Apr 202025
 


Edward Hopper The long leg 1935

 

Opposition to ‘Eurofascism’ Driving US and Russia Closer – Spy Agency (RT)
Russia Announces Easter Ceasefire (RT)
European Union Bans Commemorating The Defeat of Nazi Germany (SCF)
Trump Administration Plans To Send Envoy Witkoff To Russia Again – CNN (RT)
Scott Ritter: Rubio’s Threats to Quit Ukraine Talks Look Like Sabotage (Sp.)
US Threats To Quit Ukraine Talks Aimed at Kiev Rather Than Moscow (TASS)
US Sets Timeline For Kiev To Agree To Ceasefire (RT)
Germany Wants The UK To Hold Its Hand While It Starts WWIII (Marsden)
Moldova Wages War On Christians To Please Its EU Overlords (Romanenko)
Will Trump’s Tariffs Hurt GOP in Midterms? (Caldwell)
US, Iran Agree To Enter Next Phase Of Nuclear Negotiations (JTN)
Trump On Deported Migrant: ‘He’s Got MS-13 Tattooed’ On His Knuckles (JTN)
SCOTUS Order Pauses Deportations Under Alien Enemies Act (Allen)
SCOTUS Blocks Deportation of Alleged Venezuela Gang Members for Now (ET)
SCOTUS Halts Venezuelan Deportations, 4th Circuit Upholds Garcia Order (Turley)
Judge Blocks Trump’s Order Ending ‘X’ Gender Marker on Passports (ET)
Tesla Continues to Reign Supreme Despite Leftist Violence (Blackmon)

 

 

 

 

90 days

Cernovich
https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1913298101915238458

Tish
https://twitter.com/LynneBP_294/status/1913223009462010142

DEI

injunctions

Left

Ireland

Conor

 

 

 

 

“.. work together to prevent “a new global conflict” and confront “possible provocations both from Ukraine and from the ‘maddened Europeans’..”

Opposition to ‘Eurofascism’ Driving US and Russia Closer – Spy Agency (RT)

The US and Russia are natural allies against “Eurofascism” and the tyrannical tendencies prevalent in Western European countries, Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) has said. The spy agency published a text on its website on Wednesday titled ‘Eurofascism, just as 80 years ago, is the common enemy for Moscow and Washington.’ The SVR argued that Europe has a “historical predisposition” to “various forms of totalitarianism that periodically produce devastating, global-scale conflicts.” It cited the Reign of Terror during the French Revolution and the “bloody actions” of Napoleon as examples. It also referenced the Charlemagne Division of the SS, made up of volunteers from Nazi-occupied France.

The agency credited French author Pierre Drieu la Rochelle, who collaborated with Nazi Germany, with introducing “the concept of Eurofascism… and its ideology.” According to the SVR, la Rochelle believed that “Eurofascism … [is] inherent not only to the Germans but to other European ‘societies’ as well.” The agency cited unnamed experts as saying that the current rift between the US and the EU facilitates a “situational rapprochement of Washington and Moscow.” “The United States is free due to the willingness of the ancestors of modern Americans to confront such dictatorships as the British Monarchy or the Jacobin Revolution,” it said. The SVR claimed that “conservative expert circles in the USA believe that the British elite … is very much inclined to commit the gravest crimes against humanity.”

“America felt the effect of similar inclinations of the British back in August of 1814, when the British troops occupied Washington, burned the Capitol and the White House,” the SVR claimed. The agency said that “foreign expert circles” are hopeful that Russia and the US will work together to prevent “a new global conflict” and confront “possible provocations both from Ukraine and from the ‘maddened Europeans’ traditionally urged on by Great Britain.” The statement was released as the US is attempting to broker a ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine. Russian officials said that, unlike the Biden administration, President Donald Trump and his team have shown a readiness to listen to Moscow’s positions and understand the root causes of the conflict.

Read more …

It took just seconds for Zelensky to claim Russia was violating its own ceasefire. And that is the only newsbit broadcast all across the west.

Russia Announces Easter Ceasefire (RT)

Russian President Vladimir Putin has announced a temporary Easter pause in hostilities with Ukraine, which is slated to begin at 18:00 Moscow time on Saturday and last until midnight on April 21. The announcement came during his meeting with Chief of the General Staff Valery Gerasimov in Moscow. Putin expressed hope that Kiev would demonstrate goodwill and adhere to the ceasefire. ”At the same time, our troops must be prepared to respond to any violations or provocations by the adversary, to any aggressive actions,” he said. Putin stated that Ukraine’s reaction to the ceasefire would be a clear indicator of whether Kiev is sincerely willing to engage in negotiations to end the conflict. The president referenced the US-brokered 30-day energy infrastructure truce agreed to on March 18, accusing Ukraine of violating it.

“We know that the Kiev regime has violated the agreement on pausing energy infrastructure strikes more than a hundred times,” Putin explained. “Therefore, I ask you [Gerasimov] to remain extremely vigilant and prepared for an immediate and full-force response.” Shortly after Putin’s statement, the Russian Defense Ministry confirmed the ceasefire, calling on Kiev to reciprocate. ”The ceasefire is being introduced for humanitarian purposes and will be observed by the Russian Joint Group of Troops, provided it is mutually observed by the Kiev regime,” the ministry said. While Kiev did not immediately provide a clear response to Putin’s announcement, it appeared to reject the temporary truce. Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky branded it an attempt to “play with human lives,” claiming that swarms of Russian kamikaze drones were detected in the country’s skies at 17:15 Moscow time.

The drones “in our skies show Putin’s true attitude to Easter and human lives,” Zelensky said in a statement. According to RT war correspondent Andrey Filatov, reporting from the Pokrovsk (Krasnoarmeysk) area in Donetsk People’s Republic, multiple violations of the ceasefire were observed within an hour of it taking effect. Ukrainian forces in the area have been actively using drones, mortars and heavy artillery, striking Russian positions with cluster munitions. Earlier this week, Moscow suggested a full long-term ceasefire with Ukraine was highly unlikely, given Kiev’s long history of broken promises and violations of previous deals.

Speaking to reporters at UN headquarters on Thursday, Russian envoy Vassily Nebenzia said there are “big issues with the comprehensive ceasefire,” referencing the fate of the long-defunct Minsk agreements, as well as repeated violations of a US-brokered 30-day moratorium on energy infrastructure strikes. In the meantime, Washington has signaled that time is running out for finding a solution to the Ukraine conflict. On Friday, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the Trump administration was prepared to throw in the towel soon. “We need to figure out here now, within a matter of days, whether this is doable in the short term. Because if it’s not, then I think we’re just going to move on,” Rubio stated.

Read more …

In case you were wondering what the EU stands for. This should be hard to believe. Unfortunately, it is not.

European Union Bans Commemorating The Defeat of Nazi Germany (SCF)

The European Union is warning European leaders not to attend the 80th anniversary of Victory Day in Moscow on May 9. Ostensibly, the rationale for such a ban is that Russia is allegedly waging a war against Ukraine and threatening the rest of Europe, according to the EU. That’s one way of seeing it. Another way of seeing the matter is that the conflict in Ukraine is a proxy war sponsored by the EU and NATO to defeat Russia, eight decades after Nazi Germany failed to do it. The Euro elites who have come to dominate policymaking share the same fascist mentality. No wonder, then, that they are against attending the 80th anniversary event in Moscow next month. They need to sully that event by way of covering up their despicable politics. The event marking the defeat of Nazi Germany and fascism in Europe is a massively important historical date for the entire world.

Eighty years ago, on May 9, 1945, the Soviet Red Army crushed the Nazi regime in Berlin thereby ending the most horrific war in human history. Up to 27 million Soviet citizens – perhaps more – gave their lives in the epic struggle to defeat Nazi Germany and its fascist European allies, including Vichy France, Italy, Hungary, Finland and the Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. Russia holds the honor of liberating Europe from the evil of fascism. By comparison, the other anti-fascist allies of the United States and Britain lost less than 5 per cent of the casualties that the Soviet citizens endured. It is fitting that many international leaders are attending the Victory Day parade in Moscow this year. They include China’s Xi Jinping and India’s Narendra Modi. Many others, however, will not be in Moscow, which is lamentable.

The American President Donald Trump and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer should be present to pay respects to the soldiers and civilians who sacrificed their lives. Deplorably, the toxic politics that have poisoned relations between Western states and Russia have rendered such participation impossible. What is all the more appalling, however, is the explicit ban on European leaders attending the celebrations in Moscow. This week, Kaja Kallas, the European Union’s Commissioner for Foreign Affairs, issued a warning that any politicians who went to Moscow would face severe consequences. Kallas, who was formerly the prime minister of the tiny Baltic state of Estonia, was appointed last year as the EU’s most senior official on foreign policy. One of those defying orders is Slovakian Prime Minister Robert Fico. He rebuked Kallas for daring to tell him, as the leader of a sovereign nation, where and where not to go.

He added: “I will go to Moscow to pay respects to thousands of Red Army soldiers who died liberating Slovakia.” Fico was elected on a platform calling for friendly relations with Russia and an end to the NATO proxy war in Ukraine. He has consistently opposed sending more military aid to the Kiev regime. Last year, Fico survived an assassination attempt in which he was shot by a gunman motivated by pro-Ukraine politics. Of particular note, the European Union’s sanctions on politicians attending the Victory Day commemoration in Moscow are targeting candidate states joining the 27-member bloc. Kallas threatened that their candidacy could be cancelled. They include the Balkan nations of Albania, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Serbia, as well as Moldova and Georgia. Nevertheless, Serbian President Aleksander Vucic stated that he would be going to Moscow despite intense pressure from Brussels.

“We are proud of our struggle against fascism, and that was the key reason why I accepted the invitation”, said Vucic. He spoke, however, of the sinister leverage on his government. “It seems to me that the sky is about to fall on my head due to the pressure surrounding the trip to Moscow,” said the Serbian president, who added that his country was being destabilized by outside agitators. The unseemly controversy over the Victory Day parade in Moscow serves to highlight the growing malevolent tendencies of the EU. Increasingly, the bloc’s centralization of political power is becoming more authoritarian and hostile towards Russia. Any dissent among the EU members questioning the bloc’s support for the proxy war in Ukraine is ruthlessly suppressed with threats of political and economic sanctions.

The EU leadership, under Russophobic autocrats like European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and Kaja Kallas, is implicated in suppressing elections in Romania, Moldova and Georgia to prevent parties that are calling for an end to the war in Ukraine and better relations with Russia. The recent dubious prosecution in France of nationalist politician Marine Le Pen, who has been critical of NATO’s proxy war, is another baleful example of the EU moving to crush dissent. It is startling how much the EU has come to operate like a fascist bloc. Policy decisions about funding a NeoNazi regime in Ukraine to fight a proxy war against Russia are being made by Russophobic elites with no democratic accountability.

Read more …

This will be visit no. 4. Putin and Trump now know from each other what they want, not just what they say they want.

This is the first time that I see Witkoff saying a peace deal would include not only the recognition of Crimea as Russian, but also the other 4 regions.

Trump Administration Plans To Send Envoy Witkoff To Russia Again – CNN (RT)

US President Donald Trump’s administration is planning one more meeting between special envoy Steve Witkoff and senior Russian officials to get Moscow on board with its vision for peace in the Ukraine conflict, CNN has claimed, citing an anonymous source. Witkoff has already met with Russian President Vladimir Putin three times this year as the US president tries to broker a ceasefire between Kiev and Moscow. In its article on Saturday, CNN further quoted its source as saying that Washington’s plan, which was reportedly presented to Ukrainian officials and several European leaders during a top-level meeting in Paris on Thursday, envisages a ceasefire along the current front line. The US government also supposedly signaled a willingness to recognize Crimea as Russian territory.

Commenting on his meeting with Putin in Moscow last Friday, Witkoff told Fox News on Monday that the nearly five-hour talks were “compelling” and that the Kremlin is seeking a lasting solution to the Ukraine conflict. Trump’s special envoy claimed that Moscow and Kiev “might be on the verge of something that would be very, very important for the world at large.” According to the US official, any potential peace deal would include the recognition of Crimea, the Donetsk, and Lugansk People’s Republics, and Kherson and Zaporozhye Regions as part of Russia. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters on Tuesday that while there were “no clear outlines of any agreement yet,” Moscow values the “constructive and substantive” contact with the US.

Witkoff’s remarks did not sit well with Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky, who on Thursday accused Trump’s envoy of “wittingly or unwittingly spreading Russian narratives.” He reiterated that Kiev will “never recognize any temporarily occupied Ukrainian territory as Russian.” Russia has maintained that it is open to peace talks with Ukraine in principle, as long as its key security concerns are addressed. Moscow demands among other things that Kiev renounce its NATO aspirations and recognize the territorial “realities on the ground.” The Kremlin has insisted it will not accept a mere freeze of the conflict.

On Saturday, President Putin announced a temporary Easter truce effective from 18:00 Moscow time through midnight on Sunday night. While he expressed hope that Ukraine would reciprocate, he also stated that the “Kiev regime has violated the agreement on pausing energy infrastructure strikes more than a hundred times.” Putin argued that Ukraine’s reaction to the ceasefire would be a clear indicator of whether Kiev is serious about wanting to achieve peace.

Read more …

Trump cannot leave the talks. They’re his, after all. And it would lead to a Moscow-Brussels war, which would involve Paris, London, Berlin and … NATO. They will try to blackmail the US into that fight. Trump should simply say, beforehand, that he wants none of this to happen.

Scott Ritter: Rubio’s Threats to Quit Ukraine Talks Look Like Sabotage (Sp.)

Marco Rubio warned Friday that the US could walk out of the Ukrainian peace process if progress is not made “within days.” A day earlier, Volodymyr Zelensky accused Trump Ukraine envoy Steve Witkoff of “spreading Russian narratives,” and claimed Witkoff has no “mandate…to speak about Ukrainian territories.” The US secretary of state’s remarks on potentially ending the US peace push in Ukraine signal dual frustrations: with Steve Witkoff’s influence over Ukraine policy, and with Russia’s demands for a lasting peace instead of a temporary ceasefire, military analyst and former Marine Corps intelligence officer Scott Ritter told Sputnik. “I think this is an effort by Marco Rubio to insert himself into the process, but I want to remind people that he doesn’t make policy, especially policy concerning US-Russian relations,” Ritter emphasized.

Ritter sees Rubio’s comments as an attempt to “create the atmosphere of a failed policy” to try to get the US to abandon its current policy on Ukraine, but doesn’t see President Trump accepting this position. Ritter also recalled that Rubio’s position in the Trump administration has forced him to pull a 180 degree turn on the traditional pro-Ukraine, anti-Russia posture he held throughout his career in the Senate. “Rubio’s statement actually empowers Europe and Ukraine in many ways because now all they have to do is drag this out. The key here is for Europe and Ukraine is to get the United States out of the peacekeeping business and hopefully get the US back into the war-fighting business, that is, to continue their proxy conflict against Russia. That doesn’t seem to be the policy direction that Donald Trump favors,” the observer stressed.

Ultimately, Ritter said, what the Ukraine crisis needs right now is diplomacy. “This requires the United States to put pressure on Europe, to put pressure on Ukraine. The Trump administration doesn’t seem to have the leverage necessary to achieve that. This is where Marco Rubio is supposed to be stepping forward to take the lead diplomatically to see the president’s will translated into actual policy that can be implemented. But Rubio doesn’t seem to be inclined to do this.” “So what I envision happening is, in a week or so, you’ll see Marco Rubio make a play with the Trump administration, with the president himself, to terminate America’s effort to bring this conflict to an end. But I don’t see Donald Trump accepting that. I see Donald Trump rejecting that advice and continuing to press forward and giving Steve Witkoff a chance to work with the Russians. But this is a process that if it continues, is going to take weeks, if not months, before you get the kind of detailed agreement necessary to allow Russia to accept a ceasefire,” Ritter summed up.

Read more …

“..we’re just going to say, ‘You’re foolish, you’re fools, you’re horrible people.’

US Threats To Quit Ukraine Talks Aimed at Kiev Rather Than Moscow (TASS)

Washington’s threats to walk away from the negotiation process on Ukraine are directed against the Kiev regime rather than Moscow, the Axios portal said, citing European officials. “Two European diplomats confirmed Rubio said Trump was losing his patience and might withdraw from the process if a deal wasn’t reached soon,” the portal wrote, adding that “three European diplomats felt Rubio’s comments were mostly aimed at the Ukrainians.” “A source close to the Ukrainian government also said it seemed Rubio’s comments were aimed at pressing Ukraine. The source was also concerned that a Trump withdrawal from the negotiations could lead to suspension of US military aid to Ukraine,” the portal noted.

The European diplomats pointed out that during talks in Paris, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has not mentioned “increasing the pressure on Russia.” “The impression was that Rubio and Witkoff are under a lot of pressure from Trump and they are channeling it to the other players,” a European diplomat said. According to Axios, Rubio said that US President Donald Trump had decided that “he has dedicated a lot of time and energy to this, and there are a lot of things going on in the world right now that we need to be focused on.” “We need to figure out <…> within a matter of days, whether this is doable in the short term. If it’s not, then I think we’re just going to move on,” the top US diplomat added.

Rubio told reporters in Paris that Trump may abandon his efforts to settle the Ukraine crisis if there is no immediate progress. “We’re not going to continue with this endeavor for weeks and months on end,” he explained. Earlier, Trump himself did not rule out the US leaving the negotiations. “Now if, for some reason, one of the two parties makes it very difficult, we’re just going to say, ‘You’re foolish, you’re fools, you’re horrible people.’ And we’re going to just take a pass, but hopefully we won’t have to do that,” he told reporters at the White House.

Read more …

“..as early as next week..”

I think the talks will take much longer.

US Sets Timeline For Kiev To Agree To Ceasefire (RT)

US President Donald Trump reportedly expects to “make a determination for a full and comprehensive ceasefire” between Ukraine and Russia as early as next week. Both are to be presented with the final offer, the New York Post has claimed, citing an anonymous senior administration official. Trump has stated on multiple occasions that he wants to put an end to the Ukraine conflict as soon as possible. Since he assumed office in January, Washington and Moscow have been engaged in active diplomacy, holding several rounds of high-level talks. The newspaper quoted a source on Friday as saying that “this coming week in London, we want to make a determination for a full and comprehensive cease-fire.” The unnamed US official added that the “intent then is to have [discussions] with the Russians” and determine where Moscow and Kiev stand on this “final offer.”

According to the publication, Ukrainian Defense Minister Rustem Umerov told US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and President Trump’s envoy Steve Witkoff during their meeting in Paris on Thursday that Kiev is “90%” on board with Washington’s peace framework, which has yet to be made public. Ukraine’s remaining concerns mostly revolve around territories which Kiev claims as its own, but are in fact under Moscow’s control at present, the Post reported.Russia has demanded that Ukraine officially recognize the “reality on the ground,” while Vladimir Zelensky has repeatedly ruled out such a scenario.

The media outlet further alleged that the US could offer Russia a “carrot”: the relaxation of sanctions and the potential unfreezing of Moscow’s seized assets, which are currently held by Western institutions. Speaking to reporters on Friday, Trump echoed a remark made by Rubio earlier in the day, stating that “if for some reason one of the two parties makes it very difficult… we’re going to just take a pass.” Russian authorities have expressed skepticism about the feasibility of a ceasefire with Ukraine and accused Kiev’s backers in Europe of undermining US efforts. Speaking to journalists on Thursday, Moscow’s UN representative, Vassily Nebenzia, stated that due to the West’s record of using peace deals to help build up the Ukrainian military, expectations of a full ceasefire are “simply unrealistic at this stage.”

Read more …

“..Merz needs a useful idiot to ride shotgun alongside him in the doltmobile to share in any responsibility for the eventual mayhem when things inevitably go pear-shaped. “You rang?” say the Brits.”

Germany Wants The UK To Hold Its Hand While It Starts WWIII (Marsden)

Germany’s chancellor-in-waiting Friedrich Merz doesn’t officially take office until May 6, but that hasn’t stopped him from hitting the press circuit like it’s demolition day. Apparently, he’s got some lost time – and infrastructure – to make up for. In a chat with Germany’s public broadcaster, ARD, he floated the idea that Kiev, which seems to rank higher than Berlin on his priority list, needs to “get ahead of the situation” on the battlefield and “shape events” instead of playing defense. The event he seems most eager to shape? Oh, just the Third World War, apparently. Because he pivoted straight to the Kerch Bridge – mainland Russia’s lifeline to the Crimean peninsula – like it’s been living on borrowed time.

Merz said that “if for example, the most important land connection between Russia and Crimea is destroyed, or if something happens on Crimea itself, where most of the Russian military logistics are located, then that would be an opportunity to bring this country strategically back into the picture finally.” Cool, cool. Which picture would that be, exactly? The one labeled “Catastrophic Misjudgments of the 21st Century”? Probably. Which is why Merz needs a useful idiot to ride shotgun alongside him in the doltmobile to share in any responsibility for the eventual mayhem when things inevitably go pear-shaped. “You rang?” say the Brits. Or at least that’s what Merz is apparently hoping they say. “Our European partners are already supplying cruise missiles,” Merz said in an interview. “The British are doing it, the French are doing it, and the Americans are doing it anyway, this must be jointly agreed. And if it’s agreed, then Germany should take part.”

Merz’s fellow Christian Democratic Party MPs have been floating the idea in the Western press that he’s waiting for an official permission slip from London. It would probably read something like this: “Dear Herr Friedrich, You are hereby authorized to partake in a highly coordinated, militarized pub crawl. First stop: a punch-up with Russia, followed by a wobbly march to a greasy spoon for black coffee, bad lighting, and a collective hangover.” Merz is just days away from grabbing the wheel, and he’s done pretending to be the guy in the backseat yelling directions at Chancellor Olaf Scholz. Scholz, for his part, always said that Germany wouldn’t hand Kiev the Taurus long-range missiles. Not that he had much wiggle room after last year’s leaked audio from Russian intelligence of German Air Force brass workshopping ways to hit the Kerch Bridge without leaving any German fingerprints.

Kind of a bad look for a guy who keeps overtly declaring that he wants peace. So naturally, he was furious. Which is why, if Team Scholz suddenly turned around now and said, “You know what? Let’s try a few long-range missile strikes, just for funsies,” people might reasonably assume that he’d undergone a surprise lobotomy with a NATO letter opener. As the coalition partners for Merz’s incoming government, Scholz’s Social Democrats’ support would be needed on any vote. And so far, they’ve shown no interest in greenlighting his WW3 passion project. You know, democracy and all that. Minor hiccup, I know. If military ambition and musings alone were all it took, Merz would already be well on his way to having a Netflix original named after him and maybe even a seat with his name on it waiting at The Hague.

But hey, hear the guy out. What if it’s, like, a group project? Das ist gut, ja? Nah, dude. Nicht gut. Nicht gut at all. What exactly does Team Merz think this would look like? Would the Brits and Germans sit side by side, fingers hovering over their respective missile buttons, doing a tense little “one, two, three, fire” and just praying that neither one flinches at the last second and leaves the other one with some very awkward phone calls to make? If so, that would certainly explain why they’re talking about specifically needing Britain’s non-negotiable participation and not France – the country that trained a flagship brigade for the Ukrainian army, who apparently learned how to bail out before even seeing action. “Paris hailed it as a ‘unique’ initiative,” reported France24. Training 1,700 Ukrainians in France to fight who then just end up surrendering to the foie gras and rosé at the local café prior to deployment is ‘unique’, alright.

“Ah, wonderbar!”

Read more …

“..Moldova’s airport detentions echo the trajectory taken by the Kiev authorities in Ukraine..”

Moldova Wages War On Christians To Please Its EU Overlords (Romanenko)

On Thursday, Moldovan authorities chose to detain Bishop Marchel of the Moldovan Metropolis, a metropolitanate under the Russian Orthodox Church, at Chiinau International Airport. Bishop Marchel was on his way to Jerusalem to bring back the Holy Fire for Easter, one of the most sacred ceremonies of the year for Orthodox believers. According to reports, he was pulled aside for a thorough inspection of his person and luggage, had his passport confiscated, and was not allowed to board his flight even though nothing suspicious was ever found. His documents were only returned thirty minutes after the plane departed. By contrast, the rival Metropolis of Bessarabia, a different Orthodox Christian church in Moldova, canonically under the Romanian Patriarchate, sent its own delegate, Bishop Filaret, on the same mission unmolested.

This isn’t an isolated outrage but rather the latest episode in a systematic campaign against anyone deemed pro Russian. On March 25, 2025, Eugenia Gutul the democratically elected head of the Gagauz autonomy was detained at the very same airport. Her passport was confiscated and she was held incommunicado for 72 hours on opaque corruption and illegal financing charges, before being put under house arrest to await trial. Two days later, opposition figure Alexei Lungu was stopped from leaving the country on murky grounds, and Viktor Petrov another Gagauz leader was held for hours in February after flying in from Istanbul, an arrest he claims was orchestrated by Prime Minister Recean’s office. These incidents form a clear pattern: every pro Russian politician, cleric or public figure is under suspicion of destabilizing European choice or colluding with foreign powers.

At its core, what is being played out in Moldova in regards to the Moldovan Metropolis is an attempt to hold the spiritual life of the majority hostage to a political agenda. Nearly 70 percent of Moldovans adhere to the Moldovan Metropolis of the Russian Orthodox Church. By making its shepherds and representatives into targets, the government is sending a message: worship with a Romanian or European aligned body and you re free to practice your faith; profess loyalty to a politically inconvenient church and you risk being treated like a criminal. This is not a security measure it is a politicization of religion.

Worryingly, Moldova’s airport detentions echo the trajectory taken by the Kiev authorities in Ukraine. In August 2024, the Ukrainian parliament passed a law effectively banning any religious organization affiliated with a state engaged in armed aggression a barely veiled reference to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate (UOC MP). The bill sailed through 265 29 and obliged each parish to sever ties with Moscow or face court ordered closure within nine months. President Zelensky hailed it as a step toward spiritual independence, yet by criminalizing an entire denomination, Kiev set the stage for unprecedented state intrusion into religious life.

Read more …

“if a far-left radical is the one raising the most money, and someone who’s arguing that Democrats should go even further left, that’s good for Republicans.”

Will Trump’s Tariffs Hurt GOP in Midterms? (Caldwell)

As President Donald Trump moves at a feverish pace in imposing tariffs and undoing much of his predecessor’s legacy, a question has emerged: How will voters react to these bold actions when midterm elections arrive in 2026? Trump has said that his tariffs—which have corresponded with a drop in his economic job-approval rating—will end up benefiting him and Republicans in midterms. “And I really think we’re helped a lot by the tariff situation that’s going on, which is a good situation,” he said at a National Republican Congressional Committee fundraising dinner last week. “It’s going to be legendary. You watch.” But Brad Bannon, a veteran pollster and political consultant for Democrat congressional campaigns, told The Daily Signal he thinks lower approval ratings and higher uncertainty on the economy will benefit Democrats significantly.

“I don’t believe that anybody should panic, but the Republicans should be worried, based on the latest polling I’ve seen,” said Bannon. Bannon said he was paying particular attention to a CBS poll that showed 53% of people thought the economy had worsened in the past three months and 54% thought Trump had ownership for the state of the economy, rather than former President Joe Biden. Though he acknowledged that Trump’s economic approval rating has risen since its nosedive amid the market crash, he suggested that the fall in the stock market would trigger backlash from voters with 401(k)s who “got basically killed during the tariff thing.” But Republican consultants painted a different picture.

Jason Roe is a reelection campaign consultant for Rep. Tom Barrett, R-Mich., who flipped Michigan’s 7th Congressional District in 2024, which is one of the most volatile swing districts in the country. Michigan is in a special situation as a state that’s especially reliant on Canadian goods, but also has many voters who suffered from deindustrialization in the wake of prior free-trade agreements. Roe says polling suggests to him that voters are willing to give Trump a chance on his ambitious restructuring of the economy. “Everyone seems to—even people that don’t love Trump—feel like we’ve got to do something,” Roe said. “It’s unsustainable as it is.” “So, I think there’s this willingness to give the benefit of the doubt, and you see that in polling on issues like tariffs that don’t poll well, yet Trump’s numbers are still holding. He’s at 47 in the most recent CBS poll. For him to be doing what he’s doing and being who he is, that’s an extraordinarily strong number… but if we get much past Labor Day and people aren’t seeing results… then we could see political problems.” he added.

Democrats also have much to fear as they look toward the 2026 midterms. The Democratic Party had a 27% approval rating in an NBC poll in March. Additionally, the Democratic Party has begun to gravitate toward polarizing figures, such as Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York and Jasmine Crockett of Texas, as leaders. Republican strategists think that will be a great asset when midterm season comes. “The national party heads become great targets,” said Brett O’Donnell, a veteran of many presidential campaigns who is consulting for the reelection campaign of Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark. He contends that figures such as Ocasio-Cortez and Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., would alienate most voters. “They make for great targets because they’re talking about things that, for the most part, aren’t the concerns of the majority of Americans,” O’Donnell said.

Todd, the Republican consultant, who argues that the Democrats suffered in 2024 because “they’ve allowed themselves to get so far out of the mainstream,” thinks that those figures will hurt Democrats in the next election cycle. Asked about Ocasio-Cortez’s massive fundraising efforts, he replied, “if a far-left radical is the one raising the most money, and someone who’s arguing that Democrats should go even further left, that’s good for Republicans.”

Read more …

“..Iran completely free of nuclear weapons and sanctions, and maintaining its ability to develop peaceful nuclear energy..”

