices “functioned as a hub in the Censorship Industrial Complex.”

Read more …

“..it’s important to move to fill those vacancies while there’s a Senate that is still going to be cooperative and not trying to put up the roadblocks..”

• Confirming Trump’s Court Nominees ‘Priority’ for Judiciary Committee (DS)

Confirming President Donald Trump’s federal court nominees will be a “priority” for the Senate Judiciary Committee, says Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, a member of that panel. “It’s certainly going to be a big priority for the Judiciary Committee,” Lee told The Daily Signal in a phone interview, “particularly once we get … a number of sub-Cabinet-level nominees processed.” “I do see that occupying more of the Judiciary Committee’s time over the next little while, and once those get through the pipeline, it will start occupying more time than it has on the Senate floor,” Lee continued. “This part of the process is just starting.” On Sunday night, Trump told The Daily Signal he would nominate federal judges “rapidly” and “try to get very good ones.” He subsequently nominated five judges Tuesday night, in addition to the one he nominated Thursday night.

Because Republicans were unable to retake control of the Senate in 2022, Trump will have less ability to reshape the federal judiciary than he did in his first term. Then-Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., pushed through 139 judges nominated by President Joe Biden, the third-highest total in U.S. history. That leaves Trump with just 46 current court vacancies, compared with 123 at the start of his first term. Still, Lee says, judicial appointments will be an ongoing effort over the next four years, “as it is with any administration where the president’s party is the same party that is the majority of the Senate.” The Utah senator praised Trump’s first-term judicial nominations and said he expects to see high-caliber judges nominated again.

“We will be very fortunate if the same standards for judicial nominees are followed during this second Trump administration,” Lee said. “I know of no reason to believe that they won’t be. If that’s the case, we’ll be in really good shape.” Trump had historically high court vacancies to fill in his first term and has historically low vacancies in his second, but each of those vacancies is still critical, said Carrie Severino, president of the Judicial Crisis Network. “Every one of those is crucially important, and it’s important to move to fill those vacancies while there’s a Senate that is still going to be cooperative and not trying to put up the roadblocks,” Severino told The Daily Signal. “If the Senate ever switched hands, that would certainly be the case.” Confirming Trump’s Court Nominees Will Be ‘Priority’ for Judiciary Committee, Sen. Lee Says.

Read more …

“When President Trump called me to take this job, he told me first—he told me two things. The first was, ‘Pete, you’re going to have to be tough as s— —tough.’ Boy, he was not kidding on that one.”

• Pete Hegseth: Today’s Decisions and Tomorrow’s Military (Zito)

Maj. Gen. David Hill was standing a few feet from where the Black Hawk helicopter en route from the Defense Department would soon be landing, at the lush green fields of the Army War College. Hill is the commandant of the prestigious military institution and had been preparing for days for something rare around here: a visit from the secretary of defense. “I’ve been here for four years as the commandant of the Army War College. This is the first opportunity we’ve had to host the secretary of defense,” Hill said with a broad smile, adding, “It is pretty cool.” Hill said that having Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth come to rural Pennsylvania is important because of the history of the Carlisle Barracks, where the campus is located. “This is a really special place,” he said. “It’s a 268-year-old military encampment that predates our nation, and it’s been an integral part of our Army and our nation’s history since 1757. And since 1951, the United States Army War College has been housed here.”

Its mission is to preserve peace through intelligent preparation to repel aggression. At peak load, the student body is about 2,000. Its signature is a 10-month resident graduate degree program that certifies students in the highest level of joint professional military education. This year’s officer class drew not just U.S. military leaders from all branches and intelligence services—Hill said there are also military leaders attending from 77 different countries. “There are 31 European nations represented here, as well as most of the Indo-Pacific nations represented, such as India, Japan, Australia, the Philippines, Malaysia, Indonesia. There’s a half-dozen from the African continent and a similar number from South America and Central America. Ukraine is here, and we have an officer from Israel and Lebanon here,” Hill explained.

When Hegseth was minutes away, Hill left to greet the defense secretary and his team. As Hill walked away, he said, “Today is going to be a big day.” The handshake between Hill and Hegseth was warm. They motorcaded through the Claremont Gate and toward the Wheelock Bandstand, where 800 seats were set up outside for the defense secretary’s speech. The overflow crowd exceeded 1,000, leaving several hundred standing in the grass as Hegseth took to the podium just in front of the old bandstand. Whoever was running the sound turned up the volume for AC/DC entrance music. The senior military officers in attendance approved. “Who dialed up ‘Thunderstruck’? I didn’t choose it, but I like it. Please take your seats. It might have to become SOP,” Hegseth said as everyone in attendance, a sea of camouflage and uniforms, laughed. Hegseth was in his element: confident, assured, and far from Washington, D.C.

Hegseth was there to mark the first 100 days of the Trump administration and share what he has accomplished at the Department of Defense. He bluntly acknowledged it had been bumpy in the wake of a series of leaks that have resulted in resignations and firings, not to mention unsubstantiated rumors that President Donald Trump is about to fire him. “When President Trump called me to take this job, he told me first—he told me two things. The first was, ‘Pete, you’re going to have to be tough as s— —tough.’ Boy, he was not kidding on that one. This job requires a steel spine, and that’s fine,” he said. For the next 28 minutes, he discussed a policy blueprint and vision that this White House sees for the military. Afterward, in the same room where Army War College graduate and former five-star Gen. and President Dwight D. Eisenhower once gave a talk, Hegseth sat down with the Washington Examiner.

He spoke about his recent controversies, his mission to reshape the military, the robust growth each service branch has seen since Trump took office, and how faith has kept him grounded. Dressed in a navy-blue suit, with a crisp red, white, and blue pocket square, and dark socks with green Army warriors, Hegseth said coming here and being able to articulate the department’s focus at a hundred days while looking out at a group of men and women who are the future leaders of our formations meant a lot to him. Hegseth said he spoke to those in attendance about restoring the warrior ethos, rebuilding the military, and reestablishing deterrence. He said that these men and women were on board despite having come up in a military filled with a woke quota mindset.

Read more …

Someone stop this. It has to be Xi, right?

• Pakistan Closes Airspace For 48 Hours, Authorizes Response To Indian Attack (ZH)

Though aerial fighting between the nuclear-armed rivals does not appear to be sustained and ongoing at this point, Pakistan has closed its airspace for nearly all flights on Wednesday, in the aftermath of the Indian cross-border strikes which killed at least 26 people – including a 3-year-old girl – and wounded at least 46 other people, Pakistani authorities say based on the latest revised death toll. International carriers have also canceled flights to the region, and access to social media, including X, was temporarily blocked in Pakistan amid the assault. Heavy shelling is being reported along the Line of Control (LOC) separating the historic enemy nations.

The true casualty toll could be higher, as a Pakistani militant chief targeted in the attacks on ‘terror camps’ said 10 of his relatives, including five children, were killed. The Islamist group Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) was one of the groups targeted, and its leader Masood Azhar said his older sister, brother-in-law, his nephew and niece are among the dead. Pakistan says that civilians were harmed and targeted that mosques were hit across six locations in its territory, and so has the right to respond to aggression. Indian has said it attack nine terror sites, but has been careful to stipulate these were non-military locations, and is now seeking de-escalation. Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif has ordered his armed forces to prepare a plan for “self-defense” with “corresponding actions” in order “avenge the loss of innocent Pakistani lives”.

The order was issued after an emergency National Security Commitee (NSC) meeting on Wednesday. “Pakistan reserves the right to respond, in self-defense, at a time, place, and manner of its choosing to avenge the loss of innocent Pakistani lives and blatant violation of its sovereignty,” the NSC readout said. “The Armed Forces of Pakistan have duly been authorized to undertake corresponding actions in this regard.” Pakistan’s Government Security Committee has charged that India has “ignited an inferno in the region”. These do indeed seem to be fighting words.What India has dubbed ‘Operation Sindoor’ is intended to be limited, Indian leaders have said, but it’s highly questionable whether it was a ‘success’ – given that India lost at least one or possibly up to five fighter jets.

Read more …

“Why do you keep shooting? Business is done differently now.”

• The Russia-Ukraine Lesson India Must Learn From Its Pakistan Standoff (Suchkov)

There is plenty to say about the chaos unfolding in Washington these days, but the sudden military escalation between India and Pakistan shifts our attention elsewhere – and provides some useful lessons. Since the start of Russia’s military operation against Ukraine, India’s official stance has generally aligned with Moscow’s interests. Yet it has consistently stressed the importance of peace. While many in India’s political and media elite – especially the pro-Western crowd – have criticized Russia, their views have been shaped by alignment with the West, not by deeper national principles. India’s official line, however, has always been dressed in polished diplomatic language, designed to project wisdom and balance. Early in the conflict, India’s Ambassador to the UN, Ruchira Kamboj, said: “India has consistently called for an immediate cessation of hostilities and an end to violence.”

Fast forward to 2024, when Prime Minister Narendra Modi added: “The conflict in Ukraine is a matter of deep concern for all of us. India firmly believes that no problem can be solved on the battlefield. We support dialogue and diplomacy for early restoration of peace and stability.” And of course, External Affairs Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar offered a soundbite which was repeated endlessly in international forums: “Wars are not the way to settle disputes.” The consistent refrain at countless conferences about “peace in Europe” boiled down to this: Russia was old-fashioned, clinging to outdated great power logic. The world had moved on, they insisted. And inevitably, some “public intellectual” would spice things up with a quote from Chanakya, Confucius, or even the Pope – advising Russia on how real diplomacy should look today.

It was all reminiscent of a famous scene in Aleksei Balabanov’s 2005 movie Dead Man’s Bluff, where a bandit from the polished 2000s lectures his 1990s Russian counterparts: “Why do you keep shooting? Business is done differently now.” It wasn’t just the Indians who pushed this line. The Chinese, Brazilians, Turks (yes, them too), and other so-called “rising powers” repeated similar mantras. Now, let’s be clear: no one should gloat. War is a terrifying and extreme manifestation of unresolved contradictions. However, to pontificate about “wisdom” and peace as if it’s a fresh insight is banal – and, frankly, vulgar.

Because when real danger arrives – when an enemy or existential threat targets your home – there is no high-minded choice left. States, like individuals, take up arms and fight for victory in order to restore peace. That’s not bloodlust; it’s the basic logic of international relations, from ancient kingdoms to today’s global order. You can deny it, but you can’t make it disappear. Western propaganda’s greatest success over the past three years was convincing much of the world that Russia’s offensive was a “war of choice” rather than a “war of necessity” – which it was. Many in the so-called rising powers naively believed that every conflict offers a choice, and that they themselves would never resort to arms. But history teaches otherwise.

When survival and national security are truly at stake, even the most idealistic states will – without even realizing it – abandon their slogans and do whatever is necessary. That, too, is a timeless law of international life. As the Bible reminds us: “While people are saying, ‘Peace and safety,’ destruction will come on them suddenly, as labor pains on a pregnant woman, and they will not escape” (1 Thessalonians 5:3). What should Russia do now? Stay the course – finish what we started. And be prepared for new challenges on other fronts. At the same time, we should follow diplomatic protocol and call on India and Pakistan to resolve their crisis peacefully. We can even offer to host peace talks, if needed. Because while the reality of conflict remains unchanged, so too must our commitment: Victory first. Peace second.

Happy World War Two Victory Day – to us, and to peace.

Read more …

O’Keefe said a few days ago he was scared and would go dark ahead of this report. It’s clear why.

John Bryan, the unwilling “witnesss”, is the worst douche I’ve seen in a while.

• ‘Prince Andrew Was F*ing Underage Girls’ – James O’ Keefe (ZH)

An American businessman close to the royal family (not for long) was caught on undercover footage with damning claims about Prince Andrew’s relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. John Bryan, a trusted advisor to the Duke of York, claims that Prince Andrew lied to him about his involvement with minors, according to the footage, obtained by O’Keefe Media Group (OMG). “I knew he [Prince Andrew] saw him [Jeffrey Epstein],” said Bryan, “But he lied to me that he was such a close friend,” revealed Bryan, referring to Prince Andrew’s personal relationship with Epstein. More via OMG;

After Prince Andrew’s 2019 BBC interview, where he denied knowing Virginia Giuffre and famously claimed he was physically incapable of sweating, Bryan says he was quietly brought into “Royal Lodge,” Andrew’s private residence, to provide “crisis” management advice. In a previous interview with the New York Post, Bryan revealed “They [the British Royal Family] brought me in to help him [Andrew].” Bryan told the publication, “Andrew was so distressed, he wasn’t able to focus for more than 40 minutes.”

According to previous reporting by The Daily Mail, Bryan also admitted to crafting a five-page PR strategy titled the “House of Kroy,” advising Andrew to publicly express sympathy for victims of Jeffrey Epstein while maintaining his own innocence. At the time, Bryan publicly supported the Prince, stating, “I believe Prince Andrew is innocent.” “I did a big thing in The Daily Mail saying that I believed Andrew,” Bryan recounted to our undercover OMG journalist, adding, “And then I found out he was lying. I was so pissed.” When asked what Andrew had lied about, Bryan didn’t mince words: “That he was fucking underage girls. That’s not cool.” O’Keefe Media Group has reached out to both the Royal Family and John Bryan for comment regarding Bryan’s admissions.”

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Butler

Happy

Opera
https://twitter.com/Ducnghia16/status/1920073056439161292

Alpaca

Robot

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle May 7 2025

May 072025
 
 May 7, 2025  Posted by at 9:30 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , ,  64 Responses »


Felix Vallotton Verdun 1917

 

• Bessent Says US Is Negotiating With 17 Out of 18 Major Trade Partners (JTN)
• Bessent and USTR Greer Will Meet Chinese Trade Counterparts in Switzerland (CTH)
• Chinese Exporters Dodging US Tariffs – FT (RT)
• China May Cave to Trump on Tariffs Soon (Matt Margolis)
• The EU Zombie Uses Trump as Cover to Further Feed on Citizens (NC)
• The Death of Old Europe (von Hoffmeister)
• Canada’s War on… Canada (Solway)
• Canada: A Post-Election Autopsy (Solway)
• The Trump-Iran Deal, Explained (Victor Davis Hanson)
• $373M in DEI Funding at US Universities in Four Years (Salgado)
• OpenAI Blinks: Scraps For-Profit Plan After Outside Pressure (ZH)
• (None Dare Call It) Treason of the Judiciary (Miele)
• SCOTUS Rules On Trump’s Ban On Transgenders In The Military (Downey Jr)
• President Trump Sends Message of Support for Ed Martin as DC Attorney (CTH)
• This One Judge Keeps Getting Trump Cases, and It’s No Accident (Matt Margolis)
• America First Legal sues Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts (JTN)
• The Treaty That Kept India And Pakistan In Check Is Gone. Now What? (Chopra)

 

 

 

 

Big as it gets

Carney

Ritter
https://twitter.com/SMO_VZ/status/1919507173295718879

Orban
https://twitter.com/PM_ViktorOrban/status/1919730442808307869

Levine

Sharia

Fico
https://twitter.com/GlobalDiss/status/1919724917135646990

Catherine Austin Fitts talked about it

 

 

 

 

“I would be surprised if we don’t have more than 80% or 90% of those wrapped up by the end of the year,” he continued. “That may be much sooner. I would think that perhaps as early as this week, we will be announcing trade deals with some of our largest trading partners.”

• Bessent Says US Is Negotiating With 17 Out of 18 Major Trade Partners (JTN)

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent on Tuesday testified to Congress that the United States is in the process of negotiating with 17 of its largest trading partners. The secretary told the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government that they have received good offers from the countries they are currently negotiating with, in the wake of President Donald Trump’s tariffs. Bessent did not give a specific timeline for when trade deals would be reached, but said he expects most deals will be reached by the end of the year, according to Fox Business.

“There are 18 very important trading relationships. We are currently negotiating with 17 of those trading partners,” Bessent said. “China – we have not engaged in negotiations with as of yet. “Approximately 97% or 98% of our trade deficit is with 15 countries, 18% of the countries are major trading partners, and I would be surprised if we don’t have more than 80% or 90% of those wrapped up by the end of the year,” he continued. “That may be much sooner. I would think that perhaps as early as this week, we will be announcing trade deals with some of our largest trading partners.”

Bessent did not specify what countries they expect a deal with soon, or what the details of those deals would be. But he did state he believes the U.S. will see a reduction in the tariffs it’s charged by other countries. Hours after his testimony, officials indicated that formal trade negotiations with China could take place as early as Thursday, when the secretary travels to Switzerland. U.S. trade representative Jamieson Greer is also expected to meet with Chinese trade officials in Switzerland. The testimony also coincided with Trump’s meeting with new Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney. Canada and Mexico are two of the U.S.’s largest trading partners, along with China, Germany and Japan.

India
https://twitter.com/KanekoaTheGreat/status/1919798852426858673

Read more …

A chance meeting! It allows everyone to save face…

• Bessent and USTR Greer Will Meet Chinese Trade Counterparts in Switzerland (CTH)

The media have been going bananas wondering when President Trump will begin negotiations with China. President Trump has been very clear that there is no need to open negotiations with China, but all discussions are welcome. Essentially the point is that tariffs will remain in place until Beijing gets to a point where they acquiesce to the reality of President Trump’s terms for reciprocal trade. The goal is to bring manufacturing back to the USA, not generate terms where manufacturing remains in China. The Chinese trade delegation is scheduled to be in Switzerland at the same time as Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer are scheduled to be there. Both Bessent and Greer announced today they will meet with their Chinese counterparts on the sidelines of their travel to Switzerland.

USTR Press Release – […] “At President Trump’s direction, I am negotiating with countries to rebalance our trade relations to achieve reciprocity, open new markets, and protect America’s economic and national security,” said Ambassador Greer. “I look forward to having productive meetings with some of my counterparts as well as visiting with my team in Geneva who all work diligently to advance U.S. interests on a range of multilateral issues. ”While in Switzerland, Ambassador Greer will also meet with his counterpart from the People’s Republic of China to discuss trade matters.”

Treasury Secretary Press Release – “During Secretary Bessent’s visit to Switzerland, he will meet with President Karin Keller-Sutter of Switzerland, during which the Secretary will follow up on their recent meeting on the sidelines of the recent World Bank Group (WBG) – International Monetary Fund (IMF) Spring Meetings. While in Switzerland, Secretary Bessent will also meet with the lead representative on economic matters from the People’s Republic of China (PRC). (link) As we previously noted, the Swiss are very interested in resolving their trade status quickly. The Swiss Franc is now at the highest point against the U.S dollar in decades. One franc is worth 1.21 dollars. This makes their exports cost even more. The Swiss government desperately needs to lower the value of their currency. The Swiss central bank has already dropped interest rates to 0.25% and is now contemplating negative interest rates as a result.

Read more …

Xi can’t deny knowing about it.

• Chinese Exporters Dodging US Tariffs – FT (RT)

Chinese exporters are using various methods to avoid steep US tariffs, including shipping goods through third countries to obscure their origin, Financial Times reported on Sunday, citing trade consultants, customs officials, and social media posts. The practice, known as “place-of-origin washing,” involves rerouting goods through countries such as Malaysia, Vietnam, Thailand, and South Korea, and re-exporting them to the United States with new certificates of origin. The administration of US President Donald Trump recently imposed steep tariffs of up to 145% on Chinese goods, citing national security and trade imbalance concerns.

Chinese exporters fear that the tariffs will deprive them of access to one of their most important markets. According to the outlet, Chinese social media platforms are awash with ads offering “place-of-origin washing.” “The US must know of it,” one Malaysian salesperson has told FT. “It cannot get too crazy so we are controlling the amount [of orders we take].” According to FT, authorities in Malaysia, Vietnam, and Thailand are looking into the alleged practice and are implementing measures to tighten origin checks. Chinese exporters typically sell goods “free on board” (FOB), transferring liability to buyers once the goods leave China, which complicates enforcement efforts, the outlet added.

The other reported circumvention method is mixing high-cost items with cheaper goods, so exporters can underreport overall values of shipments, the FT quoted a cross-border trade consultant as saying. There are intermediaries who reportedly offer “grey area” tariff workarounds to small- and medium-sized enterprises. Beijing has accused Washington of “economic bullying,” retaliating with 125% duties on all US imports and implementing export controls. The Chinese Commerce Ministry said last week that it was evaluating the possibility of trade negotiations with the US but reiterated that Washington must show “sincerity” by canceling its tariffs if it wants meaningful dialogue.

Read more …

“China’s social safety net is practically nonexistent. When Chinese workers lose their jobs, they’re completely on their own: no unemployment benefits, no food stamps, nothing. That’s why we’re seeing increasing unrest as workers demand back pay and protest unfair dismissals.”

• China May Cave to Trump on Tariffs Soon (Matt Margolis)

President Donald Trump’s tough stance on China is already producing results, and the evidence suggests that Chairman Xi Jinping will have no choice but to back down. The Chinese economy, long propped up by unfair trade practices, is starting to crumble under the weight of Trump’s strategic 145% tariffs on Chinese imports. Protests from furious factory workers in China demanding back pay are spreading across the country after President Trump’s tariffs on Chinese imports began impacting the communist nation’s economy. Unrest has been reported across the country as workers have taken to the streets protesting unpaid wages and challenging unfair dismissals following the closures of factories squeezed by US tariffs, according to Radio Free Asia.

Chinese industry leaders, meanwhile, are “extremely anxious” about the steep duties, with many telling factories and suppliers to halt or delay supplies, Wang Xin, head of an industry group representing more than 2,000 Chinese merchants told the Financial Times. The scale of the crisis is staggering. Goldman Sachs’ analysis indicates that 16 million Chinese jobs are at risk due to Trump’s tariffs. Chinese industry leaders are reportedly “extremely anxious” about the steep tariffs, which is likely an understatement given the mounting evidence of economic turmoil. “It’s not easy at the moment,” a 26-year-old toy factory worker told the FT. His employer, in the Chinese city of Zhejiang, mostly sells to the US, and management recently forced workers to take two weeks off unpaid in the face of the tariffs.

Last month, construction workers threatened to throw themselves off the buildings they were working on unless they received their unpaid wages in the northeastern city of Tongliao, Radio Free Asia reported. Elsewhere, a sporting goods factory in southern Hunan province also shut without warning last month, offering no compensation or social security benefits, leading hundreds of workers to go on strike, the outlet said. But here’s the key point that the mainstream media keeps missing: China’s social safety net is practically nonexistent. When Chinese workers lose their jobs, they’re completely on their own: no unemployment benefits, no food stamps, nothing. That’s why we’re seeing increasing unrest as workers demand back pay and protest unfair dismissals.

The Chinese Communist Party maintains its grip on power through economic growth and iron-fisted control. But when millions of workers take to the streets, even totalitarian regimes start to sweat. History shows that no government, not even one as powerful as China’s, can ignore the fury of its people indefinitely. Last month, Kevin O’Leary predicted that China’s economy would face serious pressure if the U.S. got tough on trade, which it has. He pointed out that millions of Chinese factory workers rely on American demand, and without access to it, China risks internal unrest or potentially economic collapse if the government prints money to keep people employed. This vindicates what Trump has been saying all along: China needs us far more than we need them. While some American companies are feeling the pinch from the tariffs, our diverse economy and robust worker protections provide a crucial buffer. China enjoys no such luxury. If Xi wants to stay in power, he’ll have to cave sooner rather than later.

Read more …

” It’s getting pushback from the European Parliament, but the fact is Ursula can do it anyways with minimal support from EU governments. She’s likely just waiting for the right moment.”

• The EU Zombie Uses Trump as Cover to Further Feed on Citizens (NC)

Donald Trump is the gift that keeps on giving for the western misleadership class. Any anti-democratic swindle on the EU wish list is now being sold as a remedy to the Orange Man. (And if it’s not Trump, it’s Russia). The US is no longer a reliable defense partner, they say. We must give more power to Brussels and send untold billions to weapons companies. The US is no longer a reliable economic partner, they say. We must increase competitiveness by weakening labor and empowering finance. The UK voters may have opted for Brexit, but London and Brussels are “defying Trump” with a “free and open trade” declaration that includes negotiations ‘on defense and security, fishing and energy, as well as a “common understanding” of which topics will be covered by intensive Brexit reset negotiations this year.’

The strange thing about these plans, however, is that they include reliance on US weapons and energy and alignment with US geopolitical and geoeconomic goals. Let’s focus here on how the EU is pressing ahead with plans to dramatically increase defense spending due to Trump Abandonment Syndrome. The EU Jazz Band Recent commentary by Rosa Balfour, director of Carnegie Europe, perfectly sums up these arguments. In a piece titled “Europe Tried to Trump-Proof Itself. Now It’s Crafting a Plan B” she explains why the EU has no choice but to redirect social spending towards the arms industry. Balfour’s romantic version of recent history starts on February 28. That’s when “the televised humiliation of Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky” took place, and “Europe realized it could no longer rely on its longtime ally, the United States.” And here she is on the jazzy wreckage:

“The shocking depth and breadth of this realization cannot be overemphasized. Political leaders in European states, the European Union, and NATO displayed composure and coordination, but behind the scenes, the soundtrack was a frantic free jazz jam session with dramatic thuds and a long pause—the silence at the realization that the European comfort zone was over. And now, what are these composed and coordinated “political leaders” doing? They announce that Ukraine is Europe’s first line of defense, make grand plans for a “coalition of the willing,” and declare that Ukraine will become a “steel porcupine”. The coalition of the willing has fallen apart. The steel porcupine was ridiculed. And while those in the Kremlin likely aren’t losing any sleep, Europeans should be. That’s because, as Balfour writes, the European Commission “can play supporting roles by mobilizing financial resources and handling complicated in-house horse trading.”

That’s one way of putting it. The Commission is inching its way towards invoking emergency powers to push through parts of its rearmament slush fund. It’s getting pushback from the European Parliament, but the fact is Ursula can do it anyways with minimal support from EU governments. She’s likely just waiting for the right moment. Let’s look at the status of the European militarization billions. On March 19, the Commission introduced a 150 billion euro proposal — a first installment of what’s to be at least $900 billion— for establishing the Security Action for Europe (SAFE) through the reinforcement of European defence industry Instrument. It wants to move forward with it under Article 122 emergency powers which need only a qualified majority in the Council —as opposed to the usual consensus— which allows Ursula and friends to get around pesky vetoes from member countries.

The procedure for 122 is as follows: 1) the Commission proposes a Council measure; following which 2) the Council adopts the measure in line with [qualified majority voting]. No additional elements or participants are envisaged. This article allows the proposal to bypass parliamentary negotiations and go straight to the Council for negotiation and adoption. The Parliament’s role is reduced to submitting suggestions and requesting debates. How’s that for your democratic rules-based order? In an April 23 secret vote, the European Parliament’s Committee on Legal Affair unanimously backed a legal opinion rejecting the Commission’s attempt to bypass it on a 150 billion euro rearmament fund. While it is a non-binding vote, it does signal opposition to Ursula’s plan, but it’s not some principled stand for the will of the people or any romantic notion like that.

No, it’s more about dividing up slices of the pie as European weapons industry lobbyists are increasingly active in Brussels and are trying to make sure their clients are rewarded. And so much of the feeble opposition is over getting a stronger “buy European” clause in SAFE (it currently requires 65 percent of war consumables and complex systems to come from within the EU, Ukraine, or EEA/EFTA states, which includes Turkiye and Norway. Why must Ursula’s commission sideline the Parliament and some member states in order to spend 900 billion on military purchases? They lay it out in their proposal. There’s the usual nonsense about Russia:

The EU and its Member States now face an intensifying Russian aggression against Ukraine and a growing security threat from Russia. It is also now clear that this threat will persist in the foreseeable future, considering that Russia has shifted to a war-time economy enabling a rapid scaleup of its military capabilities and replenishment of its stocks. The European Council therefore underlined, in its conclusions of 6 March 2025, that “Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine and its repercussions for European and global security in a changing environment constitute an existential challenge for the European Union”. There’s also the Trump abandonment syndrome: At the same time, the United States, traditionally a strong ally, is clear that it believes it is over-committed in Europe and needs to rebalance, reducing its historical role as a primary security guarantor.

Read more …

” The disconnect between rulers and ruled has never been wider. The elites, ensconced in their Brussels bubble, continue to govern as if the people are an inconvenience, as if democracy means compliance rather than choice. The social contract is broken, and the backlash will only intensify.”

• The Death of Old Europe (von Hoffmeister)

The European Union, that grand and failing dream of technocrats, is dying. Its decline is not sudden or dramatic but a slow unraveling, a bureaucratic collapse in which every policy designed to sustain it only hastens its demise. It starves itself on the thin gruel of ideology – open borders dissolving nations into contested spaces, green mandates suffocating industry under the weight of unattainable standards, and a moralizing anti-Russian fervor that has left it isolated and energy-dependent. Once, Europe was the center of empires, the birthplace of civilizations that shaped the world. Now, it is a patient refusing medicine, convinced that its sickness is a form of enlightenment, that its weakness is a new kind of strength. The architects of this experiment still speak in the language of unity, but the cracks in the foundation are too deep to ignore.

Immigration was the first act of self-destruction, the point at which Western Europe’s ruling class severed itself from the people it claimed to govern. The elites, intoxicated by the rhetoric of multicultural utopia, flung open the gates without consideration for cohesion, for identity, for the simple reality that societies require more than abstract ideals to function. Cities have fractured into enclaves where parallel societies thrive, where police hesitate to patrol, where the native-born learn to navigate their own streets with caution. The promise was harmony, a blending of cultures into something vibrant and new. The reality is a quiet disintegration, a thousand unspoken tensions simmering beneath the surface. Politicians continue to preach the virtues of “diversity,” but the people – those who remember what it was like to have a shared history, a common language – are beginning to revolt. The backlash is no longer confined to the fringe. It is entering the mainstream, and the establishment trembles at what it has unleashed.

Then came the green delirium, the second pillar of Western Europe’s self-annihilation. Factories shutter under the weight of environmental regulations, farmers take to the streets in protest, and the middle class is squeezed between rising energy costs and stagnant wages. The climate must be saved, the leaders insist, even if the cost is economic ruin. Germany, once the industrial powerhouse of the continent, dismantles its nuclear infrastructure in favor of unreliable wind and solar power, only to return to coal when the weather turns unfavorable. There is a madness in this, a kind of collective hysteria where dogma overrides pragmatism, where the pursuit of moral purity blinds the ruling class to the suffering of ordinary citizens. The rest of the world watches, perplexed, as the EU willingly cripples itself for a cause that demands global cooperation – cooperation that is nowhere to be found. China builds coal plants, America drills for oil, India prioritizes growth over emissions, and the EU alone marches towards austerity, convinced that its sacrifice will inspire others. It will not.

And Russia – the great miscalculation, the strategic blunder that may yet prove fatal. Europe had a choice: to engage with Moscow as a partner, to integrate it into a stable continental order, or to treat it as an eternal adversary. It chose the latter, aligning itself fully with Washington’s confrontational stance, severing ties that had once provided cheap energy and economic stability. The pipelines are silent now, the ruble flows eastward, and Western Europe buys its gas at inflated prices from distant suppliers, enriching middlemen while its own industries struggle. Russia, spurned and sanctioned, turns to China, to India, to those willing to treat it as something other than a pariah. The Eurasian landmass is reconfiguring itself, and Europe is not at the center. The EU is on the outside, looking in, a spectator to its own irrelevance. The Atlanticists in Brussels believed they could serve two masters: their own people and Washington’s geopolitical whims. They were wrong.

In this unfolding drama, America and Russia emerge as twin pillars of Western civilization – different in temperament but united in their commitment to preserving sovereign nations against globalist dissolution. America, the last defender of the West’s entrepreneurial spirit and individual liberty, stands firm against the forces that would destroy borders and identities. Russia, keeper of traditional values and Christian heritage, guards against the cultural nihilism consuming Europe. Both understand that civilizations must defend themselves or perish; neither suffers the death wish that afflicts the Western European elites. And of Western Europe? It is a ghost at the feast, clutching its empty wineglass, muttering about “norms” and “values” as the world moves on without it. The European elites still cling to their illusions, still believe in the power of rhetoric over reality.

