intel sharing Archives - The Automatic Earth

.@andrewklavan: "The Democrats, who came to start trouble, were bullied into silence by this one man who has just taken everything from them … He has beaten them every time and he did it again." pic.twitter.com/optUzTctCa

— Daily Wire (@realDailyWire) March 5, 2025

Still hurting
https://twitter.com/i/status/1897211691236245955

Pres. Trump shouts out Elon Musk, DOGE savings
"To further combat inflation, we will not only be reducing the cost of energy, but we'll be ending the flagrant waste of taxpayer dollars. And to that end, I have created the brand new Department of Government Efficiency, DOGE.… pic.twitter.com/gg5EGypr6c

— Camus (@newstart_2024) March 5, 2025

Kennedy
https://twitter.com/i/status/1897128885705433139

Lutnick

Lutnick promises that Trump will balance the budget, then says: "Think about this — we got $4 trillion in entitlements! And no one has ever cut it … everybody whose grandfather died and is still getting Social Security? Give me a break." pic.twitter.com/A3VyhYtLcQ

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) March 4, 2025

Bannon
https://twitter.com/i/status/1897014746026795203

Reagan

Worth the 2 minutes.pic.twitter.com/19LZOzWK2c

— Thomas Sowell Quotes (@ThomasSowell) March 4, 2025

Suddenly
https://twitter.com/i/status/1897184307925631074

Orban

After losing Washington to the patriots, globalist-liberal forces retreated to Brussels, and set their sights on Serbia, Slovakia, and Hungary. Today's chaos in the Serbian Parliament – smoke bombs, violence, and obstruction – shows how far they’re willing to go to destabilise… pic.twitter.com/krL49UvG54

— Orbán Viktor (@PM_ViktorOrban) March 4, 2025

“..the Dems are quickly approaching a yearlong losing streak. That’s just brutal..”

• We’re 100% Heading for a Government Shutdown (Pinsker)

The Democratic base is frustrated and demoralized. Ever since President ~~Roomba~~ Biden meandered aimlessly (and mindlessly) in his one and only presidential debate, it’s been one horror show after another. (And not even a good horror show, like those classic “Friday the 13th” movies — I’m talking the bad ones that don’t even respect the viewer enough to include gratuitous nudity.) Oh, by the way: Biden Roomba’d across the debate stage on June 27, 2024. That was 250-plus days ago! At this point, the Dems are quickly approaching a yearlong losing streak. That’s just brutal: They’re the jobbers of D.C. The Washington Generals should probably sue the Democrats for copyright infringement. So, if you’re a Democrat, what’s your next move? Remember, we’re not their target audience. It doesn’t matter what we think because Democratic coalitions always come from the inside out, not the outside in.

In the GOP, an outsider like Trump can force the party’s hand, delivering a new, diverse voting bloc. That’s been the secret to MAGA’s success. But for better or worse (usually worse), that ain’t how the Democratic Party is structured: Just ask Bernie Sanders. Theirs is an organizational hierarchy that reflects their institutional media advantage: A handful of powerful Democrats will consult with donors and make key decisions, which they then try to popularize through their sycophants in the media. When the Democrats — and the mainstream media — were at their peak, it was an extraordinarily effective one-two punch. They won a lot of elections and passed a lot of legislation. It worked like this: Once the “Donkey Elders” settled on a decision, they’d promote it to the top journalists at The New York Times (and a few other top-tier outlets). Soon, an echo chamber would form; the smaller outlets would fall into line, and the story would be “sold” exclusively from the Democrats’ point of view.

The Democrats are still trying this approach, but it’s just not effective anymore. One of the permanent changes of the MAGA revolution was the diminishment of the mainstream media’s reach and prestige: Walter Cronkite might’ve been “the most trusted man in America” in the 1960s and 1970s, but that was a very long time ago. Today, the alphabet anchors are widely dismissed as “Fake News.” But since the Democrats still use the same old media tactics, we can “reverse engineer” their PR strategies to know exactly what they’re gonna do next. For example, we know the Democrats will be auditioning new flagbearers via stupidly glowing media profiles. This week, the flagbearer du jour is Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.). Then, when Murphy bombs, it’ll be someone else. I guarantee you.

And we also know the Democrats will try to sabotage the government, triggering a federal shutdown. Credit to my esteemed colleague, Rick Moran, who broke the story yesterday: “Democrats Look to Blow Up Budget Bill”. As Rick warned, “…blowing up the budget negotiations may get some traction.” The Politico story he referenced (“Democrats Are Serious About a Shutdown”) is the classic liberal trial balloon: You float a story out to a “trusted” media outlet, hoping to get a feel for public opinion. If you get a good response, you double down; if the opposite happens, you forget it and move on. But this time, the Democrats’ target audience is their own base of activists and donors. And after such a lengthy losing streak, the Democrats would rather blow up the whole government than let Trump use it. You see, liberals are in an absolute meltdown ‘cause nothing is working anymore.

Well, if you give ‘em a choice between something and nothing, they’re gonna pick something at every turn: This time, it’s Democrats who are itching for a fight — over the Department of Government Efficiency cuts that Trump has blessed and deputized mogul Elon Musk has gleefully carried out. Senior House Democrats have spent recent days privately surveying their members about whether they’d be willing to shut the government down over DOGE cuts, according to multiple well-placed Democratic sources I spoke to over the weekend. So far, they’re encountering little resistance. Your ears ought to perk at the word “resistance”: That’s a term the Democrats used extensively during Trump’s first term. What was once old is new again. And it’s coming directly from the Democrats’ party elders:

Usually shutdown saber-rattling originates on the fringes of the two parties and gains momentum until leaders just can’t ignore it, lest they risk their own jobs. This time, however, the foment is coming from the leadership table itself — where there is growing anger over the lightning-fast Trump-Musk campaign to gut federal agencies and the glacial pace of court action to stop it. And that’s the real lede of the story: The Democratic Party leadership has decided to blow up the government. It’s a calculated, deliberate decision. Assuming this trial balloon is met with rapt applause from angry liberals — which is a very safe assumption, especially after Trump’s barnburner of a speech last night was VERY well received — a government shutdown is now inevitable. President Trump’s speech to a joint session of Congress has radical Democrats in panic mode, and their childish protests won’t stop all of the winning.

“The only one who wants a shutdown right now is Elon Musk.”

• Democrats Look to Blow Up Budget Bill (Moran)

The Democrats in Congress appear to be rousing themselves from a long sleep. My colleague Scott Pinsker reported that they are going to drag out the oldest leftist protest tactic in the book: making unpleasant noises when a political opponent speaks. The Dems plan to use “Hand clappers, red cards, and various other props” to dramatize their displeasure with Trump during his speech on Tuesday evening. They’re also going to hold up strongly worded signs. If that’s the best they got, maybe they should just stay home. The Democrats also plan to demonstrate their displeasure with Elon Musk and Donald Trump by deliberately blowing up the budget negotiations, thus forcing a government shutdown. The transparent ploy to try and make Trump look bad while portraying themselves as the heroes who stand up against healthcare and other cuts is how the Democrats believe they can get back in the game.

They need to do something. Musk and Trump have been steamrolling the Democrats by “flooding the zone” with so many cuts, executive orders, and other actions that the Democrats haven’t been able to catch their breath. One “outrage” after another has them on their back foot, trying to respond. The speech interruptions are infantile, and most Americans will see it that way. But blowing up the budget negotiations may get some traction. Trump and the Republicans want a “clean” budget extension, probably through September. The extension would not include any DOGE cuts made so far. Speaker Mike Johnson and Trump want to codify cuts made by DOGE before the new fiscal year begins on Sept. 30. “People now feel like the more perilous position is giving votes without the perception there’s been any change in accountability,” Rachael Bade at Politico quotes a senior House Democratic aide as saying. “The incentive structure right now is not to provide votes for them.”

Politico: “Sure, you can chalk some of the shift up to negotiating tactics. Democrats want Republicans to put some policy handcuffs on Musk, something Republicans are firmly rejecting. House Appropriations Chair Tom Cole called it “a non-starter and battle they lost to the American people” on Monday. And Democratic leaders have every reason to amp up pressure on their GOP counterparts to deliver as many votes as possible, given their control of the House, Senate and White House. No reason to make it easy on them, even if there’s no real shutdown threat, right? But that’s not how House Democrats are talking, even in private. During a recent meeting between Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and his committee leaders, top appropriator Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut steamed about how Speaker Mike Johnson was going to try to make them swallow the clean funding extension.”

Republicans will counter by forcing votes on keeping several departments open, thus clearly establishing the Democrats’ culpability in shutting down the government. It’s always a roll of the dice when one party or the other is perceived as forcing a shutdown. In this case, Democrats have announced their intention to shut down the government, leaving no doubt who is at fault. Democrats will try to blame the GOP, but really, if their efforts aren’t any better than this, they may as well stay in bed. Senate Appropriations Vice Chair Patty Murray, a Democrat from Washington, said Monday, “The only one who wants a shutdown right now is Elon Musk.” Shutdowns occur in slow motion, as not all departments will furlough workers immediately, but within 10 days or so, the lights will begin to go out. I think the Democrats have miscalculated badly.

Zero-Basing: start (the budget) from scratch.

“It reset the federal workforce to zero and shifted the burden of proving value. The “proof” required was negligible—but noticeably greater than the zero to which federal employees had grown accustomed.”

• Elon Musk’s DOGE Is Zero-Basing the Federal Government (RCW)

What is DOGE really doing—and why is it so controversial? The answer lies in an esoteric if straightforward concept that began in the world of budgeting: Zero-basing. As a general rule, most organizations, businesses, agencies, and even households building budgets start by asking themselves a simple question: What did we spend last year? To answer, they compile a list of expense categories and the amounts spent in each one. Next, they look ahead to the coming year to see which categories will require a bump up and where they can cut. Finally, they look at projected revenues to see whether they can expect to cover planned spending. In such a process, last year’s budget serves as the “baseline” for this year’s budget. That’s a perfectly reasonable approach if the goal is performance more-or-less on par with last year’s.