US, Iran Agree To Enter Next Phase Of Nuclear Negotiations (JTN)

The U.S. and Iran have agreed to enter the next phase of negotiations over the Iranian regime’s nuclear program. The second round of the talks began in Rome on Saturday between Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and President Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff through the mediation of Oman’s Foreign Minister Badr bin Hamad Al Busaidi. The envoys have “agreed to enter into the next phase of their discussions that aim to seal a fair, enduring and binding deal which will ensure Iran completely free of nuclear weapons and sanctions, and maintaining its ability to develop peaceful nuclear energy,” a spokesperson for Oman’s foreign ministry said in a statement posted on Saturday on X. “It is only in dialogue and clear communication that we will be able to achieve a mutually credible agreement and understanding for the benefit of all concerned regionally and internationally. It is also agreed that the next round will take place in Muscat in the next few days,” the statement also read.

Read more …

Is that the hill you want to die on?

“Two other Congressional Democrats have asked the House Oversight Committee to allow them to travel to El Salvador on the taxpayers’ dime to visit the migrant, but Chairman James Comer denied the request on Friday.”

Trump On Deported Migrant: ‘He’s Got MS-13 Tattooed’ On His Knuckles (JTN)

President Donald Trump on Friday night doubled down on his administration’s allegation that a deported migrant now in El Salvador is connected to the violent MS-13 gang. Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, who was originally from El Salvador, has become the focal point of one of the biggest deportation cases in recent history, after he was sent back home with another group of illegal migrants. Democrats have argued that Abrego Garcia was a peaceful, law-abiding man from Maryland prior to his deportation, but the Trump administration argues that he was a member of MS-13, who had beaten his wife. Court documents from 2021 showed Abrego Garcia’s wife, Jennifer Vasquez, applied for a protective order against her husband, though the case was eventually dismissed. Trump, in a post on Truth Social, shared an image of what he claimed was Abrego Garcia’s hand, which showed tattoos on his knuckles that included a marijuana leaf, a cross, a skull and a smiley face.

“This is the hand of the man that the Democrats feel should be brought back to the United States, because he is such ‘a fine and innocent person,'” the president wrote in the post. “They said he is not a member of MS-13, even though he’s got MS-13 tattooed onto his knuckles, and two Highly Respected Courts found that he was a member of MS-13. “I was elected to take bad people out of the United States, among other things,” he continued. “I must be allowed to do my job. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!” The post comes after Maryland Democratic Sen. Chris Van Hollen met with Abrego Garcia in El Salvador this week. Two other Congressional Democrats have asked the House Oversight Committee to allow them to travel to El Salvador on the taxpayers’ dime to visit the migrant, but Chairman James Comer denied the request on Friday.

Read more …

“I am sympathetic to everything you’re saying, I just don’t I think I have the power to do anything,” Boasberg told the attorneys for the illegal aliens.”

SCOTUS Order Pauses Deportations Under Alien Enemies Act (Allen)

The U.S. Supreme Court ordered the Trump administration early Saturday morning to pause the deportation of some Venezuelan illegal aliens until the court can rule further. The Court did not grant or deny the use of the Alien Enemies Act to remove the illegal aliens, who the Trump administration claims are Tren de Aragua gang members, but instead the justices simply hit pause on the matter. “The Government is directed not to remove any member of the putative class of detainees from the United States until further order of this Court,” the order states. After designating Tren de Aragua as a Foreign Terrorist Organization, the White House announced in March that President Donald Trump would use the powers of the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to remove members of the gang from America.

The illegal immigrants in question in the ongoing case are currently being held in Texas. The Supreme Court order is in response to an emergency appeal from the American Civil Liberties Union. Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented from the Court’s order. Before the Supreme Court issued the order, U.S. District Judge James Boasberg in Washington, D.C. told the lawyers representing the illegal aliens that he did not have the power to stop deportation flights. “I am sympathetic to everything you’re saying, I just don’t I think I have the power to do anything,” Boasberg told the attorneys for the illegal aliens.

Boasberg did, last month, issue a temporary restraining order barring the U.S. from using the Alien Enemies Act to rapidly deport illegal aliens, but shortly thereafter the Supreme Court ruled that the Trump administration could resume deportations of Venezuelan criminal illegal aliens under the Alien Enemies Act. The previous 5-4 decision from the justices was narrow and did not address the constitutionality of using the Alien Enemies Act to deport members of the Venezuelan prison gang Tren de Aragua. Instead, the court said in its opinion that “judicial review” was requested in the wrong court. The attorneys for the illegal alien should have filed their lawsuit against the deportations in Texas, where the illegal aliens are being held, instead of filing in Washington, D.C., the court found.

Read more …

“..immediate apprehension, detention, and removal” of members of the group who are Venezuelan citizens 14 years of age or older and who are not U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents of the United States.”

SCOTUS Blocks Deportation of Alleged Venezuela Gang Members for Now (ET)

The Supreme Court on April 19 temporarily blocked the Trump administration from deporting an unspecified number of Venezuelan men currently in immigration custody who are alleged to be members of a criminal gang. The new, unsigned order granting the Venezuelans’ emergency application was issued on Saturday at about 12:55 a.m. Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented. Alito’s reasoning will be added to the court’s file later, according to the order. “The Government is directed not to remove any member of the putative class of detainees from the United States until further order of this Court,” the order states. The order notes that a request to block the deportations is currently pending before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.

After the Fifth Circuit acts, Solicitor General D. John Sauer should file a response to the application with the Supreme Court as soon as possible, the order states. The order was issued after the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed an emergency request on behalf of its Venezuelan clients late on April 18 asking the Supreme Court to immediately block the Trump administration from deporting the clients. The emergency application in A.A.R.P. and W.M.M. v. Trump, which challenges President Donald Trump’s use of the Alien Enemies Act to deport illegal immigrants who are alleged or confirmed criminal gang members, was directed to Justice Samuel Alito. The ACLU is also seeking a temporary restraining order from the U.S. District Court in the District of Columbia, as well as a stay of removal order from the Fifth Circuit, according to the application.

On March 14, President Donald Trump signed Proclamation 10903, in which he officially declared that Tren de Aragua, a designated foreign terrorist organization, “is perpetrating, attempting, and threatening an invasion or predatory incursion against the territory of the United States.” The group is using mass illegal immigration to the United States to harm U.S. citizens, undermine public safety, and support the goal of the Venezuelan regime with which it is associated to destabilize “democratic nations in the Americas, including the United States,” the proclamation said. The president invoked the Alien Enemies Act to authorize the “immediate apprehension, detention, and removal” of members of the group who are Venezuelan citizens 14 years of age or older and who are not U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents of the United States.

The application said the ACLU’s clients are challenging the Trump administration’s use of the federal statute to deport them. The clients “are in imminent and ongoing jeopardy of being removed from the United States without notice or an opportunity to be heard, in direct contravention of this Court’s order in Trump v. J.G.G.” “Many individuals have already been loaded on to buses, presumably headed to the airport” and are at risk of being sent to a prison in El Salvador, according to the application. On March 15, the Trump administration used the Alien Enemies Act to deport at least 137 Venezuelans to El Salvador, where they are now incarcerated “possibly for the rest of their lives” at the Salvadoran Terrorism Confinement Center, which is “one of the most notorious prisons in the world,” the application said.

Read more …

Turley ignores that there are a million+ cases, and they cannot possibly all be heard.

Yeah, the law works on paper. But the people do not.

SCOTUS Halts Venezuelan Deportations, 4th Circuit Upholds Garcia Order (Turley)

It has been a busy 24 hours in the courts. Early this morning, the Supreme Court blocked (for now) the deportations of any Venezuelans held in northern Texas under the Alien Enemies Act, a law only used three times before in our history. At the same time, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit upheld the lower court’s order in the case of Abrego Garcia. Despite the growing counter-constitutional movement, both decisions show how the courts are functioning appropriately and expeditiously in sorting out these difficult cases. Indeed, I wanted to flag a couple of paragraphs in the Fourth Circuit case that I hope everyone will take a second to read and consider from Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson, a widely respected conservative judge. The justices ordered the Trump administration not to remove Venezuelans being held in the Bluebonnet Detention Center “until further order of this court.”

Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented from the order. However, this is merely a hold on deportations pending further review of the emergency appeal from the American Civil Liberties Union, which is challenging the use of the Alien Enemies Act of 1798. This rarely used and highly controversial law stretches back to the Adams Administration. There are good-faith arguments on both sides of the case that the Court wants to consider. Accordingly, this is not surprising. The Fourth Circuit also correctly upheld the lower court order in the Garcia case. I remain confused by the administration’s appeal. The Supreme Court already upheld the order requiring the Administration to facilitate Garcia’s return. I have been critical of that opinion, but it clearly recognized the authority of the district court to issue that part of the earlier order.

However, Judge Wilkinson’s opinion contains one passage that I wanted to excerpt. It is a measured and important point that both branches need to show mutual respect in these cases. This sage advice is not coming from a critic or a liberal jurist. It is coming from someone who has been at the heart of conservative jurisprudence for decades:

“The basic differences between the branches mandate a serious effort at mutual respect. The respect that courts must accord the Executive must be reciprocated by the Executive’s respect for the courts. Too often today this has not been the case, as calls for impeachment of judges for decisions the Executive disfavors and exhortations to disregard court orders sadly illustrate.

Now the branches come too close to grinding irrevocably against one another in a conflict that promises to diminish both. This is a losing proposition all around. The Judiciary will lose much from the constant intimations of its illegitimacy, to which by dent of custom and detachment we can only sparingly reply. The Executive will lose much from a public perception of its lawlessness and all of its attendant contagions. The Executive may succeed for a time in weakening the courts, but over time history will script the tragic gap between what was and all that might have been, and law in time will sign its epitaph. It is, as we have noted, all too possible to see in this case an incipient crisis, but it may present an opportunity as well. We yet cling to the hope that it is not naïve to believe our good brethren in the Executive Branch perceive the rule of law as vital to the American ethos. This case presents their unique chance to vindicate that value and to summon the best that is within us while there is still time.”

Well said, your honor. One can disagree with the ultimate merits on legal issues. However, as I have previously written, the disagreement on those issues should not trigger demands for impeachment or other extreme measures.

Read more …

At first I thought Elon Musk had filed a lawsuit.

Judge Blocks Trump’s Order Ending ‘X’ Gender Marker on Passports (ET)

A federal judge ruled against the Trump administration’s executive order banning the use of an “X” on passports marked by people self-identifying as neither male nor female. U.S. District Judge Julia Kobick of the District Court of Massachusetts awarded the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) a preliminary injunction on April 18, staying the president’s executive action requiring sex, instead of gender identity, to be used as an identifier on government-issued identification documents. The executive order titled “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government” was one of several signed by President Donald Trump on his first day in office. “It is the policy of the United States to recognize two sexes, male and female,” the order stated. ”These sexes are not changeable and are grounded in fundamental and incontrovertible reality.”

The order stated that gender identity “reflects a fully internal and subjective sense of self, disconnected from biological reality and sex and existing on an infinite continuum, that does not provide a meaningful basis for identification and cannot be recognized as a replacement for sex.” It ordered the secretaries of State and Homeland Security, and the director of the Office of Personnel Management to “implement changes to require that government-issued identification documents, including passports, visas, and Global Entry cards, accurately reflect the holder’s sex.” It also ordered the rescinding of prior federal guidance documents, including “The White House Toolkit on Transgender Equality.”

The ACLU took legal action against the order on behalf of five plaintiffs who identify as transgender and two who identify as nonbinary, seeking to preserve the pro-LGBT policies put in place under President Joe Biden, allowing a third option on identification documents. “We all have a right to accurate identity documents, and this policy invites harassment, discrimination, and violence against transgender Americans who can no longer obtain or renew a passport that matches who they are,” ACLU lawyer Sruti Swaminathan said in a statement. The Trump administration argued that the president had broad discretion in setting the passport policy, and those policy changes did not “violate the equal protection guarantees of the Constitution.”

The federal government also denied any harm befalling the plaintiffs due to the policy, since they were still free to travel abroad. The judge said the administration didn’t demonstrate substantial government interests in changing the rule. “The Executive Order and the Passport Policy on their face classify passport applicants on the basis of sex and thus must be reviewed under intermediate judicial scrutiny,” Kobick wrote. “That standard requires the government to demonstrate that its actions are substantially related to an important governmental interest. The government has failed to meet this standard.”

Read more …

“Overall during the first 3 months of 2025, Tesla sold more EVs than the next 10 EV makers combined in the United States..”

Tesla Continues to Reign Supreme Despite Leftist Violence (Blackmon)

The obviously organized attacks on electric carmaker Tesla’s infrastructure and owners of Tesla cars by leftists apparently suffering from Musk Derangement Syndrome dominated the news throughout much of February and March. Sadly, the campaign was supported by a variety of virtue signaling celebrities and cynical politicians like Arizona Democrat Sen. Mark Kelly putting out videos of themselves selling off their own Teslas and replacing them with other electric vehicles or, in Kelly’s case, a gas-guzzling SUV. You can’t make this stuff up, you really can’t.

The frequency of these attacks appears to have largely died down after law enforcement officials, including Attorney General Pam Bondi and the Justice Department, arrested and charged a number of the activists with felonies, but the objective was clear: The campaign of attacks was designed to damage Tesla’s brand, in the process hoping to punish founder and CEO Elon Musk for his efforts to support the Donald Trump administration by leading the DOGE project to cut government waste and fraud.Certainly, some damage was done to Tesla’s infrastructure, and to its reputation among its liberal-heavy consumer base. But if the goal was to dethrone Musk’s EV juggernaut as the dominant player in the U.S. and global EV industry, first quarter results show the campaign of violence, vandalism, and virtue signaling to have been a miserable failure.

Web-based EV news site Teslarati compiled the numbers, and reports that Tesla still dominated the US market during the first quarter of 2025, and not just by a little, but by a lot. Tesla’s Model Y and Model 3 cars lead all others in total sales for the quarter with 64,051 and 52,520 units, respectively. Coming in a very distant third was Ford’s Mustang Mach E with just 11,607 units sold. Tesla’s vaunted, weirdly designed Cybertruck continued to be more than a bit of a disappointment, selling just 6,406 units, trailing the equally underperforming Ford F-150 Lightning by more than 700 units sold. But here’s the kicker: Overall during the first 3 months of 2025, Tesla sold more EVs than the next 10 EV makers combined in the United States. Musk’s car company dominates the EV space every bit as overwhelmingly as Google dominates the search engine space in the U.S.

Obviously, as I wrote here a few weeks ago, rumors of Tesla’s looming demise are highly overblown. And its dominant status in the market is not limited to the United States. Germany-based Blackout News reported on April 9 that just four EV companies worldwide are operating profitably today. The only one of those four EV makers not based in China – where we must admit that financial reporting is suspect at best – is, you guessed it, Tesla. That’s right: Not a single pure-play EV maker in the United States, Europe, or anywhere else outside of China is operating in the black even after 30 years of heavy financial subsidization by western governments and regulatory actions tilting the automaker playing field in their favor.

But Blackout News does not limit its report to pure-play EV companies like Rivian, Lucid and Fisker, all of which are either in bankruptcy or teetering on the brink today. The report also details the struggles of traditional car companies like Ford, GM, BMW, and others to record profits in their own EV business units, a topic I’ve covered here several times in the past few years. What it all boils down to is this: No matter how hard cynical Democrats like Sen. Kelly and crazed activists try to damage what has become one of America’s great automakers and its thousands of employees, the market is going to be the ultimate decider of the company’s fate. For the first quarter of 2025, the market has spoken, and Tesla and Musk have come out as the clear winners. That may be a bad thing for Democrats, but it’s a great thing for America.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Severe autism

Makary

Measles

Fauci

Neura

Maculatus

Catmouflage

Santorini
https://twitter.com/mamboitaliano__/status/1913482407660990550

Malaga

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Apr 182025
 
 April 18, 2025  Posted by at 10:03 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , ,  33 Responses »


Salvador Dali The knight of death 1934

 

China Is In Much Deeper Trouble Than Most Realize (Strom)
US Expects Ukraine Ceasefire Within Weeks – Bloomberg (RT)
Europe Seeking ‘Direct Line’ With Trump – NYT (RT)
Meloni’s White House Trip Paves Way For European Union Rapprochement (JTN)
US Will Pull EU to Pieces Before Letting It Partner Up With China (Sp.)
Trump Admin Fights Back Against Rogue Judge’s Contempt Warning (Margolis)
Convicted FBI Lawyer Clinesmith Was Spared From Prison By Boasberg (JTN)
REPORT: President Trump Opposed Israeli Strikes on Iran Nuclear Sites (CTH)
Pam Bondi Outlines Timeline and History of MS13 Illegal Alien (CTH)
Bondi Announces Lawsuit Against Maine Over Boys in Girls’ Sports (ET)
Rubio Shuts Down Censorship Program Biden Admin Claimed was Ended (Turley)
A Chihuahua That Thinks It’s A Lion: The Decline of Britain (Bordachev)
China Replacing US Oil With Canadian – Bloomberg (RT)
Trump Tariffs Could Cost EU $1.25 Trillion (RT)
German Anti-Russia Propaganda Is Reaching Nazi-era Levels (Amar)
Court Rules Google Illegally Holds “Monopoly Power” In Online Ad Tech (ZH)
Trump to Make an Epic Move at the IRS (Margolis)
Climate Myths (John Stossel)

 

 

 

 

Trust

Ritter

Poso
https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1912573038303863007

What is China’s messsage here? That you might as well make it at home?No wait, that’s Trump’s message.
https://twitter.com/acnewsitics/status/1912841340968395205

 

 

Pepe

 

 

 

 

Contentious topic.

“[Xi] has counted on making the US economy dependent on China to keep us cowed. Trump is turning that logic on its head.”

China Is In Much Deeper Trouble Than Most Realize (Strom)

In the tariff war between China and the United States, a lot of chatter in the Pravda Media is about Xi Jinping’s defiance, his outreach to European countries and other less important but collectively significant developing countries, and his retaliatory moves against America. They make it sound like China has a lot of cards to play in the trade war with America. Collectively, these stories tell a tale: Donald Trump may have bitten off more than he can chew in his economic war with China. Trump’s moves will hollow out the American middle class! Europe will choose China over the United States! We are doomed! The Chinese are putting up a very brave front, until recently matching Trump’s blow for blow and pointing to Chinese willingness to endure everything up to eating grass for a year to defeat their adversaries. The Chinese plan for the long term! Yeah, well, not so much.

It all sounds impressive, and some pissed-off ally countries have even hinted at turning Chinaward as a response to what they consider a stab in the back from President Trump. Except…Reality. Our ticked-off allies are acting like 6-year-old children angry at their parents, threatening to run away. As much as they resent the United States, they are utterly dependent upon us and chose to be so. They are militarily weak and have sputtering economies that rely on the US as an export market. The United States, not themselves, defends its sea lines of communication, and they all know that China is a predatory power and not a reliable economic partner. The US not only represents 25% of the world economy, which is quite impressive in itself. But it has about 40% of the world’s consumer spending. No manufacturer of consumer products can afford to turn their backs on the US.

China may be an attractive market, but it is not sufficiently large enough to make a dent in their losses should the US close our markets to them. Which brings us to China itself. All that bluster sounds good, but it hides a stark reality: their economy is utterly dependent on US consumption. As much power as they have over us–they can cause us temporary pain as we adjust to finding new suppliers–we have infinitely more over them. Even their holdings in US debt are a double-edged sword. The US has relied on China to purchase government bonds, but as the old saying goes–If you owe the bank a billion dollars, you have power over them. The tariffs on China have been DEVASTATING. Not will be devastating. They are already devastating. China’s economy is reeling from the impact of tariffs, and public discontent is growing.

On Douyin, China’s version of TikTok, videos show citizens openly criticizing the government’s rigid stance on tariffs, with some even taking to the streets in protest. Chinese authorities are cracking down, forcibly dispersing crowds and suppressing evidence of unrest, but these efforts can only hold for so long. As joblessness and food shortages deepen, desperation is setting in, pushing people to the brink. China’s heavy reliance on the U.S. market gives America the upper hand—we can outlast them until they yield or face internal upheaval, potentially threatening President Xi’s leadership. China’s government is and appears quite strong because it is. But something can be both very strong and very brittle–meaning that it performs well until the moment it shatters. Think ceramics or glass, both of which can be very strong until the moment they shatter. They don’t bend and spring back–they are good until the breaking point, and then boom.

China’s government is not loved, but it is tolerated because it is strong and because it generally delivers on its major promise: economic growth, pulling a billion people out of poverty as quickly as possible. Tariffs aren’t just a threat to that strategy. If Trump really pushes, Xi Jinping’s government is in real trouble, and not the kind of trouble that means a midterm loss or failure to get reelected. This is regime-threatening. Xi, who looked to be in the catbird seat, could be facing a collapse of his legitimacy as leader of China. The Trump administration plans to use ongoing tariff negotiations to pressure U.S. trading partners to limit their dealings with China, according to people with knowledge of the conversations. The idea is to extract commitments from U.S. trading partners to isolate China’s economy in exchange for reductions in trade and tariff barriers imposed by the White House.

U.S. officials plan to use negotiations with more than 70 nations to ask them to disallow China from shipping goods through their countries, prevent Chinese firms from locating in their territories to avoid U.S. tariffs, and not absorb China’s cheap industrial goods into their economies. These measures are meant to put a dent in China’s already rickety economy and force Beijing to the negotiating table with less leverage ahead of potential talks between Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping. The exact demands could vary widely by nation, given their degree of involvement with the Chinese economy. China’s strategy of growing its economic power and influence depends on a river of money with its headwaters in the United States. And its ability to make deals in countries not hostile to the United States is only possible because the US tolerates its moves and is committed to using only modest soft power to oppose the moves.

Donald Trump is not in a mood to tolerate expanding Chinese influence. Look at the Panama Canal port deals. Trump’s goal is not so much to own the canal as to deny China influence in the region. China, not Panama, is the target. In fact, most of Trump’s seemingly bizarre foreign policy moves–Canada as the 51st state and annexing Greenland are about trying to change the political geography to keep China from gaining influence in the Arctic. The flow of information out of China on economic performance since the tariffs hit is sparse, but I have been checking in on the social media chatter coming out of China, and the news is bleak. Consumer spending is down, export products are being sold at firesale prices, and business owners are locking doors and leaving employees unpaid. This is all chatter right now, but also likely true.

Trade wars suck for everybody involved, and when the cost of Chinese-made products go up there will be some pain here in the United States, whatever Trump and his people say. But none of this pain will be an existential threat to Trump, the country, or the Republican Party. There will be a price to pay, but it will be modest in the longer term. Not so for China. Their regime is under threat because their hand is much, much weaker. Weaker than Trump’s and weaker than people think. Of course, if China were a normal country, what Trump is doing would be a horrible policy. Generally speaking, destroying a trading partner’s economy is both morally questionable and terrible for business. Normally you would cut a deal. But China and the United States are heading for a war, and a big one at that. Xi Jinping has made that abundantly clear, and he has counted on making the US economy dependent on China to keep us cowed. Trump is turning that logic on its head.

Read more …

I don’t think they do. Looks more like they’re getting ready to pull out.

US Expects Ukraine Ceasefire Within Weeks – Bloomberg (RT)

Senior US officials have told European allies that Washington anticipates a comprehensive ceasefire in the Ukraine conflict within weeks, Bloomberg has reported. US presidential envoy Steve Witkoff and Secretary of State Marco Rubio outlined the timeline during a series of meetings in Paris on Thursday, hosted by French President Emmanuel Macron, Bloomberg reported the same day, citing anonymous sources. The European side sought to persuade the Americans that President Donald Trump should “harden its position toward Moscow,” the report said, describing the discussions as “the latest attempt by Europe to influence the outcome” of US talks with Russia.

Last week, Witkoff traveled to St. Petersburg for talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin, which he has characterized as “compelling.” Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky has criticized Trump’s envoy, accusing him of echoing “Russian narratives.” Russian officials have expressed skepticism about the feasibility of a ceasefire with Ukraine, asserting that Kiev’s backers in Europe are undermining US efforts. Speaking to journalists on Thursday, Moscow’s UN representative, Vassily Nebenzia, highlighted that Kiev has failed to adhere to a US-mediated moratorium on strikes against energy infrastructure.

The diplomat said that the West’s record of using purported peace deals to build up the Ukrainian military means that expectations for a full ceasefire are “simply unrealistic at this stage.” “I cannot speak on behalf of President Trump,” Nebenzia said. “Perhaps, he knows better what I don’t know.” The 30-day energy ceasefire announced on March 18 is set to expire this week. When asked on Wednesday whether Russia would alter its military strategy, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov stated that Putin had issued no new directives on the matter.

Read more …

What Europe? Do you mean Von der Leyen, who has no links to any European, or Macron, who’s despised by those he does have a link to? Who would Trump talk to, and why?

Europe Seeking ‘Direct Line’ With Trump – NYT (RT)

European officials are seeking to establish a “direct line” of communication with US President Donald Trump, unsure whether his team can make any real decisions or is willing to cooperate at all, the New York Times reported on Thursday, citing sources. The report, based on interviews with numerous unnamed European officials, describes the US president as “the ultimate decision maker” who is often difficult to predict, making the goal of getting Trump’s ear a priority for the Europeans. Many top-level negotiators in European NATO countries have found traditional diplomatic channels – such as the State Department and embassies – ineffective, the report said. The confusion is compounded by the fact that the most effective interlocutors on the US side are not career diplomats but rather trusted special envoys and advisers, such as Elon Musk and Steve Witkoff, the article said.

The officials also told the NYT that their US counterparts are primarily focused on fulfilling the president’s wishes, showing limited interest in the perspectives of America’s allies. The Trump administration is “not terribly interested in what the Europeans have to say,” a NYT source said. “It’s all about unilateralism and they don’t consult much. After all, if they don’t consider us allies to that extent, why would they?” While senior Trump officials have held “cordial” talks with their European counterparts on a number of issues, “it is never clear to allies” whether they have “real power over foreign policy or trade,” the article said. ”Everyone in D.C. says you have to talk to Trump directly,” a senior European official told the NYT.

However, this has proved difficult even for the highest-ranking EU officials, as Trump “despises the collective power of the European Union and sees many NATO allies as freeloaders,” the paper said, adding that leaders such as European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen are struggling to get on Trump’s calendar. The communication breakdown comes at a time of tenuous US-EU relations, marred by Washington’s decision to slap the bloc with tariffs and its push to make European NATO members pay more for their defense. Differences over the Ukraine conflict have also come into play, with Trump pursuing active diplomacy with Russia to end the conflict while the EU insists on supporting Kiev for “as long as it takes.”

Read more …

Yes, Meloni might be the EU contact for Trump. But Brussels would not give her any voice of her own.

Meloni’s White House Trip Paves Way For European Union Rapprochement (JTN)

President Donald Trump’s meeting with Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni on Thursday at the Oval Office came amid the ongoing trade dispute between the European Union and Washington and appeared to pave the way for a presidential visit to the continent to address the matter with its leaders. “I want to thank President Trump for having accepted an invitation to pay an official visit to Rome in the near future and consider the possibility in that occasion to meet also with Europe,” Meloni told reporters in the Oval Office. “The goal for me is to make the West great again, and I think we can do it together. We can and we will keep [working] on that.” The Italian leader generally ranks among those European figures with the strongest relationships with Trump himself.

A stalwart conservative and opponent of illegal immigration, Meloni shares many of Trump’s own positions, putting her on solid footing with her counterpart in the Oval Office. She further acknowledged those points in the meeting, saying “I know that we share lots of things on tackling illegal migration, on fighting against synthetic drugs.” Meloni was the only European Union leader to attend Trump’s 2024 inauguration and was among the first to congratulate him on his reelection. The pair have generally enjoyed a strong relationship and Trump himself called her a “great prime minister” during the meeting. Ahead of her trip to Washington, Meloni had been widely regarded as the European leader best suited to negotiating with Trump.

Italy is the 25th most populous nation globally with more than 59 million residents, according to data from the U.N. Dept. of Economic and Social Affairs, and a Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of $2.3 trillion (USD). In January 2025, the United States exported $2.82 billion to and imported $6.11 billion from Italy, resulting in a negative trade balance of $3.29 billion. The Observatory of Economic Complexity reported that in January 2025, the top exports of the United States to Italy were Hormones ($580M), Petroleum Gas ($249M), and Crude Petroleum ($211M). In the same month, the main imports to the United States from Italy were packaged medicines ($634M), vaccines, blood, antisera, toxins and cultures ($436M), and commodities not specified otherwise ($268M).

In early April, Trump declared “Liberation Day” and announced the imposition of sweeping “reciprocal” tariffs on most foreign nations. He later paused some of the largest tariffs, though he maintained a 10% baseline on most countries and left in place large-scale tariffs on China. Shortly after Liberation Day, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen announced a “zero for zero” tariff offer to the United States, though Washington has yet to agree to any permanent arrangement. Trump initially imposed 20% tariffs on most European goods, but he has since brought Brussels down to the 10% rate for a 90-day period and Meloni was expected to pursue a resolution to the issue. Ahead of the meeting, the White House was optimistic that it would be able to secure agreements with many nations eager to reach lasting agreements. “We’ve got 90 deals in 90 days possibly pending here,” White House advisor Peter Navarro said.