They speak of “strategic autonomy” while marching in lockstep with Washington’s wars, of “diversity” while their own cities become battlegrounds of competing identities, of “democracy” while silencing dissent with bureaucratic machinery and media censorship. The voters sense the decay. They rebel – in France, where Marine Le Pen’s supporters grow by the day; in Italy, where Giorgia Meloni’s government rejects the EU’s dictates on immigration; in Hungary, where Viktor Orbán openly defies the liberal orthodoxy. Yet the machine grinds on, dismissing every protest as populism, every objection as fascism. The disconnect between rulers and ruled has never been wider. The elites, ensconced in their Brussels bubble, continue to govern as if the people are an inconvenience, as if democracy means compliance rather than choice. The social contract is broken, and the backlash will only intensify.

Read more …

“Carney’s globalist net-zero platform will be sufficient to bring Canada to its knees without ever having to confront a political adversary.”

• Canada’s War on… Canada (Solway)

Canada is walking down a dangerous path. In a recent episode of “The Winston Marshall Show,” Steve Bannon has warned that “Canada could become ‘the next Ukraine’ if Russia or China presses territorial claims in the Arctic. “There’s no money there to defend anybody,” Bannon said, arguing that the United Kingdom, Canada’s historic security partner, “can’t defend itself.” Bannon suggested that Ottawa has only “two, maybe three years to act before external pressures harden.”

Bannon’s warning about Canada becoming a second Ukraine seems a gross exaggeration. Yet we recall that both Trudeau père and Trudeau fils were enamored of Communist China, that China has interfered in Canada’s elections favoring the Liberals, that Mark Carney is beholden to China to the tune of hundreds of millions in loans and “over $3 billion in politically sensitive investments with Chinese state-linked real estate and energy companies,” and that Canada hosted the Chinese military for tactical training in cold-weather warfare. Carney, a man of no charisma and less common sense for all his parenthetical savoir faire and encapsulated expertise, has already said that Canada’s friendly relationship and customary economic partnership with the U.S. is at an end. Meanwhile, an impoverished Canada will need generous amounts of foreign aid and may conceivably get it from China, in exchange for military bases and Canada-China cooperation in the Arctic.

As of this writing, Carney is in Washington for talks with Donald Trump. (Note, Trump is not in Ottawa for talks with Carney.) As Managing Editor for the Saskatchewan Standard, Christopher Oldcorn reports, Carney warned that any new deal “must be negotiated on our terms.” Trump was not impressed, telling Fox Business, “I’m not sure what he wants to see me about, but I guess he wants to make a deal.” Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick added, “They have their socialist regime, and it’s basically feeding off of America.” Carney is out of his depth, and Canada is in for a shock. Should a deal eventually emerge, it will not be on Carney’s terms.

At present, Canada reminds me of that preposterous knight in the Monty Python classic “The Holy Grail,” who continues pugnaciously challenging his antagonist even after he has lost both his arms and both his legs in the fight. This does not suggest that Canada is not a dangerous stump, and that it does not pose a threat to the U.S., for its alignment with China might conceivably mean a fentanyl-producing, militarily powerful, economically belligerent antagonist encroaching on its Arctic perimeter and entrenched along the 4,000-mile undefended border with the U.S. I would not put such recklessness past Carney as he labors diligently to turn Canada into a plebiscitarian sinkhole, deprived of political virility, reduced to penury and dependent for its survival on a foreign enemy.

I don’t see the U.S. engaging in open warfare with Canada, which Bannon considers a possibility. The scenario is far-fetched. Canada is not Ukraine; it is Lower Slobbovia. If you run a podcast called a “War Room,” you are prone to flights of fancy. This is not 1812, and America does not need to fire a single shot. It can batter Canada economically into submission with a stroke of the president’s pen despite China’s axial influence. America needs nothing that Canada has to offer, says Trump, neither cars, energy, lumber, etc. But it is also clear that the U.S. will not tolerate a Chinese presence on its northern border. For all his absurd bluster and his putting a Canadian slant on things, little man Carney will have to listen up.

Regrettably, Canada has become what Christopher Rufo, applying a well-known psychological personality concept, calls a “Cluster B society,” where “ideology replaces competence as a marker of distinction,” focusing on emotional excess, self-image, and dramatic posturing and leading to what psychologist Andrzej Lobaczewski calls a “pathocracy.” In a syndrome of this nature, Rufo laments, “The spontaneous life and beauty that are the fruits of a more balanced society will be snuffed out by grim commissars administering a Cluster B pathocracy. Our self-governing regime would be over.” Welcome to Canada and its preening prime minister.

Indeed, Canada is now foolishly engaged in a costly, surreptitious, self-harming skirmish with the U.S, which it could have avoided with a soupçon of maturity. The issue was never in doubt. To begin with, Canadian unity is fractured. There is little to no chance of gluing the pieces back together again and presenting a united front as a negotiating partner. It is at a distinct economic disadvantage in the so-called tariff war should Trump move to erase Canada’s $200 billion trade rip-off that helps to keep the country afloat, as Justin Trudeau himself admitted. Carney’s globalist net-zero platform will be sufficient to bring Canada to its knees without ever having to confront a political adversary. For the truth is that Canada is at war with itself. And it does not matter if it wins or loses, since it amounts to the same thing.

Read more …

“What Canada was, is not as important as what Canada is, and what it is becoming.” —Jason Stephan

• Canada: A Post-Election Autopsy (Solway)

As a result of the Liberal victory and the installation of Mark Carney as prime minister of Canada in the April 28, 2025, election, the country is now speeding down the Trans-Canada highway to certain destruction. Carney, of course, is a global financier, a promoter of centralized government control, a lover of censorship, and a climate change apostle who doubles as a trustee of the World Economic Forum and the United Nations Special Envoy on Climate Change and Finance. He carries three passports, Canadian, Irish, and British, and has spent the last decade out of Canada, which obviously makes him the ideal candidate for the prime ministership, Canadian to the bone. He is, in fact, the spitting image of the Canadian psyche, a small man, slack-faced, awkward in comportment, grim and humorless, rag doll-like in his person. The fit is almost providential.

As one commenter put it, “Carney looks the part… the funeral director of Canada.” The question that is making the rounds is how the Liberal Party managed to erase a 20-point deficit in the polls and shrug off three terms of social and economic devastation that have seen the country plummet toward third-world status while at the same time elevating the most unprepossessing choice possible to the prime minister’s office. Is the nation brain-dead? Does it have a death wish? Is it merely greed for government largesse? What are the factors that have contributed to Canada’s accelerating decline? There are several possibilities, acting singly or in concert. Donald Trump: When Trump began trolling Canada with his 51st state bagatelle, he proved once again that Canadians have no sense of humor.

Canadians, by and large, with thank-the-Lord saving exceptions, are an earnest, priggish, self-massaging, unexciting people of limited intelligence who, like most of a leftist bent, cannot recognize a joke, especially when brandished by an American. What former New York Post correspondent Emma Jo-Morris says of the media seems largely true of the Canadian electorate: “The media isn’t biased because it’s liberal; it’s biased because it has no concept of reality. The people who make media content are incapable of separating their own self-worship from objective truth.” Of course, being Liberal and having no concept of reality amount to the same thing. So Canadians took Trump seriously and got their hackles up, huffing and puffing and strutting and posturing. But when Trump launched his tariff fusillade, this was a bridge too far.

Canadians girded themselves for war like a mighty gnat prepared to crush an elephant rather than adopt the grown-up approach of Alberta Premier Danielle Smith, who visited Trump and proposed a negotiated settlement. This was Mark Carney’s and the Liberals’ gold-plated opportunity to rally a subfusc Canadian electorate to a losing cause and scrub the Conservatives’ favorable poll numbers, leading ultimately to an electoral victory that will likely destroy the country. Indeed, Canada is more ragged than it ever was. What was once a Hudson Bay blanket is now a patchwork quilt. The New Democratic Party: After years of propping up the Liberals, leader Jagmeet Singh and the NDP came crashing down. The Party lost not only its longtime leader but also its official party status.

Its 25 parliamentary seats were reduced to seven. It is likely that many of the lost 18 seats defected to Carney’s Liberals, putting them over the top, good enough for a minority government, just three seats short of a majority. There is speculation that some or all of the remaining NDP rump may follow suit, giving the Liberals the majority government they desperately crave. Biased Coverage: The Canadian media and paper press are basically no different from their Pravda-like American cousins, trafficking in lies, innuendoes, suppressions, and outright interference in the electoral process. This is their stock-in-trade. With only a few outliers like Rebel News, the Western Standard, and two or three others, the press has become a vast and undifferentiated propaganda network for the Liberal machine, flush with Liberal plugola. Canada’s public broadcaster, the CBC, is supported by an annual $1.4 billion grant, which Carney has promised to inflate and Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre had threatened to eliminate. The sequel was predictable.

Read more …

Can’t conquer Iran, Victor. Start there. Or Yemen.

• The Trump-Iran Deal, Explained (Victor Davis Hanson)

Just recently, the Houthis, that is the terrorist organization that controls half of Yemen and has been hit hard by the United States for its interruption of maritime commerce in the Red Sea and its serial attacks on Israel, has been—I guess you would say—neutered. Its port facilities, its airport, a lot of its missile depots, its command and control have all been neutralized. But yet, here they are with a vestigial force. They just sent a missile, not just into Israel, but into Israel’s international Ben Gurion Airport. It almost hit one of the terminals. Didn’t kill anybody. But it made a huge crater right on the periphery of the airport grounds. And for some reason it was not intercepted by Israel’s tripartite missile defense system. Let me add another incident. Just recently, almost at the same time, four more terrorists were arrested in the United Kingdom for organizing Iranian-inspired terror against citizens of Britain. And of course, we remember that Iran was involved in an effort to assassinate President Donald Trump.

What am I getting at is, we’re right in the middle of negotiations with Iran. Donald Trump feels that they are historically vulnerable. The Assad regime, their lifeline to the Arab world, is gone. Kaput. Vanished. They can’t use the Damascus airport to airlift weapons for Hezbollah. Hezbollah has been reduced dramatically in its effectiveness. Hamas is—I don’t know what you’d call Hamas. It’s living underground among the rubble of Gaza. And then, of course, the Houthis, as I mentioned, have been attacked. Israel has demonstrated that it can penetrate, at will, the supposedly formidable air defenses of Iran. The United States, in addition, is building up its strategic bombing force—in Diego Garcia and in areas that can reach Iran—with the capability of dropping these 20,000 to 30,000-pound bunker busters. We have two carriers that will soon be assembled near there.

What am I getting at again? The pressure is all on Iran. Militarily. Diplomatically. Economically. Socially. Culturally. What do I mean by that? Culturally, there is about 30% to 40% of the country are non-Farsi Persian speakers. And they’re very restive, angry. Power outages. The regime is unpopular. It’s diverted billions of dollars to these terrorist appendages that now didn’t pay off, that they’re defunct. And so, Donald Trump thinks that he, with this maximum pressure, putting this crushing oil embargo—which by the way, former President Joe Biden lifted—that he can bring them to negotiations one last time. Personally, I don’t think he can. Nothing that that regime has ever said is accurate. Nobody in the MAGA movement wants an optional war in the Middle East. But they will have nuclear weapons, perhaps in a year. So, what is the likely scenario? The likely scenario is they will lose face if they negotiate away their nuclear weapons.

That is the only lever they have over Western powers now that their terrorist children are all gone. So, I don’t think they’re gonna make a deal. They’re gonna delay, delay, delay; lie, lie, lie; use the Houthis. And they are playing with fire because once Donald Trump gives them an opportunity for a peaceful way out of their dilemma—that is they can negotiate an end to their nuclear program. They don’t need nuclear power. They have the fourth-largest fossil fuel reserves in the world. They have enough energy for themselves and for export for an endless amount of time. And yet they still are working on this nuclear project, not for peaceful energy generation, but to have a nuclear deterrent. And so, what we should look for in the next few months is that an exasperated Trump administration will finally throw up its hands and say, “You can’t deal with these people, but they’re not gonna get a nuclear weapon.”

At that point, one of two things will happen—I should say one of three things. Israel will hit back because of the Houthis’ attack on its airport. And that could come sooner or later. Or the United States will intervene. I don’t think it’ll intervene on its own. Or there’ll be a joint Israeli-American operation. But by the end of the year, I don’t think Iran will have a nuclear deterrent. And then we’re gonna be watching a mystery unfold. If it should be hit, and if it should lose its nuclear potential, what will be the reaction of the Iranian people? Will they be angry that their national sovereignty has been attacked? Or will they be delighted that this 50-year hated regime is now gone and they don’t have to spend money on these Arab terrorist groups that have brought them no profit? That’ll be something to see. And I think we’ll see it at the end of the year.

Read more …

“Decades after the civil rights movement, academia is obsessed with fixating not on intelligence, qualifications, or content of character, but rather on skin color..”

• $373M in DEI Funding at US Universities in Four Years (Salgado)

Educayshun has become mere propaganda at hundreds of American schools and universities. In fact, Defending Education has identified a staggering $373 million in DEI funding since 2016 across more than a hundred institutions of higher learning. Defending Ed investigated 130 colleges and universities across 44 states and Washington, D.C. to date, identifying 281 diversity, equity, and inclusion funds (DEI). These include scholarships and programs based around race and sexual “identity.” Defending Ed warned that, while many universities and colleges have now officially ended DEI programs under Trump administration pressure, in many cases, the programs have simply been renamed or gone underground for the time being. The University of Nebraska-Lincoln, for example, simply retitled its “Office of Diversity and Inclusion Fund” to be the “Community and Belonging Support Fund.”

Just add more pablum for a surface-level makeover. From the Defending Ed website: “To date, we have been able to track down over $373,344,424 in donations to fund institution DEI programs, scholarships, and offices. While some of the funding has been tracked down via “Day of Giving” style campaign webpages, the vast majority of the money has been traced through university announcements, webpages, and reports. The information contained in this report primarily covers the years from 2021 to present with one or two exceptions noted below. Decades after the civil rights movement, academia is obsessed with fixating not on intelligence, qualifications, or content of character, but rather on skin color.

This is a vast disservice to students of all ethnicities, and has turned our institutions of higher learning into little more than propaganda machines. Defending Ed also provided examples of some of the DEI projects and funds. The University of Michigan “raised over $98,665,269 for a wide range of DEI initiatives and funds, including scholarships for first-generation students” and established a “George Floyd Memorial Scholarship.” According to a 2023 University of Delaware report, the university was able to raise $21 million to expand its diversity, equity, and inclusion programming.

One of the funds included in the donor haul was it’s “Justice, Equity, Diversity and Inclusion, or JEDI, Fund” which states that support “helps provide programs, resources and opportunities to cultivate educated and empowered individuals who not only understand the origins of societal challenges related to equity and social justice but also have the tools to create solutions to address them.”… The University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) School of the Arts and Architecture includes its “Anti-racism Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion” program which includes the UCLA Arts Racial Equity Fund. Meanwhile, the University of California, Berkeley fundraised $186,420 for “Increasing Diversity and Opportunity at Cal” during a 2025 campaign. These universities need to be exposed and their federal funding cut off so long as they continue to promote racist DEI.

Read more …

Altman doesn’t dare to go up against Musk? it’s not just them anymore. It’s people seeing endless profit vs people seeing endless trouble.

• OpenAI Blinks: Scraps For-Profit Plan After Outside Pressure (ZH)

In a blog post overnight, the OpenAI Board revealed that its nonprofit arm would retain control of the chatbot company following backlash over its attempt to restructure into a for-profit business. “We made the decision for the nonprofit to retain control of OpenAI after hearing from civic leaders and engaging in constructive dialogue with the offices of the Attorney General of Delaware and the Attorney General of California,” the OpenAI Board wrote in a blog post. Last fall, OpenAI’s Sam Altman was preparing to overhaul the company’s structure and transition to a for-profit business—an effort that sparked a heated legal battle with co-founder Elon Musk, who sought to keep OpenAI ‘open’. The board provided new details about OpenAI’s evolving structure:

OpenAI was founded as a nonprofit, and is today overseen and controlled by that nonprofit. Going forward, it will continue to be overseen and controlled by that nonprofit. Our for-profit LLC, which has been under the nonprofit since 2019, will transition to a Public Benefit Corporation (PBC)–a purpose-driven company structure that has to consider the interests of both shareholders and the mission. The nonprofit will control and also be a large shareholder of the PBC, giving the nonprofit better resources to support many benefits. Our mission remains the same, and the PBC will have the same mission.

“We want our nonprofit to be the largest and most effective nonprofit in history that will be focused on using AI to enable the highest-leverage outcomes for people,” Altman wrote in a letter to employees. He also provided details about OpenAI’s evolving structure: OpenAI’s nonprofit will remain in control of the organization after discussions with civic leaders and attorneys general from California and Delaware. The for-profit LLC will convert to a Public Benefit Corporation (PBC)—a mission-aligned model also used by other AI labs like Anthropic and X.ai.

This move replaces the old capped-profit structure with a simpler equity-based model, but does not represent a sale. The nonprofit will retain oversight and become a major shareholder in the PBC, giving it more resources to advance AI for broad societal benefit. A new nonprofit commission will help guide efforts to ensure AI supports public good in areas like health, education, science, and public services. OpenAI says this new structure will enable it to make faster and safer progress toward its mission of democratizing AGI. Meanwhile, Marc Toberoff, lead counsel for Elon Musk in the ongoing lawsuit against OpenAI, told Bloomberg via email that Altman’s decision to scale back for-profit plans “changes nothing.”

“OpenAI’s announcement is a transparent dodge that fails to address the core issues: charitable assets have been and still will be transferred for the benefit of private persons, including Altman, his investors and Microsoft,” Toberoff said. In March, US District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers blocked Musk’s request to stop Altman from restructuring OpenAI into a for-profit company. This led the judge to expedite a trial for this fall. Given “the public interest at stake and potential for harm if a conversion contrary to law occurred,” Rogers said, adding that an expedited trial later this year would be on “core” claim that OpenAI’s structure conversion plan is unlawful and “potentially the interrelated contract-based claims.” Earlier this year, a Musk-led group offered to purchase OpenAI for around $100 billion, a bid that was quickly rejected.

Read more …

“Now, at long last, we can see the fruit of the corrupt tree sprouting in our court system, where judges help illegal immigrants escape through the back door of the courtroom, where other judges demand the return of deported gang members or halt the deportation of antisemitic radicals, and where every effort to put America first is ruled unconstitutional..”

• (None Dare Call It) Treason of the Judiciary (Miele)

Thursday, April 24, was a day like any other day—the sun came up, the sun went down, and President Donald Trump was hit with at least three nationwide injunctions by federal district court judges. That’s just the way it goes if you are a president who wants to take back America from the entrenched left-wing bureaucracy and restore common sense to government before it is too late. The danger of the bureaucracy was predicted by Julien Benda in his 1927 book “The Treason of the Clerks,” which warned of the danger of the intellectual class adopting political passions that had previously been the sole domain of the masses. We see this most distinctly today in the federal bureaucracy, which I dare say has the greatest concentration of degree-holders from Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Columbia (and the like) of any sector in the nation, other than the incestuous universities themselves.

The treason that Benda described was the loss of independence of thought and dispassionate reason by intellectuals, and the accompanying subservience of intellect to political passions. During Trump’s first term, I wrote a column describing the danger that Benda had foreseen: Benda wrote at the beginning of the age of mass communication, and yet he already saw that “political passions have attained a universality never before known. … Thanks to the progress of communication and, still more, to the group spirit, it is clear that the holders of the same political hatred now form a compact impassioned mass, every individual of which feels himself in touch with the infinite number of others, whereas a century ago such people were comparatively out of touch with each other and hated in a ‘scattered’ way” …

It seems that we are now living out Benda’s worst nightmare—an age of manipulation of the masses by those who think they know better—whether you call them the “deep state,” the “opposition party,” “the national elite,” “the entrenched bureaucracy,” or just “the establishment.” And for the past 10 years, they have turned their hatred on Donald Trump. Without rhyme or reason, they fight him on every reform and arm themselves with invented scandal and fake news. Now, in Trump’s second term, we see that the bureaucracy has a close ally in the judiciary—not one judge, but multitudes that aim to preserve the status quo of liberal governance. If that wasn’t clear before April 24, there was no room for doubt after the day was filled with one court ruling after another telling Trump to “stand back and stand by” rather than to exercise his lawful power as president.

Here’s what tumbled out of the judicial branch that day: – A federal district court judge in California blocked Trump’s executive order that would have denied federal funds to so-called sanctuary cities that limit or forbid cooperation with federal immigration authorities. – A Washington, D.C., judge blocked the Trump administration from following through on the president’s executive order requiring that voters in federal elections show proof of citizenship when registering. – A district judge in New Hampshire blocked efforts to defund public schools that utilize diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives. Not to be outdone, judges in Maryland and Washington, D.C., essentially issued the same order, giving added protection to one of the least popular programs ever shoved down the throat of American citizens. At the time, those were the latest of more than a dozen nationwide injunctions issued by unelected federal judges who appeared more interested in preserving and protecting left-wing shibboleths than the Constitution.

Also in courts across the nation that week were attempts by judges to reject Trump’s authority as commander in chief to ban transgender participation in the military, to deny Trump the right to strip security clearances from law firms that he says put national security interests second to political partisanship, and stop the administration’s efforts to eliminate federal news services such as Voice of America that engage in anti-American propaganda. Those are all in addition to the several injunctions issued relative to Trump’s promised reform of the immigration system to expedite deportation of illegal immigrants, especially those who have a criminal history or are members of international gangs. If that seems normal, it isn’t. There were only six nationwide injunctions during the eight years of the George W. Bush presidency, and only 12 during the Barack Obama presidency. That increased to 14 under President Joe Biden, which was surpassed by Trump in the first nine weeks of his second term when 15 such injunctions were issued.

Of course, Trump should be accustomed to such judicial abuse. In his first term, there were 64 injunctions against his policies, a staggering 92.2% issued by Democrat-appointed judges. Julien Benda would have clearly recognized the “political passions” that had supplanted the disinterested intellectual rigor we once expected of our judges. Yet because of our habituated respect for the separation of powers, none dare call it the treason of the judiciary. That of course is a reference to the 1960s tract “None Dare Call It Treason” by John A. Stormer. Stormer took on the country’s intellectual elites, blaming them for working against the interests of the nation by tolerating or quietly promoting communism. The left-wing elites of the day laughed it off as another right-wing conspiracy theory, but as time has passed it’s become clear that there was indeed a long-range effort to corrupt our institutions with Communism 101—reducing social acceptance of religion, turning education into indoctrination, and infiltrating government with the intelligentsia that thinks American values are outdated.

Now, at long last, we can see the fruit of the corrupt tree sprouting in our court system, where judges help illegal immigrants escape through the back door of the courtroom, where other judges demand the return of deported gang members or halt the deportation of antisemitic radicals, and where every effort to put America first is ruled unconstitutional. Fighting back against the overreach of the judiciary must be Trump’s No. 1 priority as he seeks to restore sanity to the federal government. Because the most important principle of constitutional law that is being decided in the next few months is whether the president is truly the chief executive or whether he serves at the pleasure of left-wing judges who put political passion ahead of national interests. In the ultimate irony, the case must be decided by nine men and women in black robes, the justices of the Supreme Court of the United States. The fate of the nation’s future hinges on whether they will seek justice impartially or be swayed by partisan rancor. Unfortunately, it’s an open question.

Read more …

“After Trump’s triumphant return to the White House, he appointed Pete Hegseth as secretary of defense. Since then, recruitment numbers have exploded, after years of the number of recruits tumbling..”

• SCOTUS Rules On Trump’s Ban On Transgenders In The Military (Downey Jr)

The Supreme Court issued a brief order on Tuesday allowing the Trump administration’s ban on transgender people in the military to proceed. Though the order was unsigned, the usual suspects, Justices Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, and Ketanji Brown Jackson, locked arms and said they would have denied the Trump administration’s request to pause the lower court’s order. Several years after the Biden administration chased warriors away from the military by mandating the COVID vaccine and also encouraging transgender people to join through DEI initiatives, the Supreme Court paused a decision by U.S. District Judge Benjamin Settle, located in Seattle, who suggested that Trump’s decision to ban transgender soldiers was unconstituional, claiming that it was “unsupported, dramatic and facially unfair.”

“A man’s assertion that he is a woman, and his requirement that others honor this falsehood, is not consistent with the humility and selflessness required of a service member,” Trump’s decree stated. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, located in San Francisco, refused to put a hold on Judge Settle’s decision. The ruling is sure to set off a dumpster fire of liberal whining, crying, and protests, not to mention another reason the left will complain that “Trump hates the LGBTFBI crew.” Shortly after taking back the White House, Trump issued a directive stating that people with a history or diagnosis of gender dysphoria would no longer be allowed to serve in any branch of the U.S. military. Under the Biden administration, many transgender people chose to join the military, some of whom opted for costly gender reassignment surgeries. Trump also released a directive stating that federal funds would no longer be spent on such surgeries.

Another important factor to keep in mind regarding Trump’s decision to keep out transgenders, the woke, and people hired and promoted through DEI initiatives is the very real notion that woke military members would be more likely to fight fellow Americans when told to do so, as some news media pundits are inclined to believe. It is unknown how long it will take to purge the military of transgender service members who pretend to be a gender other than that which science deemed them at birth. Left-leaning news sites, like Reuters, are reporting the story and suggesting that it is an attack against people who do not agree with the “gender they were assigned at birth.”

The decision is just the latest in a wave of Supreme Court victories for President Trump. The exact number of service members currently suffering from gender dysphoria is unknown, but some believe there are as many as 14,000 transgender people throughout all five branches of the military, though a senior-level member of the Defense Department suggested that there may be only 4,240 who are currently serving. After Trump’s triumphant return to the White House, he appointed Pete Hegseth as secretary of defense. Since then, recruitment numbers have exploded, after years of the number of recruits tumbling during Joe Biden’s single four-year presidential term.

Read more …

“..If the nomination is not successful by May 20th, there is a scenario where DC Judge James Boasberg could appoint the U.S. attorney. Mary McCord is smiling.”

• President Trump Sends Message of Support for Ed Martin as DC Attorney (CTH)

President Trump has sent a message of support via Truth Social on behalf of Ed Martin to be confirmed as U.S. Attorney for the important Washington DC office. Multiple ‘republican’ members of the Senate do not support the nomination. If the nomination is not successful by May 20th, there is a scenario where DC Judge James Boasberg could appoint the U.S. attorney. Mary McCord is smiling.

PRESIDENT TRUMP – “Ed Martin is going through the approval process to be U.S. Attorney in the District of Columbia. According to many but, in particular, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., his approval is IMPERATIVE in terms of doing all that has to be done to SAVE LIVES and to, MAKE AMERICA HEALTHY AGAIN. This is a passion for Ed, more so than for almost anyone that I have seen. One of the reasons that I was so successful in winning the 2024 Presidential Election is my commitment to Health, and helping to Make America Healthy. The Cost of the Chronic Disease Epidemic has gotten out of control over the past four years of the Biden Presidency. We are going to take our Country BACK, and FAST. Ed Martin will be a big player in doing so and, I hope, that the Republican Senators will make a commitment to his approval, which is now before them. Ed is coming up on the deadline for Voting and, if approved, HE WILL NOT LET YOU DOWN. When some day in the future you look back at your Vote for Ed Martin, you will be very proud of what you have done for America and America’s Health. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!”

The Republican opposition group to Ed Martin is the traditional element of the party who stand against the basic principles of what the MAGA movement is all about.

“Via CNN – […] Trump and his allies have a short window to get Martin over the finish line. If Republicans don’t confirm him by May 20 when his interim position expires, there would be a new process to play out in picking a new nominee. One option could be US District Judge James Boasberg appointing someone to become DC’s top prosecutor. Boasberg, a Barack Obama appointee, has presided over a number of high-profile cases challenging Trump policies, drawing the ire of the president and his allies. After this story published on Monday evening, Trump posted about Martin’s confirmation battle on Truth Social writing that his “approval is IMPERATIVE.” Top Justice Department officials, who had preferred another candidate for the job, have had to caution Martin about some of his public activities since taking on the job on an interim basis, sources briefed on the matter told CNN.

Despite growing blowback on the nomination, allies of Trump and Martin have made clear that the president has so far been thrilled with Martin’s job performance. “Martin is President Trump’s favorite US Attorney,” one source familiar with his nomination process previously told CNN. . On top of Trump’s direct calls to GOP senators, 23 Republican state attorneys general sent a letter to Senate Judiciary Chair Chuck Grassley and Senate Majority Leader John Thune on Monday urging them to move forward on Martin’s confirmation, according to a copy shared with CNN. Trump ally Charlie Kirk also posted on X over the weekend about the need to successfully confirm Martin. DOJ officials who may have wanted someone else for the job have come to terms with the fact that he is Trump’s pick and are doing everything they can to help get him confirmed, sources briefed on the matter told CNN.

Martin has successfully implemented Trump’s “law and order agenda” and been a “fantastic U.S. Attorney for D.C.,” said Alex Pfeiffer, White House principal deputy communications director. “The White House looks forward to his continued success in the role. Ed has shown he is the right man for the job.” Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee are expected to keep Trump’s nominee on track, despite diminishing odds Martin will advance to see a full Senate vote.”

Let us not pretend amongst ourselves…. In basic truth, both the democrats and republicans lost in the 2024 election. Donald Trump defeated the republican candidate, Ron DeSantis, and Donald Trump defeated the democrat candidate, Kamala Harris. As the second term of President Trump continues, the republican party will show increasingly obvious opposition to all of the policies and results coming from the MAGA agenda. In the background of our political dynamic the Republican apparatus is already having conversations about what comes next, after the MAGA infection identified as President Trump is removed. When we ask ourselves why President Trump’s agenda hasn’t been codified by congressional action, the honest answer is, because the MAGA policy is not supported by the Republicans in congress. Nothing about this dynamic is likely to change. The republican resistance is simply wearing a mask right now, and there are certain times when that mask slips. It has always been thus….

Read more …

Boasberg rules!

• This One Judge Keeps Getting Trump Cases, and It’s No Accident (Matt Margolis)

In a development that should send chills down the spine of every American who cares about the rule of law, Judge James Boasberg — you remember this guy, right? — has somehow ended up with case after case involving President Donald Trump’s second term. The D.C. swamp’s judicial machine continues its relentless assault on our duly elected president, with Boasberg emerging as its not-so-secret weapon. The so-called “random” assignment system has produced results that defy probability and reek of deliberate manipulation. The good news is that House Republicans are fighting back. Reps. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), Darrell Issa (R-Calif), and Chip Roy (R-Texas) are demanding answers from Angela Caesar, the court clerk who oversees this suspicious case assignment system.

In a letter that Townhall obtained on Monday, they are demanding explanations for what any rational observer would recognize as a coordinated effort to undermine the Trump presidency. “Many of these nationwide injunctions have raised concerns that Article III judges are exceeding their constitutional authority by replacing the policy decisions of the duly elected President with their own preferences, eroding public trust in the integrity and fairness of our judicial system. Many high-profile cases challenging policy decisions of the Trump Administration have been filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (District Court),” the letter states. “As Congress considers potential legislative reforms to address the abuse of nationwide injunctions and adjust the national distribution and local assignment of cases challenging Executive Branch policy decisions, we write to request information about the District Court’s assignment of cases.”