An entity displeased with past performance and contemplating major reforms must take a radically different approach. “Zero-Based Budgeting” rejects using last year’s budget as a baseline. Instead, it sets the baseline for each category at zero. It then considers each contemplated expenditure, one at a time, and asks whether current circumstances can justify it or require it. If so, it gets added to the budget. If not, it’s rejected. Though zero-basing may have begun in the world of budgeting, it’s a powerful concept that can be applied quite broadly. I’ve long advocated its deployment in regulatory reform, and I’ve used it in my day job to revamp college admissions processes. Stripped to its essentials, zero-based reforms reject inertia and incumbency as reasons for doing anything. They begin assuming nothing, review everything from first principles, and retain only that which is justifiable given current circumstances.

President Trump assumed office believing that the performance of the Executive Branch—not just last year, but for decades—has been entirely unacceptable. A majority of Americans agree with that assessment. Under such circumstances, preserving existing structures as a baseline would have been deeply foolish—not to mention counterproductive and destructive. He thus called upon Elon Musk and his team at DOGE to zero base the entire government. That’s exactly what DOGE has been doing. Consider, for example, a pair of messages that started with an announcement on X: “Consistent with President @realDonaldTrump’s instructions, all federal employees will shortly receive an email requesting to understand what they got done last week. Failure to respond will be taken as a resignation.” The promised email requested approximately five bullet points describing the employee’s accomplishments.

This request raised a furor. Why? Because it inverted the “normal” order. Under normal circumstances, new management inherits a workforce, then makes decisions about who to retain and who to cut. Even if management suspects that payrolls have been padded with phantom employees and kickbacks, they typically leave things in place until they can identify the improprieties. If you’re on payroll, you’re assumed to be earning your keep until someone proves otherwise. In other words, the status quo defines the baseline. Musk’s message went wisely in the opposite direction. It reset the federal workforce to zero and shifted the burden of proving value. The “proof” required was negligible—but noticeably greater than the zero to which federal employees had grown accustomed.

Anyone receiving the e-mail message—in effect, anyone claiming to be a federal employee—was given a minimal but real challenge: Reply with an e-mail stating “I exist, I read e-mail from my employer, and at least in my own opinion, I confer value in exchange for my paycheck.” Hardly a high standard, but enough to infuriate those who believe that the status quo must be maintained at all costs independent of the acceptability of past performance. Even a quick glimpse at DOGE’s other moves highlights their consistency, appropriateness, and brilliance—with parallels emerging throughout the Trump Administration: First, announce the termination or planned demise of an agency—say, USAID or the Department of Education. That resets its baseline to zero and shifts the burden to those claiming that said agency confers value in excess of cost upon the American people.

Next, let those who wish to preserve the program make their case: Justify the continuation of this expense given current circumstances. Past importance is irrelevant. Perhaps this program, when first introduced, solved a pressing problem. So what? Why do we need it in 2025? In most cases, the burden of proving value should be higher than the one Musk set for employee maintenance—but still something that reasonable people making a reasonable case can meet. Activities capable of clearing that hurdle will be preserved; even if the agency housing them is eliminated, they can be relocated to one of the many agencies that will prove their worth. The beauty of this approach is that it achieves two great results simultaneously:

One, it maximizes the chances of eliminating deadweight bloat and outright fraud by cutting as a default, then adding back only what can be justified. Two, it aligns incentives appropriately by making the people best positioned to justify each governmental activity responsible for providing the justifications. That’s what it means to zero-base a federal government returning far too little on the taxpayer dollar. That’s precisely what DOGE is doing. It’s far beyond time.

Looks like kiddie theater.

• Democrats Launch Anti-Trump Social Media Blitz (RT)

A group of US Democratic senators has rolled out a coordinated social media campaign, simultaneously posting videos of themselves reading from the same script. The virtual flashmob was intended to mock US President Donald Trump ahead of his first address to the US Congress since starting his second term in January. On Tuesday evening, the president delivered a 100-minute speech to a joint session of the Senate and House of Representatives, reaffirming key tenets of his ‘America First’ agenda and outlining the steps his second administration has taken to make good on his election campaign vows. Just hours before the address, at least 22 Democratic senators simultaneously released identical videos showing them commenting on the president’s previous pledges using the same script. Each posted footage starts with Trump promising to “bring prices down starting on day one” before cutting to the lawmakers dismissing those claims as “s***t that ain’t true” and reciting the same script.

Trump promised to lower prices on day one, but costs have only gone up. pic.twitter.com/noe2uwKeTG

— Elizabeth Warren (@SenWarren) March 4, 2025

“Since day one of Trump’s presidency, prices are up, not down,” they stated in their videos. “Inflation is getting worse, not better.”

Democrats all spewing the same scripted talking points like robots

This is extremely dangerous to our democracy pic.twitter.com/l9y4U7EvIb

— Tim Pool (@Timcast) March 4, 2025

Several Republican congressmen took to X to ridicule the posts. Representative Virginia Foxx called the video “weird,” while Senator Ted Cruz quipped that “DOGE fire[d] all their speech writers.” The Trump War Room account posted a sarcastic gif comparing the Democrats to computer-generated characters in a video game. In the US General Election in November 2024, Republicans won a majority in the US Senate, obtaining 53 seats in the chamber versus 47 received by the rival party. They also retained control of the House, getting 218 seats, while the Democrats have 215.

Non-payment for completed work is of course contentious, but the issue is much bigger than that:

“Does a single district-court judge who likely lacks jurisdiction have the unchecked power to compel the Government of the United States to pay out (and probably lose forever) 2 billion taxpayer dollars?”

• SCOTUS Dissenters Rage As ‘Liberals’ Unfreeze $2BN USAID Foreign-Aid Payments (ZH)

In a 5-4 vote, The US Supreme Court refused to bolster President Donald Trump’s foreign-aid freeze, reinstating a lower court order that requires the quick disbursement of as much as $2 billion owed to contractors for already completed work. Over four dissents, the justices rejected Trump’s request to toss out the trial court order, which affects money owed by the US Agency for International Development and State Department. The dissent by Justices Alito, Thomas, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh was extremely strongly worded:

“Does a single district-court judge who likely lacks jurisdiction have the unchecked power to compel the Government of the United States to pay out (and probably lose forever) 2 billion taxpayer dollars? The answer to that question should be an emphatic “No,” but a majority of this Court apparently thinks otherwise. I am stunned.”
…

Today, the Court makes a most unfortunate misstep that rewards an act of judicial hubris and imposes a $2 billion penalty on American taxpayers. The District Court has made plain its frustration with the Government, and respondents raise serious concerns about nonpayment for completed work. But the relief ordered is, quite simply, too extreme a response. A federal court has many tools to address a party’s supposed nonfeasance. Self-aggrandizement of its jurisdiction is not one of them. I would chart a different path than the Court does today, so I must respectfully dissent.”

Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Barrett sided with the liberal members of the court. The majority told the trial judge to reset the deadlines for paying the money since his original deadline has now passed. It is unclear what this means for the rest of the USAID funds that are slated to be spent but have not been sent yet. The ruling forces immediate payment of $2 billion for completed work but does not prevent broader USAID cuts. Future freezes and funding pauses are still possible but may face legal challenges under the APA. The ruling does not permanently restore funding, but it creates a legal pathway for future lawsuits if the Government halts disbursements unlawfully. Trump’s broader foreign aid policy remains largely intact, though judicial pushback may limit some of its implementation. We cannot wait to see how Musk and Trump respond to this fucking farcical outcome…

“That next round would come after the hearing on the preliminary injunction, which is scheduled for March 6th..”

• Supreme Court Rules 5-4 Against Freezing $2 Billion in USAID Funds (Turley)

In an interesting 5-4 split, the Supreme Court has denied the Trump Administration’s application for a stay of a district court’s temporary restraining order (TRO) against the Administration’s effort to freeze $2 billion in funds from the U.S. Agency for International Development. The Administration is down by one vote but hardly out in the fight with lower courts over the control of this funding. The unsigned order in Department of State v. AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition refuses to stay the temporary restraining order of U.S. District Judge Amir Ali to force the payment of the money frozen by the Administration. However, there is more than meets the eye in this short, unsigned opinion. While unsigned, it is clear that Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett joined the three liberal justices.

The reason is the dissent of Associate Justice Samuel Alito, who was joined by Justices Thomas, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh. The dissent has sharp elbows for both Judge Ali and the five justices in the majority: Does a single district-court judge who likely lacks jurisdiction have the unchecked power to compel the Government of the United States to pay out (and probably lose forever) 2 billion taxpayer dollars? The answer to that question should be an emphatic “No,” but a majority of this Court apparently thinks otherwise. I am stunned. Alito acknowledged the lower court’s “frustration with the Government” as well as the “serious concerns about nonpayment for completed work.”

However, he noted that this is “quite simply, too extreme a response. A federal court has many tools to address a party’s supposed nonfeasance. Self-aggrandizement of its jurisdiction is not one of them.” The key here is that this was a controversial move to review a TRO, which is generally not reviewable. What is clear is that there are four justices who were still prepared to do so and would obviously be likely to grant review in the next round. That next round would come after the hearing on the preliminary injunction, which is scheduled for March 6th. It can then be appealed to these awaiting justices. Only four are needed to grant review, so you do the math.

‘You’re telling us the truth. It’s been the mainstream media, those other sources on air that have been telling us lies.’

• Trump Will Remove RT Sanctions Within Two Weeks – US Journalist (RT)

US President Donald Trump could lift sanctions on RT in as little as two weeks, investigative journalist Ben Swann has suggested. Swann described the sanctions as illegal and contradicting the essence of American democracy. Speaking at a panel hosted by RT on Tuesday, Swann, who previously ran RT’s operations in the US and worked as a managing editor at Fox News, expressed confidence that Trump disagrees with the restrictions on the broadcaster and will soon act to lift them. “Within two weeks’ time… there’s going to be a move to remove those sanctions… I believe that he [Trump] disagrees with these sanctions. He thinks they’re foolish in the way they were designed. And by the way, they are. They’re not just foolish, though. They’re illegal. They violate the Constitution.” Swann also said the US has always aspired to “a very simple principle” when it comes to freedom of the press. “

The very first amendment to our Constitution, the very first right in our Bill of Rights is the right to speak freely without government interference, and the right to a free press… Free press does not mean professional press. It means you have the right to publish ideas that go against what the government believes.” Scotty Nell, a conservative political commentator and former RT anchor, echoed this assessment, suggesting that the administration of former US President Joe Biden deliberately insisted on shutting down the outlet before the election. She also rejected the argument that the crackdown on RT hinged on security considerations. “On our wall at RT America, we had a saying that said, ‘trust the viewer’. We’re going to trust our viewers to have enough intelligence to make the decisions themselves, to do their own fact-checking… Time and time again, they came back and said, ‘You’re telling us the truth. It’s been the mainstream media, those other sources on air that have been telling us lies.’”