Multiple White House officials have shared that sentiment publicly, though it is not clear which nations have expressed interest in negotiating trade deals. Meloni’s visit was decidedly more jovial than that of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, which resulted in his removal from the White House after a tempestuous press conference. By contrast, the Oval Office meeting with Meloni saw many laughs as the pair exchanged compliments and pronounced the productiveness of their talks. “We have been talking about many bilateral topics and things that we can do together, about defense, about economic [sic], about economy, about space, about energy, Italy will have to increase its LNG imports and also nuclear that we are trying to develop,” Meloni said. “I think there can be ways to work together.” She further highlighted the commitment of Italian firms to American investment, but did not speak to the prospect of an individual trade deal between the United States and Italy.

“And the Italian enterprises will invest, as they’ve been doing for many years, as you know, in the next years, I think around $10 billions,” she added [sic]. “That shows how interconnected our economies are.” Meloni did not arrive officially as an envoy for the EU, though she did emphasize the importance of America’s relationship with the continent. During the Oval Office meeting, she pointed primarily to the economic relationships between Italy and the United States, but used the American relationship with her country as a segue to discuss the continental issue. “Mr. President, it’s not only about Italy, it’s about the entire Europe. The exchange between us is a very big one, investments, trade,” she said. “So I think even if we have some problems okay between the two shores of the Atlantic, it is the time that we try to sit down and find solutions.” “I know that when I speak about the West mainly, I don’t speak about a geographical space. I speak about [the] civilization, and I want to make that civilization stronger,” she added.

Read more …

“In the US’s ‘grand geopolitical chessboard’, the EU remains “one of the big, most important parts..”

US Will Pull EU to Pieces Before Letting It Partner Up With China (Sp.)

Trump’s global trade rampage has left the European Union and China seeking improved trade and investment relations. But that’s not a realistic prospect, says veteran Hong Kong-based Italian financial analyst Angelo Giuliano. For starters, “you need to keep in mind that the EU leaders were pre-selected by the Bilderberg Group and the US. Basically…the EU is actually a US project to destroy nation states,” Giuliano told Sputnik. Much of the bloc’s former and current top leadership (including European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, Economy Commissioner Paolo Gentiloni, Chancellor Friedrich Merz of Germany, France’s Emmanuel Macron and NATO chief Mark Rutte) are members of the Atlanticist club or have spoken at its meetings.

Second, the EU doesn’t decide its own fate, a reality demonstrated by Washington’s success in decoupling the bloc from Russia’s cheap, plentiful energy resources, and forcing it to import much more costly US LNG, Giuliano said. This left the EU’s industrial output uncompetitive globally and triggered widespread deindustrialization as hundreds of companies downsized, stopped production and shifted production abroad, including to the US. Washington can and will do the same vis-à-vis Europe and China as it consolidates alliances against the emerging, BRICS-led multipolar world order, Giuliano believes. “There’s going to be some backfiring from the business community, but ultimately [Europe’s] leaders are going to side with the US as they see Russia and China as the enemies,” the observer emphasized.

Besides US vassalage, closer EU-China ties are stymied by other factors, like:
• China’s warm relations with Russia, a sharp contrast to active EU support for the anti-Russia proxy war in Ukraine.
• The acrimonious relationship with Russia means new infrastructure like the Northern Sea Route, the North-South Transport Corridor and overland transit via Russia remain closed to the EU. Instead, Europe-China trade relies on transit via the Red Sea, hindered by Houthi ops against the US and Israel.
• Fears of China’s sophisticated and cost-competitive automotive and green tech, which along with consumer goods, chemicals and steel could further deindustrialize the EU, especially as China enjoys access to discounted Russian energy while the bloc is stuck with pricey American gas deliveries.
• Unresolved industrial subsidies, agricultural dumping, IP and tech-related bitterness.

Ultimately, enhanced EU-China would be possible, and advantageous, Giuliano says, but only if Brussels “had a more neutral stance” in international affairs, “siding a little bit with BRICS and also the Belt and Road Initiative. “But again, there are a lot of obstacles for that, and the US would not allow it to happen, because they want to have a sphere of influence between North and South America and the EU. They want to control those blocs. And they fight with the multipolar world and this transition to a multipolar world,” the observer noted. In the US’s ‘grand geopolitical chessboard’, the EU remains “one of the big, most important parts,” Giuliano summed up.

Read more …

“A single Obama-appointed district judge is trying to hamstring the entire executive branch’s ability to enforce immigration law.”

Trump Admin Fights Back Against Rogue Judge’s Contempt Warning (Margolis)

The Trump administration has just shown exactly how to handle judicial activism: by fighting back with everything it has. In a bold move that’s sure to have the Democratic establishment sputtering with rage, Trump’s legal team filed an immediate appeal Wednesday evening against Judge James Boasberg’s outrageous contempt threat. The judge’s unprecedented power grab attempted to block crucial deportation flights, and he’s learning the hard way that the Trump administration isn’t taking his judicial overreach sitting down. The administration’s legal response was swift and devastating. Its appeal systematically dismantled Boasberg’s ruling, pointing out how it represents a “massive, unauthorized imposition on the Executive’s authority” and directly contradicts recent Supreme Court precedent.

The Trump administration’s brief appeal to the D.C. Circuit Court does not include any new details, as the facts of the case have already been heard by the district and appellate court. The appellate court last month ruled 2-1 to uphold Boasberg’s temporary restraining order. The Supreme Court, however, ruled 5-4 last month that the Trump administration could resume its deportation flights under the Alien Enemies Act, so long as individuals subject to removal under the law were given due process protections, and the opportunity to pursue habeas relief – or the ability to have their case heard by a U.S. court prior to their removal. Boasberg said Wednesday that the court found that the Trump administration had demonstrated a “willful disregard” for his March 15 emergency order, which temporarily halted all deportation flights to El Salvador under the Alien Enemies Act, a 1798 statute providing for such deportations during “a declared war between the United States and any foreign nation or government, or any invasion or predatory incursion” by a foreign nation.

What makes this pushback so satisfying is how it exposes the left’s double standard. When Trump follows the law and exercises his constitutional authority to protect Americans, leftists cry “contempt.” But when Democratic appointees like Boasberg ignore Supreme Court rulings they don’t like? Crickets from the mainstream media. Team Trump’s legal filing didn’t pull any punches. It meticulously detailed how Boasberg’s ruling attempts to usurp executive authority that the Supreme Court explicitly confirmed just last month. The 5-4 decision authorized these deportation flights, but apparently, left-wing district court judges think they can override the Supreme Court because “Orange man bad.” The administration’s response demonstrates exactly why Trump’s approach to the judiciary is so necessary.

While previous Republican administrations might have meekly complied with such judicial overreach, Trump’s team recognizes these tactics for what they are — an attempt to legislate from the bench. A single Obama-appointed district judge is trying to hamstring the entire executive branch’s ability to enforce immigration law. The Trump administration isn’t just fighting back against one bad ruling; it’s defending the fundamental separation of powers. This appeal systematically addresses every aspect of Boasberg’s flawed and blatantly partisan reasoning while simultaneously highlighting the urgent national security implications of these deportation flights. Of course, the left is not used to an administration that actually fights back against judicial activism. It expected Trump to roll over like so many Republicans before him. Instead, it’s getting a masterclass in constitutional governance.

Read more …

“Knee-deep in the mud..”

Trump’s present day nemesis judge fulfilled that role also during the Russiagate years. When Clinesmith falsified a FISA application.

Convicted FBI Lawyer Clinesmith Was Spared From Prison By Boasberg (JTN)

Convicted FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith — whom Judge James Boasberg gave a slap on the wrist for his crimes years before becoming a public foe of President Donald Trump’s deportation policies — was more deeply involved in the deeply flawed Crossfire Hurricane investigation than previously known. Clinesmith, who worked on both the FBI’s Hillary Clinton email investigation and on the Trump-Russia collusion inquiry, pleaded guilty to falsifying a document during the bureau’s efforts to renew FISA authority to wiretap Carter Page, who was an adviser to Trump’s 2016 campaign. Newly-declassified details about Clinesmith’s involvement include a wide swath of information about his role in the case. He was a key go-to for former FBI lawyer Lisa Page and fired FBI special agent Peter Strzok throughout the debunked collusion saga and a main driver in obtaining a FISA warrant against Page based on the infamous Steele dossier.

Clinesmith also granted his seal of approval on a document describing the FBI’s pretextual briefing of then-candidate Trump, was deeply involved in the investigation into retired Lt. Gen. Mike Flynn, played a role in going after former Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos, and more. He also helped the FBI push its “Cross Wind” investigation, which Just the News can confirm related to the targeting of security expert Walid Phares, which resulted in no accusations of wrongdoing and no charges. Clinesmith confessed in August 2020 that he had manipulated a CIA email in 2017 to state that Carter Page was “not a source” for the CIA when that agency had actually told the bureau on multiple occasions that Page was in fact an “operational contact” for the CIA.

Boasberg, the federal judge who is blocking Trump’s efforts to deport Venezuelan gang members, also played a key and controversial role in the aftermath of the Trump-Russia collusion saga as the leader of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. The judge, nominated to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia by then-President Barack Obama in 2011, is currently engaged in an all-out legal battle with the Trump Justice Department. But in his role as the head of the FISA Court he made a number of divisive decisions, including a slap on the wrist for a member of the FBI’s Crossfire Hurricane team, the appointment of officials who had defended the FBI’s actions during the Russiagate saga, the renewal of the FBI’s FISA powers, and more. Boasberg ruled this week that “probable cause exists” to hold Trump administration officials in criminal contempt after they violated his orders by continuing deportation flights. But his ruling follows the Supreme Court holding that Boasberg’s court was in an improper venue for the case altogether.

Boasberg, in his role as a federal judge, denied the Justice Department’s efforts to seek up to six months behind bars for Clinesmith, who pleaded guilty in Special Counsel John Durham’s Trump-Russia investigation — instead giving Clinesmith a year of probation, 400 hours of community service, and no fine. Durham argued that Clinesmith’s “deceptive conduct” related to the FISA application fabrication “was antithetical to the duty of candor and eroded the FISA’s confidence in the accuracy of all previous FISA applications worked on by the defendant,” and said his deception “fueled public distrust of the FBI and of the entire FISA program itself.” But Boasberg seemed to defend Clinesmith’s deceptive FISA-related actions during his January 2021 sentencing.

“Mr. Clinesmith likely believed that what he said was true,” Boasberg wrote, adding, “I do not believe he was attempting to achieve an end he knew was wrong.” The judge claimed that “it is not clear to me that the fourth FISA warrant would not have been signed but for this error. … Even if Mr. Clinesmith had been accurate about Mr. Page’s relationship with the other government agency, the warrant may well have been signed and the surveillance authorized.” Durham had argued that Clinesmith’s deception “fueled public distrust of the FBI and of the entire FISA program itself.” Anthony Scarpelli, then a top prosecutor on Durham’s team, also argued that “the defendant’s criminal conduct tarnished the integrity of the FISA program” and that “the resulting harm is immeasurable.”

Clinesmith told the court that “I am deeply remorseful for any effect my actions may have had” on the FISA process even as he claimed that “I never intended to mislead my colleagues about the status of Dr. Page.” But Boasberg lamented that Clinesmith had been “abused” and “vilified” on a “national scale” when the judge handed down his sentence, though he did acknowledge that the FISA court’s reputation “has suffered” from the ex-FBI attorney’s actions. DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz in 2019 found huge flaws with the FBI’s Russia collusion investigation, finding at least 17 “significant errors and omissions” related to the FISA warrants against former Trump campaign associate Carter Page. He also criticized the “central and essential” role of British ex-spy Christopher Steele’s debunked dossier in the FBI’s politicized FISA surveillance. Clinesmith reportedly circulated the dossier to other law enforcement staff.

FBI notes of a January 2017 interview with Steele source Igor Danchenko showed he told the bureau he “did not know the origins” of some of Steele’s claims and “did not recall” other dossier information. Danchenko also noted much of what he gave to Steele was “word of mouth and hearsay,” some of which stemmed from a “conversation that [he] had with friends over beers,” and the most salacious allegations may have been made in “jest.” The special counsel assessed that “the FBI ignored the fact that at no time before, during, or after Crossfire Hurricane were investigators able to corroborate a single substantive allegation in the Steele dossier reporting.” The new revelations about Clinesmith come partly through further declassified text messages sent by Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, and others involved in the Crossfire Hurricane investigation.

Read more …

“We keep watching….”

REPORT: President Trump Opposed Israeli Strikes on Iran Nuclear Sites (CTH)

The report comes as a result of leaks to the New York Times. Which, given the nature of the subject matter and administration officials involved, indicates the sourcing is from the domestic IC side of things. Specifically, the greatest likelihood is from someone in the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) talking to media. Keep that in mind. According to leaked information to the New York Times, President Trump did not agree with an Israeli proposal to launch military strikes against Iran. According to the narrative as advanced, President Trump, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth were in agreement to attempt diplomatic solutions instead of bombing Iran. Israel could not conduct the attack without U.S. support, which President Trump decided not to give. Instead, Trump wanted a more forceful push toward engagement and diplomacy with Iran surrounding the ongoing contentious issue of nuclear development.

NEW YORK TIMES – “Israel had planned to strike Iranian nuclear sites as soon as next month but was waved off by President Trump in recent weeks in favor of negotiating a deal with Tehran to limit its nuclear program, according to administration officials and others briefed on the discussions. Mr. Trump made his decision after months of internal debate over whether to pursue diplomacy or support Israel in seeking to set back Iran’s ability to build a bomb, at a time when Iran has been weakened militarily and economically. The debate highlighted fault lines between historically hawkish American cabinet officials and other aides more skeptical that a military assault on Iran could destroy the country’s nuclear ambitions and avoid a larger war. It resulted in a rough consensus, for now, against military action, with Iran signaling a willingness to negotiate.

Israeli officials had recently developed plans to attack Iranian nuclear sites in May. They were prepared to carry them out, and at times were optimistic that the United States would sign off. The goal of the proposals, according to officials briefed on them, was to set back Tehran’s ability to develop a nuclear weapon by a year or more. Almost all of the plans would have required U.S. help not just to defend Israel from Iranian retaliation, but also to ensure that an Israeli attack was successful, making the United States a central part of the attack itself. For now, Mr. Trump has chosen diplomacy over military action.”

This is where we need to insert the element that all media generally refuse to associate, Russia.” Iran has reengaged with officials from President Trump’s administration following a letter Trump wrote to the leadership in Iran. President Trump wants Mideast peace; he also wants to avoid the issue of Iran having a nuclear weapon. President Trump views military action as the last possible resort for failed diplomatic and geopolitical efforts. Israel wants to attack Iran. President Trump wants to support Israel but doesn’t want expanded military conflict that pulls the USA into more Mideast war. As we see in the continued issues within Ukraine, the CIA supports expanded conflict in both Ukraine and Iran. Israel and the CIA are in alignment. Hence, in our ongoing restaurant analogy, the CIA is the kitchen, and Israel has a table there. Russian President Vladimir Putin could be an influential geopolitical partner with President Trump, if Trump can get the issues of Ukraine and Russia solved and then pivot to Iran.

Unfortunately, the CIA does not want the issues within Ukraine solved, doesn’t want Trump and Putin coordinating and certainly doesn’t want Trump and Putin to work out a new strategic global map that does not contain useful conflict. Again, Israel and the CIA are in alignment. If President Trump builds a new bridge to Putin the bypass will significantly hurt traffic around the restaurant. The congressional zoning commission (House) is sympathetic to the long-term contract held by the chef, and the Israeli chamber of commerce are paying the county commissioners (senators) ‘indulgency fees’ to maintain the current ingress and egress. With the January change in shingle, Secretary of State Marco Rubio is now the maître d at the front of the house. Secretary Rubio is not using the menu options created by the kitchen team.

The kitchen is not happy (drones into Moscow). DNI Gabbard in place as the IC hostess, is trying to keep the restaurant operation seamless so the customers generally don’t notice. Unfortunately, the kitchen isn’t soundproof, and we can hear plates crashing (NYT leaks). Around the neighborhood, the locals are worried the kitchen staff might start spitting in their food if they are seen enjoying the new service and menu options. A few of the regulars have told the maître d and hostess about the rumors. The issue is being discussed as part of a pre-planned remodel. The interior architect (Trump) and interior designer (Musk) are proposing to remove the walls so the customers can see the kitchen operation as part of a new and modern decor, style and ambiance [transparency]. However, the guys who eat in the kitchen aren’t going to be happy if they are exposed to the riffraff and forced to eat at ordinary tables.

We keep watching….

Read more …

“Pam Bondi: Every American should be thanking Trump tonight..”

“..it was a stealth DOJ Lawfare operative who purposefully wrote in a court filing that Garcia’s deportation was a “mistake.”

Pam Bondi Outlines Timeline and History of MS13 Illegal Alien (CTH)

Not since the Sandra Fluke election operation have the intel democrats coordinated so heavily with their media allies to organize support for a random person within the political/social narrative space, as they have with Kilmar Abrego Garcia. Apparently, the controlled U.S. media and their leftist politicians in office are choosing to use Garcia as a 2026 midterm election cry, similar to 2020’s George Floyd. The professional democrat party, their social media warriors/foot soldiers and the aligned propaganda media are all-in to use Kilmar Abrego Garcia as the face of their politics.

Attempting to counter the false narratives that surround the deportation of Garcia, Attorney General Pam Bondi makes her 77th appearance on Fox News to push back. Sean Hannity provides the Fox venue du jour. The responsibility is accurately applied to Bondi’s effort, considering it was a stealth DOJ Lawfare operative who purposefully wrote in a court filing that Garcia’s deportation was a “mistake.” The failure of Main Justice to catch the Lawfare operation within their ranks, has triggered these media events.

Read more …

“Maine Democrats have doubled down on their far-left agenda, and now our students and families stand poised to lose hundreds of millions in federal funding..”

Maine claims that keeping guys out of girls’ private rooms is “politically motivated”. Huh?

Bondi Announces Lawsuit Against Maine Over Boys in Girls’ Sports (ET)

The Department of Justice is seeking a federal court injunction requiring Pine Tree State schools to immediately stop transgender boys from competing in girls’ sports and return all athletic records and titles to their rightful female owners. The federal agency will also consider retroactively pulling funding from school districts that have not complied with Title IX regulations in the past, Attorney General Pam Bondi said during an April 16 news conference in Washington. “Pretty basic stuff,” she said. “This is about women’s sports. This is also about young women’s personal safety.” Bondi was flanked by Education Secretary Linda McMahon and Maine Assemblywoman Laurel Libby, who was censured by her state’s Democrat-led state legislature for posting photos and the identity of a male transgender athlete from Greely High School who won an indoor track state pole vaulting title this year.

Maine high school athletes who competed against transgender males also appeared on stage, along with Riley Gaines, a former NCAA swimmer who brought this debate to the national stage after losing the championship to a transgender male who had competed in the men’s division until his senior year. Bondi said a Maine transgender male also won a cross-country state title last fall in the girls’ division and placed at state-level skiing competitions this past winter. “That took away a spot from young women in women’s sports,” Bondi said. “Shame on him.” Bondi did not disclose where this federal lawsuit was filed. In a separate court case related to the same debate, a judge ordered the federal government to unfreeze Department of Agriculture funding to schools.

President Donald Trump previously issued executive orders clarifying Title IX and prohibiting males from competing in women’s sports. The NCAA has already complied, and Republican House members are working on a bill to codify that regulation. Maine’s attorney general has already informed Bondi that his state has no intention of complying with the order. School district superintendents told their communities that until directed otherwise, they are expected to comply with state laws that are contrary to Trump’s executive order. Trump publicly sparred with Maine Gov. Janet Mills at a governor’s workshop on Capitol Hill in February, warning her that he would pull funding if she continued to defy his executive order. At the state level, the Greely High School community has shown public support for all transgender athletes, including their state champion pole vaulter, criticizing Trump and the NCAA for its compliance. But Libby has also received plenty of support via her social media presence and continues to state that most Mainers do not support men competing as women in their state.

“Maine Democrats have doubled down on their far-left agenda, and now our students and families stand poised to lose hundreds of millions in federal funding,” Libby said in a statement provided to The Epoch Times. “Their radical gender ideology is endangering the continued existence of women’s sports and penalizing Maine students against the will of Maine citizens.” Mills issued a statement after Bondi’s news conference, saying that Trump and the Department of Justice’s actions are politically motivated. “As I have said previously, this is not just about who can compete on the athletic field, this is about whether a President can force compliance with his will, without regard for the rule of law that governs our nation. I believe he cannot,” the governor said.

Read more …

They would simply rename a office and say they shut it down.

Rubio Shuts Down Censorship Program Biden Admin Claimed was Ended (Turley)

For years, I have written about the Global Engagement Center (GEC) in columns and my book, The Indispensable Right. It was one of the hubs of the censorship network under the Biden Administration, which claimed it was shut down after Congress cut off funding. However, Secretary of State Marco Rubio just announced that he has terminated the office, which was operating under a different name (a familiar tactic by the anti-free speech movement). Secretary Rubio announced the closure of the State Department’s Counter Foreign Information Manipulation and Interference office, which was previously known as the Global Engagement Center (GEC): “Over the last decade, Americans have been slandered, fired, charged, and even jailed for simply voicing their opinions. That ends today…

When Republicans in Congress sunset GEC’s funding at the end of last year, the Biden State Department slapped on a new name. The GEC became the Counter Foreign Information Manipulation and Interference (R-FIMI) office, with the same roster of employees. With this new name, they hoped to survive the transition to the new administration. Today, we are putting that to an end. Whatever name it goes by, GEC is dead. It will not return.” Bravo, Mr. Secretary, Bravo. We previously saw this dishonest practice in the Biden Administration when they claimed to shut down a censorship office only to shift work to other offices.

As we celebrated the demise of the infamous Disinformation Governing Board, the Biden administration never disclosed a larger censorship effort. That includes a recently disclosed back channel to Twitter where dozens of FBI agents tagged citizens for censorship. I have testified on that evidence of evasion and censorship. The new move will remove 50 full-time staff positions at the Counter Foreign Information Manipulation and Interference office. Rubio discussed his decision in an op-ed for The Federalist. The GEC was part of the Election Integrity Partnership, which we have also discussed as a consortium of nonprofits, social media platforms, and government agencies that were key to the censorship system.

The Biden Administration created censorship offices throughout the government while sending massive amounts of federal funding to groups and universities to help target individuals and groups.Rooting out these offices and grants will take a prolonged effort, but great progress has already occurred under the Trump Administration. Of course, this will add to the ranks of censorious Ronins looking for new sponsors. Many will find homes in academia and in Europe. Yet, there is reason to take heart even as we fight to regain the ground lost under Biden. As Winston Churchill said in 1942, “This is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning.”

Read more …

A Chihuahua rules the waves…

A Chihuahua That Thinks It’s A Lion: The Decline of Britain (Bordachev)

There are only two countries in the world that have exercised full autonomy over major political decisions for more than 500 years: Russia and Britain. No others come close. That alone makes Moscow and London natural rivals. But now, we can say with confidence that our historical adversary is no longer what it once was. Britain is losing its foreign policy clout and has been reduced to what we might call “Singapore on the Atlantic”: an island trading power, out of sync with the broader trajectory of world affairs. The fall from global relevance is not without irony. For centuries, Britain caused nothing but harm to the international system. It played France and Germany off one another, betrayed its own allies in Eastern Europe, and exploited its colonies to exhaustion. Even within the European Union, from 1972 until Brexit in 2020, the UK worked tirelessly to undermine the project of integration – first from within, and now from without, with backing from Washington.

Today, the British foreign policy establishment still attempts to sabotage European cohesion, acting as an American proxy. The late historian Edward Carr once mocked the British worldview with a fictional headline: “Fog in Channel – Continent Cut Off.” This egoism, common to island nations, is especially pronounced in Britain, which has always existed beside continental civilization. It borrowed freely from Europe’s culture and political ideas, yet always feared them. That fear was not unfounded. Britain has long understood that true unification of Europe – especially involving Germany and Russia – would leave it sidelined. Thus, the primary goal of British policy has always been to prevent cooperation between the major continental powers. Even now, no country is more eager than Britain to see the militarization of Germany. The idea of a stable Russia-Germany alliance has always been a nightmare scenario for London.

Whenever peace between Moscow and Berlin looked possible, Britain would intervene to sabotage it. The British approach to international relations mirrors its domestic political thought: atomized, competitive, distrustful of solidarity. While continental Europe produced theories of political community and mutual obligation, Britain gave the world Thomas Hobbes and his “Leviathan,” a grim vision of life without justice between the state and its citizens. That same combative logic extends to foreign policy. Britain doesn’t cooperate; it divides. It has always preferred enmity among others over engagement with them. But the tools of that strategy are disappearing. Britain today is a power in steep decline, reduced to shouting from the sidelines. Its internal political life is a carousel of increasingly unqualified prime ministers. This is not simply a result of difficult times. It reflects a deeper problem: the absence of serious political leadership in London.

Even the United States, Britain’s closest ally, is now a threat to its autonomy. The Anglosphere no longer needs two powers that speak English and operate under the same oligarchic political order. For a time, Britain found comfort in the Biden administration, which tolerated its role as transatlantic intermediary. London leveraged its anti-Russian stance to stay relevant and inserted itself into US-EU relations. But that space is narrowing. Today’s American leaders are uninterested in mediators. During a recent trip to Washington, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer could barely answer direct questions on foreign policy. His deference reflected a new reality: even the illusion of independence is fading. Meanwhile, France’s Emmanuel Macron, for all his posturing, at least leads a country that actually controls its nuclear arsenal.

Britain claims to have authority over its nuclear submarines, but many doubt it. In ten years, experts believe it may lose even the technical capacity to manage its nuclear weapons without US support. At that point, London will face a choice: full subservience to Washington or exposure to EU pressures, especially from France. Recent talk in London of sending “European peacekeepers” to Ukraine is a case in point. Despite the unrealistic nature of such proposals, British and French officials spent weeks debating operational details. Some reports suggest the plan stalled due to lack of funds. The real motive was likely to project relevance and show the world that Britain still has a role to play. But neither the media spin nor the political theater can change the facts. Britain’s global standing has diminished. It is no longer capable of independent action and has little influence even as a junior partner. Its leaders are consumed by domestic dysfunction and foreign policy fantasy.

In practical terms, Britain remains dangerous to Russia in two ways. First, by supplying weapons and mercenaries to Ukraine, it increases our costs and casualties. Second, in a moment of desperation, it might try to manufacture a small nuclear crisis. If that happens, one hopes the Americans would take the necessary steps to neutralize the threat – even if that means sinking a British submarine.There is nothing positive for Russia, or the world, in the continued existence of Britain as a foreign policy actor. Its legacy is one of division, sabotage, and imperial plunder. Now, it lives off the crumbs of a bygone empire, barking from the Atlantic like a chihuahua with memories of being a lion. The world moves on. Britain does not.

Read more …

Trump will have tariffs for that.

China Replacing US Oil With Canadian – Bloomberg (RT)

China has been importing record amounts of crude oil from Canada and drastically reducing supplies from the US in light of the trade war with Washington, Bloomberg reported on Wednesday. Washington and Beijing have implemented a series of reciprocal tariff hikes over the past two months in light of which the latter has slashed purchases of US oil by roughly 90%, according to the outlet. China previously indicated that it would not implement more tariff hikes against US goods but would rather employ alternative ways to retaliate. Chinese crude imports from a port near Vancouver on Canada’s Pacific coast soared to a record 7.3 million barrels in March and may exceed the figure this month, Bloomberg reported, citing data from London-based global oil and gas cargo tracking firm Vortexa Ltd.

Chinese imports of US oil, meanwhile, have fallen to 3 million barrels per month from a peak of 29 million last June, it added. China’s direct imports of Canadian crude oil had historically been minimal, primarily due to infrastructure constraints. Chinese refineries have mainly sourced crude from the Middle East and Russia. Roughly 1.7% of China’s total crude imports came from the US last year, according to Chinese customs data, down from 2.5% in 2023. Nearly all of Canada’s oil is shipped to the US to be processed there or re-exported to Asia. However, the completion last May of the Trans Mountain Expansion pipeline, which takes crude to Canada’s Pacific coast, provided the country with an alternative route to export more volumes directly, primarily to Asia, thus reducing its reliance on the US.

“Given the trade war, it’s unlikely for China to import more US oil,” Bloomberg quoted Wenran Jiang, president of the Canada-China Energy & Environment Forum, as saying. “They are not going to bank on Russian alone or Middle Eastern alone. Anything from Canada will be welcome news.” China accounted for roughly 5% of US crude oil exports last year, according to ship-tracking data from Kpler. Russia remains China’s largest supplier of crude oil. Russian shipments to China reached the highest level on record in 2024. The increase in recent years is largely attributable to the discounts being offered on Russian crude. China’s imports of oil from Saudi Arabia, its second-largest supplier, declined by 9% year-on-year in 2024.

Read more …

EU will buy US LNG. Lots of it.

Trump Tariffs Could Cost EU $1.25 Trillion (RT)

A trade war with the US could cost the EU up to €1.1 trillion ($1.25 trillion) over the next four years if Donald Trump proceeds with proposed tariffs, according to a study by the German Economic Institute (IW). Earlier this month, the Trump administration announced a sweeping 20% tariff on all EU goods and a 25% tariff on all car imports in a bid to eliminate what Washington sees as a large trade deficit with the bloc. Brussels was set to introduce 25% retaliatory tariffs on US imports before Trump announced a 90-day pause on most tariffs to allow for negotiations. If an agreement is not reached and US tariffs are imposed, the EU’s cumulative costs are estimated to range between €780 billion ($886.5 billion) and €1.1 trillion ($1.25 trillion) from 2025 to 2028, depending on the scenario, the study released on Thursday said.