Boasberg has been handed several significant cases within a remarkably short timeframe relating to the Trump administration. His docket now includes cases challenging the administration’s implementation of the Alien Enemies Act for deportations, as well as matters concerning administration officials’ use of the Signal app, both assigned less than two weeks apart. But that’s not all. The judge is also overseeing cases involving the Department of Government Efficiency and disputes over federal funding for programs allegedly violating civil rights laws (though the latter was dismissed at the plaintiff’s request). While the D.C. District Court’s local rules govern case assignments, the concentration of such politically sensitive matters under one judge has sparked legitimate questions about the process. The timing and clustering of these assignments demand closer scrutiny.

Last month, the House passed critical legislation aimed at restraining these activist judges who have abandoned their constitutional role in favor of political warfare. But is it too little, too late? The Left’s judicial assault continues unabated while the mainstream media yawns or actively cheers it on. The American people deserve to know: Who is pulling the strings behind these courthouse doors? How deep does this corruption go? Furthermore, will anyone be held responsible for the misuse of our judicial system against the President of the United States?

Read more …

“America First Legal, led by Trump’s powerhouse advisor Stephen Miller..”

• America First Legal sues Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts (JTN)

The President Donald Trump-aligned legal group America First Legal Foundation on Monday sued Chief Justice of the United States John Roberts, accusing him of acting beyond his scope as head of the U.S. Judicial Conference. The lawsuit was also lodged against Robert Conrad, who serves as the director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, according to Fox News. The legal action accuses the men of operating beyond their scope of resolving cases or controversies, citing their cooperation with Congress in helping them investigate Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, and a willingness to create or adopt a code of ethics for the court.

“Under our constitutional tradition, accommodations with Congress are the province of the executive branch,” the foundation said. “The Judicial Conference and the Administrative Office are therefore executive agencies,” which would be overseen by the president and not the courts. U.S. District Judge Trevor McFadden will preside over the case.

Read more …

Complex. Given their history and their nuclear status, they should never be allowed to come even this far. Call Xi.

“By Air Marshal Anil Chopra (Retired), an Indian Air Force veteran fighter test pilot and is the former Director-General of the Center for Air Power Studies in New Delhi.”

• The Treaty That Kept India And Pakistan In Check Is Gone. Now What? (Chopra)

India launched ‘Operation Sindoor’ on the night of May 7, targeting terrorist infrastructure in Pakistan in retaliation for a deadly terrorist attack in Pahalgram, Kashmir last month. New Delhi stated that it hit at least nine targets. “Our actions have been focused, measured, and non-escalatory in nature. No Pakistani military facilities have been targeted. India has demonstrated considerable restraint in the selection of targets and method of execution,” the Indian government said in a statement. Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif descried the strikes as a “cowardly” attack and said Islamabad “has every right to respond forcefully to this act of war imposed by India, and a forceful response is being given.” Tensions between India and Pakistan escalated to military actions following the killing of 26 innocent vacationers in Pahalgam, Kashmir by Pakistan-backed terrorists in a Hamas-style terror attack.

Pakistan Army and Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) links were established by India’s National Investigation Agency days after the mass killing. The public was angry, and sought appropriate revenge. A wide range of diplomatic and economic measures were announced by both nations following the attack. Remarkably, India has put the 1960 Indus Water Treaty (IWT) in abeyance for the first time since the pact was inked by the two neighbors. Rejecting India’s move to suspend the IWT, Pakistan warned that any diversion of water will be treated as an ‘Act of War.’ Islamabad also said that it would hold “in abeyance” its participation in all bilateral agreements with India, including the landmark 1972 Simla Agreement.

Pakistan pledged a full-spectrum national power response to any threat against its sovereignty, put its armed forces on high alert, and began selective mobilisation. Most measures were quite expected. But by suspending the Shimla Agreement, Pakistan unwittingly handed over big advantage to India. What is the Shimla Agreement? The Shimla agreement between India and Pakistan was signed on July 2, 1972 at Barnes Court (Raj Bhavan) in the town of Shimla in the Indian state of Himachal Pradesh, between then-Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi and her Pakistani counterpart Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. It was ratified on July 15, 1972 (by Pakistan), and August 3, 1972 (by India), and became effective the next day. The agreement had come in the wake of Pakistan’s comprehensive defeat in the 1971 war that split the country and created independent Bangladesh.

The agreement stated:“The Government of India and the Government of Pakistan are resolved that the two countries put an end to the conflict and confrontation that have hitherto marred their relations and work for the promotion of a friendly arid harmonious relationship and the establishment of durable peace in the sub-continent, so that both countries may henceforth devote their resources and energies to the pressing task of advancing the welfare of their peoples.” The document was meant to lay the foundation of a peaceful and stable relationship between the two nations. It was decided that the two countries are resolved “to settle their differences by peaceful means through bilateral negotiations or by any other peaceful means mutually agreed upon between them.”

The treaty mandated that the two countries resolve issues bilaterally, and superseded the United Nation’s resolution on Kashmir. Perhaps more importantly, under the agreement, India and Pakistan established the Line of Control (LoC), previously called the Ceasefire Line, making it a quasi-border between the two nations. New Delhi succeeded in persuading Islamabad to change the name of the ceasefire line to the Line of Control (LoC), thus delinking it from the UN-imposed 1949 ceasefire line and highlighting that Kashmir was now a purely bilateral matter between India and Pakistan. The treaty clearly stated that Indian and Pakistani forces must be withdrawn to their respective sides of the “international border.” That in Jammu and Kashmir, the LoC resulting from the cease-fire of December 17, 1971, shall be respected by both sides without prejudice toward the recognised position of either side.

Neither side shall seek to alter it unilaterally, irrespective of mutual differences and legal interpretations. India returned around 13,000 square kilometers of land taken in battle on the western border but retained some strategic areas, including Turtuk, Dhothang, Tyakshi, and Chalunka in Chorbat Valley, covering more than 883 square kilometers, so as to facilitate lasting peace. Both sides further agreed to refrain from the threat or the use of force in violation of the LoC. The fact that there has only been one limited war since the agreement was signed reflects its effectiveness. Some Indian bureaucrats later argued that a tacit agreement to convert this LoC into a international border, was reached during a one-on-one meeting between the two heads of government. Pakistani bureaucrats have denied any such thing. Nor was that acceptable to Indian public.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Green
https://twitter.com/SteveLovesAmmo/status/1919731269673365609

Spike

OMG
https://twitter.com/buitengebieden/status/1919702279579455976

Elephant

Baby
https://twitter.com/Rainmaker1973/status/1919766603157406118

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle May 4 2025

May 042025
 
 May 4, 2025  Posted by at 10:15 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , ,  39 Responses »


Edouard Vuillard The window 1894

 

• Elon Musk : DOGE, Support For Trump ‘Essential’ For America (NYP)
• Zelensky Threatens World Leaders Visiting Moscow On Victory Day: Kremlin (ZH)
• Moscow Responds To Zelensky’s Victory Day Threats (RT)
• Ukrainian Troops To Take Part In Victory Day Parade In London (RT)
• Farage’s Party Making Big Gains In Local British Elections (RT)
• What Does Russia Want? (Ben Shapiro)
• From The Mongols to NATO: Here’s The Real Russian Doctrine (Bordachev)
• US Approves F-16 Support Package For Ukraine (RT)
• Trump’s First Tariff Trade Deal With India Could Be Game-Changing (JTN)
• De Minimis Loophole for Beijing Ends, Temu Halts Direct Shipping (CTH)
• An Unavoidable Trade War with Canada is Looming (CTH)
• Want To Know The Truth Behind Those Anti-Trump Polls? (Margolis)
• Trump’s WWII Claim Is ‘Pompous Nonsense’ – Medvedev (RT)
• Freedom in the EU? Only if You Can Afford It (Roos)
• Green Energy Fixation Sends Spain Dark (Gonzalez)
• DOGE Cuts Behind Nearly Half of All Layoffs This Year (JTN)
• CIA to Cut 1,200 (5%) Jobs -Ratcliffe Shifts Focus to “Human Intelligence” (CTH)
• Buffett To Step Down As Berkshire CEO At Year-End (ZH)

 

 

 

 

Pope
https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1918683034401812862

https://twitter.com/SilverlochMedia/status/1918482139072602406

Did you see Mike Waltz’s ‘disguise’?

Tulsi

RT Editor-in-Chief

Orban

Romania has ‘elections’ today, without the leading candidate.
https://twitter.com/ricwe123/status/1918569944905633948

 

 

 

 

“That I was useful in the furtherance of civilization,.. “That I helped move civilization forward, added to the store of knowledge and capability — that I helped to understand the universe.”

• Elon Musk : DOGE, Support For Trump ‘Essential’ For America (NYP)

Tesla co-founder Elon Musk is beginning his exit from the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) as his time as a special government employee comes to a close. His tenure as the public face of DOGE has been marked by historic cuts and widespread outrage, but the tech titan does not regret his time with the Trump administration. Although once praised by the media and championed by the left, Musk’s decision to become a force in the public sphere has not been without backlash. From his purchase of Twitter, now X, to coming out in support of then-candidate Donald Trump, Musk’s year has been anything but “boring.” Fox News host Lara Trump asked Musk if he had any “regret” over his work at DOGE or his support of Trump, to which the SpaceX founder replied, “No.” “I think it was essential for President Trump to win to ensure that America remained great, and that we reach greater heights,” Musk said in an interview that aired Saturday on “My View with Lara Trump.”

In the run-up to the November 2024 election, Musk became a staunch supporter of Trump despite having been a former Obama donor, citing concerns over former President Joe Biden’s “most radical-left, crazy administration ever.” “Whoever controlled the auto pen and teleprompter during the Biden administration was the real president,” he said. Musk also told Lara Trump that he believed “if President Trump had not won, I think the Democrat campaign to import vast numbers of illegal voters would have succeeded,” adding that America would have risked becoming a “one-party state from which we could never escape.” “Some people out there may be somewhat skeptical. They may think, ‘Well, there isn’t some Democrat plan to subvert democracy and achieve a permanent one-party, deep blue socialist state.’ I assure you, the more you research it, the more that you will see it is true.”

With Trump winning in November, Musk was put to work on day one of the new administration, but his cost-cutting efforts have sparked nationwide opposition. “It’s not been boring, that’s for sure — an eventful year to say the least. At least I didn’t get shot, you know. Look on the bright side,” Musk said. “But we have had people shoot up Tesla stores and burn down Tesla cars. I wasn’t expecting that level of violence, really,” he continued. Musk even conceded the bad actors targeting him and his companies are “somewhat inevitable.” Part of the backlash has been a “relentless propaganda campaign” from opponents of the Trump administration, attempting to “destroy [his] public perception” and “doing character assassination,” he said.

Musk concluded the outrage shows DOGE’s work is “effective.” As President Donald Trump marked his 100th day in office on Tuesday, DOGE said it has cut at least $160 billion in waste, fraud and abuse in the federal government. With no plans of slowing down, DOGE has made a number of consequential and controversial cuts in recent months, including cuts to hundreds of millions in DEI contracts and efforts to slash federal spending by trimming the federal workforce. While DOGE made historic moves in the Trump administration’s first 100 days, Musk revealed what he most wants his legacy to be. “That I was useful in the furtherance of civilization,” he told Lara Trump. “That I helped move civilization forward, added to the store of knowledge and capability — that I helped to understand the universe.”

Read more …

• Zelensky Threatens World Leaders Visiting Moscow On Victory Day: Kremlin (ZH)

Ukraine’s President Zelensky has dismissed the Kremlin’s unilateral declaration of a three-day ceasefire for Russia’s World War II commemorations on May 9 as but a “game” and “theatrical performance”. “This is more of a theatrical performance on his part. Because in two or three days, it is impossible to develop a plan for the next steps to end the war,” Zelensky said, offering instead a fuller 30-day ceasefire. We reported earlier that Zelensky days ago went so far as to hint that a Ukrainian attack on Victory Day events could happen. Here’s what Zelensky warned several days ago: “Now they are worried that their parade is in question, and they are rightly worried. But they should be concerned that this war is still going on. They must end the war,” the Ukrainian president said.

Moscow officials certainly took this as a direct threat. Various world leaders, including President Xi Jinping of China, will be present for the V-Day parade through Red Square and other observances. This year’s will be particularly special given it’s the 80th anniversary since the end of WW2. Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova issued a statement Saturday saying that Zelensky “unambiguously threatened world leaders.” “After every terrorist attack on Russia’s territory, the Kiev regime, its security services, and Zelensky personally boast that this is their doing, that this will continue. Therefore, the phrase that he ‘does not guarantee security on May 9 in Russia’ as it is not his area of responsibility is, of course, a direct threat,” the diplomat stated. She and Peskov further blasted Zelensky’s stance as having exposed “the neo-Nazi nature of the Kiev regime, which has become a terrorist cell,” according to TASS.

Lately there’s been assassination bombings targeting top Russian generals, as well as long-range drone attacks which have reached the outskirts of Moscow. Clearly, Ukrainian intelligence and/or its allied Western intel services have made inroads into Russia. Without doubt, Russian defense and security services will bulk up anti-air systems in an around Moscow for Victory Day events. Defense officials, heads of state, and foreign ministers from various countries and especially Russia-friendly nations are expected to be present. Earlier in the Ukraine war, drones were sent across the Russian border and made it all the way to the Moscow Kremlin complex, lightly damaging the top of a dome, in what was a major first at the time. Since then, Moscow area airports have more frequently halted operations during inbound drone attacks.

Read more …

You’d almost hope they aim a device at Xi Jinping. Without hitting anyone, of course.

“Zelensky’s remarks “once again prove the neo-Nazi nature of the Kiev regime, which has turned into a terrorist cell..”

• Moscow Responds To Zelensky’s Victory Day Threats (RT)

Vladimir Zelensky’s refusal to join Russia in observing a 72-hour ceasefire to mark the Victory Day celebrations exposes Kiev’s “neo-Nazi essence” and amounts to a threat by an “international-level terrorist,” Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said on Saturday. Earlier in the day, Ukrainian leader reiterated his refusal to accept Moscow’s proposal for a three-day ceasefire starting May 8 and continuing through the World War II Victory Day celebrations, dismissing it as a “theatrical production.” Zelensky also appeared to threaten the world leaders expected to take part in the May 9 events in Moscow, stating that Kiev cannot guarantee their safety. Zelensky’s remarks “once again prove the neo-Nazi nature of the Kiev regime, which has turned into a terrorist cell,” Zakharova said in a statement.

“Today [Zelensky] hit a new low: now he is threatening the physical safety of veterans who will come to parades and ceremonial events on that sacred day,” she said. “After every terrorist attack on Russian territory, the Kiev regime, its security services, and Zelensky personally boast that it was their doing and that it will continue to be like this. Therefore, the phrase that he ‘does not guarantee security on May 9 on Russian territory,’ since this is not his area of responsibility, is, of course, a direct threat,” Zakharova stressed. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov offered a similar take on Zelensky’s remarks, stating the proposed ceasefire is a “test” for Kiev, and the apparent refusal to join it “clearly shows that neo-Nazism is the ideological basis of the contemporary Kiev regime.”

The 72-hour ceasefire was announced unilaterally by Russian President Vladimir Putin on Monday. The president ordered the suspension of all military action against Ukraine’s forces from midnight on May 7 to midnight on May 10 and urged Kiev to join the truce. Zelensky and other top Ukrainian officials, however, dismissed the proposal as a “manipulation attempt,” demanding an immediate 30-day ceasefire instead. In March, Russia and Ukraine both agreed to a US-brokered 30-day partial ceasefire focused on halting strikes on energy infrastructure. Kiev, however, violated the truce on numerous occasions, according to the Russian military. The Victory Day truce follows a similar unilaterally announced pause during Easter weekend in April that ended up being only partially successful. While a certain lull in the hostilities was observed, Kiev violated the truce more than 3,900 times, according to estimates by the Russian Defense Ministry.

Read more …

Let’s hope they carry some Bandera flags, insignia. That country is lost

• Ukrainian Troops To Take Part In Victory Day Parade In London (RT)

Ukrainian troops will take part in the World War II Victory Day parade in London on May 8 at the invitation of the UK government, the British Ministry of Defense has announced. Moscow has condemned the move as “blasphemous” and “disrespectful” due to Kiev’s open glorification of Nazism. Victory in Europe Day (VE Day) is celebrated in the West on May 8 to commemorate Nazi Germany’s surrender in 1945. In a post on X on Saturday, the UK MOD said Ukrainian troops will take part in a military procession commemorating the event alongside 1,000 British servicemen. The ministry claimed that Kiev’s participation in the event “reminds us that Ukraine is now at freedom’s front line.” UK Defense Secretary John Healey described it as “fitting” that Ukrainian troops will be present at the event.

Moscow has condemned London’s decision. “Inviting followers of neo-Nazi elements to Victory Day celebrations is not just disrespectful to those British veterans who gave their lives during World War II. It is blasphemy,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Saturday. Commemorations of WWII-era nationalist figures linked to Nazi Germany have been common in Ukraine. Ukrainian nationalists hold annual torchlight marches in Kiev, Lviv, and other cities in honor of Stepan Bandera, the leader of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN), which collaborated with the Nazis and took part in the massacre of more than 100,000 Poles, Jews, Russians, and Soviet-aligned Ukrainians. Throughout the conflict with Russia, Ukrainian troops have on numerous occasions been filmed displaying Nazi symbols, including patches of SS units and swastikas. Italy’s Rai News 24 apologized last year after a journalist interviewed a Ukrainian fighter wearing a cap with the emblem of the ‘Leibstandarte Adolf Hitler’ SS division.

Germany previously expelled seven Ukrainian soldiers undergoing military training in the country because they were wearing Nazi symbols. Ukraine’s notorious Azov unit, a neo-Nazi formation established in 2014 and later integrated into the National Guard, has been accused of war crimes and was designated a terrorist organization by Russia in 2022. Although the original Azov Battalion was defeated in the 2022 Battle of Mariupol, co-founder Andrey Biletsky launched the 3rd Separate Assault Brigade under the Azov banner in 2023, which remains active. Russia has repeatedly warned of a Nazi revival in Ukraine and has accused Kiev of embracing neo-Nazi ideology while whitewashing WWII collaborators. President Vladimir Putin listed “denazification” among the goals of Russia’s military operation against the Kiev regime, along with demilitarization and neutrality.

Read more …

Farage will win bigly. It’s the same pattern all over Europe. Le Pen, AfD, Georgescu…

• Farage’s Party Making Big Gains In Local British Elections (RT)

The right-wing Reform UK party has won 677 out of more than 1,600 seats in England’s local elections, while the Labour and the Conservative parties suffered heavy defeats across the country. As results began to trickle in on Friday, the party led by firebrand and Brexit proponent Nigel Farage emerged as the strongest performer in contests held in 23 local authorities across England, winning control of ten councils. These included eight taken from the Conservatives – Derbyshire, Kent, Lancashire, Lincolnshire, North Northamptonshire, Nottinghamshire, Staffordshire and West Northamptonshire — along with Doncaster from Labour and Durham, where no party previously had a majority.

Reform also won hard-fought parliamentary by-elections in Runcorn and Helsby, snatching victory from Labour by just six votes after a recount. As a result, the party now controls five seats in the UK Parliament. According to a BBC projection, if a general election were held today, Reform UK would receive 30% of the vote, ahead of Labour at 20% and the Conservatives at 15%. However, the next general election is not due until May 2029. The last one was held last year and saw Labour secure a landslide victory, riding a wave of public dissatisfaction with the economic policies of the Tories. Commenting on his party’s strides, Farage remarked: “In post-war Britain, no one has ever beaten both Labour and the Tories in a local election before. These results are unprecedented… Reform can and will win the next general election.”

UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer said that while he felt a “sharp edge of fury,” he said he understood the voters’ choice while promising to “go further and faster in pursuit of… national renewal.” Meanwhile, Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch bluntly acknowledged that the elections were a predictable “bloodbath,” stressing that the Tories must continue work to rebuild trust in the party. Reform UK’s rise has been driven by voter frustration over high levels of immigration, the rising cost of living, and what many see as years of mismanagement by both major parties. The party campaigned heavily on promises to cut migration – including by small boat crossings – lower taxes, and reduce council spending, positioning itself as the only alternative to what it calls “a failed political establishment.”

Read more …

Ben Shapiro displays a stunning lack of knowledge about the war.

“..cost Ukrainians at least 50,000 dead and the Russians as many as 200,000 dead..”

If Shapiro is right about anything at all, then people like Doug Macgregor and Scott Ritter have been terribly wrong for 3 years running now. They swear there’s not 4x as many Russian casualties, but 7-8x as many Ukrainian. Off by a factor of 30.

• What Does Russia Want? (Ben Shapiro)

Russia’s war to conquer Ukraine has been raging since February 2022. At first, the Russian offensive seemed fated for success: Russian troops came within a few kilometers of Kyiv, and Western powers offered President Volodymyr Zelenskyy exit from the country. Zelenskyy refused; Ukrainian forces proceeded to hold off and reverse the Russian offensive. Within a few weeks, the battle lines solidified, with Russia continuing to hold much of the territory in the East and Crimea they had held since 2014. The only potential solution was the obvious solution: an armistice essentially freezing the lines of conflict and security guarantees to Ukraine sufficient to deter another Russian attack. But no solution could be found. Russia demonstrated little interest, after mid-2022, in any negotiated end to the war.

President Donald Trump came into office pledging to end the war—a war that has cost Ukrainians at least 50,000 dead and the Russians as many as 200,000 dead. To that end, he pressured Zelenskyy to come to the table. Zelenskyy eventually did, offering an unconditional 30-day ceasefire. Russian President Vladimir Putin has thus far refused any such ceasefire—presumably because he hopes that the Trump administration will pull its support from Ukraine, thereby leaving the country vulnerable to a final Russian offensive. And herein lies the problem for Trump. He knows—as everyone knows—that the only off-ramp for the war lies in a Korean War-style armistice. But Russia still refuses to come to the table, no matter the pleading and cajoling of special envoy Steve Witkoff, whose negotiating style seems to be warmly embracing various anti-American dictators, speaking kindly about them in public, and then hoping they will give him what he seeks.

In order to reach an end to the war, therefore, the Trump administration ought to fully consider just what Russia wants at this point. And the answer happens to be surprisingly simple: Russia wants either Ukraine conquered or a puppet government in place or a clear pathway to conquering Ukraine in the future. We know this because Russia repeatedly says it. Alexander Dugin, a philosopher and geopolitics expert known colloquially as “Putin’s brain,” spelled all of this out in his magnum opus, “Foundations of Geopolitics” (1997)—a book that was apparently used as a textbook at the General Staff Academy. For Dugin, the Russian spirit can only be animated by imperial dreams; regional power alone would be “tantamount to suicide for the Russian nation.” The antithesis of the Russian spirit is “‘the West’ as a whole.”

And Ukraine—an independent country that should be suffused with that “Russian spirit” but that wants to orient towards the West—represents a stinging rebuke to the Russian identity as a whole. Thus, Dugin argues, Ukraine must rejoin Russia or forever be condemned to a “puppet existence and geopolitical service” to the West. Ukraine’s continued existence as a sovereign state, Dugin argues, “is tantamount to a monstrous blow to Russia’s geopolitical security, tantamount to an invasion of its territory.” Now, during the war, Dugin writes, “We must win the war in Ukraine, liberate the entire territory of this former country from the Nazi regime. Regardless of Trump’s victory or anything else, this imperative remains unchanged. Just as the ancient Roman consul Cato the Elder used to say, ‘Carthage must be destroyed,’ in our case, ‘Kiev must be taken’”

So, if the true Russian goal is the destruction or subjugation of Ukraine, how could Russia be brought to the table? Only through the “peace through strength” policy Trump pursued during his first term. Only a Russia that believes that the West will refuse to surrender Ukraine will be pressured into an armistice. Trump seems ready to consider that possibility; he’s now acknowledging publicly that Putin seems to be slow-playing him. But the answer won’t be more sanctions. It will be a recognition that Ukraine’s sovereignty can only be guaranteed by force of arms—and that an off-ramp can only be achieved by a guarantee of that sovereignty.

Read more …

Wonderful history lesson by Timofey Bordachev. It all goes back to the 13th century, the Mongol hordes.

• From The Mongols to NATO: Here’s The Real Russian Doctrine (Bordachev)

“Only crows fly straight,” goes an old saying from the Vladimir-Suzdal region, where the revival of the Russian state began after the devastation of the Mongol invasion in the 13th century. Within 250 years, a powerful state emerged in Eastern Europe, its independence and decision-making unquestioned by others. From its earliest days, Russia’s foreign policy culture has been shaped by a single goal: to preserve the nation’s ability to determine its own future. The methods have varied, but a few constants remain: no fixed strategies, no binding ideologies, and an ability to surprise opponents. Unlike European or Asian powers, Russia never needed rigid doctrines; its vast, unpredictable geography – and its instinct for unorthodox solutions – made that unnecessary. Yet this distinctive foreign policy culture did not develop overnight.

Before the mid-13th century, Russia’s trajectory looked much like the rest of Eastern Europe’s. Fragmented and inward-looking, its city-states had little reason to unify. Geography and climate kept them largely self-contained. It could have ended up like other Slavic nations, eventually dominated by German or Turkish powers. But then came what Nikolay Gogol called a “wonderful event”: the 1237 Mongol invasion. Russia’s strongest state centers were obliterated. This catastrophe, paradoxically, gave rise to two defining features of Russian statehood: a reason to unify and a deep-seated pragmatism. For 250 years, Russians paid tribute to the Golden Horde but were never its slaves. The relationship with the Horde was a constant struggle – clashes alternating with tactical cooperation. It was during this period that the “sharp sword of Moscow” was forged: a state that functioned as a military organization, always blending conflict and diplomacy. War and peace merged seamlessly, without the moral dilemmas that often paralyze others.

These centuries also forged another trait of Russian thinking: the strength of the adversary is irrelevant to the legitimacy of its demands. Unlike the Western Hobbesian notion that might makes right, Russians have historically viewed force as just one factor – not the determinant of truth. A 16th-century song about a Crimean Khan’s raid sums it up: he is called both a “tsar” for his military power and a “dog” for lacking justice. Similarly, after the Cold War, Russia recognized Western power – but not the righteousness of its actions. Demographics have always been a challenge, driven by climate and geography. Russia’s population did not match that of France until the late 18th century, despite covering an area many times larger than Western Europe. And crucially, Russia has never relied on external allies. Its foreign policy rests on the understanding that no one else will solve its problems – a lesson learned through bitter experience. Yet Russia has always been a reliable ally to others.

A pivotal moment came in the mid-15th century, when Grand Duke Vasily Vasilyevich settled Kazan princes on Russia’s eastern borders. This marked the beginning of Russia’s multi-ethnic statehood, where loyalty – not religion – was the key requirement. Unlike Western Europe, where the church dictated social order, Russia’s statehood grew as a mosaic of ethnic and religious groups, all unified by a shared commitment to defense. This pragmatism – welcoming Christians, Muslims, and others alike – set Russia apart. Spain’s rulers completed the Reconquista by expelling or forcibly converting Jews and Muslims; Russia integrated its minorities, allowing them to serve and prosper without renouncing their identities.

Today, Russia’s foreign policy still draws on these deep traditions. Its core priority remains the same: defending sovereignty and retaining freedom of choice in a volatile world. And true to form, Russia resists doctrinaire strategies. Fixed doctrines require fixed ideologies – something historically alien to Russia. Russia also rejects the idea of “eternal enemies.” The Mongol Horde, once its deadliest foe, was absorbed within decades of its collapse. Its nobles merged with Russian aristocracy, its cities became Russian cities. No other country has fully absorbed such a formidable rival. Even Poland, a centuries-long adversary, was eventually diminished not by decisive battles but by sustained pressure. Victory for Russia has never been about glory – it’s about achieving objectives. Often, this means exhausting adversaries rather than crushing them outright. The Mongols were defeated in 1480 without a single major battle. Similarly, Poland was gradually reduced in stature over centuries of relentless pressure.

This mindset explains Russia’s readiness to negotiate at every stage: politics always outweighs military concerns. Foreign and domestic policy are inseparable, and every foreign venture is also a bid to strengthen internal cohesion, just as the medieval princes of Moscow used external threats to unite the Russian lands. Today’s geopolitical landscape is shifting again. The West – led by the United States – remains powerful, but no longer omnipotent. China is expanding its influence, though cautiously. Western Europe, historically Russia’s main threat, is losing its relevance, unable to define a vision for its own future. Russia, the US and China all possess that vision – and in the coming decades, their triangular relationship will shape global politics. India may join this elite circle in time, but for now, it still lags behind.

Read more …

Dumb but predictable: the US supports its weapons industry.

• US Approves F-16 Support Package For Ukraine (RT)

The US has approved a $310.5 million deal to sustain Ukrainian-operated F-16 fighter jets provided by Kiev’s European backers. The move comes after the US and Ukraine signed a deal in which Kiev grants Washington access to its natural resources in exchange for future assistance. The F-16 deliveries from European NATO members to Ukraine were approved by former US President Joe Biden in August 2023, but the first jets did not arrive in the country until a year later. While Ukrainian officials hailed the deliveries as a major coup, Western media warned that they would not be a “game changer” in the conflict. In March, the Ukrainian Air Force acknowledged that the F-16s operated by Kiev “cannot compete” with the latest Russian jets.

In a statement on Friday, the Pentagon’s Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) said the State Department had signed off on a foreign military sale to Ukraine which includes training, spare parts, aircraft modifications, logistics assistance, and software support for F-16s. The agency added that the proposed sale “will support the foreign policy goals… of the United States by improving the security of a partner country that is a force for political stability” in Europe. More than 80 F-16s have been promised to Ukraine, with the bulk expected to come from Belgium and the Netherlands, while the US has never committed to providing the jets on its own. While the exact number of jets delivered is unknown, Moscow confirmed last month it had shot down one F-16. Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky said the aircraft’s pilot perished during a “combat mission.”

In 2024, Ukraine reported the loss of another F-16, saying it crashed while repelling a Russian air strike. The DSCA announcement comes after the Pentagon said it is sending “disused and completely non-operational F-16s to Ukraine for parts.” It also follows the signing of a US-Ukraine resource deal that is intended to allow Washington to recover the cost of future military support through shared proceeds from Ukrainian mineral resource licenses. Moscow has condemned the Western arms shipments to Ukraine, warning they will only prolong the conflict without changing the outcome. Russian President Vladimir Putin has said Ukrainian-operated F-16s will “burn” just like other Western-supplied equipment.

Read more …

India would be big. “Apple announced on April 25 that it would be shifting production of most U.S.-bound iPhones to India from China..”

• Trump’s First Tariff Trade Deal With India Could Be Game-Changing (JTN)

Just a month into his tariff policy, President Donald Trump could unveil his first new trade deals with allies as early as this week as his negotiators press for handshakes and signatures that could further calm markets and empower a brighter future for American workers, officials tell Just the News. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick hinted at an approaching announcement last week when he revealed he has a trade deal with an unspecified country, pending approval of its conditions. Administration officials said as many as two or three deals could be unveiled in the coming days.Speculation has swirled surrounding India being the first to forge a partnership after Vice President J.D. Vance last week met with India Prime Minister Narendra Modi in Delhi to discuss a Bilateral Trade Agreement (BTA).

The vice president’s office put out a statement following their meeting, which stated, “The BTA presents an opportunity to negotiate a new and modern trade agreement focused on promoting job creation and citizen well-being in both countries, with the goal of enhancing bilateral trade and supply-chain integration in a balanced and mutually beneficial manner.” Also last week, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent indicated that many trade partners had reached out to the White House since the tariffs were unveiled and had made ‘very good’ proposals. “I would guess that India would be one of the first trade deals we would sign,” Bessent told CNBC, and that the U.S. also held productive negotiations with Japan and other Asian nations.

Former Deputy National Security Advisor Victoria Coates said an early deal with India could be a game-changer, since it is a partner with the market size of China that could apply pressure on Beijing. “I’d love to have them be first out of the box,” she said, noting Prime Minister Modi’s relationship with Vance has already yielded dividends. Coates said deals with the European Union will take longer, but there are some other big early possibilities. “I would look at Japan. I think that that would be key,” she said. “I think the conversation with the Europeans is going to be a longer one, but again that really has to happen. We might be surprised by the UK.” Mere signs of trade deals on the horizon have already calmed markets after an early free fall prompted by Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariff announcement on April 2.