Washington has for years been trying to curb RT’s operations. Last September, the Biden administration imposed sanctions on several Russian outlets, accusing them of trying to covertly “undermine democracy” and interfere in US elections. Then-Secretary of State Antony Blinken accused RT of “functioning as a de facto arm of [Russian] intelligence.” Moscow has rejected the allegations, accusing the US of violating the principles of free speech. On Monday, Swann published an open letter to Trump, urging him to lift sanctions against RT and other Russian outlets. He noted that the restrictions are “unprecedented” and that “the journalists targeted by these sanctions are American citizens. Not only did they lose their jobs, but also the opportunity to share factual reporting with an audience of over 800 million people across the globe.” The Trump administration has yet to respond to the appeal.

Who’s responsible for the war?

• ‘Very Few People’ Remember US Overthrew Ukrainian Govt – Musk (RT)

Many Americans have forgotten that it was the US that helped overthrow the legitimate Ukrainian government in 2014, plunging the country into turmoil for years to come, Elon Musk has said. On Monday, Musk responded to a clip of US Senator Chris Murphy discussing Washington’s role during the 2013-2014 Maidan protests in Kiev which led to the ouster of then-Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovich. The video featured the Democrat admitting that the US had “not sat on the sidelines” during the unrest. Murphy also recalled that “we have been very much involved,” with top US lawmakers and officials attending the protests on the Maidan square. He further explained that “the Obama administration passed sanctions [against Ukrainian officials]… I really think that the clear position of the United States has in part been what has helped lead to this change in regime.”

Murphy also noted that the US had a vested economic interest in Ukraine’s turn to the West, which was the key goal of the protesters. “If Ukraine is part of the European Union and thus is part of this new trade agreement with the United States, that could result in billions of dollars in new economic opportunities for the US,” he explained. “We shouldn’t be shy about making clear that interest.” Musk responded to the clip, writing on X: “Still very few people know about this.” In February 2023, Musk, one of the closest allies of US President Donald Trump, suggested there “no question that there was indeed a coup” in Kiev in 2014. The Tesla and X owner’s remarks come after a heated clash in the White House between Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky and Trump, during which the US president accused Zelensky of ingratitude for American aid and reluctance to make peace with Russia.

Following the feud, which also derailed a much-anticipated US-Ukraine mineral resource deal, Musk suggested that Zelensky could retire to a neutral country and be granted “amnesty” in exchange for “a peaceful transition back to democracy in Ukraine.” Zelensky’s presidential term expired last spring, although the Ukrainian leader has refused to call a new election, citing martial law. Russia has branded him “illegitimate,” insisting that power in Ukraine now lies with the parliament. Last month, Trump labeled Zelensky a “dictator without elections,” although he later appeared to backtrack on that accusation.

“..Meanwhile, Brussels has also expressed an interest in Ukraine’s mineral resources..”

• Trump Wants ‘Bigger’ Ukraine Resources Deal – CBS (RT)

US President Donald Trump is seeking an improved minerals deal between Washington and Kiev, CBS News reported on Tuesday, citing a person familiar with the talks. The allegations come three days after a brief falling out over the issue between Trump and Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky. Last week, Zelensky visited the White House to finalize an agreement granting the US the rights to the country’s rare-earth minerals as restitution for military aid provided by Washington to Kiev during the conflict with Moscow. However, his meeting with Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance devolved into an argument in front of journalists. On Tuesday, Zelensky said “our meeting in Washington, at the White House on Friday, did not go the way it was supposed to be.” In a post on X, he added that “Ukraine is ready to sign [the agreement on minerals] in any time and in any convenient format.”

The deal has not been finalized yet, according to multiple sources cited by CBS News. However, a person familiar with the matter told the news outlet that the parameters of the agreement could change because the US president is pursuing a “bigger, better deal.” Addressing a special joint session of the two chambers of the US Congress on Tuesday night, Trump said that Zelensky had sent him a letter earlier in the day offering to sign the minerals deal “at any time that is convenient for” the US president. On Sunday, Zelensky stated that the “agreement that is on the table will be signed if the parties are ready.” The Ukrainian leader emphasized that he believes his relations with the US president can be mended, but specified that he would prefer their future negotiations to be held behind closed doors.

Last year, Zelensky proposed providing Washington with privileged access to Ukrainian natural resources as part of his ‘victory plan,’ but later refused to agree to two proposals pushed by Trump’s administration that would have granted the US 50% ownership of the rare-earth minerals. Trump had initially sought $500 billion in compensation from Kiev for US military and financial support, but has apparently dropped the demand. Meanwhile, Brussels has also expressed an interest in Ukraine’s mineral resources and has proposed a separate agreement to secure access to them.

Medvedev doesn’t trust Trump.

• US To Resume Arms Supplies To Kiev If Rare-Earths Deal Signed – Medvedev (TASS)

Washington will resume arms shipments to Kiev if the rare-earths deal is signed with Ukraine, Russian Security Council Deputy Chairman Dmitry Medvedev said. “Speaking to US Congress, [US President Donald] Trump noted with satisfaction that he had already received a letter of repentance from the ‘punished’ head of the Kiev regime on his readiness for peace talks under the US leadership and the signing of a bonded rare-earths deal. This means that as soon as it is signed, the US arms supplies are likely to resume (and by the way, Europe has already increased them),” he wrote on his Vkontakte page.

Earlier, a Pentagon spokesman told TASS that the US Armed Forces have suspended military aid deliveries to Ukraine. According to Bloomberg, the suspension affects all US military equipment that is not currently in Ukraine, including weapons delivered by air and ship and awaiting further transportation in Poland’s transit zones. Earlier, Trump told Congress that he had received a letter from Vladimir Zelensky saying that the head of the Kiev regime was ready for peace settlement talks on the Ukrainian conflict. Zelensky also emphasized that he was ready to sign a deal with the US on Ukrainian rare-earths, which had previously been suspended due to a dispute between Trump and Zelensky at the White House.

“They are just Pavlov’s Pundits, conditioned to disapprove of everything Donald Trump says he wants just because he says he wants it.”

• Ukraine: Is This Genuine Jingoism? (Kit Knightly)

There was a fight in the Oval Office! Former actor and comedian President Zelensky and former reality television presenter Donald Trump went at it. Trump made fun of his clothes, Zelensky warned that war would come to the US if Ukraine fell and called Vice-President JD Vance “bitch”. Zelensky disrespected the office of the President or was bullied by big meanies depending on which color you voted for. It’s all very serious, real stuff. As serious and real as the traumatised faces Zelenksy and his First Lady were making during their Vogue photoshoot in 2022. The track-suited former “peace candidate” then either left the Whitehouse voluntarily or was told to leave, again depending who you voted for. He then immediately flew to England for an “emergency last minute” meeting with Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer and a totally off-the-cuff audience with His Majesty.

Then all the leaders of Western Europe – plus Justin Trudeau, who is still in office despite resigning weeks ago – had a big old struggle session with the new “leader of the free world”, and decided they don’t want to be friends with America anymore! All this was impromptu and extempore. Like the perfectly identical messages posted to the official Twitter accounts of multiple European political leaders later that day at almost the exact same time. The leaders of Europe are shocked – shocked! – that Trump would treat a “hero” like Zelensky so shabbily and will gladly pay to guarantee Ukraine’s security. Starmer has even offered to put British boots on the ground and planes in the air to secure a ceasefire:

The jingoism is at a fever pitch, with the usual warmongers and reality-deniers salivating at the idea of young men who don’t know each other shooting each other for no reason. This is what everybody wants you to think about. It has flooded the news and social media world like nothing has since the early days of Covid. And, not since those early Covid days, has the truth/coverage ratio been so low. Even more so than most news, no reality makes it into the discourse, rather there is simply an endless exchanges of one set of myths banging against another. Two teams fighting with invisible swords. Nobody is even mentioning nuclear war, except in stories about surviving it or rebuilding after it, which is weird. But what do we think is really going on? Are we really headed to World War III?

Or is this the managed-decline of America is simply taking another step forward while the financial burden of the forever-war necessary to secure a dystopian global state is being shifted to the EU? Whether that’s the only aim or not, it’s certainly what’s about to happen. Predictably, all the “anti-billionaire”, “save the planet”, “eat the rich” pretend liberals are cheering it on. Because they don’t really care about the billionaires who own Boeing or Lockheed Martin raking in their tax revenue, they don’t really care about the impact of war on the environment, and they don’t really care about the corrupt rich making bank on both sides of the supposed “conflict”. They are just Pavlov’s Pundits, conditioned to disapprove of everything Donald Trump says he wants just because he says he wants it. Even peace. Which isn’t to say Trump really wants peace. But you know what I mean. Also, I wouldn’t rule out a “nuclear near miss” or a “limited nuclear engagement” to try and scare people into global cooperation or something. When the media gets this hysterical, everything is on the table.

“..the move made it difficult for Ukraine to launch attacks against targets deep inside Russia..”

I think there’s much more to it..

• CIA Confirms Suspension Of Intelligence Sharing With Ukraine (RT)

Washington has brought all intelligence sharing with Ukraine to a halt, CIA Director John Ratcliffe confirmed to Fox Business on Wednesday. The development came just a day after several American media outlets reported that the US had suspended military assistance, including both the purchase of new weapons and shipments already in progress. When asked by host Maria Bartiromo whether the US had “cut off” its cooperation with Ukraine, Ratcliffe said that US President Donald Trump had “asked for a pause” to see if Kiev was ready to work toward resolving the conflict with Russia. “President Trump had a real question whether… Zelensky was committed to a peace process,” Ratcliffe said, claiming that the halt to assistance and information sharing contributed to Zelensky publicly stating that he was “ready for peace.”