The institute also projects that Germany’s GDP could slump by 1.2% annually during the same period under tariffs. If trading partners respond with similar measures, the costs for Berlin could rise to 1.6%, according to the report. Germany’s economy, already facing challenges, is expected to grow by only 0.1% in 2025 after two consecutive years of contraction. The IW forecasts a total economic output loss of €180 billion (around $205 billion) by 2028 for Germany, primarily due to export losses and declining investments. The US was Germany’s largest trading partner in 2024, with bilateral trade totaling €253 billion ($287.5 billion). A trade conflict could significantly impact key sectors, including automotive and pharmaceuticals, experts have warned.

The IW also pointed out that although the tariffs have been suspended for 90 days, uncertainty remains high, hitting global investment planning.European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen earlier proposed a “zero-for-zero” tariff agreement to eliminate duties on industrial goods between the EU and the US. However, Trump rejected the offer, stating it was insufficient and demanded that the EU commit to purchasing $350 billion worth of American energy to receive tariff relief. Trump has criticized the EU’s trade practices, asserting that the bloc is “very bad to us” and highlighting the US trade deficit as justification for his stance. Officials from Washington and Brussels met for trade talks earlier this week, but made little headway in resolving their differences. US officials signaled that most tariffs on EU goods are likely to remain in place, according to Bloomberg.

Read more …

“The current iteration of traditional German the-Russians-are-coming..”

German Anti-Russia Propaganda Is Reaching Nazi-era Levels (Amar)

Like people almost everywhere in NATO-EU Europe, Germans are currently being subjected to a relentless barrage of shameless, often astonishingly crude propaganda. That’s because their political elites and mainstream media are desperately trying to prepare them for war against Russia. And this time, not by proxy, that is, by way of a devastated Ukraine and dead Ukrainians, but directly. As a former, very evil but in his prime all-too-popular German master of mass manipulation – who also happened to love war with Russia more than was good for him (or Germany) – explained a century ago, effective propaganda keeps the world very, very simple. Or, to add a little detail, propaganda’s sometimes literally stunning success is built on two primitive yet powerful – and very old – tricks: the broken-record principle and the litany effect.

Their meaning, too, is elementary: In essence, if your image of reality is delusional, you don’t have sound arguments, and your case is absurd, do not despair. Instead, ceaselessly drum in a few very basic and bogus ideas until the audience is dizzy with repetition (the broken-record principle), while also eliciting frequent consent from it (the litany effect). In short: Keep shouting the same nonsense at them and make them bleat back “yes” regularly. You know, like a ritual, really. In the case of the manufacturing of the current iteration of traditional German the-Russians-are-coming hysteria as well, it is easy to identify its handful of specious, daft, and childishly simplistic key motifs: Russia and Russia alone is to blame for the war in Ukraine; Russia intends to attack Europe (if not the world) – and soon; and Russia is incredibly devious and scheming, so you cannot find a reasonable compromise with it.

Yet what about the nuts and bolts of this propaganda campaign? Even a simple story needs detail, and, if told and retold almost without letup, that detail at least needs to vary: Same old story but different flavor. That’s where things get tricky. For one thing, if you pick the wrong flavor, your propaganda may start looking as silly as it actually is. A current example in Germany – as well as the EU parliament – would be the recent hysteria over the global hit Sigma Boy from Russia. Its brilliantly catchy tune is a piece of art, like it or not. But its lyrics are about as profound as a margarine commercial.

Yet that won’t stop Germany’s radical-Centrist elite from exploring the song’s ominous depths as a weapon of nefarious Russian cultural warfare. Because Sigma Boy, one EU parliamentarian from Hamburg has noticed – with a little help from Ukraine – is really “a viral Russian trope used on social media that communicates patriarchal and pro-Russian worldviews” as well as “only one example of Russian infiltration of popular discourse through social media.” Also, you see, Sigma Boy is really just code for – scary sound effect – PUTIN!

Read more …

Google is huge, it has many branches and companies, spends a fortune. Still, 77.4% of its revenue came from online ads in 2023. Break it up fast. It’s a threat to a million small companies.

Court Rules Google Illegally Holds “Monopoly Power” In Online Ad Tech (ZH)

A U.S. federal court ruled that Google had illegally monopolized key digital advertising markets, including publisher ad servers, ad exchanges, and advertiser ad networks. This ruling could deal a major blow to Google’s core business pillar: advertising revenue (advertising accounted for about 77.4% of Google’s total revenue in 2023). U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema found on Thursday morning that Google had violated antitrust law by “willfully acquiring and maintaining monopoly power in the open-web display publisher ad server market and the open-web display ad exchange market.”

Here are the key findings in the landmark antitrust case (U.S. v. Google, 23-cv-00108, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Virginia (Alexandria):
Google violated Section 2 of the Sherman Act by willfully acquiring and maintaining monopoly power in:
• The open-web display publisher ad server market, and
• The open-web display ad exchange market Google also violated Sections 1 and 2 by unlawfully tying its publisher ad server (DoubleClick for Publishers/DFP) to its ad exchange (AdX). The court did not find that

Google held monopoly power in the third alleged market: advertiser ad networks.
Legal and Procedural Notes:
• The DOJ and 17 states originally brought the suit, accusing Google of monopolizing three key ad tech markets.
• Google had earlier tried to dismiss the case and transfer it to New York but failed.
• The court conducted a three-week bench trial and reviewed extensive expert testimony and evidence.

This case is one of several antitrust actions pending against Google. In a separate lawsuit, the Justice Department seeks to force Alphabet to divest its Chrome browser following a landmark ruling that found the company had monopolized the online search market. “Google will be drastically reshaped by court decrees in the next year or two,” The Information said, adding, “Google will likely be forced, as a result of today’s decision, to dismantle much of its ad tech business which dominates both how advertisers buy ads on independent websites, and how web publishers sell their ad space.”

Here are the next steps for Google, and it appears the court will be deciding on potential remedies:
• Google was found liable on Counts I, II, and IV, violating Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act. Count III was dismissed.
• The court will set a schedule for briefing and hearings to determine remedies, potentially including divestiture of DFP and AdX, injunctions against anticompetitive practices, and other measures to restore competition.
• The ruling highlights Google’s decade-long strategy of tying products and imposing exclusionary policies to maintain dominance in digital advertising, harming publishers, competition, and consumers.

Market response: Alphabet shares fell as much as 3.2% after the ruling. Competitor The Trade Desk’s stock jumped nearly 8%, reflecting investor optimism about improved competition in the ad tech space.

Read more …

He put the whistleblowers in charge.

Trump to Make an Epic Move at the IRS (Margolis)

Tax Day was Tuesday, and it goes without saying that we’d all love to see the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) disappear into the dustbin of history. But just as it is certain that we’re all going to die, we’re going to have to pay taxes. There have been some welcome changes at the IRS. As PJ Media previously reported, the IRS is now sharing illegal aliens’ tax information with ICE to help facilitate deportations. Trump has been pushing to turn every federal agency into an effective tool for catching and deporting illegal immigrants. And wouldn’t you know it, acting IRS Commissioner Melanie Krause couldn’t handle doing the right thing and resigned. And guess who’s likely to take her place? Gary Shapley, the IRS whistleblower who blew the lid off the Hunter Biden tax probe. He testified under oath that he faced retaliation simply for doing his job and cooperating with congressional investigators looking into the shady business dealings of the president’s son.

Now, according to the Associated Press, Shapley is expected to be promoted to acting commissioner of the IRS. Shapley and fellow IRS investigator Joseph Ziegler were sidelined from the Hunter Biden probe in December 2022 after raising serious concerns with their superiors. According to their testimony, the Justice Department under then-U.S. Attorney David Weiss repeatedly “slow-walked investigative steps” and stalled enforcement actions in the critical months leading up to the 2020 election. The saga over Hunter Biden’s taxes ended when Joe Biden gave Hunter a blanket pardon for any and all crimes he may have committed for a nearly ten-year period. Hunter had been facing trial in California for failing to pay at least $1.4 million in taxes but abruptly agreed to plead guilty just as jury selection was about to begin.

Despite that unfortunate ending to the story, the promotion of Shapley is welcome news. It’s a classic Trump-style move — putting truth-tellers in positions of power and pushing out the bureaucrats who’ve been protecting the swamp. In March, Shapley was promoted to Deputy Chief of IRS Criminal Investigations, and another IRS investigator who testified about Biden’s taxes, Joseph Ziegler, was assigned to the Treasury Secretary’s office as a senior adviser for IRS reform. Now, the tax collection agency is planning to name Shapley to one of the highest-ranking roles at the agency — in an interim role — as former Missouri congressman Billy Long awaits a confirmation hearing to lead the agency permanently, the people say. They were not authorized to speak publicly about the plan.

President Donald Trump nominated Long, who worked as an auctioneer before serving six terms in the House of Representatives, to serve as the next commissioner of the IRS. “Gary is a long-tenured civil servant who has dedicated the last 15 years of his professional life to the IRS,” a Treasury spokesperson told the Associated Press. “Gary has proven his honesty and devotion to enforcing the law without fear or favor, even at great cost to his own career. He’ll be a great asset to the IRS as we rethink and reform this crucial organization.” Shapley may only serve temporarily, but you can’t ignore the symbolism behind the move.

Read more …

“The era of global boiling has arrived!”

Climate Myths (John Stossel)

I guess United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres didn’t think his hyping global warming risks brought him enough attention, so now he says, “The era of global boiling has arrived!” Global boiling? Give me a break. Yes, the climate is warming. We can deal with that. What annoys me is politicians, activists and media pushing hysterical myths.

Myth 1: The Arctic will soon be ice-free. It “could already be ice-free by the summer of 2030!” shrieks a DW report. “‘Doomsday Glacier’ is melting faster than scientists thought,” adds the BBC. “Earth’s biggest cities are at risk!” Nonsense. “It’s not happening at nearly the catastrophic pace that they claim,” says Heartland Institute fellow Linnea Lueken in my new video. But the media show dramatic images of melting and missing ice. “No ice! There’s all these walruses laying out on a stony beach. … It’s because it’s the summertime! In the winter, it all comes right back!”

As far as ice disappearing in winter, too, “Compared to the amount of ice that’s in the Arctic,” says Lueken, it “is like a grain of sand … so minuscule compared to the amount of ice that’s there, it doesn’t even show up on a trend chart when you plot it.” But zealots push hysteria. In 2009, Al Gore, while collecting a Nobel prize, said there was “a 75% chance that the entire north polar ice cap … during some of the summer months, could be completely ice-free within five to seven years!” In just five to seven years! Oh, no! Wait … seven years have passed. In fact, 16 years passed. The ice cap has plenty of ice, even in summer. Yet nobody calls him on it. “They absolutely should be calling him on it,” says Lueken.

Myth 2: Polar bears are going extinct. Polar bears look cute, so environmental groups use them in ads to sucker you into donating money. But Polar bear populations have increased! In the 1960s, 17,000-19,000 was the highest of three scientific estimates of polar bear population. Today, there are about 26,000 polar bears. Yet the Environmental Defense Fund collected almost a quarter-billion dollars from gullible donors running ads that say: “Your support can help Environmental Defense Fund save the polar bears!” The EDF hasn’t agreed to my interview requests. I understand why. I would call their advertising sleazy. “Absolutely,” agrees Lueken, “the data is right there. It’s not hard to find out that polar bears are fine.” OK, maybe polar bears aren’t going extinct, but we might starve!

That’s Myth 3. MSNBC shrieks, “Climate change could create a massive global food shortage.” President Barack Obama said, “Our changing climate is already making it more difficult to produce food!” “There is no claim less true.” sighs Lueken. “Food production has skyrocketed.” She’s right, and the data is there for everyone to see. Agriculture output sets record highs year after year. In fact, the extra carbon dioxide in greenhouse gasses probably increases food production. “We inject CO2 into greenhouses for a reason,” Lueken points out. “It helps to fertilize plants for faster and better growth.” As the climate has warmed, the world experienced the biggest drop in hunger and malnutrition ever.

Still, when food prices rise, media idiots still blame climate change. The New York Times claimed “devastation that climate change had wrought” caused a rise in coffee prices.But global coffee production has increased by 82% since the 1990s.The Times story focused on a brief decline in coffee production in Honduras. But since the ’90s, coffee production there rose more than 200%. “They never apologize,” I note. “They never say, ‘Oh, we got this wrong.'” “No,” replies Lueken. “Even if they did have a retraction, the damage is already done.” Alarmist media and environmental groups never apologize. When doom doesn’t happen, they just move on to the next scare. I’ll cover four more myths about climate change next week..

Read more …

 

 

 

 

IVM

 

 

Alarma

 

 

K2-18b

 

 

Cartoon

 

 

Egret

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Apr 172025
 


Piet Mondriaan Trafalgar Square 1939-43

 

What Is a Woman? The UK Supreme Court Knows the Answer (Margolis)
Trump Shot Down Israel’s Plan To Attack Iran – NYT (RT)
New York AG Letitia James Accused of Alleged Mortgage Fraud (Turley)
Judge to Trump Administration: I Feel Unfacilitated (Turley)
Judge Boasberg Floats ‘Criminal Contempt’ Against Trump Admin (ZH)
Scott Jennings Schools CNN Panel Over Gang Member’s Deportation (PJM)
OpenAI Planning To Take On Musk’s X (RT)
Trump Is Right to Hammer Environmental Lawfare (DS)
What Can We Expect from the Peace Negotiations? (Paul Craig Roberts)
‘Stop Blackmailing’ – China to US (RT)
US To Restrict China’s Access in Exchange for Fewer Tariffs on Allies (Sp.)
US To Tie Tariff Deals To China Curbs – WSJ (RT)
Dutch MPs Call For Ban On Amplified Islamic Calls To Prayer (RMX)
Belgium Eyes Welfare Cuts To Meet NATO Target (RT)
Trump Confronts Economic and Geopolitical Reality (Ring)

 

 


Longhorn beetle’s face.

 

 

Genetics

Hero

AI

CCP

Macleod

Bukele taxes
https://twitter.com/MAGAVoice/status/1912335542806802689

Flynn

Tucker Bernier

 

 

 

 

From a bit of an unexpected corner, but we’ll take it. A man’s no. 1 duty is to protect women, and that was not happening.

What Is a Woman? The UK Supreme Court Knows the Answer (Margolis)

The U.K. Supreme Court delivered a landmark ruling Wednesday that affirmed that the legal definition of “woman” refers specifically to those born biologically female, excluding biological men who “identify” as women from that category. The decision marks a major course correction after years of gender ideology sweeping Europe. The AP reports: “Several women’s groups that supported the appeal celebrated outside court and hailed it as a major victory in their effort to protect spaces designated for women. “Everyone knows what sex is and you can’t change it,” said Susan Smith, co-director of For Women Scotland, which brought the case. “It’s common sense, basic common sense and the fact that we have been down a rabbit hole where people have tried to deny science and to deny reality and hopefully this will now see us back to, back to reality.” The ruling brings some clarity in the U.K. to a controversial issue that has roiled politics as women, parents, LGBTQ+ groups, lawmakers and athletes have debated gender identity rights.”

This wasn’t some razor-thin ruling divided on ideological grounds. The UK Supreme Court ruled unanimously, with all five judges in agreement: under the Equality Act, biological men can be lawfully excluded from women-only spaces and services even if they “identify” as women. That includes places like changing rooms, female-only shelters, swimming areas, and women-centered medical or counseling services. The court made it explicit that even a transgender person holding a certificate legally recognizing them as female does not qualify as a “woman” under equality law. As far as I know, none of the judges on the UK Supreme Court are biologists, yet they were able to answer the question “What is a woman?” when Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson couldn’t do the same when asked during her confirmation hearings.

The case stems from a 2018 law passed by the Scottish Parliament stating there should be a 50% female representation on the boards of Scottish public bodies. Transgender women with gender recognition certificates were to be included in meeting the quota. “Interpreting ‘sex’ as certificated sex would cut across the definitions of ‘man’ and ‘woman’ … and, thus, the protected characteristic of sex in an incoherent way,” Hodge said. “It would create heterogeneous groupings.” Hannah Ford, an employment lawyer, said that while the judgment will provide clarity, it would be a setback for transgender rights and there would be “an uphill battle” to ensure workplaces are welcoming places for trans people. “This will be really wounding for the trans community,” Ford told Sky News. Groups that had challenged the Scottish government popped the cork on a bottle of champagne outside the court and sang, “women’s rights are human rights.”

The UK Supreme Court’s landmark ruling defining women based on biological sex isn’t just a victory for common sense; it’s a desperately needed course correction following years of radical gender ideology being legitimized worldwide. Thankfully, President Donald Trump has been fighting to bring this return to sanity to America, despite relentless opposition from radical leftists and activist judges who seem determined to deny basic biological reality.

Read more …

Looks like a narrow escape. Bombing Iran is sheer stupidity. A country that has always said it doesn’t want nukes, for religious reasons. Good to see multiple cabinet members get input.

Trump Shot Down Israel’s Plan To Attack Iran – NYT (RT)

US President Donald Trump has rejected Israel’s proposal to strike Iran’s nuclear sites, The New York Times reported on Wednesday evening, citing White House officials and others familiar with the matter. Trump reportedly chose instead to pursue a new deal with Tehran.According to the Times, Israel had drafted plans to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities in early May, aiming to delay its ability to develop a nuclear weapon by a year or more. After considering a combination of airstrikes and commando raids, the Jewish state reportedly proposed “an extensive bombing campaign” that would have lasted more than a week. Israeli officials had hoped that the US would not only greenlight the operation but also actively support it.

Trump, however, shot down the plan earlier this month, following a “rough consensus” in the White House. Vice President J.D. Vance, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard were among the top administration members who reportedly raised concerns that the strikes would “spark a wider conflict with Iran.” Iran and Israel exchanged strikes in April and October of last year, marking the most dramatic escalation between the regional arch-rivals.

Trump tore up the 2015 UN-backed agreement on Iran’s nuclear program during his first term in office. The president accused Tehran of secretly violating the deal and reimposed sanctions. Iran responded by rolling back its own compliance with the accord and accelerating its enrichment of uranium. Last month, Trump threatened to bomb Iran “if they don’t make a deal,” to which the Islamic Republic vowed not to bow to pressure. Despite the belligerent rhetoric, the US and Iran held a first round of talks in Oman on Saturday. The negotiations took place in a “productive, calm and positive atmosphere,” Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said.

https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1912670170977382901

Read more …

She deserves it.

New York AG Letitia James Accused of Alleged Mortgage Fraud (Turley)

“No matter how big, rich or powerful you think you are, no one is above the law.” Those words by New York state Attorney General Letitia James echoed throughout the media, lionizing her after her office secured a judgment against Donald Trump for false business practices, including misrepresentations on loan documents. They may echo even louder this week as James finds herself the subject of a criminal referral for committing alleged financial fraud to secure her own property loans. On April 14, William J. Pulte, Director of US Federal Housing (FHFA), sent a referral letter to the Justice Department detailing alleged false statements made in filings by James to secure housing loans. For an attorney general who just prosecuted Trump for everything short of ripping a label off a mattress, the irony is crushing.

The alleged false statements are particularly damning for someone who insisted that she had zero tolerance for such irregularities or errors in financial filings. Indeed, the greatest danger is that the Letitia James standard could be applied to Letitia James in guaranteeing that “no one is above the law.” The allegations against James run from the demonstrably false to the downright bizarre. In securing a loan for a home in Norfolk, Va., James is accused of claiming through her representative that the property would be her principal residence. As the referral notes, primary residences receive more advantageous rates. However, as “the sitting New York Attorney General of New York [James] is required by law to have her primary residence in the state of New York.” Notably, the Justice Department has prosecuted those who have committed this common fraud.

For example, in 2017, it charged a man in Puerto Rico with false statements on a reverse mortgage loan application in which he falsely claimed the property as his principal residence. It emphasized that “mortgage lenders provide capital so people can purchase homes, not enrich themselves illegally.” There are other such cases under 18 U.S.C. 1014 and related laws. James could claim that these representations were made by a third party acting on her behalf. However, that is precisely the argument that she repeatedly rejected in the Trump case, insisting that he was legally obligated to review all filings made in his name or that of his companies. James is also accused of misrepresenting a five-unit property in Brooklyn as a four-unit property “to receive better interest rates … and to receive mortgage assistance through [the Home Affordable Modification Program].”

The referral also includes a claim that James filed papers that listed herself and her father as a married couple. The referral notes that just last year, Baltimore’s State Attorney, Marilyn Mosby, was convicted by the Biden administration of filing a false mortgage application. Another case resulted in a guilty plea last week for fraudulent filings in a home loan. The timing for James could not be worse. The Trump civil case has languished on appeal for months with a long overdue opinion. The appellate argument did not go well for James in the case that resulted in a grotesque half-billion-dollar fine in a case where no one lost a dime. James accused Trump of inflating property value in filings, a common practice in the real estate field. It did not matter that the company warned banks to do their own evaluations. It did not matter that bank officials testified that they made money on the deal. Indeed, the “victim” wanted more business from Trump. None of that matters.

James not only demanded an even greater fine but wanted to foreclose on Trump properties after Trump was told to secure a ridiculous $455 million bond to simply secure appellate review. Throughout that case, James repeated her mantra that there would be no exceptions for the rich and powerful. She insisted that accuracy on such financial records is essential and must be rigorously enforced. Many of us objected that James was selectively targeting Trump after she ran for office on the pledge to nail him on some unspecified offense.

James insisted that this was not lawfare and that she would prosecute anyone guilty of false or misleading statements on financial filings. She is now allegedly that person. It is not clear what James’ defense will be to these allegations. However, she may cite the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Thompson v. United States, which ruled in March that 18 U.S.C. § 1014 does not criminalize statements that are merely misleading but are not false. The problem is that, if proven, these statements are not misleading. They are false.

Read more …

Two separate judges are on the MS-13 case.

Judge to Trump Administration: I Feel Unfacilitated (Turley)

After the Supreme Court ruling in the case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, I wrote a column disagreeing with the media coverage that claimed that the Trump Administration was ordered to return Garcia to the United States from El Salvador. The Administration mistakingly sent Garcia to a foreign prison. However, the Court only ordered that the Administration “facilitate” such a return, a term it failed to define. Now, U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis is indicating that she feels unfacilitated, but it is unclear how a court should address this curious writ of facilitation. After the ruling, many on the left claimed “Supreme Court in a unanimous decision: He has a legal right to be here, and you have to bring him back.” The Court actually warned that the district court could order the government to facilitate but not necessarily “to effectuate” the return.

“The application is granted in part and denied in part, subject to the direction of this order. Due to the administrative stay issued by THE CHIEF JUSTICE, the deadline imposed by the District Court has now passed. To that extent, the Government’s emergency application is effectively granted in part and the deadline in the challenged order is no longer effective. The rest of the District Court’s order remains in effect but requires clarification on remand. The order properly requires the Government to “facilitate” Abrego Garcia’s release from custody in El Salvador and to ensure that his case is handled as it would have been had he not been improperly sent to El Salvador. The intended scope of the term “effectuate” in the District Court’s order is, however, unclear, and may exceed the District Court’s authority. The District Court should clarify its directive, with due regard for the deference owed to the Executive Branch in the conduct of foreign affairs. For its part, the Government should be prepared to share what it can concerning the steps it has taken and the prospect of further steps. The order heretofore entered by THE CHIEF JUSTICE is vacated.”

So what does that mean? As I asked in the column, “what if the Trump Administration says that inquiries were made, but the matter has proven intractable or unresolvable? Crickets.” The Administration has made clear that it views the orders as meaning that, if El Salvador brings Garcia to its doorstep, it must open the door. The court clearly has a different interpretation. Judge Xinis said yesterday, “I’ve gotten nothing. I’ve gotten no real response, and no real legal justification for not answering,” she continued, adding that if the administration is not going to answer her questions “then justify why. That’s what we do in this house.” There is nothing worse than a feeling of being unfacilitated, but how does the court measure good faith facilitation? Garcia is an El Salvadorian citizen in an El Salvadorian prison. The refusal of El Salvador to send the accused MS-13 gang member back effectively ends the question on any return.

Many of us suspect that El Salvador would send back Garcia if asked, but how can a court measure the effort of an Administration in communications with a foreign country? Judge Xinis is suggesting that she will be holding someone in contempt. However, this is a discussion occurring at the highest level. Would a formal request be enough? Is Judge Xinis suggesting that the court can require punitive or coercive measures against a foreign country to facilitate a change in its position? The fact is that a unanimous decision of the Court is not hard when no one can say conclusively what the order means. If Judge Xinis is going to move ahead with new orders, it will find its way back to the Supreme Court.

The Court clearly (and correctly) held that Garcia deserves due process and that this removal was a mistake. As I have previously stated, the Administration should have brought him back for proper deportation. I still believe that. However, the Court also held that the President’s Article II authority over foreign policy has to weigh heavily in such questions. As the court goes down this road, it can quickly get bogged down in subjective judgments on what constitutes facilitation. That is the can kicked down the road by the Supreme Court and it is now likely to come rattling back to the justices.

Read more …

The de facto ruler of America.

Judge Boasberg Floats ‘Criminal Contempt’ Against Trump Admin (ZH)

US District Judge James Boasberg ruled Wednesday that “probable cause exists” to hold the Trump administration in criminal contempt for ignoring oral instructions to turn a plane full of alleged Venezuelan gang members around mid-flight, despite the US Supreme Court determining that Boasberg’s court was an improper venue for the case altogether – and vacating two of his temporary restraining orders related to the case. “The Court ultimately determines that the Government’s actions on that day demonstrate a willful disregard for its Order, sufficient for the Court to conclude that probable cause exists to find the Government in criminal contempt,” Boasberg wrote in a “46-page rant” (as Julie Kelly puts it). “The Court does not reach such conclusion lightly or hastily; indeed, it has given Defendants ample opportunity to rectify or explain their actions,” Boasberg continues. “None of their responses has been satisfactory.” Oh, and if the DOJ won’t prosecute the Trump admin’s alleged contempt, “the Court will “appoint another attorney to prosecute the contempt.””

https://twitter.com/julie_kelly2/status/1912553159269949783?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1912553159269949783%7Ctwgr%5Ea3688f29ee12125fd4b2930b336905f62a939345%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fpolitical%2Fpresident-jeb-boasberg-floats-criminal-contempt-against-trump-admin-over-deportations

That said, the Supreme Court is partially to blame here over their refusal to draw clear boundaries for District court judges… Which has created a complete shit-show…

Read more …

“There’s no version of this man’s life where he comes back.”

Scott Jennings Schools CNN Panel Over Gang Member’s Deportation (PJM)

CNN’s Scott Jennings was having none of the hand-wringing on Monday’s panel discussion over the Trump administration’s handling of the deportation of MS-13 gang member Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia — the latest cause célèbre of the radical left. While the liberals on the panel tiptoed around legal technicalities and rhetorical posturing, Jennings delivered a blunt reality check that left the rest of the table scrambling. Anchor Abby Phillip tried to tee up criticism of Trump by focusing on “the optics” of sending “Americans” to El Salvador — even though Abrego Garcia is an illegal immigrant. But Jennings wasn’t distracted. “Yes. He said they were studying the laws. I mean, there wasn’t any definitive statement,” he clarified, before cutting right to the core of the debate: “I think you guys need to understand, for the Trump administration, there’s no version of this man’s life that ends up with him living in the United States.”

Jennings laid out the Trump administration’s reasoning without flinching: “He’s an illegal alien from El Salvador who came to the country illegally, who has a deportation order, who, in their view and in the view of some immigration courts, has an affiliation with MS-13.” Phillip tried to interject by claiming that Garcia’s affiliation with MS-13 isn’t definitive because Abrego Garcia “strongly disputes in court.” Well, I guess that settles it, right? “I’m telling you that their view of it is that… it’s an El Salvador citizen who was sent back to El Salvador, who was in the country illegally,” Jennings reiterated. “According to some people in his long process… he has an existing deportation order, [and they] believe he has an affiliation with MS-13.” Then Jennings repeated his knockout point: “There’s no version of this man’s life where he comes back.”

As the panel continued to push the narrative of unjust exile, Jennings laid out the consequences if Abrego Garcia is returned. “If the president of El Salvador releases him and we do facilitate his return, when he lands in this country, one of two things will happen,” Jennings explained. “He’ll either be arrested… or sent to another country that I promise you you don’t want to go to. He’s not going to be allowed to come back and live in this country as though he is a U.S. citizen.” Harvard Law’s Jay Michaelson jumped in with the melodramatic accusation, “That’s literally the definition of tyranny, right?” Umm, no? What are they teaching at Harvard Law these days? Seriously.

Michaelson continued, “So, here’s what’s going to happen: We’re going to throw him in jail. No, there’s a thing called the rule of law and due process, which has not been followed in this case. And if I have a slightly optimistic take on this; I actually think this is going to come back to bite the Trump administration. Because what’s going to happen is the next time this goes up the court system, they have absolutely zero credibility to say, Don’t worry, you can file a habeas petition. You can get your person back.” But Jennings coolly reminded the panel, “They have the ability to deport people who have deportation orders.” He added that Garcia “got due process. He has a deportation order.”

Later, he dissected the legal victory Trump’s team got last week. “The reason the administration believes they got a big win at the Supreme Court is because the district court was trying to compel the executive on foreign affairs. The Supreme Court threw that out,” Jennings explained. “The courts have long recognized that they cannot compel the executive on foreign policy matters.” As for the politics? Jennings didn’t sugarcoat it. “What they also believe is that, politically, the American people want them to be as aggressive as possible… to solve a crisis that has festered for years,” he asserted. Then he drove the moral argument home with a chilling reminder: “We keep calling this guy ‘Maryland man’ in the press. Nobody seems to worry about the Maryland mother, Rachel Morin, who was murdered by someone that the previous administration let out of jail.”