The S&P 500 on Friday notched its longest streak of closing in the positive column in more than two decades, after it rose 1.47% at the close of business and marked its ninth consecutive day of gains. India has a few notable incentives to make it happen soon: India’s largest trading partner is the United States. The nation was hit with 26% reciprocal tariffs on April 2 before Trump suspended the larger tariffs on most countries for 90 days, but kept a universal 10% tariff in place. India is also placing a large emphasis on an agreement as part of its India-US Comprehensive Global Strategic Partnership, which Modi says “will be a defining partnership of the 21st Century for a better future of our people and the world.”

Adding sweetness to the deal: Apple announced on April 25 that it would be shifting production of most U.S.-bound iPhones to India from China, bringing billions in revenue and jobs to the populous, developing nation. India’s ambition to more than double trade between the U.S. and India, from the current $190 billion to $500 billion, was originally sent by Modi to Trump in February 2025. With headlines alluding to a Trump “misfire,” Democrats and legacy media have wasted no time prognosticating about why the trade deals are taking so long, and may never come. However, sources told Fox Business on Monday that the president is working on broader trade deals encompassing additional nations, not just nations involving tariffs. This, they report, is the reason there has been only speculation and no official announcements of trade deals.

Read more …

Where will Temu get its sales now?

“If you order a $20 shirt from China effective June 1st, you will pay $220. $20 for the shirt, and $200 minimum tariff. Yep, this is only the beginning.”

• De Minimis Loophole for Beijing Ends, Temu Halts Direct Shipping (CTH)

Think about it. We’ve already heard about the massive stoppages of April factory work in China, causing serious concern for Beijing and Chinese worker protests. American importers front loaded inventory in February and March with a 50% increase in orders. Now, in addition to those factories going quiet, the de minimis rule kicks in. (Via CNBC) – “Chinese bargain retailer Temu changed its business model in the U.S. as the Trump administration’s new rules on low-value shipments took effect Friday. In recent days, Temu has abruptly shifted its website and app to only display listings for products shipped from U.S.-based warehouses. Items shipped directly from China, which previously blanketed the site, are now labeled as out of stock. Temu made a name for itself in the U.S. as a destination for ultra-discounted items shipped direct from China, such as $5 sneakers and $1.50 garlic presses.

It’s been able to keep prices low because of the so-called de minimis rule, which has allowed items worth $800 or less to enter the country duty-free since 2016. The loophole expired Friday at 12:01 a.m. EDT as a result of an executive order signed by President Donald Trump in April.” The de minimis loophole comes from back in the 1930s. The idea back then was, say you went on a vacation to Paris, you shouldn’t have to file customs paperwork or pay taxes if you decided to ship some little Eiffel Tower statues to your friends back home. Congress in 2015 then raised the de minimis threshold from $200 to $800. However, the e-commerce world exploded, and Chinese companies began using the de minimis loophole to ship cheap goods (ex. Temu and Shein) into the USA direct to consumers without paying any customs duty.

On April 2nd, as part of the global trade reset and tariff structure, President Trump revoked authorization for Chinese goods to transfer to the USA using the de minimis rule. The de minimis exemption was cancelled for all products coming out of China. The rule change only targeted China and Chinese shippers. No one else. As part of the modification to Executive Order #14257, President Trump has increased the baseline tariff for product mailed from China [de minimis tariff] from 30 90 percent to 120%. Mailed products from China now face a 120% tariff. Additionally, minimum tariff amounts increased from $75 to $100 effective May 1st, and from $150 to $200 effective June 1st. Example: If you order a $20 shirt from China effective June 1st, you will pay $220. $20 for the shirt, and $200 minimum tariff. Yep, this is only the beginning.

Read more …

“When Trudeau outlines the inability of Canada to agree to trade terms, simply because his country no longer has the capability of adhering to those trade terms, a frustrated President Trump says, “then become a state.”

• An Unavoidable Trade War with Canada is Looming (CTH)

Following the 2024 presidential election, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau traveled to Mar-a-Lago and said if President Trump was to make the Canadian government face reciprocal tariffs, open the USMCA trade agreements to force reciprocity, and/or balance economic relations on non-tariff issues, then Canada would collapse upon itself economically and cease to exist. In essence, in addition to the NATO defense shortfall, Canada cannot survive as a free and independent north American nation, without receiving all the one-way benefits from the U.S. economy. To wit, President Trump then said, if Canada cannot survive in a balanced rules environment, including putting together their own military and defenses and meeting their NATO obligations, then Canada should become the 51st U.S state. It was following this meeting that President Trump started emphasizing this point and shocking everyone in the process.

However, in the emotional reaction to Trump’s statements, no-one looked at the core issues outlined by Trudeau that framed President Trump’s opinion. Representing Canada, Justin Trudeau was not expressing an unwillingness to comply with fairness and reciprocity in trade with the USA, what Trudeau was expressing was an inability to comply. Quite simply, after decades of shifting priorities, Canada no longer has the internal economic capability to comply with a fair-trade agreement (FTA). Trudeau was not lying, and President Trump understood the argument; hence his 51st state remarks.This is where it becomes important to understand the core reason why Trump, Ross and Lighthizer (2017) did not structurally want to replace the NAFTA agreement with another trilateral trade deal. Mexico and Canada are completely different as it pertains to trade with the USA. President Trump would rather have two separate bilateral agreements; one for Mexico and one for Canada.

• Firstly, Canada is a NATO partner, Mexico is not. As President Trump affirmed to Justin Trudeau during the meeting, it would be unfair of President Trump to discuss NATO funding with the European Union, while Canada is one of the worst offenders. Trump is leveraging favorable trade terms and tariff relief with the EU member states, as a carrot to get them into compliance with the 2.0 to 2.5% spending requirement for their military. If the NATO member states contribute more to their own defense, the U.S. can pull back spending and save Americans money. However, Canada is currently 26th in NATO funding, spending only 1.37% of their GDP on defense (link). Canada would have to spend at least another $15 billion/yr on their defense programs in order to reach 2.0%. Justin Trudeau told President Trump that was an impossible goal given the nature of the Canadian political system, and the current size of their economy ($2.25 trillion).

• Secondly, over the last 40 years Canada has deindustrialized their economy, Mexico has not. As the progressive political ideology of their politicians took control of Canada policy, the ‘climate change’ agenda and ‘green’ economy became their focus. The dirty industrialized systems were not compliant with the goals of the Canadian policy makers. The dirty mining sector (coal, coking coal, ore) no longer exists at scale to support self-sufficient manufacturing. The dirty oil refineries do not exist to refine the crude oil they extract. Large industrial heavy industry no longer exists at a scale needed to be self-sufficient. Instead, Canada purchases forged and rolled steel component parts from overseas (mostly China). Making the issue more challenging, Canada doesn’t even have enough people skilled to do the dirty jobs within the heavy manufacturing; they would need a national apprenticeship program. Again, all points raised by Trudeau to explain why bilateral trade compliance was impossible.

• Thirdly, the trade between Canada/U. S and Mexico/U. S is entirely different. The main imports from Canada are energy, lumber and raw materials. The main imports from Mexico are agriculture, cars and finished industrial goods. Mexico refines its own oil; Canada ships their oil to the USA for refining. There are obviously some similar products from Mexico and Canada, but for the most part there is a big difference.

• Forth, USA banks are allowed to operate in Mexico, but USA banks are not allowed to operate in Canada. USA media organizations are allowed to broadcast in Mexico, but USA media organizations are regulated and not permitted to broadcast in Canada. The Canadian government has strong regulations and restrictions on information and Intellectual Property. All of these points of difference highlight why a trilateral trade agreement like NAFTA and the USMCA just don’t work out for the USA. Additionally, if President Trump levies a tariff on Chinese imports, it hits Canada much harder than Mexico because Canada has deindustrialized and now imports from China to assemble into finished goods destined to the USA. In a very direct way Canada is a passthrough for Chinese products. Canada is now more of an assembly economy, not a dirty job manufacturing economy.

When Trudeau outlines the inability of Canada to agree to trade terms, simply because his country no longer has the capability of adhering to those trade terms, a frustrated President Trump says, “then become a state.” There is no option to remain taking advantage of the USA on this level, and things are only getting worse. Thus, the point of irreconcilable conflict is identified.

Read more …

If 80% of those you poll are Democrats, it’s easy going.

• Want To Know The Truth Behind Those Anti-Trump Polls? (Margolis)

You’ve no doubt heard the media narrative about President Trump’s poll numbers according to most pollsters—you know, the ones who got the 2024 election so wrong, Make no mistake about it — the legacy media is at it again with their dishonest polling tactics against President Trump. But this time, their deceptive game has been called out by none other than former House Speaker Newt Gingrich. Appearing on Hannity Thursday night, Gingrich exposed how the media’s recent polling showing Trump’s approval dropping is nothing but smoke and mirrors. The reality? These polls are deliberately skewed to paint a false narrative about Trump’s standing with the American people. Let’s look at the facts. The same media outlets that got it wrong in 2024—ABC News, CBS News, and CNN—are now pushing polls that show Trump’s approval is declining from his February high of 53%.

But are they really? “I got a little preview about poll numbers that are coming out tomorrow, and from both Robert Cahaly and Matt Towery, who I respect a lot,” Hannity said. “And as I suspected, all of the polls that the media has been pushing on the American people about Donald Trump are false, and that’s what the early indications are.” He pointed out the absurdity of the numbers being hyped by the media, especially when far-left figures such as Chuck Schumer were polling in the teens. “All the pollsters that got the election in ‘24 wrong and got every election about Donald Trump wrong—all of those people—the ones saying, ‘Oh, he’s plummeting.’ But meanwhile, they’re ignoring Chuck is at 17% and the Democrats are in the 20s. I’m trying to understand that logic. Can you help me out?” Gingrich didn’t mince words.

“Well, I mean, first of all, they’re just plain lying,” Gingrich replied. “And I think we’ve got to be tougher and clearer about how dishonest these people are.” He cited conversations with veteran GOP pollsters, pointing to the way poll samples are rigged to undercount Republicans. “The fact is, and I talked to John McLaughlin and I talked to Matt Towery about this, they have some polls there that are like 27% Republican when Trump got 50% of the vote. So if you add the 23 points they didn’t test, suddenly he’s in great shape. This is deliberate. It is willful.” Gingrich then laid out what he sees as the last bastions of anti-Trump resistance in the establishment. “Look, there are three great centers of resistance: the propaganda media, which will lie all the time, the fake district judges, and the fake Congressional Budget Office. Those are the last three great centers of resistance, and they’re going to do anything they can to defeat Trump and the Republicans, including lying about virtually everything.”

“None of them, to be honest with you,” Towery said when asked which poll concerned him the most. “I have a group of pollsters I look at who are public pollsters who’ve been right in all three of Trump’s cycles. We happen to be one of those. None of us have had him down by any of these numbers we’ve seen before. The only one that might concern me at all is the Fox News one because Fox did well in the 24 cycle.” Towery also took aim at the methodology behind the polls. “They are absolutely, I don’t like to criticize polling, but how can you have a poll, as John McLaughlin, a good friend of mine pointed out, how could you have a poll that shows Donald Trump at 39%? But yet when you ask people who they voted for and they said they voted for Trump, like 95% said they would vote for him again.”

Read more …

“The capitulation took effect after midnight in Moscow. May 8 is observed as Victory in Europe Day, with Russia commemorating the occasion on May 9.”

• Trump’s WWII Claim Is ‘Pompous Nonsense’ – Medvedev (RT)

Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has dismissed US President Donald Trump’s claim that America played the primary role in winning World War II as “pompous nonsense.”Medvedev made the comment on his VK page on Saturday, in response to Trump’s plan to designate May 8 as ‘American Victory Day’. “Trump recently announced that the US made the main contribution to the victory in World War II and that he would establish a holiday on May 8. A holiday is not bad. But the first conclusion is pompous nonsense,” Medvedev wrote. Earlier this week, Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform that he “will create a new holiday called AMERICAN VICTORY DAY, to be celebrated on May 8.” He went on to say: “This date marks the formal surrender of Nazi Germany to the Allied Forces in World War II, ending the war in Europe. AMERICAN VICTORY DAY will celebrate the heroes who helped vanquish tyranny and secure liberty for generations to come.”

Trump also said he wants to rename Veterans Day, a federal holiday celebrated on November 11, to “Victory Day for World War I,” adding that the US “won both wars.” In response, Medvedev, who currently serves as deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council, highlighted the Soviet Union’s role in defeating Nazi Germany, stressing that the Red Army bore heavy losses and “liberated ungrateful Europe.” “Our people gave 27 million lives of their sons and daughters for the sake of destroying damned fascism,” he wrote. “Victory Day is ours and it is on May 9. That’s how it was, is, and always will be!” Earlier this week, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Russia is grateful to the US for its support during WWII, but the USSR would have defeated Nazi Germany even without the assistance. “The famous Lend-Lease indeed helped us. We received vehicles, airplanes, ammunition, and tanks. And indeed, without this, it would have been very difficult.”

The Lend-Lease program was a US government initiative that provided allies with military supplies, equipment, food, and strategic raw materials. The Soviet Union received aid valued at around $200 billion in today’s terms, Peskov said. He noted, however, that the assistance was not free. Russia, as the USSR’s successor state, completed its financial obligations related to the Lend-Lease program in 2006. Nazi Germany officially surrendered to the Allied forces on May 8, 1945, following the capture of Berlin by Soviet troops. The capitulation took effect after midnight in Moscow. May 8 is observed as Victory in Europe Day, with Russia commemorating the occasion on May 9.

Read more …

“Starting in 2027, the European Union will expand its emissions trading system (ETS) into new territory with the launch of ETS2..”

“Margaret Thatcher: “Global warming provides a marvelous excuse for global socialism.”

• Freedom in the EU? Only if You Can Afford It (Roos)

Starting in 2027, the European Union will expand its emissions trading system (ETS) into new territory with the launch of ETS2. While the original ETS primarily targeted heavy industry and power plants, ETS2 directly impacts ordinary citizens — their homes, their cars, their daily lives. Under the guise of ’saving the climate,’ the EU will steadily make gasoline, diesel, and gas for heating more expensive. But let’s be honest: ETS2 has very little to do with protecting the environment. It is about economic control, wealth redistribution, and the consolidation of power among banks, large corporations, governments, and the European Commission. Formally, everything remains ‘voluntary.’ You may continue driving a gasoline car. You may continue heating your home with natural gas. But every choice that deviates from the state’s ‘sustainability goals’ will become economically unbearable.

This is not a direct expropriation of property, but it is economic subjugation through price pressure, regulation, and redistribution of the proceeds. Instead of free choices, citizens and companies are financially forced to adopt government-approved behavior. Who benefits? Banks, investment funds, multinational corporations, government treasuries, and the European Commission. Financial giants like Goldman Sachs and Deutsche Bank are already making billions from trading CO2 certificates. Governments are raking in massive revenues from the auctioning of emission permits. Meanwhile, large corporations that receive free allowances or have surplus certificates can sell them for profit—all while greenwashing their public image.

And who bears the cost? Ordinary citizens, small businesses, the transport sector, and independent entrepreneurs. They will face hundreds of euros in additional costs every year just to heat their homes and drive to work. The most vulnerable are promised compensation through a ’Social Climate Fund’—a government handout that makes them ever more dependent on state aid. This brings us to the deeper question: What direction are we heading in? Is this communism, where the state owns the means of production? Or is it fascism, where the state controls production and merges with big business to dominate society? In truth, ETS2 signals a new hybrid system. Private ownership remains in name, but real control is exercised through regulations, price manipulation, and conditional subsidies.

The market is not abolished; it is repurposed around ideological objectives. Economic freedom exists only for those who can afford to comply. The Brussels technocratic pressure is sold as a ‘necessary transition,’ but in reality, it is dismantling the foundation of our economy, destroying the middle class, and eroding prosperity. Instead of fostering genuine innovation, ETS2 punishes those who lack the resources to “comply.” While banks and corporations speculate and profit, the hardworking EU citizen is soon faced with a grim choice: freeze in the winter or take on debt for a heat pump they neither asked for nor needed. The EU claims that prices will rise “gradually” and that safeguards are in place to prevent social unrest. But history teaches us that once new taxes and levies are introduced, they rarely disappear. Temporary exceptions inevitably become permanent rules.

After homes and cars, aviation, agriculture, and consumer goods will follow. Every sector deemed ‘unsustainable’ will face similar price manipulation. Personal freedom will continue to shrink, not through open political force, but through economic coercion masked as environmental stewardship. And for those still believing they will retain the freedom to choose: A choice that becomes financially impossible is no longer a real choice. It is coerced compliance. It is economic submission. Remember the words of Margaret Thatcher: “Global warming provides a marvelous excuse for global socialism.” Climate change must never be used as an excuse for economic servitude. Say no to green tyranny. Say yes to freedom, prosperity, and choice.

Read more …

Many will follow. It won’t be pretty. The systems are old but volatile.

• Green Energy Fixation Sends Spain Dark (Gonzalez)

VALENCIA, Spain—Two modern ills converged in Europe on Monday, literally one of the darkest days in decades. An ideological obsession with climate fanaticism left countries without power for hours, while censorship of “disinformation,” often information the powerful don’t like, plunged the population in an informational blackout in subsequent days. The electrical blackout brought planes, trains, and automobiles to a screeching halt throughout Spain, Portugal, and small parts of southern France. Electricity simply stopped flowing, and with it control towers, rail lines, and traffic lights. Cellphones became quadrangular black boxes that did nothing and lost their “smartness.” A political conference I was attending in this sunny Mediterranean port city suddenly became eerie when people started coming in and out and whispering to each other. One person in the seat in front finally turned and enlightened a friend and me: “The electricity is down. We’re cut off from the world.”

We then realized that, yes, sirens had been wailing outside, and it had been a while since we’d gotten emails or texts. A generator in the hotel kept our conference going, but nothing else worked; everyone had to take the stairs and use bathrooms in the dark—though water, too, stopped working. It wasn’t quite dystopic, but our modern dependence on electricity and its creature comforts suddenly was brought home to us. Many speculated that it was a cyberattack from Russia or China. Who else had the power to do this? Center-right politicians from across Europe were about to descend on Valencia the next day. Surely, an invitation for bad actors to do their thing. Well, not so fast. Neither Russia’s Vladimir Putin nor China’s Xi Jinping is above carrying out this type of attack, and cybersecurity is a serious matter. But, to quote Vice President JD Vance at a February conference in Munich, Germany, the threat to worry about the most in Europe “is not Russia, it’s not China, it’s not any other external actor.”

“What I worry about,” went on Vance, “is the threat from within, the retreat of Europe from some of its fundamental values.” Vance mentioned Europe’s need “to enjoy affordable energy,” and the fact that, as he put it, “free speech, I fear, is in retreat.” European officials are still fuming about how “rude” that young Vance was, but it looks like he was on the money. It is increasingly clear that what caused the blackout was not a cyberattack. Reuters News agency reported that Spain’s grid operator Red Electrica on Tuesday ruled out external sabotage, and said instead that it had identified two “incidents of power generation loss, probably from solar plants,” in southwestern Spain. That, said the Reuters report, “caused instability in the electric system and led to a breakdown of its connection with France. The electrical system collapsed, affecting both the Spanish and Portuguese systems.”

“There was not enough inertia, or redundancy, in the system to keep it going,” my colleague Diana Furchott-Roth emailed from Washington when I was able to receive communications from the outside world. “The last coal-fired plant was closed on April 12.” Diana has been warning about this type of thing for decades, and Spain’s socialist prime minister Pedro Sanchez is a poster boy for the things she has warned against. His government has not only closed coal-fired plants, but has been busily destroying nuclear plants as well. “Net zero,” or zero CO2 emissions, is the name of this new mad delusion, and Spain’s infantile leftists have been posting on social media gleeful workers destroying nuclear power plants. The goal has been 100% “renewable” generation.

Well, they happened to have gotten very close to their holy grail on Monday at 12:30. The Iberian Peninsula’s power grid was getting a disproportionate amount of energy from the renewables loved by the Left: 80% from solar photovoltaic, solar thermal and wind. Nuclear was at a measly 11%. In a mere five minutes, solar photovoltaic generation plunged by 50%, from 18 gigawatts to eight, according to Reuters. Iberia and adjacent parts of France, including the tiny Pyrenean principality of Andorra, all of which depended on this grid, then descended into darkness at 12:35, from which it was not to recover till late at night. The hapless Sanchez was still arguing late Tuesday that just because Red Electrica was discounting a cyberattack, it did not mean that one hadn’t happened. Governments finding themselves in a corner will lie, or at least equivocate, and it’s the job of the opposition to keep asking for answers.

“An energy policy that prioritizes the fight against climate change above the security of supply has provoked this general blackout,” said an analysis on the site of the think tank Disenso, which is linked to the opposition Vox Party (full disclosure, I sit on Disenso’s foreign advisory board). But it is also the job of the media. Yet Spain’s state television stations, and even private ones, were still keeping the truth about the failure of the Left’s renewable dream from getting any airtime as late as Wednesday morning, when I left for the airport. That was left to radio and to some newspapers on the right. An honest media would be not just informing voters about how a blackout that left at least five dead and stopped a modern economy in its tracks happened. It would also be debating whether such a modern society really does want to stop using comfort creatures and working toilets, all in the name of fighting climate change.

Read more …

Big Balls can take over. They have a strong team.

• DOGE Cuts Behind Nearly Half of All Layoffs This Year (JTN)

President Donald Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency is responsible for nearly half of all job cuts announced this year, according to a new report. The report from outplacement firm Challenger, Gray and Christmas said DOGE-related actions lead all job cut reasons in 2025 with 283,172, 2,919 of which occurred in April. Another 6,945 cuts were attributed to “DOGE Downstream Impact” through April, primarily at nonprofits and education organizations. These combined (290,117) make up 48% of all job cuts announced so far in 2025, according to the report. “Though the Government cuts are front and center, we saw job cuts across sectors last month,” Andrew Challenger, senior vice president and workplace expert for Challenger, Gray & Christmas. “Generally, companies are citing the economy and new technology. Employers are slow to hire and limiting hiring plans as they wait and see what will happen with trade, supply chain, and consumer spending.”

The vast majority of the DOGE-related cuts were from March, according to the report. After DOGE, market and economic conditions were cited for 95,348 job cuts, as economic uncertainty, consumer spending, and trade challenges hit U.S. companies, according to the report. Tariffs were cited for 1,413 cuts so far this year, with 1,350 occurring in April. Restructuring accounted for 67,627, and 60,551 were due to store, unit or location closing. When Trump created DOGE, he said it would be the government cost-cutting equivalent of the “Manhattan Project.” Both Trump and Tesla CEO Elon Musk promised Americans would get a more efficient government after DOGE addressed government waste, reduced regulations, and reduced the federal workforce. Many of the DOGE-led cuts in government face legal challenges from unions and other groups. Many of those same cuts remain in limbo as pending court cases continue.

The Challenger report comes as Musk steps back from government work to focus more on Tesla. Musk initially said DOGE would aim to cut $2 trillion from the federal budget, but he later cut that in half. At a Cabinet meeting in April, Musk said DOGE was on pace to cut $150 billion from the federal budget. The U.S. government employs about 2.4 million federal workers, excluding the military (about 1.3 million active-duty military personnel) and U.S. Postal Service (about 600,000 employees), according to 2024 Pew Research report. That report noted that the federal government employed 1.87% of the entire civilian workforce. That percentage includes postal employees, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics data.

Read more …

“Musk met with Ratcliffe in late March for a discussion that included government efficiency measures, but no DOGE teams have been working at the agency’s Langley, Virginia, campus.”

• CIA to Cut 1,200 (5%) Jobs -Ratcliffe Shifts Focus to “Human Intelligence” (CTH)

The Washington Post (but of course, CIA outlet) is reporting on a downsizing effort within the CIA to eliminate approximately 1,200 jobs. The number represents approximately 5% of the workforce although the actual number of CIA employees is classified (national security, dontchaknow). Within the report, Director John Ratcliffe is noted as shifting the focus of America’s leading spy agency to use more “human intelligence.” That phrase, “human intelligence,” is IC silo code speak for shifting away from “analysts” (political operatives) and engaging in more factual intelligence information. According to the report, DNI Tulsi Gabbard has also reduced the employment level within the Director of National Intelligence office by approximately 25% (current payroll estimate of 2,000 employees). The general narrative within the WaPo reporting is that “national security” is being compromised by large downsizing of spy agency employment. Additionally, to bolster the positions of the current political operatives within the CIA, the WaPo waxes concerningly about China and other mysterious foreign adversaries recruiting the CIA employees who are now becoming increasingly concerned about their paychecks.

WASHINGTON POST – “The Trump administration is planning significant personnel cuts at the Central Intelligence Agency and other major U.S. spy units, downsizing the government’s most sensitive national security agencies, according to people familiar with the plans. The administration recently informed lawmakers on Capitol Hill that it intends to reduce the CIA’s workforce by about 1,200 personnel over several years and cut thousands more from other parts of the U.S. intelligence community, including at the National Security Agency, a highly secretive service that specializes in cryptology and global electronic espionage, a person familiar with the matter said. The person, like others interviewed, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive matters.

[…] The staff reductions would take place over several years and would be accomplished in part through reduced hiring. No outright firings are envisioned. The goal of a roughly 1,200-person staff reduction includes several hundred individuals who already have opted for early retirement, the person familiar with the matter said. The downsizing is taking place separately from efforts by the U.S. DOGE Service, led by billionaire Elon Musk, to radically restructure the federal government. Musk met with Ratcliffe in late March for a discussion that included government efficiency measures, but no DOGE teams have been working at the agency’s Langley, Virginia, campus.

[Obviously, I can certainly appreciate the “human intelligence” shift noted by Director Ratcliffe for all the factual reasons that necessitate his concern. It is part of the reason why I ended up frustrated with “western reports” and determined the only way to really understand what is going on inside Russia during the sanctions was to travel there myself and review. It was quite an experience to sit in a renamed Starbucks coffee shop at the crowded Galleria Mall in downtown St Petersburg, Russia and read the Wall Street Journal reporting on the devastation to the Russian economy, while looking around at the packed stores and purchases being made on an ordinary weekday. Then to read the New York Times reports of shortages of steel in Russia, while driving past many miles of apartment and condominium construction. Everything cited in western corporate media, “according to sources familiar with the situation”, was/is the complete opposite of everything factually visible.]

Read more …

Did I see 44,000%?!

• Buffett To Step Down As Berkshire CEO At Year-End (ZH)

It’s the end of an era at America’s largest hedge fund/private equity/insurance float-cum-rollup conglomerate, whatever you want to call it: Warren Buffett just announced during the Berkshire annual pilgrimage to Omaha that he is stepping down as CEO of Berkshire at the end of the year, and that Greg Abel, the vice chairman for non-insurance operations who has been groomed over the past decade for just this moment, will take over the conglomerate. The news was greeted with a standing ovation by the thousands of Berkshire shareholders who were present at Omaha’s Convention Center.

Buffett – whose track record cemented him, along his long-time sidesick Charlie Munger, into a celebrity billionaire renowned for his investing acumen and witticisms – built Berkshire Hathaway into a business valued at more than $1.16 trillion, generating compounded annual returns to shareholders at double the rate of the S&P (19.9% vs 10.4%), since 1965, and a staggering 5,502,482% overall gain on BRK stocks since 1964, vs “only” 39,054% for the S&P. His investing success gave him the power to move stocks and helped him strike lucrative deals with Goldman Sachs and General Electric during times of crisis. The announcement stunned the board and even Abel, who, while long signaled as Buffett’s successor, was unaware that the news was coming as the annual meeting drew to a close. “That’s the news hook for the day,” Buffett said. “Thanks for coming.”

Berkshire grew aggressively over the decades with Buffett as chairman and CEO, as he chose acquisitions and stocks for the company portfolio alongside trusted adviser and vice chairman, Charlie Munger, who died in 2023 at 99. As Bloomberg notes, “the conglomerate acquired a bewildering assortment of businesses, which Buffett often said mirrored the US economy as a whole. A bet on Berkshire, he said, was a bet on America.” Buffett started managing money when he was young, a disciple of Benjamin Graham’s investing style. He moved more into the corporate world when his Buffett Partnership Ltd. bought shares of Berkshire. In 1965, he took control of the rest of the business.

Composed mostly of struggling textile operations that would eventually fade away, Berkshire became the foundation for Buffett’s modern-day giant. Piece by piece, he built and acquired operations into a varied set of industries, including insurance — which gave him cash, or “float” — to help his investing strategy. Now, Berkshire owns businesses ranging from railroad BNSF to auto insurer Geico, sprawling energy operations, and even retailers such as Dairy Queen and See’s Candies. Its collection of companies generated $47.4 billion of annual operating earnings in 2024. Buffett also built up the stock portfolio — populating it with giant bets on the likes of Apple Inc. and American Express — and offering Berkshire another way to participate in the gains of businesses that it didn’t fully own.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

FSD

AI

Fauci

Ocean
https://twitter.com/dom_lucre/status/1918406723351802248

Moose

Birds

Cows
https://twitter.com/InternetH0F/status/1918410455258718428

Kookaburra

lion pair

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle April 28 2025

Apr 282025
 
 April 28, 2025  Posted by at 9:48 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,  45 Responses »


Odilon Redon Peyrelebade landscape 1880

 

• Rubio: ‘No Leader Is Working Harder to Prevent Wars or End Them’ (PJM)
• Trump’s Diplomacy Gains Traction, Silences Sceptics (Bhadrakumar)
• Moscow Ready To Seek ‘Balance Of Interests’ With Ukraine and US – Lavrov (RT)
• ‘Calmer’ Zelensky Requested ‘More Weapons’ In Vatican – Trump (RT)
• Zelensky Admits Ukraine Can’t Reclaim Crimea By Force (RT)
• New Sanctions On Russia Would Mean Two More Years Of War – Rubio (RT)
• Trump Failing to Resolve US Budget Deficit But Slightly Slows Debt Growth (Sp.)
• Are Americans Still Americans? (Paul Craig Roberts)
• AG Pam Bondi Leads Task Force To ‘Eradicate Anti-Christian Bias’ (JTN)
• White House To Evaluate Officials’ Loyalty To Trump – WSJ (RT)
• Trump Floats Plan To Slash Income Taxes For Millions Using Tariff Cash (ZH)
• Trump Wants US Ships to Travel Through Panama, Suez Canals for Free (ET)
• Fish Rots From Its Head: Senior EU Officials Call For Ursula’s Resignation (Sp.)
• Moderna Faces UK Suspension Over Covid Jab Breaches (Tel.)
• International Institutions Must Abandon “Wokeism” (Lacalle)

 

 

 

 

Mail

Greek

June 14
https://twitter.com/BrainStorm_Joe/status/1916297757771391435

Neuralink
https://twitter.com/iam_smx/status/1916212710297243778

 

 

 

 

Many people will question this.

• Rubio: ‘No Leader Is Working Harder to Prevent Wars or End Them’ (PJM)

“Of all the leaders in the world today, no leader is working harder to prevent wars or end them than President Trump is right now. That’s why we’re talking to Iran. That’s why we’re engaged with Ukraine and Russia. It’s the desire to prevent these wars from breaking out and to end the ones that exist already… I just think it’s tremendous for our country to be led by a president, uh, who desires to bring peace and establish peace and protect peace.” That’s what Secretary of State Marco Rubio said earlier this week to a group of reporters inside the Oval Office, and it’s a message he’s delivered continuously in recent days. On Sunday morning, Rubio appeared on “Meet the Press” and doubled down on the idea. When host Kristen Welker asked him about the potential for a peace deal for the Russia-Ukraine War, Rubio said:

“Well, I think they’re closer in general than they’ve been any time in the last three years, but it’s still not there. And as I said and he has said and others have said, he’s done an extraordinary job at the highest levels of our government. The President has put out everybody you can imagine – Ambassador Witkoff, myself, the National Security Advisor, the Vice President – been involved and engaged in this effort to bring the two sides closer so we can have a path to peace. By the way, that’s something that should be celebrated. He’s trying to end a three-year war that has no military solution, where every day people are dying, especially on the Ukrainian side, in many cases civilians and children, as we’ve seen the images over the last few weeks. He’s trying to bring this war to an end. And we’ve made real progress.