On Tuesday, the Ukrainian leader said that Kiev was ready for an immediate POW release and a temporary ceasefire with a “ban on missiles, long-ranged drones, bombs on energy and other civilian infrastructure.” Last week, Trump told reporters that Zelensky needed to be ready for an immediate ceasefire before he could be welcomed back to the US following their Oval Office debacle on Friday. ”On the military front and on the intelligence front, the pause… allowed that to happen,” Ratcliffe said, adding that he expected the US to resume cooperating with Ukraine soon. The halt to intelligence sharing was “selective,” Sky News initially reported on Wednesday, citing a Ukrainian source. However, the move made it difficult for Ukraine to launch attacks against targets deep inside Russia, the source said. The British outlet reported later the same day that Washington had halted the flow of intelligence completely. “A few hours ago, the exchange of all information was stopped,” a Ukrainian source told Sky.

Washington reportedly also barred its allies from sharing with Ukraine, Financial Times reported on Wednesday, citing sources familiar with the matter. Recipients with assets inside Ukraine itself were likely to continue to pass on relevant information, the paper said, but Kiev would likely miss out on time-sensitive and high-value intelligence it needed to strike moveable Russian targets. Trump and Zelensky had a heated verbal exchange on Friday, when the US president accused the Ukrainian leader of ingratitude and “gambling with World War III” by refusing to work towards a halt to hostilities. Several US outlets, including Bloomberg, the New York Times, and CNN, reported that Trump had paused military aid after the fall out. According to the NYT, the president’s order affected more than $1 billion in “arms and ammunition in the pipeline and on order.” Moscow commented on the reports by saying that if the US were to suspend supplies altogether it would “probably be the best contribution to the cause of peace.”

Starlink still works.

• US Bars UK From Sharing Intel With Ukraine (RT)

The US has banned the UK from providing American intelligence to Ukraine, the Daily Mail reported on Tuesday. Several Western media outlets earlier reported that the US had suspended the delivery of all American military aid to Kiev, following a public spat between President Donald Trump and Vladimir Zelensky. According to the British tabloid, all UK intelligence agencies and military outlets “received an order expressly forbidding the sharing of US-generated intelligence” marked as ‘Rel UKR’ – meaning ‘Releasable to Ukraine’. The move would further undermine Kiev’s ability to fight Russia, the newspaper noted. The suspension, which reportedly has no exact timeframe, is expected to affect such British agencies as the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) and the Ministry of Defense.

UK military intelligence expert Phil Ingram told the Daily Mail that the US will “tightly control distribution of its intelligence to Ukraine” by relying on its own agencies based in Kiev. On Wednesday, CIA Director John Ratcliffe also confirmed media reports that Washington had halted direct intelligence sharing with Ukraine. The move comes after several Western outlets reported that Trump had ordered a pause on shipments of US military aid to Ukraine, which would apply to all packages outside of the country, including those committed by the administration of former President Joe Biden.

The development followed a heated meeting between Trump and Zelensky on Friday, during which the US president accused the Ukrainian leader of “disrespecting” America and not wanting to reach peace with Russia. An unnamed official cited by CNN claimed that the freeze on aid would remain in place until Trump decides that Zelensky is committed to peace talks. In late February, Reuters also reported, citing sources, that Elon Musk’s Space X could cut Ukraine’s access to crucial Starlink internet satellite systems unless Kiev signs a deal granting the US access to its natural resources. The agreement ended up in limbo following Trump and Zelensky’s tense talks. Musk, however, has dismissed the report as “false.” Commenting on the possibility of the US suspending aid to Kiev, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said it would “probably be the best contribution to the cause of peace.”

“As Starmer prepares to send British troops to Ukraine, he continues to jail people for posting nasty messages in Facebook, in particular when they slur his own party members – an irony that only Joe Stalin would appreciate..”

• Something Is Smelling Really Bad Among The Peace Brokers Of Ukraine (Jay)

You don’t have to be a genius to work out that if you exclude Russia and just look at the three groups who are vying for war, or whining for peace, that no one is being very honest about their intentions. Previously, I tackled head on how Trump is not being very honest when he talks of peace as he has the means to enforce it at the drop of a hat, but chooses to drag his feet and hold out for deals. This is not simply Trump Basic who we all know well – where’s the deal? – but also Trump playing out a longer game with Russia, looking at where the sweet spot could be. Trump’s tour de force is always to create a crisis and then position himself to be the only person on the planet who is capable or willing to resolve it. His personality is always paramount to everything.

And so the stunt in the White House needs to be seen in the correct context. Zelensky was not honest in coming to the White House in the first place as it was believed that he was to meet Trump and JD Vance to sign a mineral deal which he agreed to and retracted from signing a number of times leading up to the visit. This became apparent when he met with Trump behind close doors and so the Plan B was to lower Zelensky into a trap and make him look ungrateful, arrogant and entirely impossible to work with. But what’s the real story behind Zelensky’s decision? Again, we see the puppet Zelensky having his strings pulled by others. Is it a coincidence that just days earlier British PM Keir Starmer arrives in the White House where, just a matter of hours earlier he announces in the British parliament that defence spending will be increased, in line with Trump’s demands for European members of NATO? Was it merely that Starmer needed to show some goodwill to Trump even to get the meeting, or was Starmer preparing for choppier waters to come, when Trump would finally hear the rumours? According to some reports, Zelensky has sold all the mineral rights already to the UK, so he was playing a game with Trump all along.

But there are more lies and games to come. If we look at Zelensky’s European partners can we honestly say they are being honest with the public which elected them? While Macron announces a no-fly zone rule, Starmer tells his own people that Britain will send its own troops to Ukraine. Has the world gone mad, or are these leaders actually serious about their intentions? How many of UK soldiers, airmen and sailors could Starmer actually send out of a total of barely 150,000 in uniform? In reality, probably only a third at best. And presumably this move would be without the support of the U.S., who would keep out of it? If that isn’t the craziest batshit idea, there is more madness to follow. Zelensky, since arriving in the UK for the emergency meeting of mostly EU leaders who support him – including Erdogan of Turkey – has started saying some very odd things to the press, while he picks up these huge checks for military support. He keeps talking about getting a peace deal with Russia.

As Starmer prepares to send British troops to Ukraine, he continues to jail people for posting nasty messages in Facebook, in particular when they slur his own party members – an irony that only Joe Stalin would appreciate, as it’s straight from the dictators’ handbook. Starmer preaches about supporting a free and democratic Ukraine while persecuting anyone who doesn’t agree with his views or uses social media to complain about the state of Britain. In reality it’s own despot supporting another and it’s hard to see how many days this could last with body bags coming back to the UK while pensioners get plain clothed policeman come to their houses and threaten them with imprisonment – or even more cuts to the poor.

Of course the body bags will be hidden by a tawdry deal struck between the government and the British press, just as so many ‘no-go zones’ were agreed beforehand. But citizen journalism will call them out as the families won’t stay quiet. Starmer and Macron seem to think that just as Churchill pulled a few stunts to draw the U.S. into the Second World War, that European soldiers on Ukrainian soil will override any agreement that the U.S. and Russia could pull off. The move by Starmer is so idiotic that it leaves many wondering whether he is being controlled by Mossad or the Obamas, comes from the same camp which so fabulously made so many poor predictions from the beginning – namely Russian sanctions.

Someone will refuse to pay the bill she sends.

• EU ‘Rearmament’ Plan Has No Funding – Euractiv (RT)

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen’s attempt to increase military spending across the EU is not backed by cash and shifts the financial burden to member states, Euractiv has reported, citing senior EU officials. The so-called ‘ReArm Europe Plan,’ backed mostly by debt and fiscal adjustments, asks EU nations to spend $840 billion, twice the EU’s 2024 defense budget, to counter “grave security threats.” The plan “includes close to no fresh money,” leaving member states to secure “the real cash” themselves, Euractiv reported on Wednesday. The total figure is based more on “hopes and guesses” than concrete reforms addressing the bloc’s production shortages, the report argued. Von der Leyen has also proposed raising $158 billion through capital markets and offering it to members as loans on condition they buy weapons made in the bloc or its regional allies.

The requirement could involve at least three EU countries or two EU countries plus Ukraine. However, loan approval criteria and the prioritization of EU-made equipment remain undecided, the report pointed out. Defense spending will be given an “escape clause” from EU budget rules, allowing governments to shift funds “rather than coming up with fresh money,” according to Euractiv. While increased deficits could generate nearly $700 billion, it’s uncertain if the measure applies to all countries or only those meeting NATO’s 2% GDP target. Another senior EU official told Euractiv that over time, governments must offset spending by raising taxes or cutting costs. Von der Leyen’s push for increased defense spending comes amid growing pressure from Washington. US President Donald Trump has distanced himself from supporting Ukraine while urging the EU to take greater responsibility for its defense.

The shift intensified this week, with news agencies’ reports on Monday suggesting that Trump had ordered a pause in military aid to Kiev. The US president has repeatedly accused Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky of refusing to negotiate peace with Russia and exploiting US support for his own gain. EU leaders will discuss von der Leyen’s proposals at a special summit on Thursday. According to a senior EU official, the measures should work “very fast and very efficiently” and require only a majority vote for adoption. Some experts, however, warn that increasing military spending could strain national budgets already under pressure.

Eva

The Eurocrats have gone totally mad.@vonderleyen is reserving €800 BILLION in European defense spending to support Ukraine.

Their default position is to claim moral superiority by doing the exact opposite of anything @realDonaldTrump does – even if it unleashes World War III. pic.twitter.com/xnrECDAXDd

— Eva Vlaardingerbroek (@EvaVlaar) March 5, 2025

“..2,469,000 Germans voted for the BSW (with the decisive so-called “second vote”). Only 0.028% – about 13,000 to 14,000 votes – more and the party would have passed the 5% barrier.”

• Democracy Does Not ‘Die In Darkness,’ It Is Dying In The EU Right Now (Amar)

Quiz time: What do Germany, Moldova, and Romania (in alphabetical order) have in common? They look so different, don’t they?Germany is a traditional, large, and at this point still relatively well-off (if less and less so due to obedient self-Morgenthauing for the greater glory of Ukraine) member of the Cold War “West” (give and take a “re-unification” and all that). Currently, it has a population of over 83 million people and a GDP equivalent to $4.53 trillion. Romania is an ex-Soviet satellite with just above 19 million citizens and a GDP less than a tenth of the German one (at $343.8 billion). Moldova, which emerged from a former Soviet republic, is the smallest: 2.4 million people and a GDP of $16.5 billion.