Read more …

Social media without people. Just AI bots.

OpenAI Planning To Take On Musk’s X (RT)

OpenAI, a San Francisco-based company best known for ChatGPT, has reportedly been working on a new social media app similar to Elon Musk’s X. The early prototype features a feed centered on AI-generated images, according to sources familiar with the project cited by The Verge on Sunday. The experimental platform reportedly includes a social media feed and is being tested internally. CEO Sam Altman has also been seeking private feedback from individuals outside the company, the outlet reported. It remains unclear whether OpenAI intends to release the project as a separate app or integrate it into ChatGPT, which was the most downloaded app worldwide last month, with 46 million new downloads, according to Appfigures.

OpenAI’s potential social media network “would likely increase Altman’s already-bitter rivalry with Elon Musk,” The Verge writes. Musk was a co-founder of OpenAI but left the company in 2018. In February, Musk offered $97.4 billion to acquire OpenAI, but Altman rejected the offer, reportedly saying, “no thank you but we will buy twitter [now known as X] for $9.74 billion if you want,” according to The Verge. Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, could also be in OpenAI’s sights. The report noted that Meta is planning to launch its own AI assistant app with a social media feed. Following reports that Meta is building a ChatGPT rival, Altman responded on X in February: “ok fine maybe we’ll do a social app.”

Having a social media platform would reportedly allow OpenAI to collect unique real-time user data to enhance its AI models, similar to how Meta and Musk’s xAI currently operate, according to The Verge. Musk has merged his AI company xAI with X. Grok is a chatbot developed by xAI. It has been integrated with X and pulls content from the platform to inform its responses. According to a source from another AI lab cited by the Verge, “The Grok integration with X has made everyone jealous,” particularly regarding its role in helping users create viral content. It is reportedly uncertain whether OpenAI’s social media prototype will be released publicly.

Read more …

“Making America Great Again” has to include energy dominance and eradicating the barriers to innovation and growth at all levels of government, including courtrooms.”

Trump Is Right to Hammer Environmental Lawfare (DS)

President Donald Trump’s critics are right about one thing: The first few months of his second term have been a reckoning. Starting with the federal government’s pursuit of law firms and organizations that committed lawfare against the president to hobble his political comeback, Trump has now supercharged executive authority to stop the flood of ideologically based lawsuits targeting America’s energy providers. In an executive order signed last week, Trump empowered Attorney General Pam Bondi to turn up the heat on local prosecutors and state attorneys general abusing the legal system with lawsuits against energy companies. He is right to do so. “Making America Great Again” has to include energy dominance and eradicating the barriers to innovation and growth at all levels of government, including courtrooms.

Trump has directed Bondi to “expeditiously take all appropriate action to stop the enforcement of state laws and continuation of civil actions” that threaten American energy dominance, including restrictive rules and civil actions against oil, natural gas, hydroelectricity, and nuclear energy projects. What Trump is specifically targeting here is the well-resourced cadre of state attorneys general and liability “lawfare” firms that have deployed creative legal strategies to try to extract money from companies by claiming they’ve committed “climate” crimes. This genre of lawsuit relies on the alleged violation of state nuisance or consumer deception laws, and litigators argue that the energy companies actively strove to mislead the public about their products’ impact on the climate.

A local lawsuit in North Carolina against Duke Energy, one of the largest nuclear energy utilities in the nation, provides the most baffling case. Officials in the small suburb town of Carrboro want the company to pay for the “climate-related harm” caused by its electricity generation, even though Duke Energy’s carbon-free nuclear energy fleet powers half the homes in North and South Carolina, and the region’s use of natural gas is one of the lowest per capita in the country. Climate lawfare has a direct impact on consumers who rely on affordable energy of all types by forcing these companies to beef up their legal departments rather than improving the delivery of their goods and services. The end result is higher prices for consumers who already live on tight budgets due to the rising cost of living in other areas of the economy.

Most, if not all, of these cases are filed in blue states and launched by attorneys on behalf of city governments such as Honolulu; Boulder, Colorado; and San Francisco. The states of Minnesota, Oregon, Vermont, Maine, New York, and California each have their own lawsuits aimed at recouping the “costs” of climate change on local communities and enforcing “net-zero” energy policies. Net-zero policies seek to rapidly choke off fossil fuel use in order to reach zero carbon emissions by reducing them as well as removing them from the atmosphere and relying on renewable energy sources such as wind, solar, and sometimes, nuclear power. Oil companies like Exxon, Chevron, Shell, and BP get hit hardest, but like in the case of Duke Energy in North Carolina, electricity utility companies get dragged into the mess as well.

But as far as messes go, it’s one carefully orchestrated by the climate litigation industry, armed with deep pockets and patience in its quest to pull the rug out from under Big Energy. That’s why Trump’s revamp of federalism to review many of these laws and statutes is not only legal but deeply necessary. Consumers who need affordable energy and who rely on continued innovation from the companies that power their lives should not have their standard of living cut by greedy environmental lawyers jamming up district courts where judges are ideologically inclined to their side. In March, the Supreme Court declined to weigh in on the deluge of Democrat state-led climate lawsuits, denying the request by red states to put a halt to the lawfare.

In their dissent, Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito made clear that the court was punting on a vital constitutional case “for policy reasons.” When the Supreme Court refuses to address the obvious abuse of our litigation system for energy providers and the consumers that rely on them, the intervention of the executive branch becomes a necessity. The most likely unconstitutional state statutes that enable these costly lawsuits should meet the wrath of a president willing to exercise some federal authority. Trump has answered that call, and at least on this specific issue, he’s proved that our government’s unique balancing act between state and federal power does make it possible to get important things done for Americans.

Read more …

PCR won’t give Putin a break. But Putin has a problem with dead Ukrainians: they’re Russia’s brothers.

What Can We Expect from the Peace Negotiations? (Paul Craig Roberts)

Are the peace negotiations leading anywhere we want to go, or are they leading nowhere, or to more conflict? If I had to bet, I would pick one of the last two choices. Most likely more conflict. It is a tendency of peace negotiations to go nowhere except to a ceasefire that is immediately broken. As for the Ukraine negotiations, the Russians are the only party to the limited cease fire in Ukraine that have kept the agreement. Putin’s reward is to be told by Trump to stop fighting and put Russia’s fate in Washington’s hands or there will be more sanctions. Negotiations tend to keep on continuing, because it is in the interest of the negotiating teams. It is their time of fame. They are in the limelight. They enjoy being important. An agreement would make them invisible again. It is their 15 minutes of fame that they stretch into months and years.

Consider how long peace negotiations have been going on between Israel and Palestine to no effect except the utter and total destruction of Palestine and its people. The same could happen to Russia as the Kremlin seems to consist of 19th century naive liberals. In my recent interview on Dialogue Works I wondered why Iran was negotiating when the solution is to invite inspectors in to see if there is any evidence of nuclear weapons production. I wondered why Putin was negotiating when his real responsibility to Russia is to win the conflict and dictate the peace terms. After all his sad costly experiences with negotiating with Washington, why does Putin desire yet another sad experience? As far as I can tell, I am the only person who has answered the question. Putin is trying to use the conflict to negotiate a Great Powers Agreement like Yalta. If he wins the war, as he should have done long ago, to his way of thinking he loses the chance for a new Yalta that naive Russian foreign affairs commentators are talking about.

My view differs from Putin’s. If he won the war, especially if he had done so right away, Russia would be recognized as a great power worthy of a Great Power Agreement. Instead, by preventing the Russian military from winning, Putin has convinced the West that Russia is not a formidable military force, and that its leadership is irresolute. Among the consequences, we have today the French and British considering sending their soldiers to fight against Russia in Ukraine. Only Putin’s irresolution could have convinced the British and French that they could take on Russia. We also have Baltic countries with small populations engaging in unresisted and unanswered aggression against Russia. Both Estonia and Finland have moved to use military force to capture and detain Russian oil tankers.

If you were the captain of a Russian oil tanker delivering oil to somewhere in Europe, you might already be wondering why your government is fueling the ability of its enemies to wage war against Russia. But when you are boarded by a two-bit country whose population is less than Moscow’s and the Kremlin does not intervene, what do you think about the world’s respect for your country? You must be heart-broken. Powerful Russia humiliated by Estonia! Putin does not think about these things. His focus is only on negotiation. He is wedded to it, firmly. He might even be a little crazed by it. It is all that is important. He won’t respond to humiliations because it might queer the all-important negotiations. So the smallest countries on earth can humiliate Russia at will.

This must affect the Russian population, unless they have been so corrupted by Western “culture” that they are no longer Russian. That is the case with many of the Russian intellectuals. If Russia can’t be a part of the West, they feel isolated and alone. Decades of Washington’s propaganda succeeded in diminishing the Russian in them. From the day that Putin, who had erroneously relied on negotiations, was forced by Washington to intervene in Donbas, Putin and his foreign minister have not ceased bleating how welcoming they would be of peace negotiations. Consequently, no one in Western governments thought, or think today, that the Kremlin has an ounce of resolve on the battlefield. This is the problem Putin caused himself.

Do you remember Prigozhin and the Wagner Group? The Wagner Group was the essentially private military force under the command of Yevgeny Prigozhin that Putin had to rely upon when he belatedly intervened in Ukraine. Having erroneously relied on the Minsk Agreement, which the West used to deceive Putin, Putin had no military force prepared to deal with the massive Ukrainian army Washington had trained and equipped. Prigozhin found Putin’s way of fighting a war problematical. He said his top echelon troops were being required to take casualties but were prohibited from fighting to win. The dissatisfaction of the troops with Putin’s strictures that prevented victory, led to a protest march on Moscow, which the jealous Russian General Staff misrepresented as a “rebellion.” Prigozhin was removed and later died in a mysterious airplane crash, and the Wagner Group was broken up, thereby depriving Russia of its hardest hitting military force. This is a huge sacrifice in behalf of a distant possible negotiated settlement.

Prigozhin wasn’t alone. The second most effective Russian force were the Muslim troops from Chechnya. Their leader also complained that his force had to take casualties but were prevented from winning. He asked publicly, why can’t we get this conflict over with? I think the answer is that Putin thinks a negotiated settlement possibly leading to a Great Power Agreement is more important than the reputation of Russian military arms and Russian and Ukrainian casualties. If Washington comes to my conclusion, the settlement imposed on Putin will look good on paper but will perpetuate American hegemony. I have said many times that Putin does not need a mutual security agreement with the West. He does not need a New Yalta. Russia needs a mutual security agreement with China and Iran. A mutual security agreement of these three powers would end all wars. The US, NATO, Israel cannot possibly confront these three countries militarily.

But there is no agreement. Why? Is it a lack of vision of Russian, Chinese, and Iranian leaders? Or is it distrust between them? Russia and Iran walked away from Syria, leaving the country to Israel, Washington, and Turkey. Why wouldn’t they walk away from one another? China, knows that if China wished, China could crush Taiwan, with or without US support to Taiwan, in a few hours. But Putin can’t defeat outclassed Ukraine in more than three years, longer than it took Stalin’s Red Army to destroy the powerful German Wehrmacht, driving the Germans out of thousands of miles of Russia, Eastern Europe, and arriving in the streets of Berlin in a shorter time than Putin has been fighting over a few kilometers in Donbas. China must wonder what sort of military help would Russia be?

My conclusion is, and I much regret it, it is not a conclusion I want, that Putin has so badly handled the Ukrainian situation, the pipeline, and all other matters with Washington that the only agreement that can be reached is Russia’s surrender. Putin has shown no will to fight, only to engage in fruitless negotiation. Putin rolls out all of Russia’s superior weapons systems, which clearly are superior to anything the West has. But no one in the West believes he would use them. Putin has failed to present himself and his country as entities that must be contended with on their terms. Consequently, Putin is dismissed by Trump as someone to be bossed around, and by militarily impotent Britain and France who are talking about sending their soldiers to Ukraine to defeat Russia.

Read more …

Blackmail? Is that what it is?

‘Stop Blackmailing’ – China to US (RT)

China has called on the US to “stop threatening and blackmailing,” if it wants to resolve the escalating trade dispute between the two countries through dialogue. Beijing has stressed that it will continue to protect its interests in the face of US pressure. The two countries have implemented a series of reciprocal tariff hikes over the past two months, with the US imposing a cumulative rate of 145% last week. On Tuesday, the White House warned that Chinese imports to the US could face tariffs as high as 245%, and claimed the ball is in China’s court. “If the United States really wants to solve the problem through dialogue and negotiation, it should give up the extreme pressure, stop threatening and blackmailing,” Foreign Ministry Spokesman Lin Jian told journalists on Wednesday.

The diplomat reiterated that the tariff war was initiated by the US and stated that China’s response was aimed at safeguarding its legitimate rights and interests. Beijing’s retaliation has included a hike to 125% on all American imports, a suspension of global shipments of rare-earth metals and magnets used in tech and military industries. In addition, Beijing ordered Chinese airlines to stop accepting Boeing jets and parts, according to Bloomberg. President Donald Trump previously suggested that the “proud” Chinese want to make a deal, they “just don’t know how quite to go about it.” The Chinese authorities have meanwhile insisted that “the door remains open” for negotiation with the US, but dialogue must be based on mutual respect. The Ministry of Commerce last week dismissed the multiple rounds of duties imposed by the US on China as “numbers game” with no practical meaning and vowed to “fight to the end.”

Read more …

The US wants to prevent China from using third countries to circumvent tarriffs.

US To Restrict China’s Access in Exchange for Fewer Tariffs on Allies (Sp.)

During negotiations with more than 70 countries, the US administration plans to secure commitments from trade partners to economically isolate China in exchange for lower tariffs imposed by the White House, The Wall Street Journal newspaper reported. The White House plans to convince countries to prohibit China from transporting goods through their territories, the report said on Tuesday, adding that Washington also wants to ban Chinese companies from locating in these countries in order to circumvent US tariffs, and prevent cheap Chinese industrial goods from entering their markets.

US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has become one of the key developers of this strategy, the report read. In his opinion, in the near future, such agreements can be reached primarily with Japan, the United Kingdom, Australia, South Korea and India. On April 2, US President Donald Trump announced reciprocal tariffs on imports from various countries, establishing a baseline rate of 10%. The tariffs were intended to be adjusted based on the rates charged by those countries on US goods. However, on April 9, Trump declared a 90-day pause on tariffs for all countries except China and lowered the rate to 10% to facilitate negotiations.

Read more …

“The ball is in China’s court. China needs to make a deal with us. We don’t have to make a deal with them,” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said..”

US To Tie Tariff Deals To China Curbs – WSJ (RT)

The US plans to use tariff negotiations to push trade partners to scale back economic ties with China, the Wall Street Journal reported on Tuesday, citing sources familiar with the talks. The strategy is reportedly aimed at securing commitments from countries hit by recent US tariff hikes to help isolate China’s economy and pressure Beijing to negotiate. US President Donald Trump announced new “reciprocal” tariffs on nearly 90 countries earlier this month, citing unfair trade practices. After global markets reacted by dropping sharply and several governments sought exemptions, he paused most of the tariffs for 90 days, reducing them to a baseline rate of 10%. However, the pause does not apply to China, whose exports to the US are now subject to tariffs of up to 145% amid an ongoing tit-for-tat trade war.

US officials aim to convince trade partners to accept permanent tariff cuts in exchange for curbing their economic engagement with China, according to the WSJ. Proposed commitments may vary by country, but could reportedly include stopping China from rerouting exports through third-party nations, banning Chinese firms from setting up operations locally to avoid US tariffs, and limiting imports of low-cost Chinese industrial goods. Sources said the measures are meant to undermine China’s economy and reduce its leverage ahead of potential negotiations between Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping. The US has already raised the proposal in early discussions with some countries, sources claimed.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent was reportedly one of the main architects of the plan. Sources claimed he presented the strategy to Trump during an April 6 meeting at Mar-a-Lago, arguing that obtaining concessions from partners could prevent China from evading tariffs and export controls. He previously named the UK, Australia, South Korea, India, and Japan as countries likely to finalize trade agreements with Washington in the near future.

The White House and Treasury Department declined to comment on the WSJ report. On Tuesday, Trump urged China to initiate negotiations to resolve the tariff dispute. “The ball is in China’s court. China needs to make a deal with us. We don’t have to make a deal with them,” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said, quoting a statement she claimed was dictated by the president. Beijing, however, has so far refused to back down. On Friday, China announced it would impose a 125% tariff on all US goods, reiterating it will “fight to the end” against Washington’s trade policy. Beijing also signaled this could be the last increase, noting that “at the current tariff level, there is no market acceptance for US goods exported to China,” while adding that other countermeasures are being considered.

Read more …

You grow up in Holland and you’re forced to hear the call to Muslim prayer 5x a day. Get real.

Dutch MPs Call For Ban On Amplified Islamic Calls To Prayer (RMX)

Two minor conservative parties in the Netherlands, the SGP and JA21, have tabled a private members’ bill aiming to ban amplified Islamic calls to prayer in residential areas, arguing that the practice is increasingly at odds with Dutch cultural norms. The proposed legislation, submitted by SGP MP André Flach and JA21 leader Joost Eerdmans, targets the growing use of loudspeakers in mosques to broadcast the adhan — the Islamic call to prayer — across neighborhoods. While amplified calls were rare until the 1990s, the MPs claim they are now heard in dozens of communities nationwide, “from Amsterdam to Alblasserdam.” “It doesn’t fit in with Dutch culture,” Flach said, as cited by De Telegraaf newspaper. He noted that current broadcasts loudly proclaim religious texts such as “Allah is the greatest” and “there is no other god but Allah” several times a day. He argued that when laws were changed in 1988 to allow amplified religious calls under the Public Manifestations Act, lawmakers did not anticipate how pervasive and loud such calls might become.

Eerdmans expressed equal concern over the trend, pointing to what he sees as a steady increase in Islamic practice seeping into the Dutch way of life. “Today, around 40 mosques play the adhan on Fridays, but with about 500 mosques in the Netherlands and that number growing, how many will there be in 10 years?” sIn some neighborhoods, “you really feel like you’re in Istanbul or Marrakesh,” he added. The MPs also cited a poll commissioned from researcher Maurice de Hond, which claims that nearly 80 percent of Dutch citizens view amplified calls to prayer as inconsistent with Dutch culture and find them bothersome. While the government had already signaled plans to tighten regulations on amplified prayer calls earlier this year, Flach and Eerdmans are pushing for a complete ban on sound amplification for such broadcasts.

“This is not about restricting freedom of religion,” Flach insisted. “People can still make the call to prayer, just without sound amplification. The current law simply lacks the word ‘unamplified’ — and we are adding it,” he said. In a statement, JA21 wrote, “More and more Dutch streets are drowned out by amplified Islamic calls to prayer. The public space belongs to everyone – the mosque does not have to rise above it. That is why JA21 and SGP are submitting a private members’ bill to ban the reinforced call.” The proposal follows earlier statements by Integration Secretary Jurgen Nobel, who in February pledged to review existing legislation to better manage noise disturbances from amplified religious expressions. Supporters argue that the measure would restore balance and respond to long-standing complaints from residents in affected areas. The bill will now move to parliamentary debate.

Read more …

Just to get to 2%. Then that becomes 5%. And then Ursula wants $800 billion on top of that.

Belgium Eyes Welfare Cuts To Meet NATO Target (RT)

Belgium is preparing to raise debt and cut welfare to meet NATO’s minimum military spending target, the EU country’s budget minister has said. Vincent Van Peteghem told the Financial Times on Wednesday that Brussels recently agreed to lift its 2025 military budget to 2% of GDP through a mix of temporary cash injections, creative accounting, and structural reforms. The planned hike in military spending could exacerbate the budget crisis as debt mounts. Recent government plans to cut social services have sparked protests, with over 100,000 people rallying in Brussels in February. Belgium had previously planned to meet the 2% target only by 2029. Military spending currently stands at around 1.31% of GDP, or roughly €8 billion ($8.5 billion), according to Defense Minister Theo Francken.

The shift comes amid pressure from Washington and ahead of a NATO summit in June, where members are expected to consider raising the spending target to above 3% of GDP. US President Donald Trump has urged the bloc members to increase military spending to 5%, warning that countries that fail to do so may no longer be guaranteed American protection. Higher spending on military budgets would take a toll on the EU’s welfare programs, Van Peteghem warned. Last month, the European Commission proposed exempting military budgets from fiscal rules and offering €150 billion in loans as part of its ‘ReArm Europe’ plan, which aims to mobilize up to €800 billion through debt and tax incentives for the bloc’s military-industrial complex.

Van Peteghem said Belgium would tap both options to fund additional military spending this year. To maintain the 2% level, the government plans to raise more debt and may privatize state-owned assets, the minister said. The remaining gap would be filled through spending cuts, including curbs on unemployment benefits, pension reforms, and tax changes. “But of course, we will need to do more,” Van Peteghem, who also serves as deputy prime minister, said. France has also announced plans to cut €5 billion from its budget, with some of the savings potentially redirected to military spending. Moscow has condemned the EU’s military buildup. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov called it “a matter of deep concern,” noting that it was aimed at Russia.

Read more …

“That would raise the annual federal interest payment on the national debt to $1.5 trillion. At what point does this become a crisis?”

Trump Confronts Economic and Geopolitical Reality (Ring)

By the time this is published, everything may have changed, and that is to be expected. Throughout his career, well before and since becoming a politician, Trump has explicitly stated that he does not think it is always a good strategy to be predictable. And while markets love predictability, sometimes markets, and the systems propping them up, need disruption. This is such a moment. Nobody should deny that the anxiety is genuine. An older friend of mine, well into his 70s, still working but ready to retire, is wondering how he and his wife will survive if their savings are wiped out. That’s true for all of us, but it begs the question: What if the painful restructuring we may be about to endure, and which may last for many years, is necessary to avoid an even worse fate? Trump’s abrupt escalation of import tariffs goes well beyond violating the principles of comparative advantage, but we can start there.

“Comparative advantage” is not all it’s cracked up to be. Repeated in business schools as if it were gospel since the 1980s, it goes something like this: “Wool is cheaper in Scotland, and wine is cheaper in France, so France should sell their wine to Scotland, and Scotland should sell their wool to France.” Everybody wins. Period. That’s the extent of it. That is the essence of free trade theory. In the real world, though, policies that rely on “comparative advantage” doctrine as their moral justification have gotten pretty ugly. While overall economic growth may be maximized when every nation exports products that it produces most cost-effectively, the local impacts are not always benign. Nations that produce coffee at competitive global prices, for example, end up with valuable cropland converted from food production to coffee plantations.

These coffee plantations are typically owned by multinational corporations that repatriate profits to low-tax nations elsewhere while buying off a small local elite that streamlines the regulatory environment. Meanwhile, the nation becomes dependent on imports for everything except coffee, and even the coffee ends up priced out of reach for the average citizen. Replace “coffee” with any specialty product, and all too often, the “gains of trade” translate on the ground into nations with seething, destitute populations dependent on accumulating debt and foreign aid. These examples aren’t restricted to foreign nations, nor are they restricted to commodities. While American multinationals moved manufacturing overseas, in the process destroying millions of jobs and thousands of communities in America, it wasn’t just cheap wool, cheap wine, and dirt-cheap flat-screen TVs that were pouring into the country in exchange. We offshored our production of steel, our chip manufacturers, our pharmaceutical industry, and much more.

And even that devastation was tolerated for decades because its effects were mostly felt in what we now call rust belt states. Our service economy and tech sectors boomed, along with what was left of manufacturing, satiating a majority of the population that loved buying cheaper foreign imports. But this whole scheme could never go on forever. America’s trade deficit in 2024 was up to $918 billion, a new record. America’s cumulative trade deficit, nearly all of it incurred since 2000, is now estimated in excess of $17 trillion.

To balance the trade deficit, there is what economists call the “current account.” If dollars flow overseas for us to purchase foreign imports in excess of foreign nations spending dollars to purchase our exports, the surplus dollars are repatriated in the form of foreigners bidding up the prices for assets they purchase in America. A slight oversimplification would be that trade deficits equate to cheap flat screens and unaffordable homes. But there is another reason America has huge trade deficits. It floods the world with dollar-denominated transactions, and by permitting foreigners to buy American assets, we effectively collateralize our currency. And so long as America is for sale in this manner, that helps sustain the dollar as a hard currency.

That comes in handy. For 46 out of the last 50 years, Americans have logged federal budget deficits. So far, the dollar’s status as the dominant transaction and reserve currency of the world gives America’s federal government the ability to borrow money by selling Treasury Notes. This is all well known and rehashed beyond the need to elaborate further. So, why are people acting like this was sustainable? How long can the global economic model rest on American trade deficits funding the military and industrial development of nations that, in some cases, aren’t even allies, with all of it balanced through foreign purchases of American assets? And how long will international demand for dollars finance federal budget deficits? To understand why this had to come to a head, consider federal budget trends in recent years.

In 2019, the last year of Trump’s first term, the federal budget was $4.4 trillion, with interest payments of $400 billion. For 2025, the first year of Trump’s current term, the projected federal budget is $7.0 trillion, with interest of just under $1.0 trillion. What changed? While the COVID pandemic was used to justify massive infusions of stimulative federal cash into the economy, much of it probably necessary, why hasn’t spending been reduced since the pandemic’s impact has been over for at least two years? Are we supposed to just expect massive federal budget deficits year after year? Is it sustainable to log a federal budget deficit that has grown from an alarming $900 billion in 2019 to $1.9 trillion in 2025, more than twice as much?

A roughly accurate summary of the economic reality we confront is federal budget deficits of $2 trillion per year and trade deficits of $1 trillion per year. Trade deficits translate into growing foreign ownership of American assets. Federal budget deficits add up in the form of accumulating, interest-bearing national debt. In 2019, the interest payments on what at the time was $22 trillion in national debt had already reached $575 billion, at an average interest rate of 2.5 percent. By 2024, the national debt had skyrocketed to $35 trillion, an increase of $13 trillion in just six years. Interest payments in 2024 were $1.1 trillion, and the average interest rate had risen to 3.3 percent. “Average” interest rate requires explanation. Ten-year treasury notes currently pay 4.4 percent. Interest rates have risen over the past few years. Imagine if that continues, and $35 trillion (or more) in treasury notes mature and are reinvested at 4.4 percent. That would raise the annual federal interest payment on the national debt to $1.5 trillion. At what point does this become a crisis?

Read more …

 

 

Favorite Calvin of all time.

 

 

https://twitter.com/khnh80044/status/1911960834559148452

Holy week

 

 

Fairy

 

 

Vancouver
https://twitter.com/dom_lucre/status/1912240470480285729

 

 

Charlie
https://twitter.com/khnh80044/status/1912456564352717089

 

 

Two things
https://twitter.com/RealDonKeith/status/1912496724888690887

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Apr 132025
 


Salvador Dali Mme. Reese 1931

 

Market Tumult From Fractious Messaging Forces Trump Narrative Shift On Tariffs (JTN)
Trump Exempts Laptops, Smartphones, Chips From Reciprocal Tariff Blitz (ZH)
‘Not Good For China’ To Retaliate Over Tariffs – White House (RT)
Why China Won’t Call a ‘Tariff-wielding Barbarian’ (Pepe Escobar)
Trump Envoy Witkoff In First ‘Direct, Constructive’ Contact With Iran (ZH)
Iran and US Unveil Results Of Nuclear Talks (RT)
Rubio and Musk Back Witkoff’s Peace Efforts (RT)
Trump Urges Congress to Work Harder to Make Daylight Saving Permanent (ET)
What Trump Did With Obama’s White House Portrait Is Epic (Margolis)
Another District Court Judge Goes Rogue Against Trump Administration (Margolis)
US Wants Control Of Key Gas Pipeline In Ukraine – Reuters (RT)
Why The AfD Is Destined For The German Government (Amar)
Euro-Atlantic Community Gearing For War – Lavrov (RT)
Steele Dossier Was Discredited In 2017 — But Sold To The Public Anyway (MPN)
Bill Maher Says ‘Mind Blown’ After Meeting With Trump (ZH)

 

 

 

 

O’Leary

Chamath

Sacks
https://twitter.com/TheChiefNerd/status/1910861025269657952

Soros
https://twitter.com/katee_K1/status/1910772111649419434

Alex

 

 

 

 

Keep things fluid at first. Can’t hurt. Keep them guessing.

Market Tumult From Fractious Messaging Forces Trump Narrative Shift On Tariffs (JTN)

President Donald Trump’s tariffs have successfully brought at least 70 countries to the negotiating table, but the tumultuous market situation highlights a need for the administration to simplify the message to the public. And they seem to have coalesced around Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent’s approach of marketing them as a negotiating tactic. The initial “Liberation Day” tariffs saw Trump impose sweeping “reciprocal” tariffs across most of America’s key trading partners and the creation of a baseline 10% tariff for other nations. Close trading partners such as Vietnam, Japan, South Korea and Israel speedily reached out to negotiate deals, with some even announcing the end of tariffs in anticipation of Trump’s initial announcement. The market fell precipitously in the following days amid internal disagreements within the Cabinet on both messaging and the long-term approach. Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) chief Elon Musk and Bessent became proponents of a negotiation-focused approach to the tariffs, while Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and economic advisor Peter Navarro favored the tariffs on their own merits.