But those last couple steps of this journey were always going to be the hardest ones, and it needs to happen soon. We cannot continue, as I said, to dedicate time and resources to this effort if it’s not going to come to fruition.So the last week has really been about figuring out how close are these sides really, and are they close enough that this merits a continued investment of our time as a mediator in this regard.” Rubio also took to X today and said, “We’re trying to achieve peace. Instead of rooting against @POTUS, everyone should be hopeful that President Trump can bring the Russia-Ukraine war to an end.”

He’s right. I grew up in the Bill Clinton/George W. Bush era, and I was constantly confronted with the idea that Democrats were the party of peace, and Republicans only wanted war, even though I, as a Republican, was not a big pro-war person. I almost feel like my young mind was brainwashed with the idea. Thankfully, I’ve matured and realized two things.

First, Democrats aren’t the party of peace. Democrats don’t have enough principles to be the party of anything. If you asked me what today’s Democrat Party stood for, I’d have a hard time finding an answer. I see Bernie Sanders out shouting about oligarchies and I see old liberal white ladies and they/thems protesting Donald Trump and Elon Musk by singing silly songs and blowing up car dealerships. I see Democrat members of Congress focusing everything they have on one sketchy citizen of El Salvador when their constituents can’t even read and write because their school systems are teaching first graders about gender-neutral genitalia.

Read more …

Indian ex-diplomat Bhadrakumar has his own unique view. Of course the fresh tensions with Pakistan come up too. Two nuke nations fighting, lovely.

• Trump’s Diplomacy Gains Traction, Silences Sceptics (Bhadrakumar)

The US President Donald Trump is a lone ranger in international arena and a self-confessed practitioner of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s absolute maxim that ours is not an era of wars no matter the ‘casus belli’. He sets a high benchmark for himself and makes himself open to attack by hawkish opinion makers at home, although a staunch nationalist who puts American interests first regardless of their legitimacy. Trump’s cabinet ministers do not necessarily subscribe to his bottom line, as the vitriolic, intrusive remark by the US’ Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, regarding the cascading tensions in India-Pakistan relations would suggest. The stunning thing about Trump’s mindset is that he is also a man of convictions.

Not many would know or choose to recall that this extraordinary person, decades before he actually waded into American politics and threw his hat on the presidential ring as an outlier, paid to New York Times a princely sum of $98,000 out of his (businessman’s) pocket to feature a one-page supplement at the dawn of the Ronald Reagan presidency espousing the hidden charms of a détente with the Soviet Union and offered his services as special envoy dedicated to that task. The run-of-the-mill politicians may pontificate noble thoughts but do not practice them when the crunch time comes. On the contrary, strong convictions have a multiplier effect on Trump’s actions, which is what distinguishes his diplomacy so far. The image of his one-on-one with Ukraine president Volodymyr Zelensky at the Vatican on Saturday will remain etched in memory for a very long time to come.

In the chaotic international situation today as the world order is transitioning from one epochal era — nearly five centuries of western dominance — to another that is inchoate still, the temptation is always there for the US, as by far the single biggest military power on the planet, to leverage its prowess and coercive means to have its way. In fact, globalism and the neocon ideology of interventionism are still very much the principal current in the stream of consciousness of American elites, civilian and military, and is a bipartisan consensus too.

Tulsi Gabbard is not an exception; today’s papers have reported that another neocon well-known in South Asia as a long-time specialist on the South Asian region, Christine Fair, has echoed the very same “free hand to India” chorus — and, unlike Gabbard, she has actually done extensive work on the region and is credited with insights into Pakistan’s use of terrorists as state policy. “That’s the right message to send even if by accident. Why should the US bail out Pakistan by trying to restrain India? Pakistan has to be taught a lesson… by India,” Fair posted on X. Suffice to say, on all three major vectors of the present international situation, Trump is reining in the US’ natural instincts for use of force — the Ukraine crisis, the situation around Iran and the Indo-Pacific devolving upon US-China relations. And that is already having a calming effect on international security.

Credit goes entirely to Trump for the backtracking by Russian President Vladimir Putin from the high horse he mounted on June 14 last year in his landmark speech at the foreign ministry in Moscow where he set forth conditions for commencing dialogue with Ukraine, which included, amazingly enough, a summary withdrawal by Ukrainian forces from the territories they still held in Donetsk, Kherson and Zaporizhzhia oblasts in the southeastern regions of their country! Of course, Putin is a pragmatist but if he felt emboldened to make concessions it is at the astonishing sight of the smart power that Trump deployed to whittle down Zelensky’s obdurate stance by holding in front of the latter to sip from a chalice of poison accepting that Crimea is an integral part of Russia!

On the other hand, Trump has scattered the hare-brained scheme of the UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer and French President Emmanuel Macron for the creation of a ‘coalition of the willing’ for deployment in Ukraine as a bulwark against Russia. In political terms, Trump crushed at one stroke the resistance from Europe to his peace plans for Ukraine and asserted the US’ leadership. Most important, Trump forced Zelensky (and his European backers) to see the writing on the wall that the choice is between travelling on the pathway that he is opening through peace talks or inviting his country’s annexation by Russia. And in this entire enterprise, not a volley of shots was fired by the Pentagon.

Read more …

Full CBS interview is here.

• Moscow Ready To Seek ‘Balance Of Interests’ With Ukraine and US – Lavrov (RT)

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has rebuked CBS host in an interview on Sunday repeating that Moscow is ready to seek a “balance of interests” both with Ukraine and with the US. The network’s journalist Margaret Brennan has said that she haven’t heard from the top diplomat that Moscow “is willing to make any concession on anything to date.” “No, my brief answer is you are wrong,” Lavrov told Brennan. “I have been emphasizing repeatedly, in relation to Ukraine, in relation to strategic relations with the United States, I have been emphasizing our readiness to seek balance of interests. If- if this is not what your station considers readiness for negotiations, then I don’t know how to be even less eloquent in trying to be brief in my answers,” he added. Lavrov confirmed that Russia is continuing contacts with Washington regarding Ukraine and welcomed US President Donald Trump’s efforts to mediate.

“There are several signs that we are moving in the right direction,” Lavrov said. He emphasized that Russia demands guarantees that any ceasefire “would not be used again to beef up Ukrainian military” and that arms supplies to Ukraine should stop. Russian President Vladimir Putin held lengthy talks on Friday with US special envoy Steve Witkoff at the Kremlin. Presidential adviser Yury Ushakov described the meeting as “constructive and very useful,” adding that the discussion touched on the idea of resuming direct negotiations between Moscow and Kiev. Trump, commenting on the state of the negotiations, said Ukraine and Russia “should now meet, at very high levels, to ‘finish it off.’ Most of the major points are agreed to.” In the interview, Lavrov reiterated Russia’s position on Crimea, stating, “Russia does not negotiate [over] its own territory,” and praised President Trump for acknowledging the peninsula’s status.

Crimea “will stay with Russia” in any peace deal, Trump told Time Magazine in an article published on Friday. He said that even Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky understands this. “It’s been with them [Russia] for a long time,” the US president stated, noting that Russia had its submarines there “long before any period that we’re talking about” and that the majority of Crimeans speak Russian. Russian officials have repeatedly said that Moscow is open to a negotiated solution, but have emphasized that any agreement must reflect the territorial realities on the ground and address the root causes of the conflict. Zelensky insisted on Wednesday that Kiev would never officially recognize Crimea as Russian. Trump sharply rebuked that statement as “very harmful to the Peace Negotiations with Russia in that Crimea was lost years ago.”

Read more …

Of course. Guns are discussed in cathedrals. Where else?

• ‘Calmer’ Zelensky Requested ‘More Weapons’ In Vatican – Trump (RT)

US President Donald Trump has said Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky was “calmer” during their meeting in the Vatican at the weekend and seemed more open to making a deal with Moscow than during their infamous encounter in the Oval Office. Speaking to reporters before boarding Air Force One on Sunday, Trump said the tone of his latest discussion with Zelensky was markedly different from their “little dispute” in February, which saw the Ukrainian delegation kicked out of the White House. “I see him as calmer. I think he understands the picture. And I think he wants to make a deal. I don’t know if he wanted to make a deal [before]. I think he wants to make a deal,” Trump said.

Earlier this week, Trump told Time magazine that “Crimea will stay with Russia” under any peace agreement, noting that even Zelensky “understands” the reality, despite public declarations to the contrary. Asked whether he believed Zelensky was now prepared to “give up” the peninsula, Trump responded: “Oh, I think so, yeah.” Zelensky has repeatedly and publicly insisted that Kiev would never formally recognize Crimea as Russian territory – a position Trump has previously criticized as “very harmful to the peace negotiations.” Despite portraying Zelensky as someone who wants to do “something good for the country,” Trump revealed that the Ukrainian leader again asked Washington for more military support.

“He told me that he needs more weapons, but he has been saying that for three years,” Trump stated. The US president noted that Kiev was in a “very tough situation,” fighting “a much bigger force” — and emphasized that “it helped them when we gave them $350 billion worth of weapons or cash.” “He needs more weapons, and we are gonna see what happens with respect to Russia,” Trump added, noting that he was “disappointed” with Moscow’s renewed strikes in Ukraine. Following a brief lull in fighting during the Easter ceasefire announced by President Vladimir Putin last weekend, the Russian military carried out multiple long-range strikes against Ukrainian military and industrial targets over the past week. Moscow has maintained that it targets only military installations and facilities used by Kiev’s forces, rejecting accusations of deliberately striking civilian sites.

Moscow has also reiterated its readiness for discussions with Kiev without preconditions. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov confirmed that the issue was raised during a meeting between President Putin and Trump’s special envoy, Steve Witkoff, on Friday. Russian officials have emphasized that any viable long-term settlement must reflect the territorial realities on the ground and address the root causes of the conflict. According to multiple reports, Washington’s proposal seeks to freeze the conflict along the current front lines and recognize Crimea as part of Russia. However, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said that – unlike Zelensky – Moscow does not intend to discuss confidential details of talks with the US until the process is completed.

Read more …

“may be willing to endure effective Russian control of Crimea,” as long as Kiev is not required to legally recognize it as such…”

No, really, you lost.

• Zelensky Admits Ukraine Can’t Reclaim Crimea By Force (RT)

Ukraine does not possess the military might necessary to retake Crimea by force, Vladimir Zelensky has conceded. The peninsula joined Russia in 2014 following a referendum. The vote was held in the wake of a Western-backed coup in Kiev earlier that year and amid fears of forced Ukrainization of the predominantly Russian-speaking region. Ukraine has continued to claim sovereignty over Crimea, repeatedly vowing to take it back. On Friday, Interfax-Ukraine quoted Zelensky as saying that “it’s true what President Trump says… that Ukraine does not have enough weapons to regain control of the Crimean Peninsula by force.” The Ukrainian leader expressed hope however that further sanctions and diplomatic pressure on Russia would be conducive to future discussions over “territorial issues,” but only after Kiev and Moscow have sealed a ceasefire.

In an interview with Time Magazine published on Friday, US President Donald Trump stated that “Crimea will stay with Russia” under any peace deal, adding that Zelensky also understands this. Trump went on to claim that the peninsula was “given” to Russia by former US President Barack Obama, and has “been with them for a long time.” He also noted that the majority of Crimeans speak Russian. In a post on his Truth Social platform later that day, Trump claimed that Ukraine and Russia “are very close to a deal, and the two sides should now meet, at very high levels, to ‘finish it off’.” According to media reports, the agreement proposed by Washington includes US recognition of Russian sovereignty over Crimea, a “freezing” of the conflict along the current front line, and acknowledgment of Moscow’s control over large parts of the four former Ukrainian regions that voted to join Russia.

Zelensky, by contrast, reiterated on Friday that Kiev’s “position is unchanged: only the Ukrainian people have the right to decide which territories are Ukrainian.” That same day, the Washington Post, citing anonymous sources, reported that European leaders were pressing Ukraine to accept the likelihood that it would be forced to cede certain territories to Russia as part of a peace accord during a high-level meeting in London on Wednesday. According to the newspaper, Western negotiators have a sense that Ukraine “may be willing to endure effective Russian control of Crimea,” as long as Kiev is not required to legally recognize it as such.

Read more …

“Kiev has demanded an unconditional ceasefire before any direct talks can happen.”

A loser’s demands.

• New Sanctions On Russia Would Mean Two More Years Of War – Rubio (RT)

The US administration has abstained from imposing new sanctions on Russia over the Ukraine conflict, believing such a move would jeopardize negotiations and prolong hostilities, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has said. Speaking to NBC News’ Meet the Press on Sunday, Rubio questioned the usefulness of placing new restrictions on Moscow, stating Washington was “hoping to see” whether the diplomacy would work first. “The minute you start doing that kind of stuff, you’re walking away from it, you’ve now doomed yourself to another two years of war and we don’t want to see it happen,” the top diplomat said. Rubio claimed that the US is the only country or institution speaking to both Kiev and Moscow, and only US President Donald Trump has the potential to bring the warring sides to the negotiating table.

The upcoming week is expected to be “very critical” for the White House with regard to the talks, as the administration is trying to make a “determination about whether this is an endeavor that we want to continue to be involved in.” While Washington does not want to walk away, it does not want to “spend time on something that’s not going to get us there” either, the secretary explained. “There are reasons to be optimistic, but there are reasons to be realistic. We’re close, but we’re not close enough,” he said. The remarks from the US secretary of state come a day after Trump threatened Moscow with new sanctions over the conflict, accusing Russia’s leadership of trying to drag out hostilities and of “shooting missiles” into Ukraine for “no reason” over the past few days. Moscow maintains it only targets facilities and infrastructure used by Kiev’s military, and has repeatedly denied accusations of staging indiscriminate strikes on civilian areas.

Trump’s threats came as Moscow once again reiterated its readiness for discussions with Kiev without preconditions. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov confirmed the topic was brought up by Russian President Vladimir Putin during a meeting with Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff in Moscow on Friday. Ukraine’s leader, Vladimir Zelensky, explicitly banned negotiations with Russia for as long as Putin is in charge back in October 2022. Since then, he has seemingly softened his position, claiming the negotiating ban concerned everyone in the country but himself. Most recently, Kiev has demanded an unconditional ceasefire before any direct talks can happen.

Read more …

Can’t do everything in 100 days.

• Trump Failing to Resolve US Budget Deficit But Slightly Slows Debt Growth (Sp.)

US President Donald Trump has not yet managed to tackle the federal budget deficit during his time in office but has slightly curbed the growth of the national debt, Sputnik has calculated based on US Treasury data.
The US budget remained in deficit for the fifth consecutive month in March, closing with a shortfall of $160.5 billion, nearly half of February’s $307 billion deficit but roughly in line with the average under Trump’s predecessor Joe Biden ($159 billion). At the same time Trump has managed to slow down the rise in US national debt. In November 2024, it reached $36.2 trillion and has since fluctuated near that level.

Meanwhile, at the end of February, the share of foreign holders of US debt in its total volume increased by 0.8 percentage points, reaching 24.3%. Among the five largest “investors” only Japan increased its positions – by 0.11 percentage points compared with January, up to 12.8%. The Cayman Islands fixed their investments at 4.7%. The other members of the top five have slightly weakened their interest in the US government debt over the month: the share of China in total investments decreased by 0.02 percentage points to 8.9%, the UK by 0.17 percentage points to 8.51%, and Luxembourg by 0.13 percentage points to 4.68%.

Read more …

“Despite the digital revolution, the Internet, social media, email, and texting, the acquisition of truthful information has become ever more difficult. The reason is that for almost all parties concerned, it is the agenda that is important, not the facts.”

• Are Americans Still Americans? (Paul Craig Roberts)

This question came to mind from reading Edward Curtin’s essays, “At the Lost and Found,” (Clarity Press, 2025), in which he shares with readers his intellectual encounters with the rising criminality of the governments of the United States since the 1960s. Edward Curtin is a decent person with a sense of justice and a moral conscience, traits more common in his time than today. I found his moral responses reassuring, and wonder if recent generations would respond in the same way. Curtin, I suspect, was a member of the old moderate left, which was concerned with fairness and pushing a reform here and there. Today this left remains only in its elderly remnants. The modern left is not reformist. It is revolutionary, committed to using law, government, and media to overthrow traditional society and replace it with a Sodom & Gomorrah Tower of Babel in which merit is regarded as a white racist tool.

Today the left, as epitomized by the Biden regime, pushes DEI over merit, sexual perversity over love between a man and a woman, sexualization of young children, demonization of white people as racists, and ideology over truth. Today for the left the truth resides in the ideological agenda, not in facts. Despite the digital revolution, the Internet, social media, email, and texting, the acquisition of truthful information has become ever more difficult. The reason is that for almost all parties concerned, it is the agenda that is important, not the facts. A consequence is that, unlike in the past, today we live in narratives orchestrated to serve agendas. As Curtin puts it, “we are living in a pretend society” in which truth is not present. Curtin’s essays, like my own, vary in quality, but every decent person will enjoy escape from social media into thought about what is happening to us. I am not going to attempt to organize Curtin’s essays around a theme. I am going to limit my comments to two of his essays.

The first is about what has become of Christmas. As my readers know, for several decades it has been my habit to republish my Christmas essay, “The Greatest Gift of All,” to remind people that Christianity gave us freedom and meaning in our lives. In the Massachusetts town in which Curtin and his wife live, Christmas fireworks are a feature. As he and his wife inside their home sit holding and trying to calm the family dogs, “sentient animals with deep feelings,” who are quaking uncontrollably, Curtin thinks of “children in Gaza quivering in fear as the Israelis bomb them night and day in savage attacks” and thinks of “the visceral sense of what those Palestinians must be feeling as they hold their trembling children” who are declared by Israel’s leader to be “useless objects.”

It is America’s shame that the entire government of the United States, including President Trump, the media, and the brainwashed and indoctrinated hapless American population accept the destruction of a people, even enable it with weapons and money and deportation of persons with sufficient moral conscience to protest the genocide of a nation. Curtin has every right to raise the question, what kind of people have Americans become? The second essay is about Curtin’s “Known Knowns,” which consists of the massive lies that the US government has based its rule upon, regardless of whether Republican or Democrat, since the 1960s. In a mere 8 pages Curtin presents the history of the US government’s degeneration into evil kept in power by lies.

He begins with the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy, Robert F. Kennedy, Malcolm X, Martin Luther King, and goes on to Allan Dulles who engineered slaughter of one million Indonesians, the orchestrated Vietnam War, the Watergate scandal orchestrated by the CIA to drive Nixon from power, the neoconservatives’ Iran-Contra scandal, the orchestrated Persian Gulf War, the Clinton regime’s bombing of four countries in four months –Afghanistan, Sudan, Iraq, and Yugoslavia, the 9/11 false flag attacks on the World Trade Center, the George W. Bush regime’s fake “war on terror,” used to strip Americans of civil liberties and to attack Afghanistan and Iraq, President Obama who institutionalized the warfare state and bombed seven countries, Trump who allowed the deadly Covid vaccine to be imposed on us and subjects the conscience of America to the support of Israel’s genocide of Palestine, and Biden who engineered the anti-Russian coup in Ukraine, renewed war with Russia, and imprisoned American citizens for exercising their constitutional rights.

From the standpoint of the American Establishment, the problem with Curtin’s indictment is that it is true. In today’s America, to tell the truth is becoming an indication of treason for which whistleblowers, allegedly protected by federal law, are being imprisoned. This is not changing under Trump. Instead, it is expanding. If you criticize Israel, you are deported. Thus, under the Trump regime, if you speak the truth about Israel, you are considered an enemy of the state. Americans really do need to think about how they arrived at this position. Curtin’s essays will help you.

Read more …

Might be a good idea. It’s what the nation was built on.

• AG Pam Bondi Leads Task Force To ‘Eradicate Anti-Christian Bias’ (JTN)

Attorney General Pam Bondi and other members of President Donald Trump’s cabinet have launched a task force to address anti-Christian bias in federal agencies that they argue escalated under the Biden administration. The goal of the task force is to identify any unlawful, anti-Christian policies, practices or conduct across the government. The task force will in that effort seek input from the faith-based organizations and state governments to end such bias and fix deficiencies in existing and regulatory practices that might be contributing factors. “The Biden administration engaged in an egregious pattern of targeting peaceful Christians while ignoring violent anti-Christian offenses,” Bondi said at the task force’s first meeting. “Pro-life Christians were arrested and imprisoned for peacefully praying outside abortion clinics. The FBI spied on traditional Catholics in their parishes. … Vandalism against churches was eight times higher in 2023 than it was in 2018.”

Bondi continued: “No longer. We ended those abuses at the Department of Justice on Day One. We dropped three ongoing cases against pro-lifers. … Just a few weeks ago, we convicted a man in Arizona for a plot to bomb Christian churches. The Department of Justice will protect religious liberty for Christians and for all Americans.” The task force was launched in response to an executive order issued by Trump and in response to pledges Bondi and others made during their Senate confirmation hearings. In response to hearing questions raised by Missouri GOP Sen. Josh Hawley, Bondi vowed to investigate the DOJ’s so-called “weaponization” of people of faith, The Center Square reported. In mid-2022, attacks by pro-abortion activists increased against a range of anti-abortion targets and U.S. Supreme Court justices ahead of the Supreme Court overturning the landmark abortion case, Roe v Wade.

At the time, protesters were targeting justices’ homes, and 25 attorneys general and U.S. senators called on the DOJ to enforce a federal law prohibiting anyone from targeting judges’ homes, The Center Square reported. The agency ignored their request. More than 100 pregnancy care centers and 300 churches were attacked, vandalized and firebombed, but the DOJ prosecuted only two cases, Hawley said. The Biden administration DOJ wouldn’t “lift a finger to defend [prolife] Americans but at the same time they used … the Face Act to prosecute at least 53 different pro-life demonstrators,” he also said. Prior to being confirmed as FBI director, Kash Patel also told Hawley he would investigate who wrote a Jan. 23, 2023, FBI Richmond, Virginia, field office memo “making a list of Catholic churches and parishes that they regard as potentially suspect and directing the potential recruitment of informants and other spies” into them, The Center Square reported.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio raised concerns about some Christian Foreign Service Officers being threatened for homeschooling their children, including being referred to the IRS, threatened with prosecution, and investigated by the Inspector General’s Office. He also cited examples of State Department employees being harassed because they refused to take a COVID-19 vaccine, citing religious reasons. He also discussed allegations that religious freedom policy offices and programs were sidelined unless they promoted diversity, equity and inclusion policies. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said the Biden administration threatened the St. Francis Health System, in Oklahoma, by telling the facility to put out a sanctuary candle or risk losing Medicare, Medicaid or Children’s Health Insurance Program funding and agency rules dissuaded Christians from becoming foster parents.

Secretary of Education Linda McMahon said Oregon educators were fired for helping others teach without violating their conscience in response to so-called gender identity education policies and how public schools were transitioning minors without parental consent or knowledge. Deputy Treasury Secretary Michael Faulkender said the Biden administration implemented “financial surveillance” and removed certain IRS tax classifications of Christian and pro-life organizations through a “debanking” process and FinCEN’s identified certain pro-Christian groups as “hate groups.”

The Biden administration brought federal criminal charges and obtained multi-year prison sentences against nearly two dozen anti-abortion Christians who prayed and demonstrated outside abortion facilities. Those convicted included a Catholic priest, a 75-year-old grandmother, an 87-year-old woman, and a father of 11 children who was “arrested 18 months after praying and singing hymns outside an abortion facility in Tennessee as a part of a politically motivated prosecution campaign by the Biden Administration,” Trump said in his order. On his third day in office, Trump “rectified this injustice … by issuing pardons in these cases.” Trump said his administration “will not tolerate anti-Christian weaponization of government or unlawful conduct targeting Christians” and that Americans will be protected to practice their faith in peace, and those targeting them will be brought to justice.

Read more …

Will be presented as some dictators’ craze, but entire departments are populated by TDS, so he may not have a choice if he wants to get aything done.

• White House To Evaluate Officials’ Loyalty To Trump – WSJ (RT)

A US government agency will begin assessing federal workers based on their loyalty to President Donald Trump, the Wall Street Journal has reported. The Office of Personnel Management (OPM), which is the US federal government’s human-resources arm, has been tasked with leading the evaluation program, the outlet said in an article on Saturday. According to memos from OPM Acting Director Chuck Ezell, which were seen by the WSJ, high-ranking civil servants will be judged based on their “faithful administration of the law and the president’s policies.” The documents described advancing Trump’s agenda as the “most critical element” in measuring the performance of the officials, the report read. The new performance plan is expected to be adopted by the US government agencies by the beginning of fiscal year 2026, it added.

The WSJ stressed that civil servants had also been graded previously, but it was done based on factors such as business acumen, leadership skills, ability to build coalitions and results of their work. During the previous Democratic administration of President Joe Biden, staffing policy focused heavily on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) practices. Critics, however, argued that DEI initiatives often prioritized identity over merit, leading to claims of lowered standards and divisiveness. Many companies, including, Walt Disney, JPMorgan Chase, Amazon, and Google, facing similar criticisms and legal challenges, have since scaled back or entirely abandoned their DEI programs. Shortly after assuming office in January, Trump signed several executive orders aimed at eliminating DEI initiatives, describing them as “radical,” within the federal government, its contractors, and grantees.

The WSJ said that OPM had already begun approving positions that other federal agencies are looking to add in what it described as an attempt by the Trump administration “to consolidate control over the hiring and firing of federal workers.” The Office of Personnel Management will also continue some of the government downsizing efforts initiated by Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk, according to the report. Musk announced earlier this week that he will scale back his involvement as the head of the US Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and refocus on his business activities. The world’s richest man explained his decision by saying that “major work” to establish DOGE has now been completed. However, Musk clarified that he has no intention of stepping away from his work at the agency altogether, adding that he would still spend “a day or two per week on government matters.”

Read more …

How much does he need in tariffs?

• Trump Floats Plan To Slash Income Taxes For Millions Using Tariff Cash (ZH)

President Donald Trump doubled down Sunday on his plan to use tariff revenue to slash – and possibly eliminate – income taxes for millions of Americans. [The former president] took to Truth Social to tout his vision, claiming that his sweeping tariffs could lead to big tax breaks for workers making under $200,000 a year. “When Tariffs cut in, many people’s Income Taxes will be substantially reduced, maybe even completely eliminated. Focus will be on people making less than $200,000 a year,” Trump wrote. The bold pledge comes as public anxiety grows over the economic fallout from Trump’s aggressive trade policies, which have rattled global markets and fueled fears of higher prices at home. In the weeks since Trump slapped so-called reciprocal tariffs on dozens of countries – including a staggering 145% levy on Chinese goods, economists have sounded the alarm that the tariffs could backfire, hurting American consumers more than foreign rivals.

That said – not everyone’s excited after Trump told TIME Magazine in the April 25 edition that he “love[s] the concept” of raising taxes on millionaires as a means of paying for an extension of the 2017 tax cuts. “I certainly don’t mind having a tax increase,” Trump told TIME. “I would be honored to pay more, but I don’t want to be in a position where we lose an election because I was generous, but me, as a rich person, would not mind paying and you know, we’re talking about very little.” He said it would involve raising taxes on the wealthy to “take care of [the] middle class.” “But I don’t want it to be used against me politically, because I’ve seen people lose elections for less, especially with the fake news.” Former White House strategist Steve Bannon told News Nation’s “CUOMO” on Friday that he supported the idea.

“This is being fought behind closed doors right now, and I’m telling you, with the massive tax cut, in addition, he’s going to give the working class and the middle class, the math only works out if you actually increase taxes on the wealthy,” Bannon said. The former White House strategist said it could help Trump politically if he decided to run again in 2028, despite the Constitution preventing a third term in the Oval Office. However, on April 23, the day after he sat down with TIME, Trump told reporters at the White House that raising taxes on the wealthy could be “very disruptive” and could lead to a loss of money for the United States. House Speaker Mike Johnson dismissed the idea in an interview with Fox News. “I’m not in favor of raising the tax rates because our party is the party that stands against that,” Johnson said on April 23.

He acknowledged that the proposal had been discussed as one of many possible ways to permanently implement personal income tax cuts in the Republicans’ final funding package. “There were lots of ideas thrown out on the table along this process over the last year, but I would just say for everybody, just wait and see,” Johnson said. A CBS News poll released Sunday found 69% of Americans believe the Trump administration isn’t focused enough on lowering prices. Approval of Trump’s handling of the economy dropped to 42%, down from 51% in early March, Bloomberg reports. Still, Trump’s team insists their strategy will pay off – eventually. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, appearing on ABC’s “This Week,” defended the president’s approach, saying consumers are still spending and talks are underway with 17 key trading partners to hammer out bilateral deals.

“We have a process in place, over the next 90 days, to negotiate with them,” Bessent said. “Some of those are moving along very well, especially with the Asian countries.” Bessent also insisted China would have no choice but to return to the negotiating table under pressure from Trump’s new tariff wall. “Their business model is predicated on selling cheap, subsidized goods to the US,” Bessent said. “And if there’s a sudden stop in that, they will have a sudden stop in the economy, so they will negotiate.” Bessent also explained America’s “barbell” economy – in which there is a “financial system and tech sector that is the envy of the world” on one hand, and “a natural resource-economy led by energy” on the other end. Trump has claimed that talks with China are ongoing – a claim Beijing has flatly denied. Bessent admitted he didn’t know if Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping had spoken directly, noting that Chinese officials he saw during a global finance summit last week stuck to safer topics like “financial stability” and “early warnings.”

Despite the rocky start, Bessent said he’s optimistic that a path forward could emerge, starting with a “de-escalation” and leading to an “agreement in principle” – even if a full trade deal takes longer. Meanwhile, Trump is eyeing sweeping tax changes at home. His 2017 tax cuts are set to expire at the end of 2025, and he has vowed to not only extend them but expand them, exempting workers’ tips, slashing the corporate tax rate to 15%, and possibly wiping out income taxes for working-class Americans. The House GOP’s early-April framework allows for up to $5.3 trillion in tax cuts over the next decade. Trade adviser Peter Navarro has suggested tariff revenue could more than cover that – a claim most economists dismiss as wildly optimistic. Reports already show that Trump’s tariffs are expected to hit lower-income Americans harder than the wealthy, potentially complicating the president’s pitch to working families. But Trump, undeterred, appears ready to bet that tariff-fueled tax cuts will give him a powerful message heading into the 2026 midterms, even if voters are feeling the pinch now.

Read more …

Control trumps money.

• Trump Wants US Ships to Travel Through Panama, Suez Canals for Free (ET)

President Donald Trump said on April 26 that U.S. military and commercial ships should be allowed to pass through the Panama and Suez canals “free of charge.”“Those Canals would not exist without the United States of America,” Trump wrote on his social media platform, Truth Social. “I’ve asked Secretary of State Marco Rubio to immediately take care of, and memorialize, this situation!” Stretching across the isthmus that connects North America and South America, the Panama Canal allows ships to quickly traverse between the Atlantic and Pacific oceans, and it carries roughly 40 percent of U.S. container traffic yearly. American and British leaders and businessmen discussed plans for building the canal throughout the 1800s as a way to quickly and cheaply transport goods without having to travel around the southern tip of South America to get between the Pacific and Atlantic oceans. The United States built the canal between 1903 and 1914.