And yet, look more closely, and they are not so different: They are all either inside the EU and NATO (Germany and Romania) or attached to these two organizations as an outside yet important strategic asset (the case of Moldova – despite and in de facto breach of its constitutionally anchored neutrality, as it happens). And also, all three have serious problems with conducting fair and clean elections. What a coincidence. Not. Let’s take a quick look at each case: In Germany’s recent federal election, the Bündnis Sahra Wagenknecht (BSW) failed to cross the threshold to representation in parliament – 5% of the national vote – by the thinnest of margins: The party officially garnered 4.972% of the vote. In absolute numbers, almost 2,469,000 Germans voted for the BSW (with the decisive so-called “second vote”). Only 0.028% – about 13,000 to 14,000 votes – more and the party would have passed the 5% barrier.

Even extremely tight results can, of course, be real and legitimate. The problem in Germany now is that there is steadily accumulating evidence that the elections were compromised by serious flaws and repeated errors. What makes this even more urgent is the fact that there seems to be a clear pattern with mistakes occurring not randomly but mostly at the cost of the BSW. We already know about two key problems, although not much more than one week has passed after the election on February 23: First, about 230,000 German voters live abroad, but many of them could not cast their vote because the necessary documents reached them too late, sometimes even only after the elections. Of course, we cannot tell how exactly these voters would have voted if given the chance. But that is not the point. The fact alone that they could not participate casts severe doubt on the legitimacy of the results.

And especially in the case of the BSW where so few additional votes would have been enough to principally change the outcome, that is, secure seats – and probably two to three dozen – in the next parliament. The second even more disturbing issue is that there is ever more evidence of actual BSW votes inside Germany being allocated to another party. In the case of the major city of Aachen, for instance, a result of 7.24% for the BSW was registered for the “Bündnis für Deutschland” (an entirely different and much smaller party with no chance of parliamentary representation to begin with). The BSW vote was erroneously registered as 0%. Only protests by local BSW voters brought the scandal to light.German mainstream media are trying to depict what happened in Aachen as an exception. Yet by now there are reports of similar “errors” from all over Germany – and don’t forget that the process of looking for these cases has only just started.

In sum, there are good reasons – and they are getting better by the day – for believing that, for the BSW, the difference between correct and incorrect election procedures actually amounts to the one between being and not being in parliament. That implies, of course, that all those citizens who have voted for the BSW may well have been deprived of their proper democratic representation as foreseen by law. Is there a motive for foul play? You bet. The BSW, an insurgent party combining leftwing social with rightwing cultural and migration-policy positions, has been hounded as too friendly toward Russia because it is demanding peace in Ukraine; it also has been outspoken about its opposition to basing fresh US missiles in Germany and to Israel’s crimes as well. In Germany as it is now, these are all reasons for neo-McCarthyite smear campaigns and repression by – at least – dirty media tricks, all of which has already happened. It is entirely possible that a wave of deliberate local “mistakes” was added to that nasty tool box.

And, a slightly different issue, asserting the BSW’s legal rights now will be especially difficult, in particular because a revision of the election result to include the party in parliament would immediately upset the complicated arithmetic of government coalition building. The BSW and its voters, in short, may well have been cheated, and they may be cheated again in case they seek redress. The fact that one problem with those German elections has to do with voters living abroad rings a bell called Moldova, of course. There, last November, Maia Sandu narrowly won a presidential election that involved massively manipulating the outside-the-country vote. In essence, Moldovans abroad, especially in Russia, likely to vote against her were, in effect, disenfranchised by making it impossible for them to actually cast their vote; Moldovans more likely to vote for her, in the West, faced no such problems.

“We have switched off the sun and now we need to pay everyday for the heating… Every day you need to pay for ammunition, at least for several years, until Trump is dead.”

• EU Security Could ‘Crumble’ Without US Support – Politico (RT)

EU leaders fear that the post-World War II security architecture could “crumble any day” without US support, Politico reported on Wednesday, citing European officials familiar with the mood ahead of a crucial summit in Brussels. The sense of uncertainty and pessimism among Ukraine’s backers in Europe has only grown since US President Donald Trump reportedly halted all weapons deliveries to Kiev on Monday. “Defense spending is becoming a fixed cost,” a European diplomat told Politico. “We have switched off the sun and now we need to pay everyday for the heating… Every day you need to pay for ammunition, at least for several years, until Trump is dead.”

Top officials in the EU, UK, and Ukraine previously expressed frustration after Trump launched direct talks with Russia and publicly berated Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky, who he called “a dictator.” According to Politico, some officials from EU member states worry that the bloc’s response to Trump “could go horribly wrong.” The diplomats also reportedly have concerns that “a pro-Russia group” of leaders led by Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban is capable of “derailing” support for Ukraine. Orban, as well as Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico, have urged Brussels to drop unconditional military aid to Ukraine in favor of finding a diplomatic solution to the conflict.

According to Politico, Hungary has opposed the inclusion of a pledge to ensure further arms deliveries to Ukraine in the final statement from the upcoming summit of EU leaders. The EU will discuss further steps to back Ukraine and boost the bloc’s own defenses during a high-profile meeting in Brussels on Thursday. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has unveiled a plan to invest €800 billion ($863 billion) in the military capabilities of member states. While Russia has welcomed the resumption of direct negotiations with the US, it stressed that no amount of Western aid will prevent it from achieving the goals of its military operation.

BlackRock for the win! Just lovely.

• US Consortium To Buy Panama Canal Ports (RT)

A Hong Kong-based company has announced plans to sell a controlling stake in a business operating two major ports on the Panama Canal to a consortium of investors led by an American multinational. The deal comes amid mounting pressure from US President Donald Trump over alleged Chinese influence on the crucial waterway. Addressing a special joint session of the two chambers of the US Congress on Tuesday, the US president claimed he is making a successful diplomatic push to reclaim the Panama Canal, which he describes as a vital infrastructure project created by Americans for Americans.

Asian logistics giant CK Hutchison Holdings will sell a 90% interest in Panama Ports Company to a consortium that includes US investment holding BlackRock, its subsidiary Global Infrastructure Partners, and Geneva-based container terminals major Terminal Investment, according to a joint statement issued by CK Hutchison and BlackRock on Tuesday. Panama Ports Company holds the contract to run the ports of Balboa and Cristobal, located at the Pacific and Atlantic entrances of the canal respectively, until 2047. The deal also covers the sale of an 80% stake of CK Hutchison’s ports subsidiaries operating 43 ports across 23 countries, including in the UK, Germany, Mexico, Australia, Argentina, and South Korea.

According to the statement, the agreement, valued at nearly $23 billion, including $5 billion in debt, does not have any interest in a trust that “operates ports in Hong Kong, Shenzhen and South China, or any other ports in China.”Shares of CK Hutchison, the market capitalization of which amounts to HK$148 billion ($19 billion) soared 22% in morning trading in Hong Kong on Wednesday. Trump has repeatedly threatened to take back control of the Panama Canal, citing “ridiculous fees” and concerns over China’s growing influence around the waterway, which was built by the US in the early 20th century and handed over to Panama in 1999. In February, Panamanian President Jose Raul Mulino made a concession to Washington by refusing to renew the country’s 2017 agreements with China under Beijing’s Belt and Road Initiative.

Horse

This horse waited his whole life for this moment

pic.twitter.com/vWvkFsYquC

— Science girl (@gunsnrosesgirl3) March 5, 2025

Pink dolphin
https://twitter.com/i/status/1897307827057852599

Mask

This is Poppy. Her pink silk sleeping mask fell off right before bedtime. Fortunately she only threw a very reasonably sized tantrum about the ordeal. 13/10 pic.twitter.com/CSmvFTNdjm

— WeRateDogs (@dog_rates) March 5, 2025

Water
https://twitter.com/i/status/1896986684480479727

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

Debt Rattle September 12 2022

Sep 122022

September 12, 2022 Posted by Raúl Ilargi Meijer at 8:14 am Finance Tagged with: blackout, climate policy, dollar shortage, grid, intel sharing, mass formation, Trump, WTC 74 Responses »

Claude Monet Éretrat sunset 1882-3

• Ukraine Suffers Massive Blackout After ‘Russian Strikes’ (RT)

• Ukraine Says It’s Repaired Damaged Power Infrastructure (RT)

• Ukraine Lost Thousands Of Soldiers In Counteroffensive – Moscow (RT)

• Ukraine and US Increased Intel-sharing Prior To Counteroffensive – NYT (RT)

• Is the US Sacrificing Europe to Maintain Global Dominance? (Armstrong)

• Belgium PM Fears “Severe Risk Of Social Unrest”

• Europe To Blame For Electricity Crisis – Former Austrian FM (RT)

• Talks With Ukraine Still On The Table – Russia (RT)

• Climate Policy Is a Much Greater Threat Than Climate Change (Mish)

• US Creates Dollar Shortage As Russia Creates Oil, Gas & Grain Shortage (Peters)

• A Different Take on the Dismissal of the Trump v Clinton Lawsuit (CTH)

• Instagram Fact-checks Trump WTC Photo As ‘Missing Context’ (PM) s

• Mass Formation Hypnosis Disorder (CJ Hopkins)

• ‘Unethical’ and up to 98 Times Worse Than the Disease (ET)

Ukraine cannot win this war. But it can win peace.

Fuellmilch

Dr. R.einer F.uellmich and his dang c.onspiracy t.heories.pic.twitter.com/Q0qD2kvgEi

— NEWSNANCY (@NewsNancy9) September 11, 2022

Tried to find some western sources for this, but they all say this was done in retaliation for Ukraine “successes”, which they can’t prove, and then just lazily cite Zelensky verbatim. And I can’t even remember the last time he said something true. So we’re stuck with RT.