The administration, however, froze the most expansive tariffs this week, with the exception of those on China, which Trump raised to 125%. Markets subsequently soared on the news, leading to higher closures for major indices. They fell again on Thursday as the administration stood by its China tariffs. When making his “Liberation Day” announcement, Trump pitched the tariffs as a means of encouraging domestic production in the United States and revitalizing towns left behind by globalization. “Now it’s our turn to prosper, and in so doing, use trillions and trillions of dollars to reduce our taxes and pay down our national debt,” he said. “Jobs and factories will come roaring back into our country and you see it happening already. We will supercharge our domestic industrial base.”

Not all members of the Cabinet were on the same page and a division emerged between officials emphasizing the tariffs as a negotiating tactic to secure favorable trade deals and those who supported maintaining the tariffs on their own merit in the longer-term for revenue purposes. Musk and Navarro, specifically, had a high-profile disagreement throughout the week, with the pair openly taking potshots at one another on television and social media. Navarro, a tariff proponent, called attention to Musk’s automotive business and suggested it was a motivating factor for his opposition to tariffs. Musk, in turn, dubbed Navarro “Peter Retarrdo” and called him a “moron.” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt brushed off the exchanges, saying “boys will be boys.”

As uncertainty in the market grew, however, Trump and his supporters began to shift decidedly toward presenting the tariffs as a negotiating strategy. Trump himself took the lead on this approach, largely through his Truth Social account. On Monday, for instance, Trump posted that “countries from all over the World are talking to us. Tough but fair parameters are being set. Spoke to the Japanese Prime Minister this morning. He is sending a top team to negotiate!” “As I’ve said in the past, no one creates leverage for himself like [Donald Trump],” Bessent said, following Trump’s decision to pause some of the tariffs. Bessent and National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett echoed the negotiation-centered line of messaging throughout the week. Hassett on Thursday confirmed to Fox News that “we’ve already got offers on the table from at least 15 countries.” He further clarified that many more had offered to negotiate but that these nations had submitted tangible proposals.

Even Lutnick, one of the administration’s most vocal tariff proponents, appeared to fall in line by Wednesday, saying “President Trump is standing firm against our global trade imbalances. We will sign the greatest deals in history.” “The Golden Age is coming. We are committed to protecting our interests, engaging in global negotiations and exploding our economy,” he added Thursday. While far from the original messaging, some members of the administration have suggested that the larger tariffs and their subsequent reduction may have been planned as a means of bringing typically intransigent trading partners to the negotiating table. “I think that what’s been going on all along is the president recognizes that in order to get the big change that we need for America’s workers… that we need to create enough pressure on our trading partners that things that American presidents have been asking for, for decades, are actually offered at the table,” Hassett said on CNBC.

Lutnick, for his part, appeared to echo that during a recent meeting, saying “we have so many countries to talk to.” “They have come with offers that they never, ever, ever would’ve come with but for the moves the president has made,” he added. “You’re going to start seeing deals, one after the other.” Potentially boding well for Lutnick’s prediction is the Australian refusal of a Chinese proposal to join forces to oppose American tariffs. Beijing officials have suggested targeted countries work against Washington, though it has evidently struggled to attract partners for the endeavor.

Read more …

“.. still “subject to the tariff under the original IEEPA on China of 20 percent.”

Things that everyone uses. Sensitive. Hurts Americans. Bring production home step by step. Ask Elon.

Trump Exempts Laptops, Smartphones, Chips From Reciprocal Tariff Blitz (ZH)

Update (1255ET): As Trump adviser Stephen Miller points out, the products are still “subject to the tariff under the original IEEPA on China of 20 percent.”

The White House issued a further clarifying statement that the exemption (from the higher tariffs only) will be retroative to April 5th and all duties received since then will be refunded. Any duties that were collected at or after 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time on April 5, 2025, pursuant to Executive Order 14257 and the Subsequent Orders, on imports that are excepted under Executive Order 14257 and the Subsequent Orders because they are “semiconductors,” as explained in this memorandum, shall be refunded in accordance with U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s standard procedures for such refunds.

* * *
U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued an updated guidance late Friday night on product exclusions from President Trump’s reciprocal tariffs, imposed under Executive Order 14257 and its amendments (EO 14259). The exclusions cover a wide range of electronic devices, including smartphones, laptops, and related components. First, President Trump paused reciprocal tariffs for non-retaliating countries (e.g., China) for 90 days last week. Now, updated guidance from CBP reveals that some of the highest-value trade—particularly a wide range of electronics—is excluded from the reciprocal tariffs.

Read more …

Come to the table. You will at some point anyway.

‘Not Good For China’ To Retaliate Over Tariffs – White House (RT)

The White House has warned China that further retaliation through tariff hikes would not serve Beijing’s interests, as the world’s two largest economies clash over trade. Press secretary Karoline Leavitt has stated that over 75 countries reached out to US President Donald Trump’s administration to initiate trade talks, a sign that Washington’s tariff policy is working, she argued. “The phones have been ringing off the hook to make deals,” she said on Friday during a press briefing at the White House. “These countries wisely heeded President Trump’s warning not to retaliate… and were rewarded with a 90-day pause and substantially lower reciprocal tariff rates,” she added.

In early April, Trump imposed a universal 10% tariff on all imports and higher “reciprocal” tariffs on select countries to promote domestic manufacturing and address trade imbalances. While most elevated tariffs were paused for 90 days, China was excluded from this reprieve. The total tariff on Chinese goods has been hiked to 145%. In response, China imposed a 125% tariff on US imports, while criticizing Washington’s actions as “economic bullying” and warning that continued escalations would render the US a “joke” in global economic history. When asked directly about China, Leavitt reiterated Trump’s stance. “The tariff rate on China remains where it was yesterday at the 145 percent level,” she confirmed. Beijing has signaled that its recent tariff hike might be the last, and that further increases would not make economic sense.

When asked if this meant China was backing down, Leavitt said the US president had made it very clear that “when the United States is punched, he will punch back harder.” Leavitt said the administration remains open to negotiations, claiming Trump would “be gracious if China intends to make a deal with the United States,” but added without elaborating, “If China continues to retaliate, it’s not good for China.” She also rebuffed critics who said the US administration had not pushed China hard enough with tariffs, saying “Trump is finally taking bold and courageous action.” She added that both Democrats and Republicans have talked tough on China for years, but “no other president had the courage, the work ethic, or the stamina to take on such a task.”

Read more …

Pepe sees the Chinese as refined and Trump as a brute. And finance is not his forté.

Why China Won’t Call a ‘Tariff-wielding Barbarian’ (Pepe Escobar)

The Toddler Temper Tantrum-style Trump Tariff Tizzy (TTT), now accelerated to 145% – and counting – is yet another thunderous trademark pigeon smashing the chessboard gambit. It won’t work. Trump claimed that China would call him to “make a deal”. That’s reality show territory. Reality is more like the statement by the Customs Tariff Commission of the State Council: “Given that U.S. exports to China already have no market acceptability under the current tariff rates, if the U.S. further imposes additional tariffs on Chinese goods, China will simply ignore them.” Translation: keep vociferating/tariffing. We don’t care. And we will stop buying from you. Anything. The Chinese Foreign Ministry: A “tariff-wielding barbarian can never expect a call from China.” Basic numbers. China’s GDP for 2025 is projected at 5%. U.S. imports account for at best 4% of Chinese GDP. China’s share of total exports to the U.S. dropped to 13.4 per cent in 2024.

Goldman Sachs – not exactly a CCP “mouthpiece” – has just projected that TTT will cost China only 0.5% of GDP in 2025, while costing no less than 2% of U.S. GDP. Talk about blowback. Still, from now on, what matters most for Beijing is to keep diversifying the supply chain. Asia-wide, the extra wheels are in motion. President Xi Jinping will soon start an ASEAN mini-tour (Vietnam, Cambodia, Malaysia). The Shanghai Cooperation Organization – increasingly focused on geoeconomics – is about to meet. The EU, for all the mendacity of its “elites”, is absolutely itching to strike trade deals with China. Zhao Minghao, deputy director at the Centre for American Studies at Fudan University, in Shanghai, refers to the current incandescence as “a game of strategic resolve.” Previously, the eminent Wang Yiwei, international relations star professor at Renmin University in Beijing and an expert on the New Silk Roads, noted that the current tariff rate already made China’s exports to the U.S. “almost impossible”.

This analysis noted how China started to deal with TTT with a “courtesy before force” approach, then turned to “we don’t care”, while cultivating “the art of timing” in its asymmetric attack on U.S. stocks. A fascinating window on the real wheels of Chinese trade is offered by a timely visit to the vast Yiwu International Trade City, the largest concentration of small traders on the planet. Less than 10% of Yiwu’s phenomenal amount of business involves the U.S. Among the 75,000 business operators in Yiwu Small Commodity City, only a little over 3,000 do business with the U.S. TTT is largely the product of two crude Team Trump arrogant/ignorant Sinophobes, economic advisor Peter Navarro and Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent, who know less than zero about all things China. In fact it was Bessent who right at the start gave the game away:

“This was driven by the president’s strategy… You might even say that he goaded China into a bad position. They responded. They have shown themselves to the world to be the bad actors, and we are willing to cooperate with our allies and with our trading partners who did not retaliate.” A crude trap. With the sole focus on China. That had nothing to do with the initial tawdry plot line: tariffs, Mafia-style, on most of the planet, penguins included. If you don’t retaliate, fine. If you do, we hit harder.

Read more …

We are now supposed to be able to tell “direct” from “indirect” talks.

Witkoff, fresh off that four hour meeting with Putin, moves on to the Iran topic, no problem.

Trump Envoy Witkoff In First ‘Direct, Constructive’ Contact With Iran (ZH)

Not very much happened at the much-anticipated ‘indirect’ meeting between Iranian and US delegations in Oman on Saturday. While Tehran has been emphasizing the indirect nature of the dialogue, President Trump and his top officials have been calling these ‘direct’ talks. The main ‘positive’ is that the two sides didn’t yell each other out the room, or make new accusations – instead they agreed to keep the diplomatic engagement going. “Iran and the United States will hold more negotiations next week over Tehran’s rapidly advancing nuclear program, Iranian state television reported Saturday at the end of the first round of talks between the two countries since President Donald Trump returned to the White House,” The Associated Press reports as the meeting wrapped up.

As for whether they were ‘direct’ or not, Iranian state did say that Trump regional onvoy Steve Witkoff and Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi “briefly spoke in the presence of the Omani foreign minister” at the end of the talks. This does indeed mark the first direct interaction between the Islamic Republic and the Trump administration. It is Trump during his first term who pulled the US out of the 2015 JCPOA nuclear deal (in April 2018). The Iranian side has announced that the next round of talks will take place April 19, in a clear sing that both sides could be ready to do a new deal. This is precisely what Trump has demanded – the inking of a new nuclear deal – while threatening military action against Tehran. Trump has also warned that Israel might ‘lead’ such strikes on nuclear facilities.

According to more details from Muscat, Oman on Saturday: American officials did not immediately acknowledge the Iranian reports, which Tehran likely speeded out to its public ahead of a possible Trump post on a social media. But declaring that the two sides spoke face-to-face — even if briefly — suggests the negotiations went well. The talks began at around 3:30 p.m. local. The two sides spoke for over two hours at a location in the outskirts of Oman, ending the talks around 5:50 p.m. local time. The convoy believed to be carrying Witkoff returned to Muscat, the capital of Oman, before disappearing into traffic around a neighborhood that is home to the U.S. Embassy. Baghaei in follow-up stated that “The objective of the Islamic Republic of Iran is very clear — we have only one goal, and that is to safeguard Iran’s national interests.”

“We are giving a genuine and honest opportunity to diplomacy, so that through dialogue, we can move forward on the nuclear issue on one hand, and more importantly for us, the lifting of sanctions,” he added. No one is in the mood for war (though perhaps Israel?). “Look, this is just a beginning. So it is natural that, at this stage, both sides will present their foundational positions through the Omani mediator,” Baghaei continued. “Therefore, we do not expect this round of negotiations to be lengthy.” Witkoff had previewed to The Wall Street Journal just ahead of the trip, “I think our position begins with dismantlement of your program. That is our position today.” He added: “Where our red line will be, there can’t be weaponization of your nuclear capability.”

However Iran has maintained all along that its program is only for peaceful nuclear energy to meet the nation’s power needs, and further several Ayatollah’s have declared nuclear weapons to be ‘unIslamic’. But recent conflict with Israel means Tehran is likely eyeing escalation of its program, possibly seeing in this the only final deterrent to Israel, and the potential for US-led regime change (as happened in neighboring Iraq and Afghanistan).

Read more …

“Iran and the United States held their first diplomatic engagement IN YEARS on Saturday ..”

Iran and US Unveil Results Of Nuclear Talks (RT)

Iran and the United States held their first diplomatic engagement in years on Saturday in the Omani capital of Muscat, with discussions focused on Tehran’s nuclear program and the potential easing of US sanctions. The two-and-a-half-hour talks were led by Iranian Foreign Minister Seyed Abbas Araghchi and White House Special Envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff. Although the negotiations were conducted indirectly through Omani mediation, the heads of the two delegations – Araghchi and Witkoff – briefly spoke face-to-face in the presence of Oman’s Foreign Minister Badr al-Busaidi after the formal talks concluded. Addressing reporters in Muscat, Araghchi described the first round of negotiations as “constructive” and held in a “calm and very respectful atmosphere.”

“No inappropriate language was used, and the two sides demonstrated their commitment to advancing the talks until the achievement of a mutually favorable agreement from an equal position,” the Iranian minister said. According to Araghchi, both sides aim to outline a general framework for a future agreement in the next round of talks. He indicated that the second meeting is scheduled for April 19, although it may not take place in Muscat. “In the next round of the talks, we will try to enter the negotiations’ agenda, which will of course have a timetable alongside it,” he said, expressing hope that the two sides could finalize a basis for starting “real talks” soon. Speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One on Saturday night, President Donald Trump said the talks with Tehran “are going okay.” Nothing matters until you get it done, so I don’t like talking about it. But it’s going okay. The Iran situation is going pretty good.

Meanwhile, the White House emphasized that – despite Tehran’s insistence on indirect talks – Witkoff met Araghchi face-to-face, calling the “direct communication a step forward in achieving a mutually beneficial outcome.” Witkoff, a close confidant of President Trump and Washington’s lead negotiator with Moscow, has also played a prominent role in regional diplomacy. Even before Trump took office, Witkoff was credited with allegedly convincing Israel to agree to a Gaza truce. The next round of negotiations with Iran is expected to take place on April 19. While both sides have expressed cautious optimism, analysts noted that significant challenges remain. Iranian officials have publicly opposed major concessions, while President Trump has reportedly given negotiators a two-month deadline, warning of possible military action if talks fail.

Read more …

“Steve Witkoff is busting his ass for President Trump.”

Rubio and Musk Back Witkoff’s Peace Efforts (RT)

The US leader’s confidant spent over four hours behind closed doors discussing aspects of a potential settlement of the Ukraine conflict with Russian President Vladimir Putin on Friday, before heading to Oman for high-level talks on Iran’s nuclear program on Saturday. White House special envoy to the Middle East, Steve Witkoff, reportedly managed to convince Israel to agree to a Gaza truce in just one meeting – even before President Donald Trump took office – and has since become one of the key US negotiators on Ukraine.

When he traveled to Russia for the third time in two months – and a video of Witkoff smiling and shaking hands with Putin emerged on Friday – critics rushed to accuse him of everything from acting too cozy and perpetuating “Russian propaganda,” to being too “inexperienced” to conduct negotiations and effectively “taking over” the role of US Secretary of State. “People love attacking Steve Witkoff, but he has done more to advance peace negotiations & hostage releases than any of his career bureaucrat critics have done during their entire careers in the Swamp,” conservative activist Laura Loomer wrote on X, adding that “Steve Witkoff is busting his ass for President Trump.”

“Witkoff is great,” agreed billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk, another of Trump’s closest allies, who leads his government waste-cutting task force known as DOGE (Department of Government Efficiency). US Secretary of State Marco Rubio also “100%” agreed with Loomer’s post. Witkoff’s first visit to Russia in February resulted in a high-profile prisoner exchange and paved the way for a phone call between the countries’ leaders, kickstarting the resumption of diplomatic relations. Just ahead of Witkoff’s third visit on Friday, Russia and the US conducted another prisoner swap in Abu Dhabi. The discussions between President Putin and Steve Witkoff on Friday involved “aspects of the settlement of the Ukraine conflict,” the Kremlin has announced, declining to provide further details.

Read more …

We can fight over this till the end of time.

“If we called it the ‘Go to Work An Hour Earlier Act,’ rather than the ‘Sunshine Protection Act,’ no one would be voting for it.”

Trump Urges Congress to Work Harder to Make Daylight Saving Permanent (ET)

President Donald Trump has offered his support for the “lock the clock” movement. “The House and Senate should push hard for more Daylight at the end of a day,” calling the time change “a big inconvenience and, for our government, A VERY COSTLY EVENT!!!” he wrote in an April 11 Truth Social post. Trump’s comments came a day after a bipartisan group of lawmakers conducted a hearing on making daylight saving time permanent. The Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation hearing, titled “If I Could Turn Back Time: Should We Lock The Clock?” featured testimony from experts in the public and private sectors, as well as health care experts, all advocating for the push to stop the twice-yearly time change. Daylight saving time was initially a World War I strategy to reduce energy consumption in the evenings.

According to Commerce Committee Chairman Ted Cruz (R-Texas), however, energy efficiency and technological advancements show that currently, the hour change no longer has cost-saving benefits. “Congress has the authority to end this outdated and harmful practice. This hearing is an excellent opportunity to examine a thoughtful and rational approach to how we manage time,” Cruz said in his opening remarks. “Whether we lock the clock on Standard Time year-round or daylight saving time, let’s put our health, the economy, and well-being first and embrace a sensible approach to time management.” Sen. Scott (R-Fla.) introduced the Sunshine Protection Act on Jan. 7 of this year. It has been referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation but has not yet been brought to a vote.

The senator spoke to the committee, encouraging quick action on the bill. Scott called the time change “confusing, unnecessary, and completely outdated.” He said his bipartisan legislation had the support of 17 senators and that Rep. Vern Buchanan (R-Fla.) has introduced a companion bill in the House of Representatives. “We have a great opportunity to finally get this done with President Trump on board to lock the clock,” Scott said. Hearing witnesses included representatives from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, the American Academy of Sleep Medicine, the National Golf Course Owners Association, and the Lock the Clock Movement. All of the testimony provided supported ending the twice-yearly time change, citing health, safety, and economic concerns. While there is widespread support for locking the clock, not everyone agrees on where it should be frozen.

[..] Trump has voiced his support for more daylight at the end of the day, making daylight saving time the likely model going forward. [..] Dr. David Harkey, the president of the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, testified about the road safety implications of the time change to daylight saving time, saying that the change was associated with an increased risk of fatal crashes. Harkey noted that while adjusting the clock doesn’t increase the number of daylight hours, it can change how those hours align with work and school schedules. “The clearest takeaway from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety’s research is that there is a strong relationship between increased darkness and fatal crashes, particularly for pedestrians and bicyclists,” he said.

Dr. Karen Johnson, a practicing sleep medicine physician and representative of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine, cited evidence of the negative health impacts of changing the clocks, including an increased risk of chronic disease, depression, and suicide. “Permanent standard time would get more Americans to get the opportunity to improve their sleep without even trying,” Johnson said. “The sun is one of the most powerful drivers of health and well-being, but the timing of sunlight is what’s critically important.”Johnson strongly advocates for permanent standard time, saying that daylight saving time would deprive Americans of critical morning light and that while the spring clock change is bad, “permanent daylight saving time is worse.” “Permanent daylight saving time does not make days longer, nor is it the reason why people feel better in the summer,” Johnson said.“Instead, permanent daylight saving time is a hidden mandate to wake Americans up an hour earlier, rather than to their alarm clocks or the sun. “If we called it the ‘Go to Work An Hour Earlier Act,’ rather than the ‘Sunshine Protection Act,’ no one would be voting for it.”

Read more …

Epic? Looks like normal procedure. It’s just that the Trump painting is different.

What Trump Did With Obama’s White House Portrait Is Epic (Margolis)

Remember that bizarre official portrait of Barack Obama—standing stiffly in a black suit and gray tie, set against a blank white background? The 2022 painting by Robert McCurdy stirred some controversy when it was unveiled, and rightly so. At the time, I called it a perfect metaphor for Obama’s notorious narcissism. Of course he’d want his White House portrait stripped of any setting, context, or symbolism. Just him, front and center—because, in his mind, that’s all that matters. Apparently, it was featured in the White House Entrance Hall:

Why was it on display at the White House? Beats me. I get that it’s Obama’s official White House portrait and all, but doesn’t it belong in a service corridor or a janitor’s closet somewhere? Well, guess what? The portrait was moved from its prime location on Friday, and this prime location is now being used for something so much better— a historic image capturing one of the most defining moments of the Trump presidency. The new portrait, unveiled Friday by the White House, shows President Trump in perhaps his most resolute moment: standing among Secret Service agents immediately after being shot in the ear during an assassination attempt, defiantly shouting “Fight, fight, fight!” It’s an image that perfectly encapsulates the fighting spirit that has defined his presidency.

https://twitter.com/WhiteHouse/status/1910764795382349948?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1910764795382349948%7Ctwgr%5E71ad4a8fdabedd535f627c9cc17fdc11a18a7f09%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fpjmedia.com%2Fmatt-margolis%2F2025%2F04%2F12%2Fwhat-trump-did-with-obamas-white-house-portrait-is-epic-n4938830

Predictably, critics immediately began claiming this was some sort of breach of protocol, suggesting the Obama portrait had been removed entirely. White House Director of Communications Steven Cheung swiftly shut down that narrative with characteristic directness:

The Hill has more: “A portrait of President Trump that depicts him raising his fist immediately following the attempt on his life last summer at a Butler, Pa., rally is replacing an image of former President Obama in a prominent spot inside the White House. Dan Scavino, the White House deputy chief of staff, posted side-by-side photos on social media of the Trump artwork seemingly replacing the Obama painting on Friday at the bottom of the Grand Staircase. The artwork of the 47th president shows him bloodied with an American flag waving behind him after he survived the assassination attempt last July. A White House spokesperson didn’t immediately return a request for comment about the artist behind the painting. The image of Trump appeared to take the place of a portrait of Obama that was unveiled at the White House in 2022.”

The white background, the White House said at the time, “allow the viewer to establish a relationship with the subject.” The paper also notes that such portrait rearrangements are standard practice when new administrations take office. The Obama portrait remains in the Entrance Hall, just in a different location—though the symbolism of its replacement hasn’t been lost on observers from either side of the political aisle. The new portrait serves as a sobering reminder of the assassination attempt on President Trump in Butler, Pa., last July—a moment that demonstrated both the very real dangers presidents face and Trump’s remarkable resilience. While some critics on social media have promoted baseless conspiracy theories suggesting the attempt was staged, such claims ignore the tragic reality that people were killed and wounded during the incident.

Read more …

“Governor Mills would have done well to adhere to the wisdom embedded in the old idiom—be careful what you wish for. Now she will see the Trump Administration in court.”

Another District Court Judge Goes Rogue Against Trump Administration (Margolis)

The judiciary’s assault on executive power has once again reared its ugly head. A Bush-appointed federal judge just handed Maine’s radical leftist government a major victory in its crusade to destroy women’s sports. U.S. District Judge John A. Woodcock ordered the Trump administration to unfreeze federal education funding that was withheld after the state brazenly defied Trump’s executive order protecting women’s sports from the radical transgender agenda. Make no mistake about it, this is a direct challenge to President Trump’s efforts to preserve fair competition and protect female athletes. The administration had rightfully frozen funding after Maine refused to comply with basic Title IX protections that keep biological males out of women’s sports.

“The state of Maine requests a temporary restraining order to enjoin the United States Department of Agriculture and the United States Secretary of Agriculture from terminating, freezing, or otherwise interfering with the State’s access to federal funds based on alleged Title IX violations without following the process required by federal statute,” the ruling states. “The court orders the defendants to immediately unfreeze and release to the state of Maine any federal funding that they have frozen or failed or refused to pay because of the State’s alleged failure to comply with the requirements of Title IX.” Barack Obama unilaterally reinterpreted Title IX in his final months in office to include “gender identity,” Donald Trump reversed that policy, and Joe Biden promptly restored the Obama standard. Trump reversed it again and legislation codifying that Title IX doesn’t apply to “gender identity” is stalled in Congress because Democrats blocked it in the Senate last month.

Have you ever noticed how the judiciary constantly tries to hide behind procedure when substantive arguments fail them? In 2020, we saw the courts claim that the Trump campaign didn’t have standing to challenge election results over suspected fraud over claims of lack of standing. Judge Woodcock claimed the USDA under Secretary Brooke Rollins didn’t follow proper protocols, completely ignoring the real issue at hand: Maine’s assault on women’s athletics. The state of Maine argued that Secretary Rollins “cannot simply declare that the [s]tate of Maine is in violation of Title IX and terminate federal funding” because “Congress has expressly declared that to terminate or refuse to continue federal financial assistance to a recipient, the agency must first hold a hearing and then make an ‘express finding on the record’ that the recipient violated Title IX.”

The Trump administration wasn’t having any of it. Acting Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Craig Trainor fired back with both barrels: “The Department has given Maine every opportunity to come into compliance with Title IX, but the state’s leaders have stubbornly refused to do so, choosing instead to prioritize an extremist ideological agenda over their students’ safety, privacy, and dignity,” Acting Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Craig Trainor said in a statement. “The Maine Department of Education will now have to defend its discriminatory practices before a Department administrative law judge and in a federal court against the Justice Department. Governor Mills would have done well to adhere to the wisdom embedded in the old idiom—be careful what you wish for. Now she will see the Trump Administration in court.”

This is just the latest example of activist judges running interference for the radical left’s gender ideology. Governor Janet Mills and her administration are so devoted to their extremist agenda that they’re willing to sacrifice the rights of female athletes just to push their transgender narrative. In addition to the sports controversy, the Department of Education launched an investigation into Maine schools for hiding student gender transitions from parents. The battle lines are clearly drawn. On one side, we have the Trump administration fighting to protect women’s sports and parental rights. On the other, we have leftist ideologues willing to sacrifice both on the altar of gender ideology. Something tells me this fight is far from over.

Read more …

“..one of the “Easter eggs”..

“..take control of a natural gas pipeline from Russian energy giant Gazprom..”

US Wants Control Of Key Gas Pipeline In Ukraine – Reuters (RT)

The administration of US President Donald Trump wants Kiev to give Washington control of a pipeline through which Russian gas reaches the EU, according to Reuters. The request is one of the “Easter eggs” contained in the latest draft of the minerals deal that Washington is pressuring the government of Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky to sign, the agency claimed in an article on Friday. Reuters said, citing an informed source, that the text of the agreement put together by Washington includes a “demand that the US government’s International Development Finance Corporation take control of a natural gas pipeline from Russian energy giant Gazprom across Ukraine to Europe.” No gas has been sent through Gazprom’s pipeline since the start of year due to Ukraine refusing to prolong its transit deal with the Russian company.

On Friday, US and Ukrainian officials met in Washington to discuss the deal granting the Americans access to Ukraine’s mineral resources, including rare-earth metals, with the talks going on in a “very antagonistic” environment, according to the source. The strains between the sides stemmed from “maximalist” demands in the latest draft of the agreement, which the Trump administration presented to Kiev last month, the agency’s interlocutor explained. The Ukrainian authorities have hired a US-British law firm, Hogan Lovells, to work as an outside adviser on the deal, the source added. The US came up with harsher terms after Zelensky refused to sign the initial agreement during his White House meeting in late February.

The visit ended with a public spat between the US and Ukrainian leaders, during which Trump accused his guest of being ungrateful for Washington’s assistance during the conflict with Russia and not wanting peace. According to Reuters, the latest draft of the deal would give the US privileged access to Ukraine’s mineral deposits and require Kiev to place in a joint investment fund all income from the exploitation of its natural resources. The agreement does not provide the country with American security guarantees, which the Ukrainian government considers a priority. Trump, who claims that the agreement would enable the US taxpayers to recoup funds spent by the previous administration of Joe Biden on aiding Kiev, warned earlier this month that Zelensky would have “big, big problems” if he backs out of it.

Read more …

“Sensible observers have long predicted it, and now it is becoming ever more obvious: Freezing the AfD out only serves to make it stronger.”

“Germans have felt for a while already that they are in dire trouble; and a preponderant majority thinks that that is where they will be stuck under new old management as well..”

Why The AfD Is Destined For The German Government (Amar)

Germany has an undeserved reputation for dour rationality and lacking an appreciation of the absurd. In reality, however, Germany is a – for want of nicer terms – very counterintuitive country. If you are running a regime in Kiev (at least according to the official story) and blow up Germany’s vital energy infrastructure, Germans will say thank you and throw money and arms at you, while also helping you blame someone else (the Russians, of course: Germany has never been an imaginative country). If you are in Washington and certainly had a hand in blowing up that infrastructure, and then go on to fleece the Germans by selling LNG at a high cost and promoting their deindustrialization by filching their companies, good Germans get very, very angry – at China.

If you happen to be the single most popular and perfectly legal political party in Germany, get ready to never be allowed to actually participate in governing. Because Germany is also a country in which that single most popular party – the Alternative for Germany (Alternative für Deutschland, commonly known simply as AfD) – is locked out of building governing coalitions. By definition. That system is called a “firewall” – against that nasty most popular party that makes life so difficult for all those other, no longer popular parties. It has absolutely no basis in the constitution or in law. Come to think of it, as the “firewall” systematically and deliberately treats the votes of AfD voters as somehow less effective than those of others, it may well be the “firewall” itself that is unconstitutional, at least in spirit if not even by the letter of the law. So much for Germany, the country that allegedly loves order and rules.