President Jimmy Carter negotiated the Torrijos-Carter Treaties, ratified by the Senate in 1978, that set in motion the relinquishing of control of the canal to Panama. That finally came to fruition in 1999. Trump has previously said that he wants to “take back” the canal and bring it under U.S. control, suggesting that he would not rule out using economic or military force to regain the shipping passageway. Earlier this month, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said the United States was partnering with Panama to secure the Panama Canal while countering China’s “malign influence.” “The Panama Canal is key terrain that must be secured by Panama, with America and not China,” Hegseth said at a joint press conference with Panamanian Public Security Minister Frank Abrego. The two nations signed a memorandum of understanding on bilateral security matters in the region that will see an expansion of joint training exercises between the United States and Panama while improving interoperability between their militaries, the secretary said.

The Suez Canal, which connects the Mediterranean to the Red Sea, was constructed in the late 1800s. However, recent military conflicts and terrorist attacks in the area have disrupted shipping traffic moving through the Suez Canal, forcing some ships to reroute around Africa’s southern Cape of Good Hope instead of using the corridor. The Houthi terrorist group, backed by Iran, has caused repeated shipping disruptions in the area, according to the Atlantic Council, which estimates that the canal generated roughly $9.4 billion in revenue for Egypt in 2022–2023. The Trump administration has approved multiple targeted strikes on the Houthis this year. Trump said the strikes would continue until the group no longer disrupts shipping between the Mediterranean and the Red Sea.

Read more …

“Diplomats view European Commission President von der Leyen as “toxic,” asserting that her resignation could help “unblock many issues”..”

• Fish Rots From Its Head: Senior EU Officials Call For Ursula’s Resignation (Sp.)

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen’s track record as a politician is marred by a number of scandals. During the COVID-19 pandemic, for example, she made a deal with US pharmaceutical giant Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla to buy 1.8 billion doses of then-untested COVID vaccines worth about $37.6 billion. Diplomats view European Commission President von der Leyen as “toxic,” asserting that her resignation could help “unblock many issues”, according to Switzerland’s Die Weltwoche weekly. The EU is currently embroiled in a crisis marked by internal divisions, a trade dispute with the United States, and the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, among other things, the publication notes. Von der Leyen’s resignation could foster greater diversity within the EU and promote openness toward the East and the West, the Swiss weekly maintains.

Read more …

“..offering children £1,500 and teddy bears to take part in Covid vaccine trials..”

• Moderna Faces UK Suspension Over Covid Jab Breaches (Tel.)

Moderna could face suspension from Britain’s pharmaceutical trade body following a string of breaches of the regulatory code. The Covid vaccine maker is due to be audited by the Prescription Medicines Code of Practice Authority (PMCPA) over “unacceptable” practices that brought discredit upon the industry. If found to be lacking adequate compliance systems, Moderna could ultimately be suspended or expelled from the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry (APBI). It follows several code breaches, including representatives of the company offering children £1,500 and teddy bears to take part in Covid vaccine trials. In a fresh ruling, which is expected to be published in the coming days, the company was also found to have misled regulators about when it first became aware of the financial incentives to children.

Moderna claimed it had taken action as soon as it was notified about the cash offer by the Health Research Agency in January 2024, but it has now emerged that senior executives were informed in August 2023 by the campaign group UsForThem, yet failed to take action. Under the Medicines for Human Use (Clinical Trials) regulations, it is prohibited for incentives or financial inducements to be given to children or their parents. The PMCPA ruled the company had shown a lack of transparency that was “completely unacceptable” and brought discredit upon the industry. A senior employee was also found to have co-authored three articles, including one with Nadhim Zahawi, the former vaccines minister, which promoted Moderna’s Covid vaccine without disclosing he worked for the company. He also sent promotional tweets from a personal account without revealing his role.

The PMCPA said the article and tweets amounted to advertising the vaccine, and viewed the failure to inform readers of links to Moderna as unacceptable. Molly Kingsley, the founder of UsForThem, said: “Many of the previous judgments against Moderna have revealed how readily it put profit ahead of the health and safety of children. “Now it has also laid bare just how little regard it has had for the regulatory system that was supposed to keep it honest. “Never before has a company so new to the pharmaceutical industry been rebuked in this way.” In two new rulings, Moderna was found to have made ten new breaches of the code. UsforThem said it was particularly worrying as they related to three senior executives at the company. The PMCPA said that an audit was now necessary to look at whether Moderna’s culture, governance and framework were operating effectively, and said the Appeal Board would then consider whether further sanctions were needed after auditors had reported back.

The Appeal Board can report a company to the APBI board, which can suspend or expel them from the APBI. Suspension or expulsion would be a blow for Moderna, which only joined in 2023. The APBI has taken the measure just nine times in the past 40 years. The last company to be suspended was Novo Nordisk in 2023. The company manufactures the high-profile weight loss drugs Saxenda and Wegovy, and type 2 diabetes drug Ozempic. Its membership was restored in March. In the past year, Moderna has been ordered to pay thousands for breaches of the regulations, including for using off-label data to promote its Spikevax vaccine at the European congress of clinical microbiology and infectious diseases in April 2022. But critics argue the company’s revenue is nearly £7 billion in 2023, so with such small sums it has no incentive to stick to the rules, while being suspended from the APBI only brings reputational damage.

Esther McVey MP, a former member of the all-party parliamentary group on Covid vaccine damage, said: “There have now been six cases over the last few months where the UK Prescription Medicines Code of Practice Authority (PMCPA) have ruled against Moderna regarding multiple breaches of the industry’s Code of Practice. “The news that the PMCPA is taking the highly unusual step of ordering an audit of Moderna’s culture, governance and compliance framework is reputationally damaging, but it is incredible that the regulator has no real power to impose appropriate fines or other meaningful penalties which might make pharmaceutical companies think twice before breaking the rules. “They know they can get away with it, and so they do; time and time again. It’s hardly surprising that public trust in the pharmaceutical industry and its regulators is through the floor.”

Read more …

Economist Lacalle asserts that if the iMF and World Bank would have done their job instead of going woke, the tariff war would never have happened,

• International Institutions Must Abandon “Wokeism” (Lacalle)

The scandal over the alleged corruption of the founder of the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos would be just an anecdote were it not another example of what has happened recently with many international institutions. The Financial Times reveals that the WEF founder faces accusations of manipulating the organization’s analysis to gain favour with governments. For years, many of us have watched with sadness as an important forum like Davos shifted from being a centre for debate and confrontation of ideas in defence of free enterprise to becoming a loudspeaker for the most interventionist ideas, the most damaging statism, and a whitewasher of authoritarian governments, spreading the destructive ideas of inflationism, socialism, and wokeism— which, in reality, are all the same.

Davos went from being a forum for debate to a congregation for repeating interventionist dogmas and whitewashing a single, extractive mindset; those who defended economic freedom, attractive taxes, and control over public spending were gradually ostracised. We have heard enthusiastic applause for those demanding more taxes and greater assaults on job creators, and one-sided debates in which all participants repeated clichés and words like “resilience” and “sustainability” as Trojan horses for predatory statism, where the idea of creating value and wealth was repudiated. Do you remember the aberration of “you will own nothing and be happy”, abandoning profit generation as a goal, or the suggestion that coffee cultivation should be banned because it contributes to climate change? With phrases like “equal rights to economic resources, as well as access to basic services, ownership and control over land and other forms of property, inheritance, and natural resources”, the most absurd and obsolete collectivism was being sold.

It hasn’t just happened in Davos. This week, Scott Bessent, the U.S. Treasury Secretary, confronted the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank, exposing their complicity in selling the flawed products of socialist interventionism. “The IMF and the World Bank have enduring value, but their mission has drifted off course.” It was very frustrating to see how these institutions whitewashed the constant increase in the weight of governments in the economy, confiscatory taxes, and inflationism through fiscal and monetary excess. They have forgotten their role as guarantors of economic logic, defenders of wealth creators, enforcers of fiscal responsibility, and enforcers of tax prudence. Instead, they became increasingly permissive with authoritarian, exploitative, and wasteful governments.

Bessent stated: “The IMF has suffered from mission creep. The IMF was once unwavering in its mission of promoting global monetary cooperation and financial stability. Now it devotes disproportionate time and resources to work on climate change, gender, and social issues.” Just like other institutions, such as the European Central Bank, which also set climate change as a goal while abandoning its true aim of price stability, they focus on cosmetic and ideological issues unrelated to monetary policy, financial stability, and fiscal responsibility, as these are matters for government social policy. Moreover, many of these supposed social concerns only serve to hide the whitewashing of a constant increase in government excesses, uncontrolled spending, debt, and rising taxes.

Bessent added: “The International Monetary Fund should be a brutal revealer of the truth. Instead, it is ‘whistling past the graveyard.’” This statement from Bessent mirrors the perception of any freedom defender in many of the IMF’s reports: it acquiesces as governments push their countries, companies, and self-employed workers towards financial ruin. Do you remember the IMF’s 2020 call to “do whatever it takes and keep the receipts”? Governments happily rushed to spend without control, printing money recklessly, leaving poverty, inflation, runaway debt, and suffocating taxes in their wake. However, in 2024, when over seventy countries were spending uncontrollably due to elections and the public debt was rapidly increasing, the IMF declared a strategy of “safe but slow growth: resilience with divergence”. Incredible.

Regarding the World Bank, Bessent stated: “The bank should no longer expect blank cheques for vapid, buzzword-centric marketing accompanied by half-hearted commitments to reform.” If the institutions that should guarantee financial stability, economic logic, fiscal responsibility, and business growth focus on disguising fiscal and monetary imbalances or ignoring attacks on private property, financial and monetary stability, or free enterprise in countries with totalitarian regimes and interventionist governments, they cease to fulfil their functions and become the orchestra on the Titanic. It is time to abandon propaganda, excuses, and cosmetics. It is time to stop whitewashing interventionism and recover the essential role these institutions play in preserving and strengthening growth. It is time to stop justifying wasteful governments and return to defending businesses and wealth creators.

We cannot forget the importance of the IMF, World Bank, ECB, or WEF as guarantors of economic and financial stability and monetary soundness. Their work is essential. Do not forget it. They must return to defending what creates wealth, reduces poverty, and improves the lives of citizens: business growth, the free market, economic freedom, and fiscal and monetary prudence. Their association with predatory authoritarian governments has led to a significant loss of their former prestige. If Davos, the IMF and mainstream economists had been half as blunt about China and other nations’ tariffs and trade barriers in the past decade as they are today about US trade policy, we would not need forced negotiations to level the playing field.

Dear institutions: It is time to remind the world that progress comes from saving, economic freedom, and prudent investment, not from political spending, debt, and monetary inflationism. The great institutions have much to contribute, but they must know they face two alternatives: recover their mission as defenders of fiscal and monetary responsibility and economic freedom or disappear.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

228

Friends

Gandalf
https://twitter.com/buitengebieden/status/1916048241944125606

Pup
https://twitter.com/Texg70/status/1915918236547264685

Dick
https://twitter.com/ThatEricAlper/status/1916300013249966205

Lovers

Moonwalk

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

How We Averted The Polycrisis

Dec 282023
 
 December 28, 2023  Posted by at 12:30 pm Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,  8 Responses »


Edward Hopper Funnel of Trawler 1924

 

 

Good thing India didn’t join the sanctions, explains Andrew Korybko. Maybe there’s a lesson in there for more people and countries. Also, maybe it’s too late for some. Even if the deindustralization of Germany has barely started.

 

 

Andrew Korybko:

A representative of India’s Petroleum and Natural Gas Ministry told a department-related parliamentary standing committee that their country’s Russian oil imports helped stabilize the global energy market and prevent havoc from breaking out according to a recent report from The Indian Express. What follows are the excerpts that they cited from that event, which will then be analyzed so that the reader can fully appreciate India’s latest contribution to the world:

“If they (Indian refiners) had not imported Russian oil into India, which may be a big number of 1.95 million barrels per day, that deficiency would have created a havoc in the crude oil market and the prices would have shot up by about $30-40.

The crude oil market is such that in the market of 100 million barrels per day, if the OPEC (Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries) says that they are going to reduce it by one or two million barrels per day, prices increase by 10 to 20 per cent and reach up to $125-130.

If India does not absorb–I would call it absorption–1.95 million barrels per day, these prices would have reached $120-130. It would have created a havoc. Diplomatically, we are a sovereign country and could say that we have been doing what is good for the country as well as the world.”

This insight aligns with what was earlier shared in these five analyses from June 2022-March 2023:

* 14 June 2022: “Russian-Indian Energy Diplomacy Helps Delhi Balance Washington”

* 30 November 2022: “Russia’s Energy Geopolitics With China & India”

* 16 January 2023: “The US Discredited Its Own Sanctions By Buying Refined Russian Oil Products Via India”

* 8 February 2023: “The West’s Anti-Russian Sanctions Made India Indispensable To The Global Energy Market”

* 1 March 2023: “Russia Will Keep Up The Pace Of Oil Exports To India Despite Increased Chinese Demand”

If India hadn’t resisted Western pressure, then the whole international community would have suffered.

To explain, many Global South states were already struggling to deal with COVID-connected debt problems prior to the West’s anti-Russian sanctions worsening their food insecurity, so an energy price crisis on top of that could have pushed them over the edge into an uncontrollable polycrisis. Not only could this have led to spiraling unrest that could have spread throughout this swath of the world, but the security and humanitarian consequences would have also destabilized the West as well.  

Those countries among that New Cold War bloc that are dependent on resources and markets there might have felt compelled to launch unilateral military interventions, while large-scale refugee flows could have crashed into their societies with all that entails for exacerbating preexisting tensions. This worst-case scenario was averted through India’s principled neutrality towards the Ukrainian Conflict, which saw this globally significant Great Power resist Western pressure to boycott Russian energy.

If Delhi had capitulated to their demands, then the abrupt removal of so much energy from the market would have plunged it into chaos. The remaining producers couldn’t have replaced Russia’s lost share, thus leading to a competition among the wealthiest countries (namely China and the EU) to purchase their remaining resources. All the while, the debt-beleaguered and newly food-insecure Global South would have been unable to maintain its minimum energy needs, thus setting the polycrisis into motion.

As the unnamed Indian official told parliament, “we have been doing what is good for the country as well as the world”, which highlighted the growing convergence between India’s national interests and those of the international community. This South Asian Great Power practices what can be described as a hyper-realist grand strategy wherein India not only prioritizes its national interests as policymakers conceive them to be, but candidly acknowledges this approach and also details those same interests.

By doing so, India removes all ambiguity about its interests, which therefore makes it the most predictable partner that anyone can have. This policy is premised on the trust that India has cultivated with everyone since they don’t have any reason to question its representatives’ sincerity whenever they speak about their national interests. Some might have different views and even dislike India’s policies, but nobody can credibly claim that those representatives are lying about what that they want and why.

Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov praised this approach and the multi–alignment that it naturally led to during a press conference with his Indian counterpart on Wednesday when saying that “I believe this policy is not just important for Russia and all other countries around the world, but it is the only policy worth conducting that will ensure respect and reputation and be beneficial in India’s cooperation with other countries that show similar respect to all members of the international community.”

The West will never appreciate what India did for the world, but the Global South is beginning to realize that the polycrisis that many of their officials feared would unfold shortly after the anti-Russian sanctions were promulgated was largely averted through India’s drastically scaled imports of that country’s oil. This stabilized the market, which made it easier for them to manage their debt and food security problems, thus preventing this part of the world from slipping into full-scale instability to everyone’s detriment.

 

 

 

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

 

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

Debt Rattle October 30 2023

Oct 302023
 
 October 30, 2023  Posted by at 8:50 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , ,  43 Responses »


William Blake Europe Supported by Africa and America 1796

 

• Leaked: Israeli Plan To Ethnically Cleanse Gaza (Cradle)
• Israel Faces ‘Near Impossible Task’ in Gaza (Scott Ritter)
• Netanyahu Strengthened Hamas to Discredit Palestinian Cause (Sp.)
• 2 Billion Will Die in New War Cycle – Charles Nenner (USAW)
• India’s Solidarity With Israel Is Untenable (Bhadrakumar)
• Israel Scaled Back Gaza Ground Campaign After US Intervention – NYT (RT)
• EU May Become Complicit In ‘Genocide’ – Spanish Official (RT)
• EU No Longer Independent In Politics Even In Europe – Medvedev (TASS)
• Western Media ‘Cancel’ the Ukraine Conflict (SCF)
• Trump’s ex-Russia Expert Predicts Big Changes In ‘International Order’ (RT)
• Israel-Hamas War A Conflict Between ‘Civilization And Savagery’ – Trump (RT)
• US Judge Reinstates Gag Order on Trump in Federal Election Case (Sp.)
• Jack Smith Quietly Withdraws Second Subpoena in Trump Probe (GP)
• China’s Local Governments Are Out Of Money (SCMP)

 

 

 

 

PCR

 

 

 

 

 

 

Trump

 

 

Bibi NL

 

 

 

 

“..the ten-page document is authentic but “was not supposed to reach the media..”

• Leaked: Israeli Plan To Ethnically Cleanse Gaza (Cradle)

Israeli culture magazine Mekovit published on 28 October a leaked document issued by Israel’s Ministry of Intelligence recommending the occupation of Gaza and total transfer of its 2.3 million inhabitants to Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula. The document, issued on 13 October, identifies a plan to transfer all residents of the Gaza Strip to North Sinai as the preferred option among three alternatives regarding the future of the Palestinians in Gaza at the end of the current war between Israel and the Hamas-led Palestinian resistance. The document recommends that Israel evacuate the Gazan population to Sinai during the war, establish tent cities and new cities in northern Sinai to accommodate the deported population, and then create a closed security zone stretching several kilometers inside Egypt. The deported Palestinians would not be allowed to return to any areas near the Israeli border.

The existence of the document does not necessarily indicate that its recommendations are being implemented by Israel’s security establishment. The Ministry of Intelligence, headed by Gila Gamliel of the Likud party, does not control any of Israel’s intelligence agencies, but independently prepares studies and policy papers, which are distributed for consideration by the government and its security bodies. However, recent statements by Israeli government officials and actions by the Israeli army in Gaza suggest the plan is indeed being implemented. Since 7 October, Israeli officials have repeatedly issued warnings to Palestinians to move to southern Gaza in advance of a looming ground invasion. Israel has imposed a total siege on Gaza, cutting off food, water, fuel, and electricity. The siege, combined with intense Israeli bombing that has killed over 8,000 Palestinians, the majority women and children, threatens to make Gaza uninhabitable.

An official at the Ministry of Intelligence confirmed that the ten-page document is authentic but “was not supposed to reach the media,” Mekovit noted. According to a right-wing activist, the document from the Ministry of Intelligence was leaked by a member of Likud. Leaking the document was an attempt to find out whether “the public in Israel is ready to accept ideas of a transfer from Gaza.” The document unequivocally and explicitly recommends carrying out a transfer of civilians from Gaza as the desired outcome of the war.

Read more …

“..it is highly likely that Hamas will be able to hold off a concerted Israeli assault..”

• Israel Faces ‘Near Impossible Task’ in Gaza (Scott Ritter)

If one combined the above ground rubble of Monte Casino with the below-ground tunnel network of Iwo Jima, you might approximate the hellish scenario awaiting Israel in Gaza. Over 500 kilometers of tunnels dug in under the 360 square kilometers that comprise the Gaza Strip, these tunnels are purpose built, designed to serve as transportation corridors, command centers, supply depots, dormitories and hospitals, defensive positions, and in support of offensive action. Simply put, there has never been a military operation against a target such as the one presented by Hamas in Gaza. Israel has trained a small number of its elite special forces to carry out limited-scope operations in an underground environment.

These operations, typically involving hostage rescue or direct action (i.e., eliminating a high value target), are conducted under very controlled circumstances, with the attacking forces proceeding only when the circumstances support a favorable outcome. As such, the experiences of these troops are counterproductive when it comes to transferring knowledge to the conventional forces that would bear the brunt of any Israeli assault on Gaza. Simply trying to navigate the rubble-strewn streets of Gaza will be a nearly impossible task for the Israeli troops. The going will be slow, and the Israeli infantry will have to operate dismounted, exposing themselves to sniper fire and ambushes. Israeli vehicles will find themselves hemmed in without the ability to maneuver, making themselves vulnerable to mines, improvised explosive devices, and anti-tank weaponry. Close air support under these circumstances will be very difficult, effectively neutralizing Israel’s greatest advantage.

If Israel does not sync its above-ground actions with a simultaneous effort to defeat Hamas’ underground tunnel-based defenses, then the situation above ground will become even more precarious, with Hamas emerging from tunnels behind the Israeli forces, cutting them off and inflicting heavy casualties. But Israel is going to be operating largely blind underground, probing into a tunnel network designed by Hamas to protect against any such effort. Israel’s best bet would be to simply locate tunnel entrances and seal them off, leaving the Hamas forces underground to die of thirst, hunger, oxygen deprivation, or disease. But this will require the physical occupation of every square meter of the city, an immensely difficult problem from both a logistical and operational standpoint. It will also expose more Israeli forces to harm, resulting in a dramatic increase in casualties.

By reacting to the Hamas attack of October 7 in the way it has, Israel has literally walked into a trap designed by Hamas to defeat any Israeli incursion. Israeli forces are neither trained, equipped, organized, nor motivated to carry out the kind of brutal, bloody, and physically demanding combat that will be required to defeat Hamas above and below the ground in Gaza. Israeli political and military leaders have boxed themselves into a corner with their aggressive winner-take-all rhetoric. But now that the time has come to pay the price of their collective verbiage, the question becomes is this a price Israel is willing and able to pay?

The answer is probably no. Israel has defined victory as being predicated on the total defeat of Hamas as a military organization. This is most probably a mission impossible. Hamas, therefore, emerges victorious simply by surviving. Given the strong defensive position Hamas finds itself in, through a combination of its immense tunnel network and the destroyed urban environment brought on by Israeli bombardment, it is highly likely that Hamas will be able to hold off a concerted Israeli assault until which time the Israel Defense Forces, like the German Pioneer battalions in Stalingrad, exhaust themselves on the field of battle.

Read more …

“Netanyahu and Hamas are political partners,” declared a recent article in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, “and both sides have fulfilled their side of the bargain.”

• Netanyahu Strengthened Hamas to Discredit Palestinian Cause (Sp.)

In contrast to the secular Fatah and PFLP, Hamas is an explicitly Islamist group. The political party began to gain support in Palestinian society for their provision of social services and leadership of armed resistance. However, international support for the Palestinian cause was damaged as the United States, the UK, and other Western powers designated Hamas as a terrorist organization, a label that increasingly stigmatized supporters of Palestinian liberation, especially after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. The deeply polarizing nature of Hamas and their tactics began to be recognized as politically useful by certain enterprising figures in Israeli politics. “Netanyahu and Hamas are political partners,” declared a recent article in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, “and both sides have fulfilled their side of the bargain.”

The article goes on to document some of the ways Netanyahu has materially supported the armed group during his over 16 years as Israeli prime minister, including allowing untraceable cash contributions to Hamas from Iran and Qatar. In the latter country, Hamas’ leader Ismail Haniyeh is allowed to operate freely. Israel tightly controls who and what is allowed to enter into Gaza, but the Qatari envoy is permitted to arrive with suitcases of cash to fund Hamas’ operations. The Israeli government often argues Hamas invests money in building military capability rather than providing social services in Gaza. The free flow of funds to the group, overseen and approved by Israel’s hands-off approach, ensures that this continues.

Netanyahu retains his useful talking point demonizing the terrorist threat while Hamas periodically rebuilds its capability to wage war, providing justification for Netanyahu’s hardline approach. “Netanyahu is the one who turned Hamas from a terror organization with few resources into a semi-state body,” noted Haaretz, emphasizing that the group’s rule in Gaza politically isolates Palestinians in the enclave from those in the West Bank. In case the politically symbiotic relationship weren’t clear, Netanyahu made it explicit during a meeting with members of his Likud party in 2019: “Anyone who wants to thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state has to support the bolstering of Hamas and transferring money to Hamas. This is part of our strategy, to isolate the Palestinians in Gaza from the Palestinians in the West Bank.”

Read more …

“.. I don’t know how many of them are in there already. They are catching Iranians on a terror list. How did Iranians get to Mexico?“

• 2 Billion Will Die in New War Cycle – Charles Nenner (USAW)

Renowned geopolitical and financial cycle expert Charles Nenner has been warning a once every 120-year war cycle is coming, and with hostilities in the Middle East, it is clearly here. This cycle is for big wars such as WWI and WWII. These two wars were part of one big war cycle according to Nenner, and history is now repeating. Keep in mind, this war cycle comes with many countries in possession of nuclear arsenals. Nenner explains, “If you do cycles on war games and war cycles, you can calculate how many people are going to die in such a war. We discussed this in the past, and it now looks ugly. We are talking about a lot of people. There are so many things bad going on in the world, so I would like to not to tell you the number.”

Nenner has said this war cycle will top all other war cycles in body counts. Nenner predicts, “This war cycle is going to be worse than World War II. So, the question is what do we do and where do we go? A lot of my clients are not interested in ‘how do I make money,’ but where should we go. So, I am studying where are the best places to go. This is what I am trying to find out, and I have been very busy with this.” Back to the death toll that Nenner knows is coming. So, I ask again, how many people will die in the current war cycle? Nenner blurts out, “It could be a quarter of the population of the world.” That’s roughly 2 billion people that could be killed in the current war cycle. Nenner goes on to say, “This may not be in the next war because this is going to continue for many years. It could be in the war after this.

What I see now is the Chinese going to the Middle East and the United States helping Israel because if they don’t do that, nobody would trust the United States anymore. I guess the Chinese are going to watch how tough the United States is going to be because, otherwise, they take over Tiawan just like that. They may still do it because everybody is busy with Ukraine and Israel. . . . The U.S. is going to have to prove themselves, otherwise, they will be laughed off the world.” Nenner also sees a war cycle coming to America through the Southern U.S. border. America will be attacked like never before in this war cycle. Nenner says, “There will be terror attacks in the U.S. and maybe much more because I don’t know how many of them are in there already. They are catching Iranians on a terror list. How did Iranians get to Mexico?”

Nenner thinks the dollar is stable–for now. Interest rates are going to continue to climb but will take a short downward path in the near term. Inflation is going to be going back up soon. Nenner is not a long-term buyer of stocks, and he still thinks the Dow’s downside is 5,000 and global war could take it there in a hurry. The greatest depression in history is still a few years away, but Nenner is 100% sure it is coming. Nenner’s cycles say it will most likely happen in the 2027-2028 time period. Nenner does like gold and silver and thinks gold will be well over $2,500 per ounce within a year and a half. Nenner’s best financial advice is “buy the 2-year Treasury,” and lock in a 5% return with zero risk.

Read more …

“..Qatar and Israel had once collaborated since the mid-nineties to prop up Hamas as an Islamist antidote to the secular-minded PLO..”

• India’s Solidarity With Israel Is Untenable (Bhadrakumar)

The Indo-Israeli fusion through the past decade hasn’t gone unnoticed in the Muslim countries. They resent it, perhaps, but it may not surge into view because Arabs are a hospitable people. That said, their resentment may surface if push comes to shove and their core interests are involved. The US-Israeli attempt to put the lid on the region’s growing strategic autonomy is one such core issue. It is far from the case that the regional states — be it Qatar, Iran, Egypt, Syria or even Turkey — do not understand that the Biden administration’s grandiloquent idea of a India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor is in reality a wedge to disrupt the nascent trends of unity among regional states so as to insert Israel into the regional processes and rekindle the flame of sectarian schism and geopolitical rifts, which the US invariably exploited to impose its hegemony in West Asia historically.

That is why, the three-way Qatar-India-Israel tangled mess of espionage, which should never have been allowed to happen, becomes a litmus test of mutual intentions in the geopolitics of the region. Lest it is forgotten, Qatar and Israel had once collaborated since the mid-nineties to prop up Hamas as an Islamist antidote to the secular-minded PLO under Yasser Arafat. In a recent interview with the Deutsche Welle, former Israeli Prime minister Ehud Olmert disclosed, inter alia, “We know that the Hamas was financed with the assistance of Israel— for years — by hundreds of millions of dollars that came from Qatar with the assistance of the state of Israel, with the full knowledge and support of the Israeli government led by Netanyahu.” That convergence — rather, Fustian deal — ended in 2009 following the three-week Gaza Massacre by Israel, whereupon, Doha drew closer to Tehran.

Nonetheless, a pragmatic relationship continued, and in 2015, the Qatari government facilitated discussions between Israel and Hamas in Doha in search of a possible five-year ceasefire between the two parties. Suffice to say, the Indian diplomacy is swimming in shark-infested waters. The news from Doha this week is a wake-up call. Equally, our public discourse on Hamas as a terrorist organisation and our branding of that national liberation movement is surreal, to say the least. Although it may be difficult today for the government to openly deal with Hamas, it shouldn’t be that we lack a proper understanding of Islamism. If ever a Palestine settlement comes to fruition, Hamas will have a lead role in it as the fountainhead of resistance. India’s political elite must bear in mind this reality. Eliminating the Hamas from the political landscape is no longer possible, given the massive grassroots support it enjoys among the Palestinian people, which is of course a proven fact in the successive elections held in Gaza and West Bank.

Read more …

The US makes the decisions.

• Israel Scaled Back Gaza Ground Campaign After US Intervention – NYT (RT)

The Israeli military has limited the scope of its “expanded” ground operation against the Palestinian armed group Hamas in Gaza following consultations with senior White House officials, the New York Times reported on Saturday, citing sources. According to the paper, the initial plans “alarmed” officials in Washington, who voiced concern that they “lacked achievable military objectives,” with fears that the IDF was not yet prepared for a full-scale ground assault. However, an unnamed US government source told NYT that after discussions with Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and other officials “the Israelis improved and refined their plan” for the offensive. As a result, the report said, the IDF’s actions in Gaza have so far been “smaller and more narrowly focused” than Israeli officials initially proposed to their US counterparts.

Numerous US officials and former commanders told the outlet that “Israel appeared to be conducting a phased operation” with reconnaissance units probing Hamas positions in Gaza for potential weaknesses. According to the article, however, Israel’s decision-making process was also influenced by deliberations concerning hostages held by Hamas, as well as by a rift in the country’s leadership over how, when, and even whether to kick off the operation. Commenting on the progress of the battle, IDF spokesperson Rear Admiral Daniel Hagari said Sunday that the country’s military had “expanded the entry” into the Palestinian enclave overnight. “We are progressing through the stages of the war according to plan,” he said, adding that the IDF is “gradually expanding the ground activity and the scope of our forces” in the area.

Earlier this month, several media outlets reported the US was exerting strong influence on Israel’s plans, with Bloomberg describing it as “deeper and more intense than any exerted by Washington in the past.” Several outlets said the US also wanted the IDF to delay its incursion to gain more time to secure the release of more than 200 hostages held by Hamas. US President Joe Biden, however, rejected the notion that Washington was pressuring Israel to postpone the ground campaign, saying that “the Israelis can make their own decisions.” So far, the hostilities have claimed the lives of more than 8,000 Palestinians and 1,400 Israelis. After West Jerusalem announced the “complete siege” of Gaza, the UN warned on Wednesday that the humanitarian crisis in the Palestinian enclave had reached an “unprecedented point.”

Read more …

“Israel believes that its international alliances guarantee its impunity.”

• EU May Become Complicit In ‘Genocide’ – Spanish Official (RT)

Spanish Social Rights Minister Ione Belarra has urged European leaders to take immediate action against Israel, including severing diplomatic ties and imposing economic sanctions, amid the intensified bombing and expanded ground operations against Hamas militants in the besieged Palestinian enclave. She also called for Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to be prosecuted for the alleged war crimes committed against civilians in Gaza. “After this hellish night in Gaza, I have a very simple but very important message for European leaders. Do not make us complicit in genocide. Act. Not in our name,” Belarra said in a passionate video message on X (formerly Twitter) on Saturday.