• Ukraine Suffers Massive Blackout After ‘Russian Strikes’ (RT)

Multiple regions of southeastern Ukraine suffered electricity shortages and blackouts late on Sunday. President Vladimir Zelensky has said the cause was missile attacks by Moscow on “critical infrastructure.” Full blackouts have hit Kharkov and Donetsk regions, Zelensky said in a social media post, apparently referring to the Ukrainian-controlled part of Donetsk People’s Republic. Sumy, Dnepropetrovsk, Poltava, Zaporozhye and Odessa regions have been hit by partial blackouts, according to the president, who blamed the incident on “Russian terrorists.” So, far Moscow has remained silent on the matter, neither confirming nor denying its involvement. Still, the incident has been preceded by a reported launch of multiple cruise missiles from Russian ships positioned in the Black and Caspian Seas.

Footage circulating online shows the aftermath of the purported attacks, with firefighters trying to extinguish flames at what appear to be power plants. Another video, purportedly shot in Poltava, shows a trolleybus that caught fire, apparently due to a power surge in the grid. The blackout has affected the operations of Ukrainian railways, which reported delays across the country. It also brought the subway system in the eastern city of Kharkov to a halt the, footage circulating online purports to show. So, far, emergency services have managed to restore power supply only in Poltava, Sumy and Dnepropetrovsk regions, according to Ukrainian media reports.

I think this was just a warning shot, not an attempt to kill the grid. There are ways to do that.

• Ukraine Says It’s Repaired Damaged Power Infrastructure (RT)

Blackouts allegedly caused by Russian strikes on the Ukrainian power grid were partially dealt with overnight, according to President Vladimir Zelensky’s deputy chief-of-staff. In a Telegram post, Kirill Timoshenko reported the full restoration of electricity supplies in the Ukrainian cities of Sumy, Dnepropetrovsk and Poltava. Grid capacity in Kharkov region, which was the scene of a successful Ukrainian counter-offensive last week, was at 80% on Monday morning, according to the official. The Mayor of Kharkov, Igor Terekhov, said on Monday morning that the city’s subway and trolleybus systems were back online and that the water supply would be fully restored during the day. Electric-powered transport was paralysed during the Sunday outage.

Kiev blamed the blackouts in several of its regions on Russian missile attacks targeting power stations and key nodes of the transmission grid. The Russian military has neither confirmed nor denied carrying out such attacks. The purported Russian military action on Sunday followed Ukraine’s counter-offensive in the north of the country. Last week, Kiev forced Russian troops to leave a swath of previously captured territory in Kharkov region. Kiev called it a major success for its military and a harbinger of further victories on the battlefield. Moscow has described the loss of territory as a temporary setback, necessary to win time for regrouping Russian troops.

12,000 in 5 days. Over 4,000 killed and another 8,000 injured.

Gonzalo Lira: “Assuming that Dima at Military Summary channel is correct (and I think he is), in these past two weeks of offensives, Ukraine lost +10,000 and another +20,000 wounded.”

As the Russians reportedly mostly just walked away these past few days.

• Ukraine Lost Thousands Of Soldiers In Counteroffensive – Moscow

Ukrainian military casualties in just five days of its counteroffensive exceeded 12,000, Russia’s Defense Ministry has claimed. More than 4,000 Ukrainian troops were killed and another 8,000 injured between September 6 and 10 in the south and east of the country, ministry spokesman Lieutenant General Igor Konashenkov said during a daily briefing on Sunday. According to the official, Russian forces conducted “precision strikes” with missiles and artillery targeting pro-Kiev units in Kharkov region, from where Russian troops retreated earlier as part of what Moscow described as “redeployment.” Russia said its military has destroyed, among other things, numerous command posts and shot down a helicopter over the past few days.

The Defense Ministry also accused the Ukrainian troops of having shelled the Zaporozhye nuclear power plant 26 times since September 1. The Russia-controlled facility located in Ukraine’s southern Zaporozhye region was seized by Russian forces in early March, soon after Moscow launched its military operation. On Sunday, the last working reactor at the plant was switched off. According to a member of the region’s pro-Russian administration, the decision was made due to continued shelling of the plant by Ukraine and damage to the power lines. The constantly changing modes in which the reactors and turbines were forced to operate, because of the attacks, created the risk of an accident, Vladimir Rogov told RIA-Novosti.

Kiev and Moscow have been accusing each other of targeting the power plant and risking a nuclear disaster for several months now. In its Sunday briefing, the Russian Defense Ministry also alleged that the Ukrainian military was deliberately striking “energy infrastructure on liberated territories,” including in the Donetsk People’s Republic.

They want to advertize direct US involvement?!

• Ukraine and US Increased Intel-sharing Prior To Counteroffensive – NYT (RT)

Ukraine had stepped up intelligence-sharing with the US in preparation for its counteroffensive against the Russian forces in the Kharkov Region, The New York Times reported on Saturday. Despite Washington providing information on Russian command posts, ammunition depots and other targets to Kiev, Ukrainian officials had been reluctant earlier in the conflict to reveal operational plans to their US counterparts, over concerns that this “could highlight weaknesses and discourage continued American support,”the newspaper claimed. But it all changed during the summer as Kiev decided that sharing plans for its counteroffensive would, contrary to previous concerns, prompt Washington to provide Ukraine with even more assistance, unnamed senior US officials told the NYT.

This shift allowed the US to offer “better and more relevant information about Russian weaknesses,” the sources reported. They declined to expand on how much information has been shared between the sides or on how deep the Americans have been involved in the planning of the Ukrainian counteroffensive, the newspaper said. However, one official claimed that the US had“constantly” discussed with Ukraine ways that it could blunt the Russian advance in the east of the country.
The large-scale Ukrainian offensive with the use of weapons supplied by the US and other Western nations started in the north-eastern Kharkov Region on Thursday after Kiev’s attempts to advance in other areas failed.

On Saturday, Russia’s Defense Ministry announced the withdrawal of its troops from the city of Izyum and some other settlements in the region, saying that these are being regrouped in order “to build up efforts in the Donetsk direction.” During the operation, it added, the military had performed what it called a “number of distracting and demonstration activities imitating the real action of troops.” Ukrainian president Vladimir Zelensky celebrated the Russian retreat as a victory, but the NYT pointed out that “it is not yet clear how much broad strategic importance those gains [by Kiev] will have.” Moscow has many times warned Washington against providing weapons and sharing intelligence data with Ukraine, saying that the US risked becoming a party to the conflict through such actions.

“..they sacrificed their main supplier of energy to save a nation with a GDP of roughly only $200 billion..”

“The war in Ukraine has only promoted capital to rush into the dollar.”

• Is the US Sacrificing Europe to Maintain Global Dominance? (Armstrong)

Vladimir Putin believes that Washington is sacrificing Europe to maintain global dominance. The United States has always been the world police, and the top country that others turn to in times of crisis. America’s post-World War II status left it as the financial capital of the world, and the dollar has remained the world’s reserve currency. Nothing has topped the dollar. Europe attempted to create the European Union in an effort to prevent European conflicts, but it also created the euro to compete against the dollar. I explained various times how their attempts have failed. However, the euro is now beneath the dollar and on the decline. Nations maintain diplomatic relations, but only Schwab wants a one-world government as everyone is competing for global dominance.

Putin claims that the West rushed to place sanctions on Russia. There was indeed a rush to place sanctions on Russia despite Joe Biden himself coming out and admitting sanctions never work. Peace talks were never an option. Returning land or promising to curtail NATO was never an option. Sanctions and threats were immediately imposed. Why? “The pandemic has been replaced by new challenges of a global nature, carrying a threat to the whole world, I’m talking about the sanctions rush in the West and the West’s blatantly aggressive attempts to impose their modus vivendi on other countries, to take away their sovereignty, to submit them to their will,” Putin told delegates at Russia’s Eastern Economic Forum in the port city of Vladivostok on Russia’s Pacific coast, as reported by CNBC.

It is true that Europe is facing the brunt of these sanctions as they sacrificed their main supplier of energy to save a nation with a GDP of roughly only $200 billion. Europe did not want to allow Ukraine to join the euro, and they had no interest in the country prior to this conflict. The hatred for Russia runs deep in Europe, especially in Germany after Russia took hold of the east after the last World War. The politicians are certainly old enough to remember when Germany was split in two until 1989. There is a reason Russia’s integral support for the axis powers during World War II is diminished in Western history books. Putin went on to say that the standard of living in Europe and overall social and economic stability was “being thrown onto the fire of sanctions.” The United States has been eager to sanction Russia since the war in Syria began. Obama tried but failed to kick Russia out of the SWIFT system in 2014, with Christine Lagarde offering her support. Zelensky, who rand the NYSE bell this week remotely, admitted that he needed America to place harsh sanctions on Russia to accelerate the war.

“So far, I think that the United States of America is the accelerator of the sanction policies and I think they do more than any other country. And this is the way it should be because they are the most powerful country right now. I see the same support with respect to sanctions from the United Kingdom,” Zelensky told reporters at Fox in May. The dollar remains strong and is the last safe haven. The war in Ukraine has only promoted capital to rush into the dollar. So is Europe “being sacrificed in the name of preserving the US dictatorship in global affairs,” as Putin claims? Europe will suffer more than the United States due to these sanctions. In fact, had Biden not eliminated domestic oil production, the US would not be facing an energy crisis at all. One thing is clear – the support to Ukraine is not an act of kindness. The invisible hand is at play.

He’s said a few smart things. That won’t make him popular on the other side of Brussels.

• Belgium PM Fears “Severe Risk Of Social Unrest”

“A few weeks like this and the European economy will just go into a full stop…” That is the ominous warning of yet another EU leader who recognizes the needs of his people over the needs to signal virtue towards Ukraine (and against Putin “for the sake of democracy.”) Belgian Prime Minister Alexander De Croo warned that Europe needs to act immediately to address the energy crisis or risk the kind of fundamental economic shutdown that the bloc would struggle to recover from. During an interview with Bloomberg News, De Croo warned: “The risk of that is de-industrialization and severe risk of fundamental social unrest.”

Like a number of other EU leaders, who are rapidly diverging from Brussels bureaucrats on the path forward, the Belgium leader warns against unilateral action against Russia, urging “I honestly do not see any other choice than doing market interventions,” De Croo said. “We don’t get a second chance to prove as 450 million Europeans that we take things in our hands. What you are seeing today is a massive drainage of prosperity out of the European Union.” Specifically, Belgium’s federal government is calling for introducing broad price caps on gas markets rather than just on Russian imports “because Vladimir Putin already said that he would stop selling gas.”