In reality, the “firewall” amounts to a dirty political cartel and a form of disenfranchisement: The traditional parties, feeling threatened by the insurgent AfD have simply decided that they do not care what the voters say and won’t have anything to do with it. Since German governments are virtually always based on coalitions, which means that the AfD and its voters are treated as inferior. That this means that, as of now, in particular voters in the former East Germany are subject to this kind of discrimination, adding a West-East aspect to it that sits very badly with talk about German unity.

To get one thing out of the way: For now, it is only one poll that shows the AfD in the lead; other polls still have it in (barely) second place after the mainstream conservatives of the CDU/CSU bloc (which, in reality, functions as one party) of soon-to-be chancellor Friedrich Merz. But these differences are irrelevant. What matters is that the AfD’s rising trend is unbroken. That is definitely a blow to Merz, even before he has officially assumed office, as international observers are noting. Especially in view of the fact that Merz’s own poll numbers are cratering at the same time. Yet there is a broader point, too: The whole “firewall” strategy is malfunctioning extremely badly. Sensible observers have long predicted it, and now it is becoming ever more obvious: Freezing the AfD out only serves to make it stronger.

One thing that does not make Berlin’s ruling parties, the CDU and SPD, any more popular is that they have concluded their negotiations on how to divvy up the spoils of ministries and other goodies. Indeed, it is extremely embarrassing for the new governing coalition of conservatives and Social-Democrats (SPD) that the most recent AfD milestone breakthrough is happening now. It is a coincidence from hell: there they are, the traditional parties, seemingly safe behind their “firewall” and all ready to go, and the voters – uncouth as they can be – show them just how unpopular they are. Germans expect little from them, even now: A fresh poll shows that two thirds do not believe that things will change under the new coalition of tired old parties.

Note that most Germans have been deeply unhappy with the status quo, as we also know from recent polls: In February, Ipsos found that the general mood was “as bad as never before.” Only 17 percent of citizens – less than a fifth – believed their country was “on a good trajectory.” The other 83 percent were not indifferent or neutral but felt Germany was on the “wrong” trajectory. Even for a nation with something of a culture of angst and doom, those are atrocious figures. Hence, expecting no change now amounts to deep pessimism: Germans have felt for a while already that they are in dire trouble; and a preponderant majority thinks that that is where they will be stuck under new old management as well.

Read more …

“They have failed to strengthen security and stability. The Euro-Atlantic structures have ultimately succeeded in precisely the opposite, stoking international tensions and “remilitarizing Europe..”

Euro-Atlantic Community Gearing For War – Lavrov (RT)

The international structures centered in the Euro-Atlantic have failed to deliver stability and security to the region, and now the members of this community are preparing for a new major war, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said. The top diplomat delivered the remarks on Saturday during a Q&A session at the Antalya Diplomacy Forum in Türkiye. Lavrov criticized what he described as “the Euro-Atlantic structures,” including the European Union and Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), stating that the groups have ultimately failed to deliver on their proclaimed goals. “The security issues after the Second World War in our common region were defined in terms of Euro-Atlantic logic. NATO and the EU were essentially European,” Lavrov said.

“The EU recently signed an agreement with NATO. The EU is now part of the Euro-Atlantic policy – there is no doubt about that – including making its territory available for the alliance’s plans to move to the East, to the South, I don’t know where else,” he added, apparently referring to the Joint Declaration on EU-NATO Cooperation inked in early 2023. I believe all these Euro-Atlantic structures have failed. They have failed to strengthen security and stability. The Euro-Atlantic structures have ultimately succeeded in precisely the opposite, stoking international tensions and “remilitarizing Europe,” Lavrov suggested. “All the efforts of this Euro-Atlantic community are focused on preparing for a new war. Germany, together with France and Great Britain, are leading this process,” he added. Lavrov’s remarks come after a meeting of the so-called “coalition of the willing,” a group of Ukraine’s backers predominantly consisting of NATO and EU nations, held earlier this week.

The defense chiefs from the member states discussed a potential deployment of a “peacekeeping” force to Ukraine, with the idea spearheaded by the UK and France. The latest gathering failed to yield any tangible result, with EU top diplomat Kaja Kallas admitting that “different member states have different opinions and the discussions are still ongoing.” While UK Secretary of Defense John Healey insisted that the group’s were “well developed,” multiple of his counterparts publicly questioned the idea, raising concerns about the goals, mission and mandate of the potential deployment. Moscow has repeatedly warned the West against deploying troops to Ukraine under any pretext, specifically objecting to forces from any NATO countries ending up in the country. Last month, former Russian President and the deputy head of Russia’s Security Council, Dmitry Medvedev, said that the potential emergence of any NATO “peacekeepers” in Ukraine would mean a war between the bloc and Russia.

Read more …

“The Pentagon’s academic program studied dissent, protest, and radicalization. Now it’s being replaced by a private AI surveillance network run in total secrecy..”

Steele Dossier Was Discredited In 2017 — But Sold To The Public Anyway (MPN)

On March 25, Donald Trump signed an executive order declassifying all documentation related to Crossfire Hurricane, the FBI’s 2016 investigation into alleged collusion between Russia and then-presidential candidate Donald Trump. The order has unexpectedly resurrected buried documents that cast new light on the Steele dossier — and when it was known to be false. It is unclear what new information will be revealed, given substantial previous declassifications, two special counsel investigations, multiple congressional inquiries, several civil lawsuits, and a scathing Justice Department internal review. It has long been confirmed the FBI relied heavily on Steele’s discredited dossier to secure warrants against Trump aide Carter Page, despite grave internal concerns about its origins and reliability, and Steele’s sole “subsource” for all its lurid allegations openly admitted in interviews with the Bureau he could offer no corroboration for any of the dossier’s claims.

Such inconvenient facts and damning disclosures were nonetheless concealed from the public for several years following the dossier’s January 2017 publication by BuzzFeed News, now defunct. In the intervening time, it became the central component of the Russiagate narrative, a conspiracy theory that was a major rallying point for countless mainstream journalists, pundits, public figures, Western intelligence officials, and elected lawmakers. In the process, Steele attained mythological status. For example, NBC News dubbed the former MI6 operative “a real-life James Bond.” Primetime news networks dedicated countless hours to the topic, while leading media outlets invested enormous time, energy and money into verifying the dossier’s claims without success. Undeterred, legacy reporters relied on a roster of mainstream “Russia experts,” including prominent British and U.S. military and intelligence veterans, and briefings from anonymous officials to reinforce Steele’s credibility and the likely veracity of his dossier. As award-winning investigative journalist Aaron Maté told MintPress News:

“Media outlets served as unquestioning stenographers for Steele. If his dossier’s claims themselves weren’t sufficient to dismiss it with ridicule, another obvious marker should have set off alarms. Reading the dossier chronologically, a clear pattern emerges – many of its most explosive claims are influenced by contemporary media reporting. For instance, it was only after Wikileaks published the DNC emails in July 2016 that the dossier mentioned them. This is just one example demonstrating the dossier’s true sources were overactive imaginations and mainstream news outlets.” Even more damningly, leaked documents reviewed by MintPress News reveal that while Western journalists were hard at work attempting to validate Steele’s dossier and elevating the MI6 spy to wholly undeserved pillars of probity, the now-defunct private investigations firm GPW Group was, in early 2017, secretly unearthing vast amounts of damaging material that fatally undermined the dossier’s content, and comprehensively dismantling Steele’s previously unimpeachable public persona. It remains speculative what impact the firm’s findings might have had if they had been released publicly at the time.

The Pentagon’s academic program studied dissent, protest, and radicalization. Now it’s being replaced by a private AI surveillance network run in total secrecy., academic surveillance programs, AI in warfare, AI-powered social control, DARPA social science, military surveillance, Minerva Initiative, MKUltra, Pentagon AI research, Stargate, Stargate AI program, Trump AI initiative, U.S. GPW’s probe of Steele and his dossier was commissioned by Carter Ledyard & Milburn, a law firm representing Mikhail Fridman, Petr Aven, and German Khan — owners of Alfa Bank. The dossier leveled several serious allegations against them. The trio purportedly possessed a “kompromat” on Vladimir Putin, delivered “illicit cash” to him throughout the 1990s, and routinely provided the Kremlin with “informal advice” on foreign policy — “especially about the U.S.” Meanwhile, Alfa Bank supposedly served as a clandestine back channel between Trump and Moscow.

“In order to build a profile of Christopher Steele…as well as the broader operations of both Orbis Business Intelligence and Fusion GPS,” which commissioned the dossier on behalf of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee, GPW consulted “a variety of sources.” This included “U.S. intelligence figures,” various journalists, “private intelligence subcontractors” who had previously worked with Steele and Orbis, and “contacts who knew the man from his time with [MI6]…and, in one instance, directly oversaw his work.” The picture that emerged of Steele sharply contrasted with his mainstream portrayal as a “superstar.” One operative who “acted as Steele’s manager when he began working with [MI6] and later supervised him at two further points” described him as “average, middle of the road,” stating he had never “shined” in any of his postings. Another suggested Steele’s founding of Orbis “was the source of some incredulity” within MI6 due to his underwhelming professional history and perceived lack of “commercial nous.”

Yet another suggested Steele’s production of the dossier reflected his lack of “big picture judgment.” Sources consulted by GPW were even more critical of Fusion GPS chief Glenn Simpson. One journalist described him as a “hack” without “a license or the contacts to do…actual investigations,” instead outsourcing “all” work ostensibly conducted by his firm to others while skimming commissions. They also “openly admitted” to disliking Simpson, described by GPW as “not an uncommon attitude amongst those to whom we spoke.”

Read more …

Trump is quite a bit smarter than Maher.

Bill Maher Says ‘Mind Blown’ After Meeting With Trump (ZH)

While Bill Maher may change opinions like a windsock depending on who he’s pandering to, the “Real Time” host told his mostly-Democrat audience that Donald Trump, aka Hitler-Stalin-Mussolini, was “gracious and measured” at their recent meeting last week. We know, duh… but considering the influence Maher has on the left, his comments are interesting nonetheless. “You can hate me for it, but I’m not a liar. Trump was gracious and measured,” Maher said. “And why isn’t that in other settings- I don’t know, and I can’t answer, and it’s not my place to answer. I’m just telling you what I saw, and I wasn’t high.” Maher said the meeting, brokered by their mutual friend Kid Rock, wasn’t “some kind of summit.”

“I have no power. I’m a fucking comedian, and he’s the most powerful leader in the world!” he continued. “I’m not the leader of anything, except maybe a contingent of centrist-minded people who think there’s got to be a better way of running this country than hating each other every minute.” Maher admitted that he went in ready for a fight – only to find Trump absolutely charming. “Everything I’ve not liked about him was, I swear to God, absent. At least on this night, with this guy,” Maher, 69, said – seemingly shocked at his own admission. “I never felt I had to walk on eggshells around him. And honestly, I voted for Clinton and Obama, but I would never feel comfortable talking to them the way I was able to talk with Donald Trump,” he continued, adding “Make of it what you will.”

“I’ve had so many conversations with prominent people who are much less connected. People that don’t look you in the eye. People that don’t really listen because they just want to get to their next thing. People whose response to things you say just doesn’t track. None of that with him,” Maher continued. “Mostly he steered the conversation to ‘what do you think about this?’ I know. Your mind is blown. So is mine.” Maher added that Trump gave him a bunch of MAGA hats, which are stored in the same room where former President Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky engaged in extracurricular activities. At one point in the dinner, Maher says Trump asked him about his thoughts on the Iran nuclear situation. After he allegedly gave Trump shit for eliminating the Obama-era nuclear deal, Trump “didn’t get mad or call me a left-wing lunatic. He took it in.”

According to Maher, Trump used the word ‘lost’ in relation to the 2020 presidential election. “And I distinctly remember saying, ‘Wow, I never thought I’d hear you say that.’ He didn’t get mad. He’s much more self-aware than he lets on in public,” Maher said, adding that in private, Trump is just normal. “Just for starters, he laughs,” Maher stated in disbelief. “I’d never seen him laugh in public. But he does — including at himself — and it’s not fake. Believe me, as a comedian of forty years, I know a fake laugh when I hear it.” Watch:

Meanwhile, journalist Laura Loomer is jumping all over conservative “Bill Maher Simps,” while she says she had “a productive week in Cali, which included my deposition of Bill Maher,” who she’s suing for defamation.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Increase

 

 

Cholesterol
https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1910755326653059144

 

 

RFK
https://twitter.com/liz_churchill10/status/1911150761905717473

 

 

 

 

Babysitters
https://twitter.com/atensnut/status/1910846503096111548

 

 

Cheetah

 

 

Elephamily

 

 

Bamba
https://twitter.com/buitengebieden/status/1911059202795098239

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Apr 112025
 
 April 11, 2025  Posted by at 10:17 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , ,  62 Responses »


Salvador Dali The hand 1930

 

Trump Is the Bull in China’s Shop (Green)
Trump’s Reality-Driven U-Turn (Ben Shapiro)
House Passes Trump-Backed Budget Plan (Caldwell)
Trump Says He Just ‘Likes’ Musk (RT)
EU Would ‘Cut Its Own Throat’ By Pivoting To China – Bessent (RT)
EU Puts US Counter-Tariffs On Hold (RT)
EU Issues Threat To US Tech Giants (RT)
No Solution But The Dissolution Of The Terrorist Kiev Regime (SCF)
Trump Envoy In Russia For High-Level Talks – Media (RT)
‘Some EU States’ Opposed To Using Frozen Russian Assets – Kallas (RT)
Adam Schiff Wants Trump Probed For Market Manipulation (RT)
Trump Severs a Key Pillar of the Left’s Climate Alarmist Strategy (O’Neil)
Russia–Iran–China: All for One, and One for All? (Pepe Escobar)
Iran’s Regime Unlikely To Back Down As Trump Plays With Fire (Jay)
RFK Jr. Promises To Reveal Cause Of ‘Autism Epidemic’ by September (RT)
AfD Tops The German Polls For First Time In History (RMX)
The Supreme Court Must Clarify Presidential Power (Jeffrey Tucker)

 

 

 

 

Protect

Miller China

Japan
https://twitter.com/Nihonpolitics/status/1910096159835594786

Elon Pelosi

Peterson

Claims

WTO

Bessent

Dems
https://twitter.com/WesternLensman/status/1910115200562569510?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1910115200562569510%7Ctwgr%5E42f1445addc2139f8e015b1c7933578c6043e779%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fpolitical%2Fheres-what-democrats-stand-their-own-words

 

 

 

 

China just annnounced rates of 125%, said it would not go higher than that. Are they ready to talk?!

Trump Is the Bull in China’s Shop (Green)

President Donald Trump has been called a bull in a china shop one million and six times — but what if it’s China’s shop he’s aiming to break? He just might, too. Recent history shows that, just like with any other government program, tariffs can produce mixed results at best. But I’m not here today to discuss the merits of tariffs broadly but rather their effect on our most worrisome strategic competitor, Communist China. (For the record, I’m generally a fan of free trade — at least with friendly nations — but I’m no ideologue. ) I have to get a bit technical here, so bear with me. Wellington-Altus Chief Market Strategist James Thorne argued on X last night about the bind Trump put China in. China, he wrote, is “weighed down by surplus production, overcapacity, and inelastic supply. A rapidly aging population and rising labor costs have left its growth model wobbling.”

Economically, China has yet to recover the dynamic growth it enjoyed before Communist Party boss Xi Jinping’s extended COVID lockdowns. Thorne went on to ask, “What happens when millions from the countryside lose their jobs as factories slow and exports falter? Social unrest could erupt like a powder keg, while Beijing’s half-hearted reforms offer little relief.” Selling their horde of T-bills helps Beijing weaken the RMB while simultaneously thwarting Trump and SecTreas Scott Bessent’s goal of bringing down interest rates. That much is working. We’re just a few days into this and, after early drops, the yield on the 10-year is inching back up again. The thing to remember about war — even a trade war — is that the other guy gets to shoot back. Beijing’s goal is to keep its exports competitive even with an eye-popping 104% tariff while putting the hurt on us here at home until Trump blinks.

But Thorne compared Trump to Dirty Harry, who “stares down China’s precarious economy and growls, ‘Go ahead, make my day.’ Devalue the RMB and sell [US Treasuries].” But devaluing the RMB too far risks capital flight, as the Chinese do whatever they can to trade in their increasingly low-value RMB and park their savings overseas in safer currencies. Beijing has been trying (and failing) for years to stimulate economic growth, and capital flight would make a bad situation worse. Looking at the bigger picture, Martin Capital founder Rod Martin noted on Tuesday that “Countries from Argentina to Vietnam are falling all over themselves to cut ‘zero-zero’ tariff deals with Trump,” giving companies like Apple a not-so-gentle prod to accelerate moving their production out of China.

So China’s dependence on the U.S. export market isn’t its only choke point, and Trump is squeezing it hard. That isn’t to say we don’t have choke points, too. Carol Roth, financial analyst and author of “You Will Own Nothing: Your War With a New Financial World Order and How to Fight Back,” warned on X today that “Small businesses have been beaten up for 5 years — Covid, supply chain, labor disruption, inflation,” and that “they cannot take another govt induced shock.” “Wall Street can manage through, Main Street will be crushed again,” Roth concluded. There’s at least some anecdotal evidence to back that up. There are plenty of reports out there, and this one is just the most recent I found:

Those tariffs kicked in today, but many importers have their sales prices contractually locked in for the short term. Where is the money supposed to come from for a small business existing on slender margins? That’s a tough question and one we don’t yet have the answer to. There are risks and pain involved in weaning ourselves off our dependence on China for vital finished goods, and I’m trying, once again, to be honest about them. The point to remember is that detox hurts, but it beats the hell out of continued addiction. And sometimes it takes somebody with a bull in a china shop attitude to help us kick.

Read more …

“Trump lives in the world of reality; he is a pragmatist, not an idealist…”

Trump’s Reality-Driven U-Turn (Ben Shapiro)

President Donald Trump did what he had to do. Last week, Trump dropped an economic neutron bomb by declaring tariffs on virtually every country on the planet—tariffs based not on reciprocal tariff rates, but on trade deficits. After an initial stock dump of approximately 10% and then days of the markets bouncing up and down like a hyperactive corgi, Trump finally announced that he would be undoing his threatened tariff regime with regard to our allies.

In a statement posted to TruthSocial, he said, “Based on the lack of respect that China has shown to the World’s Markets, I am hereby raising the Tariff charged to China by the United States of America to 125%, effective immediately. At some point, hopefully in the near future, China will realize that the days of ripping off the U.S.A., and other Countries, is no longer sustainable or acceptable. Conversely, and based on the fact that more than 75 Countries have called Representatives of the United States, including the Departments of Commerce, Treasury, and the USTR, to negotiate a solution to the subjects being discussed relative to Trade, Trade Barriers, Tariffs, Currency Manipulation, and Non Monetary Tariffs, and that these Countries have not, at my strong suggestion, retaliated in any way, shape, or form against the United States, I have authorized a 90 day PAUSE, and a substantially lowered Reciprocal Tariff during this period, of 10%, also effective immediately. Thank you for your attention to this matter!”

This was reality setting in and Trump respecting it. As I wrote last week, “Now, Trump is unlikely to carry his policies to their full fruition if markets respond as expected. He is too canny a politician for that.” Trump lives in the world of reality; he is a pragmatist, not an idealist. And that means that when the stock market tanks, when the effects of his tariff regime are about to wipe out small businesses across America, when the economic pain is imminent, Trump will change course. And he did. Some Trump acolytes make the case that this was all a planned rollout. If so, the evidence is sorely lacking; from poorly calibrated posterboards to the bizarrely ignorant comments of presidential adviser Peter Navarro, all this would have to have been a peculiar plan.

If the plan was to tariff China and negotiate better trade terms with our allies, the easiest thing to do would have been to tariff China and negotiate better trade terms with our allies. Occam’s razor suggests that Trump unleashed a policy he preferred and then reversed course thanks to blowback. Trump himself acknowledged that he changed policy because people were getting “yippy” and “queasy.” But in effect, it makes no difference whether this was planned chaos or merely reactionary course-changing—the utilitarian nature of the result is the same. I’ve said before that Trump lives in the world of reality—that he responds to headlines, to incentives and to situations. That’s just as true today as it has always been. And for that, Trump deserves credit.

Read more …

Tour de force by Mike Johnson. Needed.

House Passes Trump-Backed Budget Plan (Caldwell)

House Republicans pushed through a Trump-backed budget framework on a 216-214 vote Thursday, providing a boost to the president’s legislative agenda. Democrats voted against it unanimously, while Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., and Victoria Spartz, R-Ind., were the only Republicans in opposition.The resolution’s passage came amid some protests from hard-line fiscal conservatives within the GOP, who argued that the plan does not provide sufficient cuts to the deficit. The budget resolution is a major first step that Congress must pass in order to get to budget reconciliation—the process of setting targets for spending in various areas.

Republicans have been eager to finish the process by Memorial Day, as the budget process will allow them to extend President Donald Trump’s first-term 2017 tax cuts, as well as provide funding for border security and other major campaign promises. Both houses of Congress must eventually agree on one identical bill in order to move forward. President Donald Trump on April 2 backed the Senate’s budget framework, which was passed in the Senate an all-night voting session which concluded early Saturday morning. He then urged the House to pass the exact same plan, and to “close [their] eyes and get there,” despite their reservations about the Senate’s plan.

The only problem? Many in the House criticized the Senate’s plan for not including as many enforceable cuts as the House’s previous framework did. Rep. Andy Harris, R-Md., who chairs the conservative House Freedom Caucus, said he would probably “vote against it,” as he thought its framework would lead to excess spending and, as a result, higher taxes. His remarks were echoed by several other Freedom Caucus members. House Budget Committee Chairman Jodey Arrington, R-Texas, also criticized the plan as “unserious and disappointing.” It creates “a mere $4 billion in enforceable cuts, less than one day’s worth of borrowing by the federal government,” Arrington wrote in his response to the plan.

House leadership attempted to assuage these fears, arguing that since the budget plan is not binding, House Republicans should wait until later to argue for more cuts. Skeptics of the plan held out until the very end, forcing Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, R-La., to delay a Wednesday evening vote on the matter until Thursday morning, when it ultimately passed. Now, Congress can focus on negotiating the final budget reconciliation bill, a process in which debate between GOP factions will continue.

Read more …

“We’d like to keep as many as we can. In fact, hopefully they’ll stay around for the long haul.”

He’ll need to find a way to keep Musk involved.

Trump Says He Just ‘Likes’ Musk (RT)

US President Donald Trump has heaped praise on Elon Musk, the head of his government waste-cutting task force, saying he wants the billionaire and his “fantastic” Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) team to stay in Washington for the “long haul.” Speaking at a Cabinet meeting on Thursday, Trump said he didn’t need anything from the billionaire entrepreneur – except that he happens to like him – while crediting Musk with uncovering billions in potential savings across the federal government. “Elon’s done a fantastic job. Look, he’s sitting here and I don’t care. I don’t need Elon for anything other than I happen to like him,” Trump said. “But I’m telling you, this guy did a fantastic job.”

The president said that he even bought a Tesla car he doesn’t need – not for himself, but to let his office staff drive around as a show of support for Musk. “They said, oh, did you get a bargain? No. I said, give me the top price,” Trump quipped. Musk, in turn, credited the “fantastic leadership” of Trump and the Cabinet, announcing that DOGE anticipates saving $150 billion in fiscal year 2026 by reducing fraud and waste in federal spending. “Some of it is just absurd – like people getting unemployment insurance who haven’t been born yet,” Musk said.

Musk’s high-profile advisory role in Trump’s administration has attracted many critics, accusing him of alleged conflicts of interest and political bias in his companies’ operations and federal contracts. A group of Democratic lawmakers sent a letter to the White House calling for Musk’s removal, arguing that his “erratic behavior” and past controversies undermine public trust. The White House has so far stood by Musk, with Trump making clear on Thursday that he has no intention of parting ways with his government’s waste hunter. The US president said he hopes Musk’s team will stay on beyond this initiative, praising their tech-savvy approach. “Your people are fantastic… They’re great. Smart, sharp… finding things that nobody would have thought of,” the president said. “We’d like to keep as many as we can. In fact, hopefully they’ll stay around for the long haul.”

Read more …

China wants to produce for the whole world except itself. Now it needs to start consuming. But that won’t happen in times of uncertainty. The Chinese will sit on their money.

EU Would ‘Cut Its Own Throat’ By Pivoting To China – Bessent (RT)

US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has claimed that the EU would be “cutting its own throat” if it seeks a closer alliance with China while loosening ties with Washington. Bessent commented on Wednesday after Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez had called for a reassessment of the EU’s trade relationship with Beijing earlier in the day. Sanchez told reporters during a diplomatic trip to Asia that the EU could benefit from closer cooperation with China amid uncertainty surrounding US trade policies and President Donald Trump’s recent moves to hike tariffs for nearly all trade partners. “Nobody wins with a trade war. Every country loses,” Sanchez warned. Bessent defended Trump’s tariff moves and urged partners not to side with Beijing, claiming that its trade policies are ruinous to the global economy.

“The economic minister in Spain made some comments this morning, ‘Oh, well, maybe we should align ourselves more with China,’ – that would be cutting your own throat,” Bessent stated at a press briefing. “These Chinese exports that the US tariff wall is gonna keep out… the Chinese business model… it never stops. They just keep producing and producing and dumping and dumping.” Trump on Wednesday announced a 90-day pause on reciprocal tariffs for 75 countries, which he had earlier hit with duties ranging from 10% to 50% over what he called unfair trade imbalances, and lowered duties to a flat 10% rate on everyone except Beijing. Instead, he slapped China with a further hike to 125%, accusing Beijing of escalation after it raised tariffs on US goods to 84%.

“In terms of escalation, unfortunately, the biggest offender in the global trading system is China, and they’re the only country who’s escalated,” Bessent claimed. The Treasury chief said many countries are now seeking negotiations with Washington following the tariff changes, noting upcoming talks with Japan and Vietnam. He also said he hopes to finalize new trade deals with US allies to create a united front against what he called China’s unbalanced trade structure. China has vehemently opposed the tariffs and vowed to fight them. On Wednesday, the Chinese Finance Ministry called the latest US hikes a “mistake on top of a mistake” that “infringes on China’s legitimate rights and interests and seriously damages the rules-based multilateral trading system.”

Read more …

Negotiate zero.

EU Puts US Counter-Tariffs On Hold (RT)

The EU has suspended the imposition of counter-tariffs on American imports, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has announced. The move follows US President Donald Trump’s decision to pause increased tariffs for three months while negotiations take place. In a post on X on Thursday, von der Leyen said the EU “took note of the announcement by President Trump” and wants to “give negotiations a chance.” “While finalizing the adoption of the EU countermeasures that saw strong support from our Member States, we will put them on hold for 90 days,” she stated. According to von der Leyen, the bloc will not hesitate to go ahead with counter-tariffs if the negotiations with the US fail. In a post on his Truth Social platform on Wednesday, Trump announced a “90 day PAUSE, and a substantially lowered Reciprocal Tariff during this period, of 10%.”

He claimed that “more than 75 Countries have called Representatives of the United States, including the Departments of Commerce, Treasury, and the USTR [Office of the United States Trade Representative] to negotiate a solution to the subjects being discussed relative to Trade, Trade Barriers, Tariffs, Currency Manipulation, and Non Monetary Tariffs.” According to the US president, these nations have refrained from retaliating against the tariffs his administration previously placed on them. That same day, EU member states approved retaliatory measures to the 25% tariffs imposed last month by the US on the bloc’s steel and aluminum, effective April 15. The counter-tariffs do not address the more recent 20% US tariffs on all EU exports that took effect on Wednesday and have since been paused.

While Brussels did not specify the list of targeted goods or tariff levels, media outlets have reported that tariffs ranging from 10% to 25% would cover a wide array of US goods, including poultry, grains, clothing, and metals. Last week, Trump announced sweeping tariffs targeting numerous countries across the world, citing the need to restore global trade fairness and accusing other nations of “ripping off” the US. The move sent shockwaves across global stock markets, though they have rebounded since Trump announced the pause on Wednesday.

Read more …

If the politicians do’t do our will, we’ll go after private industry.

EU Issues Threat To US Tech Giants (RT)

The European Union is prepared to impose bloc-wide tariffs on major US tech companies, such as Meta and Google, if negotiations with Washington fail to resolve the escalating trade dispute, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has warned. Following President Donald Trump’s decision to pause further tariff hikes for 90 days, EU exports to the US will still face a “baseline” 10% import duty instead of planned 20% under his new trade regime. Nevertheless, the European Commission announced it would temporarily suspend its countermeasures pending further negotiations. Speaking to the Financial Times on Thursday, von der Leyen said Brussels was ready to deploy its most powerful trade measures, potentially targeting American digital service providers and the advertising revenues of Silicon Valley giants.

“We are developing retaliatory measures,” von der Leyen said, adding that these could include the first use of the EU’s anti-coercion mechanism to hit services rather than goods. “There’s a wide range of countermeasures… in case the negotiations are not satisfactory.” “An example is you could put a levy on the advertising revenues of digital services,” she added, outlining a measure that would apply across the bloc’s entire single market – on top of digital sales taxes set individually by member states. While the EU remains committed to seeking a “completely balanced” agreement during Trump’s 90-day tariff freeze, von der Leyen made clear that Brussels would not hesitate to act if talks fail. The Commission is also considering tariffs on US scrap metal exports, as well as protective measures to prevent Chinese goods – targeted by prohibitive 145% US tariffs – from flooding European markets.