More than 8,000 Palestinians, including 3,342 children, have been killed in Gaza since Israel’s air campaign began, according to the latest figures from the Gaza Health Ministry. The unprecedented Hamas raid into Israel, as well as hundreds of rocket strikes on Israeli territory earlier this month, left around 1,400 people dead, while some 230 Israelis and foreigners were taken hostage, according to the Israel Defence Forces. Addressing the severity of the current situation in Gaza and Israel’s disproportionate retaliation, the minister highlighted the termination of internet and telephone services in the strip, claiming that the move “has a very clear objective” of guaranteeing that “Israel commits crimes against humanity without consequences.” “Our inaction is turning us into accomplices,” the minister stressed, arguing that “Israel believes that its international alliances guarantee its impunity.”

“We have to act now, tomorrow will be too late,” she continued, voicing her message to the EU leaders: “Cut diplomatic relations with the State of Israel. Carry out exemplary economic sanctions against those responsible for this genocide. And without a doubt, let’s take Netanyahu before the International Criminal Court, so that he can be tried for what he is, a war criminal.” She also appealed to EU citizens to take to the streets and raise their voice so that “this genocide” comes to an end. The IDF escalated air and ground attack on Gaza on Friday, causing a near-total communication blackout. Connectivity was partially restored over the weekend, but the Israeli blockade of Gaza continues; Netanyahu announced the “second stage” of the war against Hamas on Saturday.

Read more …

“..Let them console themselves with the thought that they are no longer dependent on energy from hated Russia..s”

• EU No Longer Independent In Politics Even In Europe – Medvedev (TASS)

The European Union has lost its geopolitical autonomy not only in the international arena but even in Europe, Deputy Chairman of the Russian Security Council Dmitry Medvedev said. “Whatever European leaders might be saying, de facto the European Union cannot act independently not only in the international arena but even on the European soil. Practically all EU countries are standing upright before the United States and Great Britain and have begun to obediently fulfil their orders to support the Nazi regime in Kiev. And now they are fulfilling any orders whatsoever,” he wrote on his VKontakte account. According to Medvedev, dreams about the European Union as a pillar of the world order have vanished as the European Union “has lost its international authority of a mediator in any conflict.”.

Europe’s energy cooperation with Russia has been frozen for a long time and now the European Union is living through difficult time, Medvedev said. “Europe has gelded itself, bloodily and unanesthetized, having refused from energy cooperation with our country. It has been spoiled or frozen for a very long time. And America is rubbing its hands as it sells its LNG to Europe three times over the price,” he wrote. He noted that Europe’s largest economies, which used to be the European Union’s growth drivers for years, have demonstrated a dramatic slump and would recover very slowly, if ever. “And this is a bad outlook for weaker countries of Western Europe. Difficult times have come for a long time,” he wrote.

He drew attention to the fact that the European Commission has downgraded the economic growth forecasts for the euro zone in 2023 from 1.1% to 0.8%. “Inflation in many EU countries is off the charts. Food prices are going up and will continue to do so,” he noted. Touching on other aspects of everyday life in Europe, he noted that no one can guarantee that the coming winter will be warm and mild. “And this means that tariffs for heat and all other things will go up. And American LNG, which is sold to Europe thrice the price, will be of little help. Europe has finally dropped the price policy which ensured Europe’s prosperity a couple of year ago. This time has gone. Let them console themselves with the thought that they are no longer dependent on energy from hated Russia,” he added.

Read more …

“..and then just like that there is a void in any attention to what had been previously billed as an existential crisis for Europe and Western democratic civilization…

• Western Media ‘Cancel’ the Ukraine Conflict (SCF)

Every media outlet around the world has been transfixed by the barbarity, albeit differing in their perspective on how much blame to apportion to the Israeli regime or to the Hamas Palestinian militant group that triggered the escalation in violence with its mass killings of 1,400 Israelis on October 7. (It is now becoming clear that many of those deaths were actually caused by the Israeli military using indiscriminate excessive lethal force.) In any case, the point here is how remarkable is the sudden cessation in Western media coverage of the war in Ukraine. For the past three weeks, there has hardly been any mention of that conflict. This peremptory absence is phenomenal. For months on end, the war in Ukraine was given non-stop, saturation coverage – albeit with an anti-Russian propaganda spin – and then just like that there is a void in any attention to what had been previously billed as an existential crisis for Europe and Western democratic civilization.

It’s not as if the hostilities in Ukraine have really diminished. Far from it, the battling between the NATO-backed Kiev regime forces and the Russian military has been as fierce as in previous months. Over the past week alone, it is estimated that more than 2,000 Ukrainian troops were killed by Russian forces on the frontlines in the Donetsk, Kherson and Zaporozhye regions. How is that absence in Western media explained? Part of the “cancelling” of the Ukraine conflict in Western media coverage is due to the failure of the NATO-backed counteroffensive that was launched in early June. That military venture was hyped as the expected breakthrough against Russian forces after months of heavy weapons supply from NATO leading up to the counteroffensive. The gambit has been a disastrous anti-climax in NATO terms.

Up to 90,000 Ukrainian soldiers have been lost in four months adding to a total of 400,000 Ukrainian military deaths over the entire conflict so far. The great NATO surge has been an abject calamity. Russian defense lines all along a swathe of former Eastern Ukrainian territory (now part of the Russian Federation) reaching down to Crimea and the Black Sea remain formidably intact and invulnerable. The expenditure of $200 billion in military and other aid by the United States and the European Union for propping up a corrupt Nazi regime in Kiev can now be seen as the biggest farce and scandal of modern times. The Western governments and their servile media must therefore not let the Western public see this grotesque waste of money and human life. Public attention must somehow be diverted to avoid the resounding political repercussions.

The slaughter of Palestinians going on in Gaza and the Occupied West Bank territory is a global shame that certainly deserves priority attention. A ceasefire must be called immediately and the mass murder and siege must end. Palestinian rights must be defended and a proper peace settlement to the conflict must be pursued urgently in a genuinely brokered legal and diplomatic framework – not the disingenuous process that Washington and the European Union have been peddling for decades. However, even the extensive Western media focus on the violence in Gaza is not out of a genuine concern for facts, let alone truth or justice. It is, as usual, a cover-up for the Israeli regime’s crimes and the complicity of Western states in the decades-long genocide against the Palestinians. A genocide that has going on for 75 years since the creation of the Israeli state in 1948 by British and American subterfuge as our columnist Finian Cunningham contended this week. No, the Western media saturation coverage of terrible events in Gaza over the past three weeks is driven in large part by the onerous need to divert attention from the scandal and debacle of NATO’s proxy war in Ukraine.

The quickness and expedience of canceling Ukraine as a story by Western media and their governments is a powerful demonstration. The purported concerns about Ukraine were never about principle or the alleged narrative of defending democracy. If there was any credible substance to that narrative then how is it dispensed with so readily? It is something to behold how Western media have simply dumped Ukraine as if it were damaged goods of no longer any use, or, worse, a soiled rag. It is a further diabolical tragedy in the long-suffering of the Palestinian people. Not only are they being annihilated, starved and denied their basic human rights by the Western-backed Israeli regime. Their suffering is also poignant proof of the callous deception and criminality of the United States and its Western partners in Ukraine.

Read more …

mamamamamamama My Fiona

• Trump’s ex-Russia Expert Predicts Big Changes In ‘International Order’ (RT)

Fiona Hill, the one-time Russia guru in US President Donald Trump’s administration, has posited that the ongoing conflicts in Ukraine and Israel portend seismic geopolitical shifts that Moscow sees working in its favor. “These could be global-system-shifting wars, something like World War I and World War II, which reflected and produced major changes in the international order,” Hill said in a Los Angeles Times interview published on Sunday. “In a sense, the Hamas attack on Israel was a kind of Pearl Harbor moment. It opened a second front.” The first front in today’s geopolitical conflagration was the Russia-Ukraine conflict. With the October 7 Hamas attacks on Israel triggering a new war in the Middle East, the situation became more complicated. Hill did not spell out how she sees the two conflicts changing the international order, but she said Russian President Vladimir Putin sees “everything trending in his favor.”

“This helps Putin,” Hill said of the Israel-Hamas war. “It’s going to distract the United States and European supporters of Ukraine.” Hill argued that the US and other Ukraine backers “put too much weight” on the foundering Ukrainian counteroffensive that began in June. “This is going to be a long war,” she said. “Putin thinks we will give up if he holds on long enough.” The Russian leader also is waiting for the 2024 US election, which could result in Washington cutting off aid for Ukraine if Trump wins back the presidency, Hill suggested. She added that the US presidential race is worrying for US allies: “If the rest of the world thinks every time a new government comes along, we are going to tear up agreements we just made, we won’t be looked at as a very reliable partner.”

Russia, China and Iran are aligned against Ukraine and against Israel, Hill said, and the conflicts have brought Beijing and Moscow closer together. US President Joe Biden’s administration should counter that troubling trend by mending ties with Chinese President Xi Jinping’s government, she suggested. “We’re not going to have any hope of curtailing Russia’s options and getting the Middle East to calm down if we have a super-antagonistic relationship with China,” she said. Hill, who testified against Trump during the then president’s 2019 impeachment inquiry, previously advised former Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama. Washington and its Western allies have been fighting World War III against Russia “for a long time,” without being aware of it, she said last month in a New Yorker magazine interview.

Read more …

“I’ll be implementing strong ideological screenings for all immigrants coming in..”

• Israel-Hamas War A Conflict Between ‘Civilization And Savagery’ – Trump (RT)

Former US President Donald Trump has condemned Hamas as “monsters,” framing the Palestinian militant group’s war with Israel as a conflict between “good and evil” and vowing to rid America of immigrants and foreign students who sympathize with jihadists. Speaking on Saturday at the Republican Jewish Coalition summit in Las Vegas, Trump vowed to stop the “mass importation of anti-Semitism” into the US if he’s re-elected as president in 2024. He blamed Hamas for all of the deaths that have occurred on both sides – numbering over 1,400 in Israel and 8,000 in Gaza – since the group’s October 7 attacks on Israeli villages triggered the region’s latest war. “Every single life that is lost in this conflict is on the shoulders of Hamas, Hamas alone, and I think you have to really add in the word Iran…,” Trump said.

“There can be no sympathy, no excuses, and no escape for these monsters. We will do what has to be done.” The Hamas attacks, in which hundreds of Israeli civilians were killed or kidnapped, proved that the group’s conflict with West Jerusalem isn’t a battle between “equal sides,” Trump said. He added, “This is a fight between civilization and savagery, between decency and depravity, and between good and evil. There is no comparison between a group that worships death and a group that cherishes life and cherishes our nation.” Trump is polling as the leading Republican candidate to face his successor, President Joe Biden, in the 2024 election. He argued that in the wake of the Hamas attacks, Biden has “turned a blind eye to the greatest outbreak of anti-Semitism in American history.”

The ex-president lamented the “pro-jihadist” protests occurring in major US cities and on college campuses amid the Israel-Hamas war. He blamed Biden’s administration for letting in “colossal amounts of jihadists” as refugees or foreign students. “They’re letting them in at levels that nobody’s ever seen before,” he said. “We cannot allow that to happen, and we don’t want to be like Europe, with jihadists on every corner.” Trump promised to reimpose the travel ban that he instituted shortly after taking office as president in 2017, which restricted entry to the US by travelers from seven predominantly Muslim countries. He also claimed that he would deport foreign nationals who protested in support of Hamas and would ensure that jihadist sympathizers won’t be allowed to enter the US. “I’ll be implementing strong ideological screenings for all immigrants coming in,” Trump told the audience. “If you hate America, if you want to abolish Israel, if you sympathize with jihadists, then we don’t want you in our country, and you’re not going to be getting into our country.”

Pro-Hamas foreign students who joined the protests also will be targeted with cancellation of their study visas, Trump said. “Come 2025, we will find you, and we will deport you.” He also vowed to threaten colleges and universities with the loss of federal funding and academic accreditation if they don’t “purge” their campuses of “anti-Semitism and pro-terrorism.” Trump argued that the attacks on Israel wouldn’t have happened if he had been president, just as he previously claimed that he would have prevented the Russia-Ukraine conflict. “For four years, you didn’t have any of these problems,” he said. “Think of it, you wouldn’t have Ukraine, you wouldn’t have Israel being attacked, you wouldn’t have inflation, you wouldn’t have anything.”

Read more …

A travesty indeed.

• US Judge Reinstates Gag Order on Trump in Federal Election Case (Sp.)

A federal judge overseeing former US President Donald Trump’s federal election subversion case has reinstated a gag order that had earlier been issued against the one-time commander-in-chief. The late Sunday ruling also saw US District Judge Tanya Chutkan deny a request by Trump lawyers to prolong the earlier gag order freeze, explaining it would instead remain active while it’s reviewed by a federal appeals court. Chutkan issued the gag order at the behest of the US Department of Justice before temporarily halting it on October 20 as Trump’s lawyers filed an appeal and argued it was vaguely worded. The matter has remained a heated topic of debate among lawyers, with representatives for the former president arguing it bars Trump from his First Amendment rights and acts as a hitch as he undertakes his 2024 reelection effort.

Prosecutors have underscored that regardless of Trump’s 2024 bid, he does not have clearance to issue public remarks that appear to threaten any individuals tied to the election interference case. Trump appears to have publicly responded to the development on social media, writing in a Truth Social post: “The Corrupt Biden Administration just took away my First Amendment Right To Free Speech. NOT CONSTITUTIONAL! MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN.” The weekend decision now puts the former president under two gag orders that prevent him from discussing any aspects of his legal cases with the wider public. The second gag was implemented as part of Trump’s civil fraud trial in New York, which has so far prompted two fines to be issued over violations.

Read more …

“..and 6 other process crimes stemming from his conversations with his lawyer..” (?!)

• Jack Smith Quietly Withdraws Second Subpoena in Trump Probe (GP)

Special Counsel Jack Smith quietly withdrew two subpoenas to Donald J. Trump for President Inc. and Save America within the last week. Jack Smith recently expanded his investigation into Trump’s effort to challenge the 2020 election and is focusing on Trump’s fundraising efforts. President Trump raised more than $250 million after the 2020 election to investigate rampant Democrat vote fraud. Jack Smith was investigating whether Trump defrauded investors when he raised money to investigate 2020 election fraud. The New York Times reported:

“Federal prosecutors have quietly withdrawn a subpoena seeking records from former President Donald J. Trump’s 2020 campaign as part of their investigation into whether Mr. Trump’s political and fund-raising operations committed any crimes as he sought to stay in power after he lost the election, according to two people familiar with the matter. The decision this week by the office of the special counsel, Jack Smith, to effectively kill the subpoena to the Trump campaign came on the heels of the withdrawal of a similar subpoena to Save America, the political action committee that was formed by Mr. Trump’s aides shortly after he lost the race in 2020. The rescission of the subpoenas to Donald J. Trump for President Inc. and Save America was an indication that Mr. Smith’s office was slowing down or even closing its monthslong inquiry into whether Mr. Trump’s political operation broke any laws by citing baseless claims of election fraud to raise money. The withdrawal of the subpoena to Save America was first reported last week by The Washington Post.”

Jack Smith indicted Trump on 37 federal counts in Miami in June. Trump was charged with 31 counts of willful retention of national defense information and 6 other process crimes stemming from his conversations with his lawyer. In August Jack Smith hit Trump with 3 additional charges in the investigation into classified documents stored at Mar-a-Lago. The superseding indictment, filed in the Southern District of Florida, claims Trump was part of a scheme to delete security footage from Mar-a-Lago. Last month Trump was hit with 4 counts in Jack Smith’s January 6 case up in DC: Conspiracy to defraud the United States, conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, obstruction of and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding, and conspiracy against rights.

Read more …

“..the core is the fact that local governments are out of money. And the core reason for that is the downturn in the real estate market.”

• China’s Local Governments Are Out Of Money (SCMP)

China’s top leaders are expected to gather in Beijing for a key financial conference this week, with debt risks and strengthening the supervision of the Communist Party set to be top of the agenda, sources familiar with the details said. The closed-door, two-day national financial work conference is scheduled to start on Monday, one source said. China’s top leaders, state executives, regulators and senior bankers have gathered every five years since 1997 for the conference focusing on financial policies and development. The last national financial work conference was held in 2017. “[The conference] will primarily focus on resolving debt. At the moment, the most important thing is to resolve the debt problems,” one of the sources said.

“Of which the core is the fact that local governments are out of money. And the core reason for that is the downturn in the real estate market.” Another source added that strengthening the leadership of the party, as well as financial discipline in the areas of local government debt, would be given emphasis at the conference. The prolonged downturn in the property market has triggered rising concerns over its impact on local government revenues and outlook for the world’s second-largest economy. In 2018, the central government demanded local authorities stop accumulating so-called hidden debts – informal channels of borrowing often through local government financing vehicles (LGFVs). LGFVs are hybrid entities that are both public and corporate and were created to skirt restrictions on local government borrowing and have proliferated since the global financial crisis in 2008.

However, LGFV debt level remains elevated, and the IMF estimated that their total debt had swollen to a record 66 trillion yuan (US$9 trillion) this year, more than double the 30.7 trillion yuan in 2017. “In the end, the central government may have to bail them out,” a second source said. “This is why relevant personnel in the financial sector have to be dealt with, to prevent new aid from being abused.” On Tuesday, Beijing approved the issuance of 1 trillion yuan (US$137 billion) of sovereign bonds, with the funds from the sale to be transferred to local governments to support reconstruction and improve disaster prevention and relief capabilities.

The new issuance, approved by the National People’s Congress, will raise the budget deficit ratio to about 3.8 per cent of GDP – well above the 3 per cent target set in March. “I think one key objective of the conference is to manage systemic risk. That is, to contain the risk from the property sector and the LGFVs, preventing such problems from causing systemic risks,” said Zhang Zhiwei, president and chief economist at Pinpoint Asset Management.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Mad
https://twitter.com/i/status/1718528593972838851

 

 

 

 

Raup snails

 

 

SphereVegas

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

US Looks For Allies In Possible War With China

May 012023
 
 May 1, 2023  Posted by at 6:30 pm Finance Tagged with: , , , , , ,  5 Responses »


Edgar Degas Self Portrait 1862

Andrew Korybko:

 

The US is shaping the Asia-Pacific in preparation of a conventional conflict with China, to which end it unveiled the AUKUS alliance in late 2021. This platform is intended to form the core of a NATO-like military structure for containing the People’s Republic, and it’ll replace whatever related role American policymakers initially envisaged the Quad playing. This makes AUKUS extremely dangerous, especially as other regional countries tacitly expand their cooperation with its American leader.

South Korea’s recent decision to let US nuclear-armed submarines dock at its ports for the first time in decades, which was made during President Yoon’s trip to DC last week, signals its interest in de facto integrating into this anti-Chinese bloc. Nearby Japan can already be regarded as an informal member of that alliance after Prime Minister Kishida reaffirmed his country’s commitment to the US’ regional goals in January and implied that it’ll rapidly remilitarize in the coming future in order to contain China.

Taken together and paired with the recent Japanese-Korean rapprochement, it can therefore be concluded that the US has strengthened its alliance network in Northeast Asia in order to facilitate the region’s unofficial integration into AUKUS+. At the same time, it’s also doing something similar with the Philippines in Southeast Asia, whose president visits the US this week. He’s expected to also de facto integrate his country into AUKUS+ too exactly as his South Korean counterpart just did.

The Philippines’ northernmost core island of Luzon is much closer to Taiwan than the Japanese Home Islands are, thus making it an ideal staging post for any American military intervention in that Chinese province. Although President Marcos just denied that his country intends to facilitate anyone’s regional military plans, it was recently revealed that the four new bases that he agreed to let America use are located on that island, thus casting serious doubts on the sincerity of his claim.

Three other recent developments bode ill for peace in this part of Asia. CNN published a lengthy analysis in mid-April arguing that the US should maximally stockpile weapons in Taiwan in order to help its ally’s forces survive in the event that China blockades the island prior to launching a special operation there. Curiously, such resupply challenges were then confirmed a few days later during an anti-Chinese congressional committee’s wargame of precisely that scenario.

The second development concerned top EU diplomat Borrell’s suggestion that the bloc’s navies patrol the Taiwan Strait. This came just several weeks after NATO Secretary-General Stoltenberg declared that “We are now stepping up our cooperation with our partners in the Indo-Pacific: Japan, South Korea, New Zealand and Australia.” The indisputable trend is that the US’ European partners are poised to play a larger military role in the region, including a provocative one if they end up patrolling the Taiwan Strait.

And lastly, it was reported last weekend that US special forces carried out their first-ever drills simulating what they’d do if their country went to war with China over Taiwan, thus removing any so-called “strategic ambiguity” about how Washington would respond to that scenario. It can no longer claim any pretense to neutrality after literally preparing its most highly trained forces for infiltrating into Taiwan to kill whatever Chinese forces might eventually enter that island.

These three developments prove that the US is rounding up allies in both the Asia-Pacific and Europe ahead of a possible war with China, but there are two important players that either won’t participate in this plot or have yet to decide, with these being India and Indonesia respectively. The influential Council on Foreign Relations’ official magazine just published a piece about why India won’t get involved, while Indonesia is being pressured to allow American and Australian forces to transit through its territory.

Even without those two, the US’ emerging anti-Chinese containment coalition is still very formidable and represents its success in getting a multitude of countries to converge around AUKUS. South Korea will serve as an intelligence and missile outpost, Japan’s Ryukyu Islands and the Philippines’ Luzon are complementary staging points for facilitating a US intervention in Taiwan, and NATO will provide back-end support all across the region as well as possibly provoke China by patrolling the Taiwan Strait.

Amidst the solidification of the Asia-Pacific’s NATO-like military structure, the US and its allies will likely fill Taiwan to the brim with weapons exactly as CNN suggested and an anti-Chinese congressional committee curiously confirmed should be a top priority just a couple days later. These interconnected trends represent extremely pressing challenges for China’s objective national security interests, which are being threatened ever more by the day as it holds off on launching a special operation in Taiwan.

There are justifiable reasons for China’s stance, especially since its leadership would truly prefer to peacefully reunify with their country’s wayward region and thus want to completely exhaust all related possibilities before resorting to military means. This moral approach is predicated on their reluctance to be the first to initiate what would be a fratricidal conflict, which is commendable, but it comes at the expense of military interests in the event that a war over that island is inevitable.

No one knows whether it is or not, but the US is doing its utmost to be in the best position possible should that scenario unfold, which thus complicates China’s own position in that event. If the US feels that it’s obtained a decisive edge over China through the crystallization of AUKUS+ and upon maximally stockpiling weapons in Taiwan, then it might even seek to provoke a conflict that wargamers convinced themselves Beijing would lose, which is a frightening scenario that can’t be ruled out.

 

 

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

 

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

 

 

Debt Rattle April 30 2023

Apr 302023
 
 April 30, 2023  Posted by at 8:55 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , ,  46 Responses »


Mark Chagall I and the village 1911

 

• Zelensky’s Top Adviser Threatens China With Economic Ruin (RT)
• Poland’s Top General Has Some Unpopular Truths About The Ukraine Proxy War (ZB)
• Medvedev Calls For ‘Complete’ Dismantling Of ‘Kiev Regime’ (RT)
• Medvedev Sees No Point In Maintaining Diplomatic Relations With Poland (TASS)
• Russian Next-Gen T-14 Tank Makes Ukraine Debut (ZH)
• Merkel Says She Used Everything To Try To Prevent Conflict In Ukraine (TASS)
• Europe Is Buying Record Amounts Of Refined Russian Fuels Through India
• Morocco Supplies Spain With Russian Diesel – El Mundo (RT)
• US Troops Drill For Taiwan War – Media (RT)
• Kiev Decries EU Restrictions On Ukrainian Imports (RT)
• EU Reaches Deal On Ukrainian Food Imports (RT)
• War Threatens Ukraine Auto Empire of Biden Megadonor (Sperry)
• Hunter’s Collapsing World: A Criminal Plea Could Now Be Best Option (Turley)
• No Buyer for First Republic Bank at Any Price (Mish)
• Irish President Condemns ‘Obsession’ With Economic Growth (Leahy)

 

 

 

 

Lavrov
https://twitter.com/i/status/1652184461302276096

 

 

 

 

Doctorow

 

 

Net zero

 

 

 

 

“..why China would “help Russia, which is experiencing the collapse of its civilization?”

• Zelensky’s Top Adviser Threatens China With Economic Ruin (RT)

Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky’s main adviser, Mikhail Podoliak, has claimed that China must follow the West’s position on Ukraine or “lose its influence, including economic influence.” Beijing has given no indication that it intends to take his advice. “Now China has to make a choice,” Podoliak said on Ukraine’s Rada TV on Friday. “Either it works within the framework defined by international law, and then replaces Russia in the full sense of the word, or China continues to stand aside and then it will gradually lose its influence, including economic influence.” Podoliak’s statement came two days after Zelensky and Chinese President Xi Jinping spoke by phone, their first known conversation since Russia’s military operation in Ukraine began last February.

According to the Chinese side, Xi stressed that Beijing’s “core position” on the conflict is that “dialogue and negotiations are the only viable way out.” The US has repeatedly called on China to condemn Russia over the conflict, which Beijing has refused to do. Instead, China and Russia have deepened their diplomatic and trade links, and officials from both countries have repeatedly condemned the US for attempting to impose what it calls a “rules-based international order” upon the world through military force and sanctions. China and Russia have instead called for the construction of a multipolar system based on the rule of international law and respect for the UN charter. “Right now there are changes – the likes of which we haven’t seen for 100 years – and we are the ones driving these changes together,” Xi told Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow last month.

Podoliak has attempted to drive a wedge between Moscow and Beijing before. Late last month he asked the Italian Corriere della Sera newspaper why China would “help Russia, which is experiencing the collapse of its civilization?” “It would be an irreversible investment, and China is too pragmatic to make such mistakes,” he added. However, even if China were to break from Russia, it would still face a United States hostile to its interests. The Pentagon’s most recent National Defense Strategy lists countering the supposed “threat posed by China” as its number one priority, while Washington has blocked the sale of some semiconductor manufacturing hardware to China and rallied its Asian allies to shut Beijing out of this vital industrial sector. Meanwhile, US President Joe Biden has said on several occasions that he would use the US military to defend Taiwan – which China considers its territory – from a potential Chinese invasion.

Read more …

“It’s simply impossible to sustain the pace, scale, and scope of the West’s multidimensional aid to Ukraine if the conflict drags on.”

“..Russia can continue conducting its special operation for 1-2 more years before it begins to feel any structural pressure to curtail its activities.”

“We just don’t have ammunition. The industry is not ready not only to send equipment to Ukraine, but also to replenish our stocks, which are melting.”

• Poland’s Top General Has Some Unpopular Truths About The Ukraine Proxy War (ZB)

The last time that Chief of the General Staff of the Polish Armed Forces General Rajmund Andrzejczak generated media attention was in late January after he elaborated on how formidable Russia remained at the time, but now he’s once again making headlines for building upon this assessment. Poland’s Do Rzecy reported on his recent participation in a strategy session with the National Security Bureau, during which time he shared some unpopular truths about the NATO-Russian proxy war in Ukraine. Andrzejczak said that the situation doesn’t look good for Kiev at all when considering the economic dynamics of this conflict, with him drawing particular attention to finance, infrastructure issues, social issues, technology, and food production, et al. From this vantage point, he predicts that Russia can continue conducting its special operation for 1-2 more years before it begins to feel any structural pressure to curtail its activities.

By contrast, Kiev is burning through tens of billions of dollars’ worth of aid, yet it still remains very far away from achieving its maximum objectives. Andrzejczak candidly said that Poland’s Western partners aren’t properly assessing the challenges that stand in the way of Ukraine’s victory, including those connected to the “race of logistics”/ war of attrition” that the NATO chief declared in mid-February. Another serious problems concerns refugees’ unwillingness to return to their homeland anytime soon. These economic, logistical, and population factors combined to convince him that he must urgently raise the greatest possible awareness of these problems in order to “give Ukraine a chance to build its secure future”, which in the context that he shared this motivation, is a euphemism for even more Western aid. He elaborated by adding that “As a soldier, I am also obliged to present the most unfavorable and difficult to implement variant, giving a field to all those who can and should help Ukraine.”

Nobody should therefore doubt Andrzejczak’s intentions or suspect that he’s a so-called “Russian agent” since he sincerely wants the West to win its proxy war with Russia in Ukraine, but he’s also very worried that it might lose unless his side acknowledges the unpopular truths that he just shared. In his view, their failure to do so could doom Kiev to defeat, though the argument can also compellingly be made that indefinitely perpetuating this conflict like Poland seeks to do might be even more disastrous. After all, none of the three challenges that he drew attention to can be overcome anytime soon. The only exception might be the population one, but that would entail changing EU legislation in order to allow the expulsion of refugees, which is unlikely to happen. The economic and logistical factors are systemic ones, which affect not only Ukraine, but the entire West in general. It’s simply impossible to sustain the pace, scale, and scope of the West’s multidimensional aid to Ukraine if the conflict drags on.

As Andrzejczak himself admitted, “We just don’t have ammunition. The industry is not ready not only to send equipment to Ukraine, but also to replenish our stocks, which are melting.” Considering that Poland is Ukraine’s third most important patron behind the Anglo-American Axis, this strongly suggests that all other NATO members are struggling just as much as it is to keep up the pace, scale, and scope of support, if not more since many are a lot smaller and thus less capable of contributing in this respect. Accordingly, this observation means that Kiev’s upcoming counteroffensive will likely be its “last hurrah” prior to resuming peace talks with Russia since the West won’t be able to keep up its assistance for much longer. Andrzejczak seems keenly aware of this “politically inconvenient” fact, hence why he wants his side to give its proxies as much as possible until the end of that operation in the hopes that they can then be in a comparatively more advantageous position by the time these talks recommence.

Cavoli
https://twitter.com/i/status/1652039270784180246

Read more …

“Otherwise, they will not calm down, and the drug-addled nonsense can turn into reality and the war will drag on for a long time. Our country does not need that..”

• Medvedev Calls For ‘Complete’ Dismantling Of ‘Kiev Regime’ (RT)

Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has called for the “complete dismantling” of the “Kiev regime,” as well as for inflicting “mass destruction” on the country’s military personnel and hardware. Medvedev, who currently serves as deputy chair of Russia’s National Security Council, made the remarks in a Telegram post on Friday, commenting on an interview Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky recently gave to several Nordic media outlets. He summarized Zelensky’s comments as consisting of demands for more weapons from Kiev’s Western backers and promises of a successful counteroffensive, including an attack on Crimea, while also warning that the conflict may drag on for “decades.” While the interview appeared to be “contradictory” and “delusional,” even such statements should not be underestimated, Medvedev warned.

“One should not underestimate even delusional speeches. This is a hysterical manifesto of the Kiev regime, which is seeking to consolidate its Nazi elites, maintain the morale of the troops and receive additional support from its sponsors.” To successfully foil Kiev’s plans, Russia must inflict “mass destruction of personnel and military equipment” during the much-hyped Ukrainian counteroffensive and inflict a “maximum military defeat” on Kiev’s military, Medvedev said. Ultimately, the “Nazi regime in Kiev” must be “completely dismantled” and demilitarized throughout the entire territory of “former Ukraine,” he added. Apart from that, Russia must pursue those who manage to flee, and seek “retribution” against the “key figures of the Nazi regime, regardless of their location and without statute of limitations,” Medvedev stressed. Anything short of that would not suffice, the ex-president believes.