“What you are seeing today is a massive drainage of prosperity out of the European Union,” De Cross concluded. “A cap on Russian gas only is a purely political objective,” Belgium’s energy minister doubled-down on De Croo’s warnings, adding that Belgium “will not agree to this” as it did not “see the added value in that.” On security of supply for gas and electricity this winter, De Croo reassured his people that Belgium will be fine (thought we are unclear how he knows that), but warned that if any European country gets into a situation of blackouts it will be a “gigantic problem for all of us.”

“..prices for electricity in the region saw a surge of up to 40% after April 2021, and have now soared nearly 400%..”

• Europe To Blame For Electricity Crisis – Former Austrian FM (RT)

The crisis affecting the electric power industry across Europe started in 2021 and was caused by European policymakers themselves, according to former Austrian foreign minister Karin Kneissl. “We had a crisis in the electric power industry even before the gas crisis began,” she said on Saturday in an interview with Russian news agency TASS. “That’s the result of the liberalization of the past 15-18 years, and we have been going through this since April 2021, for more than a year so far,” Kneissl added. According to the former foreign minister, the electricity market in Europe is not a classic supply-and-demand market anymore, and is now operating “in accordance with some incomprehensible principles.”

She added that the market had been redirected with a preference for renewable energy, and had turned into a unbalanced one as a result. “The electricity market, despite the role of renewable energy sources, is still highly dependent on gas prices, even when more electricity is generated from renewable sources,” Kneissl said. The former minister stressed that prices for electricity in the region saw a surge of up to 40% after April 2021, and have now soared nearly 400%, inevitably dragging households’ finances down.

“For manufacturers, for the industrial sector, the situation is even worse. There’s already a movement in the UK – it’s not [part of] the EU, but it might spread further – where people are simply boycotting their electricity bills,” she said, noting that the electricity crisis had begun prior to the gas crunch. Kneissl attributed the crisis to the significant reduction in investment in oil and gas projects, explaining that supply was declining while demand remained. “The demand has been growing after the pandemic. It was quite calm during the pandemic for a year and a half,” she said. “And we can still be glad that in China demand remains at a fairly low level, since they are introducing quite a lot of lockdowns,” Kneissl added.

“Nobody needs a meeting for the sake of a meeting”: Kremlin press-secretary Dmitry Peskov.

• Talks With Ukraine Still On The Table – Russia (RT)

Moscow is not giving up on the idea of peace talks with Kiev, but the sides need to start negotiations sooner rather than later, Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said. “We don’t reject the negotiations; we’re not giving up on the negotiations” with Ukraine, Lavrov told the Rossiya 1 channel. “Those who reject them must understand that the longer this process is delayed, the harder it will be to reach an agreement,” he added in an apparent reference to the authorities in Kiev. Lavrov noted that Russia’s President Vladimir Putin earlier voiced the same stance on peace talks. The conflicting sides have not sat down at the negotiating table since talks in Istanbul in late March.

Russia, which initially expressed optimism on the peace process, later accused Kiev of backtracking on the progress achieved in Turkey, saying it had lost trust in the Ukrainian negotiators. Russian officials warned that Moscow’s demands would be more extensive if the talks were to restart. In recent months, Ukraine has been either putting forward terms that Moscow deemed ‘unrealistic’ for the resumption of the negotiations, or said that they can only begin after Russia is defeated on the battlefield. Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky has also claimed on several occasions that he wanted to discuss the outcome of the conflict directly with President Putin.

But Moscow’s position has been that the two leaders should only meet to sign concrete agreements, prepared for them by the negotiators. “Nobody needs a meeting for the sake of a meeting,” Kremlin press-secretary Dmitry Peskov said earlier this week. Ukraine launched a major counter-offensive in the north-eastern Kharkov region earlier this week after attempts to advance in other areas failed. On Saturday, Russia withdrew its forces from Izuym and some other settlements in the area, saying that they will be regrouped “to build up efforts in the Donetsk direction.”

The people who make the policies don’t know a thing about energy.

• Climate Policy Is a Much Greater Threat Than Climate Change (Mish)

Germany’s decision to scrap its nuclear reactors before having replacement energy is in play. In April, then UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson bragged his Energy Security Strategy would “bring clean, affordable, secure power to the people for generations to come.” In the US, California marches on with the blessing of president Biden, preposterous targets for electric cars without having the faintest idea where the minerals and mining for those batteries will come from. The Wall Street Journal comments on the Coming Global Crisis of Climate Policy. A crisis isn’t coming, it’s already here, and obviously so.

“The Federal Reserve, Bank of England and European Central Bank, among others, want to know how global temperature variations a century hence might weigh on Citi’s or Barclays’ or Deutsche Bank’s capital and risk weightings today. The fad is for quantifying, with preposterous faux-precision, the costs of reinsuring flood risks, or fire, or the depressed corporate profits of a dystopian hotter future. Well, if you seek “climate risk” to financial stability, look around you. It has arrived, although in exactly the opposite manner to what our current crop of eco-financiers predicted. Europe’s plight tells a tale that could become all too familiar in the U.S. soon.

The U.K. may be facing a wave of business bankruptcies exceeding anything witnessed during the post-2008 panic and recession. Some 100,000 firms could be forced into insolvency in coming months, bankruptcy consultancy Red Flag Alert warned this week. These are otherwise healthy firms with at least £1 million in annual revenue. Business failures on this scale would dwarf the roughly 65,000 firms of any size that went under from 2008-10. Matters are probably worse in Germany, the eurozone’s largest economy. Some 73% of small and medium-sized enterprises in one survey reported feeling heavy pressure from energy prices, and 10% of those say they believe they face “existential” threats to their businesses over the next six months. And that poll, from the small-business association BMD, is the optimistic one. [..]

Policy decisions by clueless heads of state bow down to Saint Gretta, AOC, and president Biden. They have put in place an inflationary inferno that central bankers do not know how to stop. Even more ridiculous, President Biden, Elizabeth Warren and others want the Fed to take on a third mandate and stress test the economic impact of continued rise in temperature. What needs to be stress tested is the reverse, the inflationary impact of a push for clean energy before battery storage technology exists, grid improvements exist, and whether or not physical metals for all the batteries that will be needed are even available.

With the shift into SCO, BRICS et al, who will be hurt most?

• US Creates Dollar Shortage As Russia Creates Oil, Gas & Grain Shortage (Peters)

“We must cut Russia’s revenues which Putin uses to finance this atrocious war,” said European Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen, discussing a proposal to cap the price of Russian gas. There are no easy solutions to Europe’s energy crisis, just a range of suboptimal outcomes, each of which carries unknown costs in a world growing increasingly uncertain. Making difficult decisions is always hard and subjects all involved to unintended consequences. But in a world trending toward ever greater economic integration the risk of unexpectedly bad outcomes is more muted than in periods of conflict, division, deglobalization. The reason for this (as Zoltan Pozsar pointed out two weeks ago) is a matter of trust.

When we trust that we are all competitors striving for a greater share of a more prosperous common future, the price of misjudgments and misunderstandings is relatively lower than in a world filled with real and perceived adversaries who expect the worst from one another. “We will not supply gas, oil, coal, heating oil – we will not supply anything,” said Putin in response to Ursula’s statement. In recent years, the possibility that such stark outcomes might manifest were seen by consensus as pure fancy. But those innocent times have passed, perhaps not to return for decades. The Japanese continued to cap government bond yields, intervening in markets to monetize their enormous debts. The yen extended its dramatic losses as markets prepare for another 75bp rate hike from the Fed.

The US is naturally doing what it sees as in its national interest, creating a shortage of dollars, just like Russia is doing in oil and gas, grain, and fertilizer (perhaps someday we will suffer a shortage of Taiwan’s chips). Without an ample and growing supply of dollars, the global economy sputters, markets too. Then things break. In more peaceful times, the Americans rarely adjusted domestic policy to help foreigners until the overseas problem washed ashore here at home. And we are now left to wonder how such decisions will be made in a world without trust.

“sundance” argues that Trump’s lawyers expected the case to be dismissed, but filed it anyway, because now everything in it is “on the record”.

• A Different Take on the Dismissal of the Trump v Clinton Lawsuit (CTH)

[..] when I originally read the 108-page lawsuit filed in March, it took me a few moments, and then I realized this was not a lawsuit; this was a legal transfer mechanism created by lawyers to establish a proprietary information silo. Second, because I do not want another ridiculous subpoena from DC simply because they can’t fathom how any outside entity could solve a puzzle without insider assistance. As to the former, I have prayed on it and come to the opinion it’s worth sharing. As to the latter, it’s just another waste of taxpayer funds, but whatever – the truth has no agenda. So, here’s a totally different take on the issues surrounding the Trump -v- Clinton lawsuit, which -from the outset- I always believed was going to be dismissed because suing all of those characters under the auspices of a civil RICO case was never the objective.

However, in the aftermath, the silo created by the lawsuit is also grounded upon attorney-client privilege, a legal countermeasure to a predictable DOJ-NSD lawfare maneuver, which unfolded in the Mar-a-Lago raid and ongoing issues. In March 2022 President Trump filed a civil lawsuit against: Hillary Clinton, Hillary for America Campaign Committee, DNC, DNC Services Corp, Perkins Coie, Michael Sussmann, Marc Elias, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Charles Dolan, Jake Sullivan, John Podesta, Robby Mook, Phillipe Reines as well as Fusion GPS, Glenn Simpson, Peter Fritsch, Nellie Ohr, Bruce Ohr, Orbis Business Intelligence, Christopher Steele, Igor Danchenko, Neustar Inc., Rodney Joffe, James Comey Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, Kevin Clinesmith and Andrew McCabe.

When I was about one-third of the way through reading the lawsuit, I initially stopped and said to myself this is going to take a lot of documentary evidence to back up the claims in the assertions. Dozens of attachments would be needed and hundreds of citations to the dozens of attachments would be mandatory. Except, they were not there. After reading further, while completely understanding the background material that was being described in the filing, I realized this wasn’t a lawsuit per se’. The 108-pages I was holding in my hands was more akin to legal transfer mechanism from President Trump to lawyers who needed it. The filing was contingent upon a series of documents that would be needed to support the claims within it.

Whoever wrote the lawsuit had obviously reviewed the evidence to support the filing. However, the attachments and citations were missing. That was weird. That’s when I realized the purpose of the lawsuit. In hindsight, things became clear when the DOJ-NSD raided the home of Donald Trump, and suddenly the motive to confiscate the documents that would be the missing lawsuit attachments and citations surfaced. With the manipulative, and I say intentional, “ongoing investigation” angle of the John Durham probe essentially blocking public release of declassified documents showing the efforts of all the lawsuit participants (Trump-Russia Collusion Hoax), President Trump needed a legal way to secure and more importantly share the evidence.

Think of it like the people around Trump wanting to show lawyers the evidence in the documents. However, because of the construct of the lawfare being deployed against Trump, any lawyer would need a *reason* to review the evidence. The Trump -v- Clinton et al lawsuit becomes that ‘reason.’ [..] If the documents seized by the FBI were part of the lawsuit established by President Trump and his legal team via Trump -v- Clinton, then the material seized is all attorney client work product. Lawfully obtained, constitutionally declassified and legally protected material. sThis is where the ‘special master’ will play a key role.

Don’t think there’s any doubt that Trump loves NYC.

• Instagram Fact-checks Trump WTC Photo As ‘Missing Context’ (PM)

In honor of the 21st anniversary of the attacks on the World Trade Center, Human Events Daily’s Jack Posobiec posted a photo of Donald Trump visiting Ground Zero in 2001. In response to the Instagram post, showing Trump at that horrific scene so many years ago, Instagram posted a “fact-check,” reading: “Missing Context. The same information was reviewed by independent fact-checkers in another post.” Posobiec’s comment was “No one told him to go. He went anyway.” The photo is credited to Getty Images. The fact-check was posted on the photo, despite no claims being made other than that Trump was there. Instagram’s parent Meta’s algorithms appear to be looking to discredit Trump, even when there is nothing to discredit.

Opening up the message brings readers to a fact-check showing two fact checks. Lead Stories says that the conclusion of their fact check is that the post has “missing context,” by which they explain that there is “No evidence that Donald Trump paid hundreds of workers to help with search and rescue after 9/11.” This is a fact check on a photo showing Trump at the site of the terrorist attack in 2001. It made no claims other than that he was there, which he was. A fact-check from Snopes states that their conclusion is that the post is “partly false,” giving as “more information” the question “Was Donald Trump at Ground Zero searching for survivors two days at 9/11 with workers he paid for?” This on a fact-check of a photo which made no additional claims. Snopes’ rating as to whether or not Trump brought employees down to Ground Zero is recorded as “unproven.”

It was years later that a meme, using the same Getty photo, began circulating that was captioned: “2 days after the September 11th attacks Donald Trump was at ground zero with hundreds of workers that he payed for, to help find and identify victims.” Trump visited Ground Zero on September 13, 2001, two days after the attacks. According to The New York Times, Trump had said “Many of those affected were firefighters, police officers and other first responders. And I was down there also, but I’m not considering myself a first responder. But I was down there. I spent a lot of time down there with you” at a speaking event years later. Others said he wasn’t there for extended periods of time. Trump said in 2001 that “I have a lot of men down here right now. We have over 100 and we have 125 coming. So we’ll have a couple of hundred people down here.”

He added: “We will be involved in some form helping to reconstruct.” The reconstruction efforts were led by the City of New York, and Larry Silverstein, who was the existing developer of the property. At a 2016 speaking event in Buffalo, NY, Trump said “Everyone who helped clear the rubble — and I was there, and I watched, and I helped a little bit — but I want to tell you: Those people were amazing. Clearing the rubble. Trying to find additional lives. You didn’t know what was going to come down on all of us — and they handled it.” Trump was a private citizen in 2001, a native New Yorker, and a local businessman.

CJ Hopkins is not impressed with Mattias Desmet.

• Mass Formation Hypnosis Disorder (CJ Hopkins)

Well, gosh, this is kind of embarrassing. For approximately the last two and a half years, I have been documenting, analyzing, and occasionally satirizing the so-called “New Normal,” i.e., the new, pathologized, official ideology that has been rolled out all across the planet by the global-capitalist ruling classes under the pretext of combating an apocalyptic pandemic … or at least that’s what I thought was going on. As it turns out, I was totally wrong. Apparently, the global-capitalist ruling establishment (or “GloboCap,” as I often refer to the unaccountable, supranational network of global corporations, banks, governments, and non-governmental governing entities that unaccountably govern our world) has not been rolling out a new official ideology, or pathologized form of totalitarianism, or not intentionally in any event.

No one has been methodically gaslighting anyone, or terrorizing anyone with propaganda, or censoring or segregating anyone, or coercing anyone to get needlessly “vaccinated” with any sort of dangerous experimental drugs, or consciously conspiring with anyone to do anything. Everyone has simply been suffering from Mass Formation Hypnosis Disorder! I know, you probably find this hard to believe, especially because I have been making precisely the opposite case for over two years now, but I saw it on the Alex Jones show! Mattias Desmet, a professor from Belgium, and “the world’s leading expert” on this new disorder, explained it all in meticulous detail.

According to Desmet, the way this disorder works is, people feel “lonely and isolated,” which makes them feel angry, but they don’t have anything or anyone to unleash their anger on, so they form a mass and hypnotize each other, and invent a new fanatical ideology that they all fanatically hypnotically believe in, which, at that point, their rulers, who are also hypnotized, have no choice but to go full-totalitarian, and hypnotize everyone even more, because that is what the hypnotized mass demands, so that they can finally unleash their anger on someone, i.e., those who have managed to avoid being hypnotized (one assumes with some special anti-hypnosis technology, but I don’t think Professor Desmet explained that part). And, OK, before you hypnosis deniers start sending me emails denying the power of hypnosis to totally totalitarianize society, listen to Professor Desmet explain how surgeons in Belgium are routinely performing open-heart surgery on hypnotized patients without any anesthetic whatsoever!

They just saw right through their breastbones with a sternum saw, ratchet open their rib cages with a sternal retractor, and start slicing into the patients’ hearts … and these patients don’t even flinch or anything! He has witnessed this with his own two eyes! Or, all right, it seems he hasn’t actually witnessed this with his own two eyes. It seems he was actually just lying when he said that, which he confessed to in a lengthy Facebook post (after people pointed out that he had lied) in which he publicly wondered why he had lied, and then rationalized his lie with various excuses, and posted several misleading links in an attempt to suggest that he hadn’t actually lied, despite the fact that he had just admitted he did, and just generally tried to muddy the waters with a lot of awkward psychobabble.

“22,000 to 30,000 Previously Unaffected Young Adults Must be Vaccinated to Prevent Just 1 Hospitalization..”

• ‘Unethical’ and up to 98 Times Worse Than the Disease (ET)

A team of nine experts from Harvard, Johns Hopkins, and other top universities has published paradigm-shifting research about the efficacy and safety of the COVID-19 vaccines and why mandating vaccines for college students is unethical. This 50-page study, which was published on The Social Science Research Network at the end of August, analyzed CDC and industry-sponsored data on vaccine adverse events, and concluded that mandates for COVID-19 boosters for young people may cause 18 to 98 actual serious adverse events for each COVID-19 infection-related hospitalization theoretically prevented. [..] As the study pointed out, students at universities in America, Canada, and Mexico are being told they must have a third dose of the vaccines against COVID-19 or be disenrolled.

Unvaccinated high school students who are just starting college are also being told the COVID-19 vaccines are “mandatory” for attendance. These mandates are widespread. There are currently 15 states which continue to honor philosophical (personal belief) exemptions, and 44 states and Washington, D.C. allow religious exemptions to vaccines. But even in these states, private universities are telling parents they will not accept state-recognized vaccine exemptions. Against a backdrop of confusing and often changing public health recommendations and booster fatigue, the authors of this new paper argue that university booster mandates are unethical. They give five specific reasons for this bold claim:

1) Lack of policymaking transparency. The scientists pointed out that no formal and scientifically rigorous risk-benefit analysis of whether boosters are helpful in preventing severe infections and hospitalizations exists for young adults. 2) Expected harm. A look at the currently available data shows that mandates will result in what the authors call a “net expected harm” to young people. This expected harm will exceed the potential benefit from the boosters. 3) Lack of efficacy. The vaccines have not effectively prevented transmission of COVID-19. Given how poorly they work—the authors call this “modest and transient effectiveness”—the expected harms caused by the boosters likely outweigh any benefits to public health. 4) No recourse for vaccine-injured young adults. Forcing vaccination as a prerequisite to attend college is especially problematic because young people injured by these vaccines will likely not be able to receive compensation for these injuries. 5) Harm to society. Mandates, the authors insisted, ostracize unvaccinated young adults, excluding them from education and university employment opportunities. Coerced vaccination entails “major infringements to free choice of occupation and freedom of association,” the scientists wrote, especially when “mandates are not supported by compelling public health justification.”

The lack of effectiveness of the vaccines is a major concern to these researchers. Based on their analysis of the public data provided to the CDC, they estimated that between 22,000 and 30,000 previously uninfected young adults would need to be boosted with an mRNA vaccine to prevent just a single hospitalization. However, this estimate does not take into account the protection conferred by a previous infection. So, the authors insisted, “this should be considered a conservative and optimistic assessment of benefit.” In other words, the mRNA vaccines against COVID-19 are essentially useless. But the documented lack of efficacy is only part of the problem. The researchers further found that per every one COVID-19 hospitalization prevented in young adults who had not previously been infected with COVID-19, the data show that 18 to 98 “serious adverse events” will be caused by the vaccinations themselves. These events include up to three times as many booster-associated myocarditis in young men than hospitalizations prevented, and as many as 3,234 cases of other side effects so serious that they interfere with normal daily activities.

Stoltenberg

How they built the proxy army against #Russia: #NATO boss @jensstoltenberg – although #Ukraine is not a #NATO member we have armed and trained them since the #Kiev coup of 2014. pic.twitter.com/R4O12ulGSz

— tim anderson (@timand2037) September 11, 2022

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