“Otherwise, they will not calm down, and the drug-addled nonsense can turn into reality and the war will drag on for a long time. Our country does not need that,” Medvedev said. The ex-president has repeatedly warned Kiev against any attempts to seize the Crimean peninsula, which broke away from Ukraine in the aftermath of the 2014 Maidan coup and joined Russia after locals overwhelmingly supported such a move during a referendum. Last month, Medvedev issued a nuclear warning to Kiev, cautioning that any attempt at a “serious offensive” targeting the peninsula would be “the basis for the use of all means of protection, including those provided for by the fundamentals of the Doctrine of Nuclear Deterrence.”

Read more …

“This state must not exist for us while there is no one but Russophobes in power and Ukraine is full of Polish mercenaries..”

• Medvedev Sees No Point In Maintaining Diplomatic Relations With Poland (TASS)

Russia sees no sense in maintaining diplomatic relations with Poland as long as anti-Russian forces remain in power, Russian Security Council Deputy Chairman Dmitry Medvedev wrote on his Twitter page on Saturday. “I see no point in maintaining diplomatic relations with Poland. This state must not exist for us while there is no one but Russophobes in power and Ukraine is full of Polish mercenaries, who should be ruthlessly exterminated like stinky rats,” Medvedev wrote in English and Polish.


Medvedev’s tweet was posted in the wake of the situation with the school at the Russian embassy in Warsaw. Andrey Ordash, Minister-Councilor at the Russian embassy in Poland, told TASS that the Polish authorities had demanded that the staff of the Russian school at the embassy in Warsaw vacate the building by 7 p.m. on Saturday. The Russian Foreign Ministry said that Russia deems the Polish authorities’ intrusion into the Russian embassy school in Warsaw as a blatant violation of the 1961 Vienna Convention and another encroachment on Russian diplomatic property in Poland. The Foreign Ministry said that Warsaw’s steps would not remain without Moscow’s firm response and consequences for Poland.

Read more …

It won’t be their last new toy.

• Russian Next-Gen T-14 Tank Makes Ukraine Debut (ZH)

While Western nations are working to upgrade Ukraine’s ground game with US M-1 Abrams and German Leopard 2 tanks, Russia has now introduced its latest-generation tank into the war in Ukraine, according to Russia’s state-owned RIA. The new Russian tank is the T-14 Armata, which features an unmanned turret, with a three-man crew operating the vehicle from what RIA describes as an “isolated armored capsule located at the front of the hull.” The tank has a maximum highway speed of 50 miles per hour. It’s equipped with a 125mm smoothbore main gun with a reported range of 8 kilometers. The gun is fed by an automated loader with a 45-round capacity, and can also fire laser-guided missiles.

On defense, it has both reactive armor that explodes outward upon a projectile’s impact, and an “active protection system” (APS), which BBC has described as “essentially an anti-missile system for tanks, with radars capable of tracking the incoming anti-tank missile, and projectiles that are launched to disrupt or destroy it.” The T-14 is additionally distinguished from predecessor T-90 tanks by having higher ground clearance. A developer also claimed the tank would have technology to hide it from radar- and heat-seeking targeting systems: “We essentially made the tank invisible.” RIA reports the deployed T-14s have received “additional side protection from anti-tank ammunition.”

Until now, T-14 appearances have been largely limited to a series of Moscow Victory Day parades stretching all the way back to 2015, though RIA says they have been “tested in Syria.” [..] The initial order called for 2,300 of them to be delivered by 2020. However, the UK claims “production is probably only in the low tens, while commanders are unlikely to trust the vehicle in combat,” and suggested its introduction in Ukraine may largely be for propaganda purposes. Of course, that jab may itself be propaganda.

Read more …

Mutti knew exactly what was going on with the Misk agreements. No use denying it.

• Merkel Says She Used Everything To Try To Prevent Conflict In Ukraine (TASS)

Former German chancellor Angela Merkel said she used every means at her disposal to try to prevent the current conflict in Ukraine. “I used everything at my disposal to try to prevent this situation,” Merkel said, commenting on the Russian special operation in Ukraine on Saturday in an interview with the German daily Die Zeit. “The fact that it failed is not proof that it was wrong to try,” she stressed. Diplomacy is a “necessity,” as the ex-Chancellor noted.However. Merkel repeatedly defended her policy towards Russia. She called the efforts to resolve the conflict in eastern Ukraine after the events in Crimea in 2014 as part of the so-called Minsk agreements correct.

“I support these diplomatic efforts,” the former head of the German government said, adding that she was “very worried” about Ukraine. “To my great chagrin, there were quite a few who were not interested in this,” Merkel admitted. According to her, in the European Council Germany and France, made efforts to resolve the conflict in eastern Ukraine.= The ex-Chancellor of Germany said that she talked a lot with the former President of Ukraine Pyotr Poroshenko and the current President Vladimir Zelensky. “President Zelensky was very critical of the Minsk agreements. He already said this during his election campaign and noted that he considers it unfeasible,” Merkel stated.

She noted that, according to Ukrainian political leaders, this agreement is not popular in Ukraine, and it was very difficult to implement it politically. In an interview with Die Zeit, published on December 7, 2022, Merkel stated that the 2014 Minsk agreements were an attempt to let Ukraine gain time. She said “it was clear to everyone” that the conflict had been frozen and the problem had not been resolved. Russian President Vladimir Putin later said that he found Merkel’s statement completely unexpected and disappointing.

Read more …

“..the Asian country is on track to become Europe’s largest supplier of refined fuels this month..”

• Europe Is Buying Record Amounts Of Refined Russian Fuels Through India

Last August, we were the first to show how Russia was bypassing Europe’s so-called commodities embargo: it was selling LNG to China which was then re-selling it to Europe at a substantial mark up. And while we also frequently reported that Russia was using a similar sanctions bypass for oil, this time using India instead of China, few were willing to confirm as much: after all, it would seem very shortsighted if European consumers were paying an extra surcharge to India, while Russia was not suffering any adverse consequences from Europe’s laughable “sanctions.” Not any more: on Friday, Bloomberg reported that for all of Europe’s fire and brimstone about an embargo (which has gotten decidedly quieter in recent months), “Russian oil is still powering Europe just with the help of India.”

As we reported at the time, last December the EU barred almost any seaborne crude oil imports from Russia. It extended the prohibition to refined fuels two months later. However, the rules didn’t stop countries like India from snapping up cheap Russian crude, turning it into fuels like diesel, and shipping it back to Europe at a big markup: as shown in the chart below, just the Brent to Urals price differential, a byproduct of the Russian sanctions, is about $25/bbl, almost a third of the price of a barrel of crude. The markups on Russian product are even greater when dealing with refined products such as gasoline or diesel. In fact, India has become so good at reselling Russian oil to the same Europeans who refuse to buy it directly from Moscow for a much lower price, that the Asian country is on track to become Europe’s largest supplier of refined fuels this month while simultaneously buying record amounts of Russian crude, according to data from analytics firm Kpler.


In other words, Europe is still buying Russian oil, keeping Putin’s military machine well-funded, but because of the virtue signaling exercise of buying Russian oil though a mediator, the transaction ends up costing Europeans billions more than if they simply had purchased the oil directly. “Russian oil is finding its way back into Europe despite all the sanctioning and India ramping up fuel exports to the west is a good example of it,” said Viktor Katona, lead crude analyst at the firm. “With India taking in so much Russian barrels, it’s inevitable.”

Read more …

They all do it.

• Morocco Supplies Spain With Russian Diesel – El Mundo (RT)

Morocco is purchasing Russian diesel and other refined products at discounted prices and re-exporting the fuel to Spain, El Mundo reported on Friday, citing ship tracking sources. Data from navigation tracking portal Vesselfinder showed that, on April 28, at least three tankers were heading from Russia’s Baltic ports to Morocco carrying approximately 170,000 tons of oil products on board. The North African country, which bought about 600,000 barrels of Russian diesel throughout 2021, ramped up imports of the product to 2 million barrels in January 2023, with another 1.2 million barrels arriving in the country in February, according to tracking sources. Morocco’s fuel exports almost stopped after its only processing plant was shut down in 2015 over unpaid taxes and legal hurdles, leaving the country dependent on refined oil imports.

In the beginning of the year, Rabat resumed fuel supplies and expanded exports of diesel from its Horizon Tanger terminal to Spain, Türkiye, Ghana, and southern Africa, the outlet said. In January, the country sent 280,000 barrels of diesel to the Spanish Canary Islands and another 270,000 barrels to Türkiye. “At the end of 2022, Morocco began to buy diesel fuel from Moscow at an average of more than 7 million liters per day. In parallel, Rabat began to export it to Spain,” the outlet wrote. According to ship tracking data, Moroccan deliveries now account for 10% of monthly Spanish demand for diesel, estimated at $60 million. According to some media reports, in March, Morocco, Tunisia, and Algeria accounted for 30% of Russia’s diesel exports.

Meanwhile, the Spanish government has pledged to ensure that no Russian fuel enters the kingdom. “Our obligation is to investigate what happens with the fuel [supplies],” Spanish Deputy Prime Minister Teresa Ribera told reporters on Friday. “Initially, it comes with documents confirming its appropriate origin,” she added. Russia has been diversifying its energy supplies in response to Western sanctions after the EU stopped accepting the country’s oil transported by sea. In December, the EU, G7, and allied countries imposed an embargo and a $60-per-barrel price cap on Russian crude. Similar restrictions were introduced in February for exports of petroleum products.

Read more …

Posturing.

• US Troops Drill For Taiwan War – Media (RT)

The US Army Special Operations Command (USASOC) has reportedly carried out drills simulating its response to a Chinese seizure of Taiwan for the first time, reflecting rising concern in Washington that Beijing may try to seize control of the self-governing island by force. The Taiwan scenario was played out as part of the USAOC’s annual capabilities exercise, known as CAPEX, at North Carolina’s Fort Bragg, Military.com reported on Saturday. Troops practiced being inserted into Taiwan to help defend against a Chinese offensive, using a concrete mock-up on the base to simulate the environment in which they would fight the People’s Republic of China (PRC). “The PRC, in accordance with our national defense strategy, is our true pacing challenge out there,” Lieutenant General Jonathan Braga, commander of USASOC, said in a speech before the exercise on Thursday. “Ultimately, what we’re trying to do is prevent World War III. That’s our job.”

The drills included firing recoilless rifles, breaching tunnels and operating Switchblade drones, the media outlet said. The special forces used some of the same weaponry and tactics employed during Washington’s so-called War on Terror, along with “other tools reflecting a seismic shift for the command as it prepares for potential conflict against major military rivals.” It’s unusual for USASOC to identify the opposition force so directly during APEX, “given the military’s hesitancy to overtly suggest conflict,” according to Military.com. US-China relations have deteriorated in the past year amid Beijing’s refusal to join in a Western sanctions campaign against Russia over the Ukraine crisis. Chinese officials have accused US leaders of emboldening separatists in Taiwan, such as when then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi traveled to Taipei last August. China responded by breaking off defense and climate ties with Washington and launching massive military drills in the Taiwan Strait.

The US government recognizes, without endorsing, China’s claim to sovereignty over Taiwan. For decades, Washington has maintained a policy of “strategic ambiguity,” keeping Beijing and Taipei guessing as to whether, and to what extent, the US military would intervene if China invaded Taiwan. However, President Joe Biden has repeatedly hinted that Washington would come to Taiwan’s aid militarily in the event of a Chinese offensive. Washington think tanks have conducted wargaming exercises in recent months to simulate how a war over Taiwan might play out. One such study was done for a congressional committee by the Center for New American Security, which found earlier this month that US forces would be unable to resupply Taiwan with weapons and equipment once a Chinese offensive began. An exercise done by the Center for Strategic and International Studies found that although US and Japanese forces would be able to successfully repel Beijing’s offensive, they would lose dozens of warships, hundreds of planes, and thousands of troops.

Read more …

“Such restrictions, for whatever reason, do not comply with the Ukraine-EU Association Agreement and the principles and norms of the EU Single Market..”

• Kiev Decries EU Restrictions On Ukrainian Imports (RT)

The Ukrainian authorities have sent notes of protest to the Polish and EU embassies, decrying the restrictions on imports of the country’s agricultural products to the bloc. This was announced on Saturday by Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman Oleg Nikolenko in a Facebook post. According to Nikolenko, Ukraine considers the restrictions “utterly unacceptable.” “Such restrictions, for whatever reason, do not comply with the Ukraine-EU Association Agreement and the principles and norms of the EU Single Market,” he wrote. The minister noted that Kiev has “all legal grounds” to immediately resume its exports to Poland, Romania, Hungary, Slovakia, and Bulgaria and continue uninterrupted transit of all Ukrainian products to other countries both inside and outside of the EU. “The Ukrainian Foreign Ministry urged its [EU] partners to find a balanced solution based on EU legislation, the Association Agreement, and in the spirit of solidarity,” he added.


Earlier this month, Poland, Hungary, Slovakia, and Bulgaria unilaterally banned the import of agricultural products from Ukraine in a bid to protect their domestic markets, which has been overflowing with cheap Ukrainian products. Romania did not impose an import ban, but joined the other four in calls for Brussels to free the region of Ukrainian goods. After two weeks of discussions, the European Commission and the five member states struck a deal on Friday, which involves replacing the individual bans placed by the countries on Ukrainian imports with “emergency safeguard measures” for four major staples – wheat, maize, rapeseed, and sunflower seeds. Sources claim that imports of these crops into the five Eastern European countries will likely be blocked unless for transit.

Read more …

They treat Ukraine like a member. It’s not.

• EU Reaches Deal On Ukrainian Food Imports (RT)

The European Commission on Friday struck an agreement with five EU member-states to help clear the supply glut caused by Ukrainian agricultural imports. The announcement was made on Twitter by EU trade chief Valdis Dombrovskis. “The European Commission has reached an agreement in principle with Bulgaria, Hungary, Poland, Romania & Slovakia regarding Ukraine agri-food products. We have acted to address concerns of both farmers in neighboring EU countries and Ukraine,” Dombrovskis wrote on the social media platform. According to the official, the key elements of the new deal include the withdrawal of unilateral import restrictions previously placed by the countries on Ukrainian agricultural produce, a €100 million ($110 million) support package for the member-states’ farmers, and “emergency safeguard measures” for four Ukrainian staples – wheat, maize, rapeseed and sunflower seeds.

Dombrovskis did not elaborate on what these emergency measures would entail, but sources claim that the imports of these crops into the five Eastern European countries will likely be blocked unless for transit. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen welcomed the deal, saying that it would help guarantee the transit of Ukrainian produce. “This agreement preserves both Ukraine’s export capacity so that it continues to feed the world, and the livelihoods of our farmers,” she tweeted. In June last year, the EU lifted tariffs and quotas for Ukrainian agricultural imports for one year in order to enable grain from Ukraine to be shipped to global markets amid the conflict with Russia. Many of the shipments, however, ended up in Eastern European countries, flooding their markets with cheap produce and sparking protests among local farmers.

Earlier this month, Poland, Hungary, Slovakia, and Bulgaria unilaterally banned agricultural products imported from Ukraine in bid to protect their markets. While Romania had not imposed its own import ban, it joined the other four in urging Brussels to find a solution to the glut of Ukrainian produce. Import bans were deemed “unacceptable” by Brussels, as they undermined the bloc’s single market rules. The news of a deal on Ukrainian food imports followed a decision by EU ambassadors to extend Ukraine’s tariff-free access to the bloc’s market by another year. However, the extension is still subject to formal approval by the European Parliament and EU countries in the coming weeks.

Read more …

“The connection between Joe Biden and Hynansky’s business ventures dates back to 2009, when the then-vice president made his first visit to Ukraine..”

• War Threatens Ukraine Auto Empire of Biden Megadonor (Sperry)

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky isn’t the only one demanding more military assistance from President Biden to protect Kiev from Russian forces. So too is a close Delaware friend and financial backer of Biden, who owns several luxury car dealerships around the Ukrainian capital. By sending billions of dollars in weapons and other military aid to help defend Ukraine, Biden also is securing the investments of millionaire car magnate John Hynansky, a Ukrainian American and longtime supporter of the president. Over the course of Biden’s political career, Hynansky and his family have contributed more than $100,000 to his campaigns, including $8,000 in 2020, Federal Election Commission records show. Hynansky family members have been guests at the White House, and Hynansky has floated hundreds of thousands of dollars in loans to Biden family members, property records show.

Hynansky’s son, Michael, who helps run his car empire, lent the use of his Lear jet to Biden when he was a senator. Since Russia started shelling the area around Kiev in February 2022, the U.S. government has spent $77 billion to help Ukraine rebuild and repel future attacks. Government ethics watchdogs say the president’s friendship poses a potential conflict of interest that demands a full accounting of how the massive foreign aid, which includes open-ended humanitarian and economic assistance, has been used and who has benefited from it. On the military side, moreover, billions of dollars have gone to unspecified areas, such as “security,” “intelligence,” and “training.” In the past, Hynansky has supplied the police cars and ambulances in several regions of Ukraine.

[..] The connection between Joe Biden and Hynansky’s business ventures dates back to 2009, when the then-vice president made his first visit to Ukraine. In a speech in Kiev to government officials, Biden singled out Hynansky for praise, noting that he had just had breakfast with “my very good friend, John Hynansky.” (The previous year, Hynansky had individually contributed more than $33,000 to the Obama-Biden ticket primarily through the Obama Victory Fund, according to FEC records.) Within months of his hobnobbing with the vice president and local officials in the Ukrainian capital, Hynansky scored his first international development loan from the U.S. Overseas Private Investment Corporation, or OPIC, a federal body whose board was appointed by President Obama.

Hynansky used the $2.5 million to break ground on a new headquarters and massive distribution center outside Kiev that prepares 8,000 cars for sale every year. In 2012, Hynansky landed another $20 million in OPIC funding to expand his dealership facilities, federal records show, helping him corner roughly 25% of the luxury car market in Ukraine. “The proceeds of the loan will be used to construct and operate two new, state-of-the-art dealership facilities for Porsche and Land Rover/Jaguar automobiles, and repay any outstanding balance of an existing OPIC loan,” according to a 2012 OPIC financing document.

Read more …

Without implicating the Big Guy?

• Hunter’s Collapsing World: A Criminal Plea Could Now Be Best Option (Turley)

This week, Hunter Biden’s defense team traveled to Delaware seeking an update on the federal criminal investigation that has dragged on for almost five years. The reason seems clear: Time is running out on Hunter and the Biden family. After years of delaying disclosures and admissions, Hunter could now be pushing to cap off the criminal side of the scandal before more information is released in Arkansas and Washington. For the White House, even a criminal plea is preferred if they can avoid one particular claim — and they may be succeeding. For years, the Bidens have worked (with the media’s help) to delay any recognition of the influence peddling and corruption that may be revealed on Hunter Biden’s laptop. Even this week, in child support proceedings in Arkansas, Hunter’s counsel continued to refuse to admit ownership of the laptop abandoned at The Mac Shop in Wilmington, Del., in April 2019.

It won’t work any more than his long refusal to acknowledge his fathering of his four-year-old child, Navy. Just as Hunter could not deny DNA, forensic and other evidence will soon make his laptop denials untenable in proceedings in which he and his counsel are required to tell the truth. These proceedings are now colliding for the Bidens. With the laptop being raised in Arkansas and being investigated in Washington by House committees, time is up and the Biden team knows it. An establishment of the laptop’s authenticity in one forum could produce cascading effects in the other forums. There has already been a recent shift to a scorched-earth strategy, including reportedly threatening possible witnesses and calling for the IRS to investigate critics.

New leaks from the Justice Department investigation have indicated that prosecutors are considering four charges: two misdemeanor counts for failure to file taxes, a single felony count of tax evasion related to a business expense for one year of taxes and a potential felony count on falsifying a form linked to a gun permit. Those four charges could well result in jail time, but the situation is likely to get worse for Hunter if the House reveals new evidence of foreign dealings and payments. That is why a capstone plea could control the damage for both Hunter and his father. A capstone is designed to protect against erosion and even help to hold together an arch that might otherwise collapse. This capstone plea could avoid a worst scenario (and charge) that would undermine years of denials by both Bidens.

However, there was one conspicuous omission from the list of potential charges that may also indicate a reason to push toward a plea. There is no mention of a charge as an unregistered foreign agent under the Foreign Agent Registration Act (FARA). The Justice Department aggressively used this charge against Trump figures like Paul Manafort and, if the same standard is applied, it is hard to see the basis for discarding the charge in the Hunter Biden case. The laptop shows emails from various foreign sources, including some with close connections to foreign governments and intelligence services. There are also records of visits of clients and business associates to the White House as well as pictures with then-Vice President Joe Biden. Finally, there are emails showing Hunter reached out to high-ranking officials like Antony Blinken for “advice.” Now our secretary of state, Blinken was then deputy secretary of state.

Read more …

“..merger accounting rules would require a buyer to immediately mark down FRC’s assets to fair value..”

• No Buyer for First Republic Bank at Any Price (Mish)

In one of the biggest bank collapses ever, First Republic Bank is down 96 percent in two months. But look on the bright side. Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) fared even worse. At least FRC is still kicking. It rose 8.79 percent on Thursday. You likely can’t give FRC away. There would be no takers. Its assets are worth less than zero. That’s because merger accounting rules would require a buyer to immediately mark down FRC’s assets to fair value. FRC lost $100 billion in deposits. And unlike SVB, it is stuck with severely underwater mortgage loans. The FRC business model was to give ridiculously cheap mortgage loans to high-wealth clients in return for their business. When that model started blowing up, clients pulled their deposits.


Given all around silliness by banks chasing yield, any buyer would likely have to raise capital which would hammer their own share price. According to the WSJ, Autonomous Research analyst David Smith commented “It might cost you $30 billion of capital to buy the bank for free.” If the run on assets continues, either the Treasury or the Fed is likely to step in. Elizabeth Warren would then moan about the Fed bailing out the wealthy. If the bank went under, she would moan about something else. Meanwhile, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen repeated her comment that the U.S. banking system remains sound and the U.S. government will take “any necessary steps” to keep it the strongest and safest financial system in the world.

Read more …

“envisage our future utopia”, suggesting that Ireland must “rebalance economy, ecology and ethics..”

• Irish President Condemns ‘Obsession’ With Economic Growth (Leahy)

President Michael D Higgins has condemned the “obsession” with achieving economic growth in a speech on Friday that was implicitly critical of the economic policies pursued by successive governments. In a reception at Áras an Uachtaráin for Tasc, a think tank dedicated to social change, the President delivered a typically wide-ranging speech that featured a strong critique of economic policy that seeks to prioritise growth, a condemnation of “neoliberalism” and an evaluation of the shortcomings of the teaching of economics at universities. He also urged those present to “envisage our future utopia”, suggesting that Ireland must “rebalance economy, ecology and ethics”. And he insisted that the current exchequer surplus was not just the product of corporation tax receipts from multinationals, but “has been made possible by an educated and hard-working population”.


“Many economists remain stuck in an inexorable growth narrative, or at best a ‘green growth’ narrative,” he said. “A fixation on a narrowly defined efficiency, productivity, perpetual growth has resulted in a discipline that has become blinkered to the ecological challenge – the ecological catastrophe – we now face. “That narrow focus constitutes an empty economics which has lost touch with everything meaningful, a social science which no longer is connected, or even attempts to be connected, with the social issues and objectives for which it was developed over centuries. It is incapable of offering solutions to glaring inadequacies of provision as to public needs, devoid of vision.” Later he added: “Our obsession with inexorable economic expansion expresses, perhaps, a desire to transcend our material limits and rise above the state of nature. Yet this growth fixation paradoxically increases the potency of those very limits. “A deadly cocktail of exploding inequalities, massive deregulation and a globalisation defined solely by trade densities has precipitated this ecological crisis.”

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Fern
https://twitter.com/i/status/1652411867732557825

 

 

 

 


Greta oto, also known as glasswinged butterfly, has transparent wings with a span of 5.6 to 6.1 cm

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Lula’s Grand Strategy

Apr 012023
 
 April 1, 2023  Posted by at 4:51 pm Finance Tagged with: , , , , , ,  25 Responses »


Georgia O’Keeffe Red poppy 1927

 

Andrew Korybko:

 

Background Briefing

Brazil and Chinese reached an agreement earlier this week to de-dollarize their trade, which will accelerate financial multipolarity processes amidst the global systemic transition. The timing was curious, however, since Brazil’s Agriculture Minister Carlos Favaro told the media last weekend that “All government actions are postponed” due to Lula canceling his planned trip after falling ill. Even though he rescheduled it for 11-14 April, the parties decided to sign it last week instead of waiting till then.

Furthermore, this took place on the same week that the US hosted its second “Summit for Democracy”, which Lula didn’t attend via video as planned on the pretext of his recent illness. Nevertheless, he sent a lengthy statement that allied media misreported as pro-Russian, the description of which is discredited by verifiable facts from official sources here as well as the text itself that was later published in full here. Russia isn’t mentioned therein at all, and it actually reads like a love letter to the US Democrats.

Lula’s Ideological Alignment With The US’ Liberal-Globalists

Lula is ideologically aligned with those liberal–globalists, which intrepid readers can learn more about by perusing the collection of articles shared at the end of this analysis here. It’s therefore unsurprising that his letter implied that the Brazilian opposition are “extremists”, condemned the “disinformation” that he hints is driving the latter as a pretext for potentially imposing more censorship in the coming future as part of his US-backed power consolidation campaign, and praised “LGBTQIA+” people.

These agendas that he pushed in his statement to the “Summit for Democracy” also align with the causes that are aggressively propagated across the world by Color Revolution financier George Soros, who enthusiastically endorsed Lula in his speech at the Munich Security Conference in mid-February. The last one regarding LGBTQIA+ people in particular directly contradicts Russia’s official support for traditional moral values as promulgated in its new foreign policy concept that can be read here.

In the eighth paragraph, Russia warns that “A wide-spread form of interference in the internal affairs of sovereign states has become the imposition of destructive neoliberal ideological attitudes that run counter to traditional spiritual and moral values.” This passage justifies its official goal of defending traditional moral values that’s mentioned a dozen times, explains why Russia banned LGBT+ propaganda, and adds context to President Putin’s conclusion that the liberal elite promote pedophilia.

Managing US Perceptions Of Brazil’s Financial Multipolarity Policy

The socio-cultural dimension of Lula’s worldview is therefore opposed to Russia’s, which he presumably regards as “bigoted” and “fascist” just like his liberal-leftist supporters generally do. Nevertheless, these two BRICS countries still share the common goal of financial multipolarity, thus explaining his decision to de-dollarize Brazilian-Chinese trade. Returning to that development, its timing suggests that Lula wanted this to happen comparatively more quietly than him announcing it while standing with his counterpart.

Since it was already agreed upon, his challenge was therefore to manage US perceptions since he didn’t want to risk offending his fellow “social justice warriors” there like AOC and Bernie Sanders, both of whom he met during his trip to DC in February. Lula also wanted to avoid offending his new buddy Biden too after those two agreed to comprehensively strengthen their countries’ strategic partnership in their joint statement, which can be read at the official White House website here and was analyzed here.

To that end, his latest illness was politically convenient in the sense that it allowed him to postpone his planned trip so that it didn’t coincide with the US’ second “Summit for Democracy” and subsequently authorize the de-dollarization deal’s signing in his absence to comparatively less attention. As was explained above, he wanted to do his best to manage US perceptions about this development that advances Brazil’s goal of financial multipolarity at the dollar’s indisputable expense.

The Scenario Of Russian-Brazilian Ideological Competition In Africa

For as much as his media allies and social media sycophants claim otherwise, it’s nevertheless factually false to describe Lula as opposed to the US as proven by his previously cited statement to the last week’s summit participants as well as his joint one with Biden in February that was hyperlinked above too. Despite his promotion of financial multipolarity at the dollar’s indisputable expense, he’s solidly aligned with the US’ ruling liberal-globalists, especially in the domestic political and socio-cultural sense.

The two referenced statements prove that Lula shares Biden’s liberal-globalist mission of delegitimizing their respective opposition as “extremists”, preparing for imposing more censorship on that aforementioned pretext, and propagating LGBT+ causes in full cooperation with each other. The last-mentioned part directly contradicts one of the key precepts contained in Russia’s new foreign policy concept regarding the defense of traditional moral values and thus constitutes a hybrid threat.

Be that as it may, Brazil as a state isn’t a threat to Russia, but its potential propagation of LGBT+ causes in collusion with the US in third countries where Moscow also has interests such as those traditionally conservative ones in Africa like Uganda could constitute an unfriendly asymmetrical challenge. Russia and Brazil might therefore find one another competing for hearts and minds there, with the first defending restrictions on LGBT+ propaganda and the second agitating locals against them.

Brazil’s Envisaged Balancing Act Between China & The US

As regards China, however, Brazil isn’t expected to clash or compete with it in any form since Lula actually envisages his country balancing between it and the US. On the one hand, China is Brazil’s top economic partner and an ally in advancing their shared goal of financial multipolarity. On the other hand, the US is Brazil’s top security partner and is nowadays also a source of inspiration for its liberal-globalists who model themselves off of its ruling Democrat Party, thus explaining his balancing act.

It was earlier touched upon in passing in this analysis here, which interpreted Foreign Minister Vieira’s praise of China in an interview as implying “the possibility of Brazil attempting to balance between the Golden Billion’s US leader with whom Lula has politically aligned himself against Russia and the Sino-Russo Entente’s Chinese economic engine”. Regardless of how successful this approach proves to be, observers should note that Russia isn’t expected to play any prominent role in Lula’s grand strategy.

Trade will likely continue to grow since it’s mutually beneficial, but political ties could soon worsen in the event that Lula extradites a suspected spy to the US to face charges instead of deporting him back to Russia, which readers can learn more about here. Foreign Minister Lavrov’s potential trip to Brazil this month will likely focus on that issue while also exploring the possibility of further expanding their economic ties, particularly in the energy sector like that country’s Ambassador to Russia suggested.

Debunking The “Big Lie” Of The Brazilian Left

Lula’s appointment of former President Rousseff to lead BRICS’ New Development Bank (NDB) should therefore be interpreted in the context of advancing Brazil’s financial multipolarity goals instead of having anything to do with Russia like his media allies and social media sycophants are spinning it as. The ”Big Lie” of the Brazilian left and their supporters abroad is that Lula is pro-Russian even though the facts prove that he’s politically aligned with the US against it in that country’s proxy war with NATO.

They’ll spin anything that he does to lie that he’s secretly allied with Russia against the US despite the facts cited in this analysis from official sources comprehensively debunking that literal conspiracy theory. This “politically inconvenient” fact can never be openly acknowledged even in the scenario that he extradites that suspected spy to the US to face charges instead of deporting him back to Russia since those propagandists fear that it’ll expose the truth about Lula’s US-aligned liberal-globalist worldview.

In their minds, the false perception of Lula as a “multipolar revolutionary opposed to US hegemony” must be maintained at all costs lest the aforesaid truth about his worldview prompts a political revolt among the Workers’ Party’s base that results in him being pressured to recalibrate his grand strategy. This explains why they’re so actively pushing the latest disinformation narrative falsely alleging that his de-dollarization deal with the US supposedly means that he’s opposed to it and aligned with Russia.

The Future Of Russian-Brazilian Relations

In reality, Russia is only considered by Lula to be a commodities partner and a country to cooperate with in pursuit of their shared financial multipolarity goals. He’s fiercely opposed to its official defense of traditional moral values and especially the military moves that it was forced to make in defense of its national security red lines in Ukraine after NATO clandestinely crossed them there. Lula won’t ever say so openly, but he in all likelihood thinks that Russia is “bigoted”, “fascist”, and “imperialist”.

Even so, he’ll still cooperate with it on issues of shared interest as explained, but neither can rely on one another beyond that like Russia can depend on fellow BRICS partner India, which Lula probably also thinks is led by “bigots” and “fascists” in accordance with his liberal-globalist worldview. Artificial limits are imposed on their partnership due to the Brazilian leader’s radical ideology, which all honest observers must acknowledge if they aspire to accurately analyze his grand strategy going forward.

 

 

 

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

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

 

 Older Entries