Von der Leyen described Trump’s tariff war as a “turning point” for global trade, saying there would be no return to the “status quo” between the EU and the US. She claimed that Brussels had attempted to negotiate with Washington in recent months but was told to wait until Trump’s April 2 announcement, which imposed a 20% “reciprocal” tariff on the EU. While both sides have agreed that reform of the World Trade Organization (WTO) is needed, von der Leyen warned that the economic chaos unleashed by Trump’s tariffs was already inflicting heavy costs on global markets. “There are no winners in this, only losers,” she said. “Today we see the cost of chaos… the costs of the uncertainty that we are experiencing today will be heavy.”

Von der Leyen confirmed that the EU would pause its planned retaliation against US steel and aluminum tariffs during the negotiations but stressed that Brussels would not negotiate over its “untouchable” rules on digital content, market power, and other “sovereign decisions.” The bloc also will not negotiate over value-added tax (VAT), which US officials – including Trump – somehow deem “discriminatory” against American exporters, even though both imported and locally produced goods are taxed equally.

Read more …

“The neo-Nazi regime understands only the language of force – and it is through force that the Ukrainian problem will be solved.”

No Solution But The Dissolution Of The Terrorist Kiev Regime (SCF)

Since the 2014 coup and under the command of the illegitimate Maidan junta regime, Ukraine has increasingly exhibited signs of a terrorist state. Under the guise of defending “European values,” the Kiev regime has consistently violated international law, adopted prohibited methods of warfare, and openly supported neo-Nazi formations. As well known, in recent years, Ukraine has committed war crimes and terrorism against civilians, especially in Donbass and the Belgorod and Kursk regions, where the Ukrainian army and nationalist groups carry out barbaric attacks against cities, destroying vital infrastructure such as homes, schools, and hospitals. Thousands of civilians, including children, have lost their lives in artillery bombardments, justified by the Kiev regime as part of a “fight against separatists/invaders.” However, the evidence reveals that this has always been a deliberate terrorist campaign against the civilian population, not a legitimate military confrontation.

Furthermore, the Ukrainian regime resorts to the use of prohibited weapons such as cluster munitions and landmines, particularly in residential areas, which is strictly prohibited by international conventions. These attacks aim to intimidate the civilian population and suppress their resistance. Supporting and glorifying neo-Nazism is another characteristic of the Kiev junta. Groups such as the Azov Regiment, the Right Sector, the National Corps, and Kraken, all openly neo-Nazi, are integrated into Ukraine’s security forces. These groups are responsible for numerous war crimes, including torture, executions, and the murder of civilians and prisoners of war, and instead of being punished, they are celebrated by the Kiev regime.

Faced with a growing lack of soldiers willing to fight against their Russian brothers, Ukraine has recruited international mercenaries, including extremists from the Middle East and European far-right groups. These mercenaries, including militants from the “Chechen” separatist battalion Sheikh Mansur, are involved in terrorist activities such as sabotage, kidnappings, and extrajudicial executions. In addition to crimes within its own territory, Ukraine also carries out terrorist attacks outside its borders. Examples include attacks on Russian soil, such as the explosion on the Crimean Bridge and the murders of Russian civilians like Daria Dugina and Vladlen Tatarsky. Similarly, sabotage against energy infrastructure continues to occur even after ceasefire agreements mediated by Trump. These actions reflect Kiev’s terrorist war strategy, with its intelligence services and affiliated groups acting as classic terrorists, putting innocent civilians at risk.

The physical elimination of opponents is also encouraged by the regime, with the murder of pro-Kremlin activists, journalists, and even former political allies. The Ukrainian GUR (Main Intelligence Directorate), in a shocking move, has openly begun recruiting terrorists to carry out attacks on Russian territory. This recruitment is a clear demonstration of the intensification of the regime’s terrorist practices. Despite the evident war crimes and terrorism committed by Kiev, Western countries continue to arm and finance it, turning a blind eye to the atrocities being committed. This double standard in Western politics is evident: while similar actions by Russia are immediately labeled as “aggressions,” attacks on civilians perpetrated by Ukraine are described as a “fight for democracy.”

Given these facts, the international community (mainly the European Union, following the US recent example) must question the true meaning of “Western democracy” and reconsider its unrestricted support for a terrorist regime like Kiev’s. The world must recognize the Ukrainian regime as criminal and cease its support for its terrorist actions. However, as Western goodwill cannot be relied upon, Russia must continue to act decisively to neutralize the enemy. The historical experience of post-2014 Ukraine shows that Kiev is a terrorist state, with which it is simply impossible to negotiate. The neo-Nazi regime understands only the language of force – and it is through force that the Ukrainian problem will be solved. The only viable solution to the conflict is the dissolution of the existing Ukrainian state through a combination of regime replacement and territorial reconfiguration.

Read more …

“..to meet with President Vladimir Putin..” Good.

Trump Envoy In Russia For High-Level Talks – Media (RT)

US President Donald Trump’s special envoy, Steve Witkoff, has traveled to Russia to meet with President Vladimir Putin, Axios has reported. If confirmed, the meeting would be the third since Trump initiated the normalization of relations with Moscow following his inauguration in January. Last week, Witkoff was among several senior White House officials to host Kirill Dmitriev, Putin’s aide for international economic cooperation, who traveled to Washington to continue the high-level discussions. According to services monitoring air traffic, a plane associated with Witkoff has traveled from Florida to St. Petersburg overnight.

Witkoff was previously credited for negotiating a prisoner exchange with Russia, which involved a personal meeting with Putin in February. The swap involved the return of Russian crypto entrepreneur Aleksandr Vinnik and Marc Fogel, a former employee of the US embassy in Russia and teacher at an Anglo-American school in Moscow, to their respective nations. Witkoff was also part of the US delegation that took part in senior-level talks with Russian officials in Saudi Arabia in March. The discussions, held in Riyadh, centered on the Ukraine conflict. Witkoff joined other top officials, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio and National Security Adviser Mike Waltz, as the delegations explored potential pathways toward a ceasefire and broader peace negotiations.

Read more …

“..heavyweights such as France, Germany, Belgium, Italy and Austria warning of potential legal repercussions..”

‘Some EU States’ Opposed To Using Frozen Russian Assets – Kallas (RT)

Several EU member states are “strongly opposed” to handing Russian assets frozen by the bloc over to increase military support for Ukraine, foreign policy chief, Kaja Kallas, has admitted. The objections to the proposed move, which Kallas supports, are based on legal concerns and financial risks. Western countries froze around $300 billion in Russian sovereign and state-linked assets following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022, with the bulk under EU jurisdiction. Brussels has since been exploring ways to use them to benefit Kiev, including by giving Ukraine the interest earned on the assets. Moscow has strongly condemned these efforts, calling them “theft.”

In an interview with Estonian state broadcaster ERR on Thursday, Kallas said that the bloc’s members are still in talks on the issue. “We’re getting ready, as there are certain risks involved and we need to find ways to mitigate those risks. Plus, some states are strongly opposed to it,” she said. When asked which countries are opposed, Kallas declined. “I can’t start naming names… it is not very difficult to figure out,” she said. The diplomat noted that countries holding large portions of the frozen assets face greater risks. “For example, take Belgium… they hold most of the assets. As a result, they feel their risk exposure is the highest.”

The proposal to use Russian assets to help Ukraine has faced significant opposition within the EU, with heavyweights such as France, Germany, Belgium, Italy and Austria warning of potential legal repercussions of an outright confiscation. Meanwhile, Hungary and Slovakia have warned that such a move could escalate the conflict and undermine regional stability. Responding to Kallas’ comments, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov stressed that “Russia will never renounce its rights to its own assets and will not stop defending them”. Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova remarked that Kallas’s interview presents “a unique opportunity to analyze a crime not after its commission, but at the moment of its planning.”

Read more …

They found a new angle..

Adam Schiff Wants Trump Probed For Market Manipulation (RT)

US Democratic Senator Adam Schiff has called on Congress to investigate President Donald Trump for possible insider trading and market manipulation following his abrupt trade policy U-turn. Global stocks soared after the president paused the imposition of tariffs on a multitude of countries this week. On Wednesday, Trump announced a 90-day pause on reciprocal tariffs against US trade partners, lowering duties to a flat 10% rate. The only exception was China, which he hit with an increase to 125% following Beijing’s tariff hike on US goods to 84%. Immediately after the announcement, US stock markets posted near-record gains after a week-long slump. Mere hours before the announcement, Trump posted on his Truth Social platform: “BE COOL! Everything is going to work out well,” followed by, “THIS IS A GREAT TIME TO BUY!!! DJT,” referencing his media company’s stock ticker.

The timing of his posts, the pause and the resulting market rally sparked speculation about market manipulation online, which became even more heated after White House aide Margo Martin posted a video of Trump praising financier Charles Schwab for making billions during the rally. “Trump removed many of the tariffs he had imposed in this on-again, off-again… kind of policy. This has just wreaked havoc on the markets,” Schiff said in his video address posted on X. “But there is another profound danger as well, and that is insider trading within the White House.” “The question is, who knew what the president was going to do? And did people around the president trade stock knowing the incredible gyration the market was about to go through?” he added.

Schiff went on to accuse Trump of corruption, citing his family’s crypto trading and the “conflicted self-dealing” of ally, billionaire Elon Musk. “We in Congress need to do more than demand answers. We need to do the oversight necessary to get those answers… We’re going to get to the bottom of this,” he pledged. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt earlier claimed that the tariff reversal was part of Trump’s broader negotiation strategy, calling it his “art of the deal.” The White House has so far made no comment on Schiff’s call for a congressional probe.

Other Democrats also voiced concerns. “The President of the United States is literally engaging in the world’s biggest market manipulation scheme,” the House Democratic Financial Services Committee wrote on X, in response to Trump’s “Time to buy” post. Rep. Steven Horsford of Nevada openly questioned whether the pause amounted to market manipulation during a House hearing with Trump’s trade representative, Jamieson Greer on Wednesday. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez called for all lawmakers to disclose recent stock purchases. “I’ve been hearing some interesting chatter on the floor,” she wrote on X. “Disclosure deadline is May 15th. We’re about to learn a few things. It’s time to ban insider trading in Congress.”

Read more …

“The Trump administration is cutting funding for the U.S. Global Change Research Program, which produces a National Climate Assessment..”

Trump Severs a Key Pillar of the Left’s Climate Alarmist Strategy (O’Neil)

The White House has begun to cut funding for a federal program that drives climate alarmism and bolsters the narrative that burning fossil fuels will doom the environment. The Trump administration is cutting funding for the U.S. Global Change Research Program, which produces a National Climate Assessment. Agencies across the government use the assessment to justify directing taxpayer dollars to fighting the specter of climate change. President George H.W. Bush signed the Global Change Research Act of 1990, which directs the administration to release the assessment every four years. The law does not require the assessment to come to biased conclusions in favor of climate alarmism, however. The government report gives a veneer of respectability to the claims that scientists all agree that burning fossil fuels will lead to catastrophic climate change.

This justifies massive boondoggles like the so-called Inflation Reduction Act. As I wrote in my book, “The Woketopus: The Dark Money Cabal Manipulating the Federal Government,” President Joe Biden picked John Podesta, Hillary Clinton’s former campaign manager and the founder of the Center for American Progress, to determine where billions of dollars went. Podesta, who also founded a powerful Washington lobbying firm with his brother Tony, enjoys close ties with the Left’s dark money network. Podesta helped prop up a climate alarmist industry that uses billions of taxpayer dollars to promote less reliable forms of energy, like wind and solar power, in the name of saving the planet. NASA canceled a contract with the consulting firm ICF International, which coordinates the program and the 13 federal agencies that write the assessment, Politico reported. Killing that contract has “forever severed” climate change work across federal agencies, one official reportedly said.

“NASA is working with [the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy] on how to best support the congressionally-mandated program while also increasing efficiencies across the 14 agencies and advisory committee supporting this effort,” a NASA spokesperson said. A source familiar with the decision told The Daily Wire that ICF International’s leftist bias contaminated the assessments. “ICF has produced assessments riddled with worst-case scenarios, obfuscating the assumptions underlying dire predictions about what the planet will be like in 100 years,” the source said. “The quality of the information is low, and the administration is committed to basing decisions on realistic assumptions that comport with legal standards.”

Climate alarmists repeatedly claim that 97% of climate scientists agree that human burning of fossil fuels will spell global doom, yet the data does not back up this claim. The 2013 study that reached that conclusion not only excluded relevant studies but also mischaracterized scientific research to fit the alarmist narrative. Climate alarmist predictions have repeatedly failed to come true. Al Gore predicted that the snows would disappear from Mount Kilimanjaro due to climate change. Others predicted that the Maldives islands in the Indian Ocean would sink beneath the waves due to climate change. Rooting out the alarmist bias from the National Climate Assessment may enable scientists to admit what most Americans intuitively grasp: the global climate changes for many reasons, and carbon emissions are only one factor among many. If the climate alarmist narrative falls, the entire green boondoggle falls apart. Expect climate groups to scream to high heaven about this move.

Read more …

Complex relations. But close to each other.

Russia–Iran–China: All for One, and One for All? (Pepe Escobar)

Russia and Iran are at the forefront of the multi-layered Eurasia integration process – the most crucial geopolitical development of the young 21st century. Both are top members of BRICS+ and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). Both are seriously implicated as Global Majority leaders to build a multi-nodal, multipolar world. And both have signed, in late January in Moscow, a detailed, comprehensive strategic partnership. The second administration of US President Donald Trump, starting with the “maximum pressure” antics employed by the bombastic Circus Ringmaster himself, seems to ignore these imperatives. It was up to the Russian Foreign Ministry to re-introduce rationality in what was fast becoming an out of control shouting match: essentially Moscow, alongside its partner Tehran, simply will not accept outside threats of bombing Iran’s nuclear and energy infrastructure, while insisting on the search for viable negotiated solutions for the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program.

And then, just like lightning, the Washington narrative changed. US Special Envoy for Middle East Affairs, Steven Witkoff – not exactly a Metternich, and previously a “maximum pressure” hardliner – started talking about the need for “confidence-building” and even “resolving disagreements,” implying Washington began “seriously considering,” according to the proverbial “officials,” indirect nuclear talks. These implications turned to reality on Monday afternoon when Trump allegedly blindsided the visiting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu with the announcement of a “very big meeting” with Iranian officials in the next few days. Tehran later confirmed the news, with Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi saying he would engage in indirect nuclear negotiations with Witkoff in Oman on Saturday. It’s as if Trump had at least listened to the arguments exposed by the Islamic Republic’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. But then again, he can change his mind in a Trump New York minute.

Essential background to decipher the “Will Russia help Iran” conundrum can be found in these all-too-diplomatic exchanges at the Valdai Club in Moscow. The key points were made by Alexander Maryasov, Russia’s ambassador to Iran from 2001 to 2005. Maryasov argues that the Russia–Iran treaty is not only a symbolic milestone, but “serves as a roadmap for advancing our cooperation across virtually all domains.” It is more of “a bilateral relations document” – not a defense treaty. The treaty was extensively discussed – then approved – as a counter-point to “the intensified military-political and economic pressure exerted by western nations on both Russia and Iran.” The main rationale was how to fight against the sanctions tsunami.

Yet even if it does not constitute a military alliance, the treaty details mutually agreed moves if there is an attack or threats to either nation’s national security – as in Trump’s careless bombing threats against Iran. The treaty also defines the vast scope of military-technical and defense cooperation, including, crucially, regular intel talk. Maryasov identified the key security points as the Caspian, the South Caucasus, Central Asia, and last but not least, West Asia, including the breadth and reach of the Axis of Resistance. The official Moscow position on the Axis of Resistance is an extremely delicate affair. For instance, let’s look at Yemen. Moscow does not officially recognize the Yemeni resistance government embodied by Ansarallah and with its HQ in the capital Sanaa; rather, it recognizes, just like Washington, a puppet government in Aden, which is in fact housed in a five-star hotel in Riyadh, sponsored by Saudi Arabia.

Last summer two different Yemeni delegations were visiting Moscow. As I witnessed it, the Sanaa delegation faced tremendous bureaucratic problems to clinch official meetings. There is, of course, sympathy for Ansarallah across Moscow intel and military circles. But as confirmed in Sanaa with a member of the High Political Council, these contacts occur via “privileged channels,” and not institutionally. The same applies to Lebanon’s Hezbollah, which was a key Russian ally in routing ISIS and other Islamist extremist groups during the Syrian war. When it comes to Syria, the only thing that really matters for official Moscow, after the Al-Qaeda-linked extremists took power in Damascus last December, is to preserve the Russian bases in Tartous and Hmeimim.

Read more …

“ n reality, what we see in front of the cameras is a theatre. In reality Trump is unhappy about Netanyahu’s plans and his bigger ruse to draw the U.S. into a war with Iran. The real story here is that Trump does want a better deal from Iran..”

Iran’s Regime Unlikely To Back Down As Trump Plays With Fire (Jay)

June 2019 was a critical moment in Donald Trump’s first term as president where, he was told that Iran had shot down a U.S. drone in international waters in the Persian Gulf. It is reported that he instructed the Pentagon to carry out a number of strikes against Iranian military installations but then was told by a general that if he did that, this would invoke a world war and that many U.S. soldiers would die as a consequence. He backed down, after weighing up the consequences and probably considered that the Iranian downing of the U.S. drone was probably within Iran’s airspace after all. For those who know Trump, this was quite a salient moment. Many would argue that Biden would not have backed down and that a war with Iran – and Iran alone in those days – would have been a huge defeat for the U.S. in that it would not win, thus only suffering from defeats on the battlefield would make it a loser.

Was it not Kissinger who said that “The conventional army loses if it does not win. The guerrilla wins if he does not lose.” The quote, of course, is perhaps poorly aligned with the reality of a war between the U.S. and Iran, as the latter can hardly be described as a guerrilla organization, but the point is that America cannot win against Iran simply because of the ratio of body bags and collateral losses of material. Iran can lose 1,000 soldiers verses America’s one, in terms of the negative impact on Trump’s decision to go ahead with the war in the first place. For the U.S. to fight Iran, even with partners, it would need to have only one plan, which would be the entire inhalation of the country and its regime. Given that the U.S. cannot even defeat the Houthis, it’s hard to see how even the most hard-core sycophant in the Pentagon that Trump has, indulging themselves to this level of fantasy.

Has Donald Trump reinvented his own political doctrine in his second term? Given that we are always led to believe that he doesn’t like the distraction of foreign wars, it’s hard to take him seriously with the threats he has made to Iran in recent days. In 2019 Iran’s ballistic missile defence system was considered too sophisticated and impenetrable for a U.S. attack. Six years later it is even greater than it was and Tehran now has both China and Russia as security partners. Add to that, Iran is believed to have purchased Russia’s S-400 air defence system, in exchange for it supplying Russia with ballistic missiles, which presents the possibility of an air strike by either America’s B-52 bombers or even fighter jets as a mission impossible – as they won’t be able to enter Iranian airspace as was the case in October 2024 when Israeli fighter jets attempted a massive attack but failed on a grand scale.

But then while Trump mulls over the idea of what a massive embarrassment such a failed operation would be, both politically at home but also in the region, military experts will no doubt point out that Iran has hypersonic missiles, which are not only impossible to shoot down, due the their speed (which we saw last year when they penetrated Israel’s airspace and struck at a number of military bases), but will be a game changer for the U.S. The ease of how one of those missiles could sink a U.S. aircraft carrier in the region should not be underestimated. So what is the real story here? Is Trump’s threat that if Iran doesn’t comply with the latest demands over a nuclear deal, a real one? The Iranians themselves don’t seem to be taking the threat seriously but they are taking the negotiations at face value as an opportunity while they now have 60% enriched nuclear grade uranium. And they are right not to.

It’s unlikely Trump is serious about an attack on Iran, as, according to a number of credible sources and despite appearances, he wants Netanyahu to back down from his ambitions of a war with Iran which would involve U.S. troops. In reality, what we see in front of the cameras is a theatre. In reality Trump is unhappy about Netanyahu’s plans and his bigger ruse to draw the U.S. into a war with Iran. The real story here is that Trump does want a better deal from Iran which gives him a longer ‘break out’ period for Iran to develop a nuclear bomb and some sort of curtailment on Iran’s ballistic missile program – his demands back in 2018 when he pulled the U.S. out of the JCPOA deal – but also wants to use the negotiations as a tool to both control Netanyahu and the Jewish lobby in DC.

Read more …

First big test. If he passes, the world’s his oyster.

RFK Jr. Promises To Reveal Cause Of ‘Autism Epidemic’ by September (RT)

US Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has announced a large-scale federal initiative aimed at identifying the factors behind what he called the “autism epidemic,” with findings expected by September 2025. Speaking during a televised Cabinet meeting with President Donald Trump on Thursday, Kennedy – who has previously been accused by critics of promoting conspiracy theories about vaccines – said the new research effort would involve “hundreds of scientists from around the world.” “By September, we will know what has caused the autism epidemic. And we’ll be able to eliminate those exposures,” Kennedy promised. He stressed the urgency of the project, citing a sharp increase in childhood autism diagnoses over recent decades, rising from “one in 10,000 when I was a kid.”

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) currently estimate that 1 in 36 children in the US are diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder – a rise often attributed to improved awareness and expanded diagnostic criteria. “That is a horrible statistic, isn’t it? There’s got to be something artificial out there that’s doing this,” Trump told Kennedy. “If you can come up with that answer – where you stop taking something, you stop eating something, or maybe it’s a shot – but something’s causing it,” Trump added. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) already invests over $300 million annually in autism research, primarily focusing on genetic factors and prenatal environmental influences. Kennedy did not elaborate on the scope of the new “massive testing and research effort” or what specific exposures might be targeted.

Kennedy, the founder of the anti-vaccine group Children’s Health Defense, has gained prominence in the US for questioning the safety and effectiveness of childhood vaccinations and promoting the claim that vaccines are linked to autism – a theory widely rejected by the scientific community. He was also a vocal critic of the World Health Organization’s Covid-19 response measures, including lockdowns and the rapid rollout of experimental vaccines. Despite his controversial reputation, Kennedy denies being opposed to vaccination, noting that his own children are immunized. During his confirmation hearings, he stated that he advocates for stricter safety testing and more rigorous studies of vaccines. After Kennedy endorsed Trump’s campaign last year, the president vowed to give him broad authority over healthcare policy, saying he would let Kennedy “go wild.”

RFK

Read more …

Unstoppable, unless they try a Le Pen. They’ve been calling the AfD fascist for a long time, but the people stopped listening,

AfD Tops The German Polls For First Time In History (RMX)

The Alternative for Germany (AfD) has become the most popular party nationwide for the first time in its history, edging past the CDU/CSU in the latest Ipsos poll. The survey, conducted April 4–5, 2025, shows the AfD at 25 percent, just ahead of the CDU/CSU at 24 percent. The polling marks a dramatic turnaround since February’s federal election, when the Christian Democrats attained 29 percent and the AfD came second, four points behind. Meanwhile, the SPD holds 15 percent, and both the Greens and the Left Party are at 11 percent each.

https://twitter.com/RMXnews/status/1909885937758175428?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1909885937758175428%7Ctwgr%5E880847c0b612ae1426055e38356a23fe805989cb%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Frmx.news%2Farticle%2Fafd-tops-the-polls-for-first-time-in-its-history-as-merzs-public-support-for-chancellor-plummets%2F

These numbers come amid growing dissatisfaction with CDU leader Friedrich Merz. According to a separate Forsa poll for RTL and ntv, only 32 percent of Germans believe Merz is suited for the office of chancellor, while 60 percent say he is not. This marks a steep decline from early March, when 40 percent still had confidence in him. Merz’s numbers are even worse in East Germany, where just 19 percent see him as a good future chancellor, compared to 34 percent in the West. Only among Union voters does Merz enjoy solid support, with 69 percent considering him a strong candidate. Among supporters of other parties, skepticism is widespread: 69 percent of SPD voters, 71 percent of Green voters, and 84 percent of AfD voters say Merz is unfit for the role. Among Left Party voters, that number climbs to 85 percent.

“The majority of voters doubt that the black-red agreement is moving in the right direction,” said Hermann Binkert, head of the INSA polling institute, referring to ongoing negotiations over a possible Grand Coalition between the CDU and SPD. Voter frustration is also being stoked by the controversial €500 billion investment fund, approved with backing from the CDU, SPD, and Greens. Viewed as a signal of increased spending and mounting debt, the fund has intensified criticism of the political establishment.

FDP senior figure Wolfgang Kubicki recently issued a warning to Germany’s legacy parties, saying the country is on the verge of a political revolution. “An AfD chancellor is closer than we think,” Kubicki said. “The vast majority of German citizens have recently voted somehow right-wing. Now, however, they threaten to get left-wing politics. That can’t go on for much longer.” Following February’s election result, AfD co-leader Alice Weidel accused Merz of betraying his voters by cozying up to left-wing parties.

https://twitter.com/RMXnews/status/1893951595374575629?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1893951595374575629%7Ctwgr%5E880847c0b612ae1426055e38356a23fe805989cb%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Frmx.news%2Farticle%2Fafd-tops-the-polls-for-first-time-in-its-history-as-merzs-public-support-for-chancellor-plummets%2F

“If the CDU commits electoral fraud against its own voters by forming a coalition with the left, the next election will come sooner than you think,” she warned. “Then, we will overtake the CDU as the strongest force!” Coalition talks between the SPD and the CDU continued long into the night on Tuesday, with an announcement on the next federal government expected in the coming days.

Read more …

Very much.

The Supreme Court Must Clarify Presidential Power (Jeffrey Tucker)

Signs are appearing all over my neighborhood. They say “Rejecting Kings Since 1776.” It does not take much political sophistication to grasp the upshot of this messaging. It is a focus-group-tested slogan to use against President Donald Trump. We have no history of kings or monarchs. The Founders were very clear about that. Our leaders would be elected by the people. There is widespread agreement on that point. But oddly a general bias against monarchs is not actually a helpful lens through which to understand the main controversies of our time. The kind of power that Trump is deploying right now—here we leave aside the issue of trade and tariffs—is mainly about the ability of the president to be in charge of his own executive branch. You might think that we have settled law and precedent that could decisively offer the answer. Incredibly, we do not.

The rise of the administrative state with more than 400 agencies and millions of employees with the power to make regulation and law is not something that has been clearly adjudicated by the highest court. Why not? Mostly because presidents have not really set out to offer a comprehensive challenge to the power of the agencies. Trump is arguably the first to make a forceful claim to be in charge of the agencies. He and his staff knew for sure that this claim would be subject to litigation and likely rejected by lower courts. But they also believed that forcing the Supreme Court to intervene was worth the risk. So far, the highest court has generally sided with the Trump administration against lower court attempts to restrict the power of the elected president over executive agencies. But the decisions have largely turned on procedural grounds, and these have been issued by a divided court with narrow wins.

What we await is a serious and large decision on the general topic of presidential authority. Is this about kingmaking? Not at all. It is about the ability of the head of state to determine policy within his own branch of government. Nor is it about stepping on the privileges and powers of the legislative and judicial branches. It is about recognizing the authority of each branch to manage its own shop. Consider the alternatives to having the elected president determine policy within his administration. It means allowing the agencies to act without any sort of accountability to anyone, not voters, not courts, not the president. That has been largely the case for many decades. Nothing in the Constitution would seem to permit that. And yet that is exactly where we are. Everyone is awaiting this decision. So long as it does not come down, there will be uncertainty within the White House about exactly what is possible, what policies will stick, and what policies will be overturned by the courts.

It comes down to this. The Trump administration bears full responsibility for whatever emanates from the executive branch during his term. In 2020, I blamed Trump for what the CDC, NIH, and FDA did. I took this position somewhat naively, thinking that Trump was surely in charge. I’ve since learned that this is not the case. There has been a long presumption within all these agencies that they can ignore the president. It’s the same with military policy. The president bears responsibility for wars and interventions and their effects. Trump blamed Biden for the disaster in Afghanistan and this is as it should be. It’s been the same with all presidents in American history. The success or failure of any single presidential term falls squarely on the shoulders of one man.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

McCullough on the vaccine

 

 

Tucker X

Tucker Alex

 

 

 

 

Tariff song
https://twitter.com/jayroo69/status/1909995847732834467

 

 

Maloney: ‘Mar-a-Lago Accords’

 

 

DNA
https://twitter.com/ill_Scholar/status/1909798418496496008

 

 

Peacock
https://twitter.com/AMAZlNGNATURE/status/1910234114797543816

 

 

King

 

 

Train

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Apr 042025
 
 April 4, 2025  Posted by at 9:14 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , ,  57 Responses »


Pablo Picasso Portrait of woman in wheelchair 1936

 

This Is Good. Very, Very Good. (CTH)
Beijing Slams Trump’s “Unilateral Bullying” Tariffs, Signals Retaliation (ZH)
President Trump Ends Duty-Free De Minimis Treatment for All Chinese Goods (CTH)
World Leaders React To Trump’s Tariff Onslaught (RT)
Here’s Why Trump Will Win the Tariff Standoff (Margolis)
Kevin O’Leary Slams Canada’s ‘Sheer Stupidity’ in Trade Standoff With Trump (Margolis)
How Could Trump Tackle Trap Set Up by Europe? (Sp.)
Trump Teases Bombshell DOGE Finding: ‘What They Found Is Incredible’ (ZH)
Trump Tariffs Breach NATO Rules – Norway (RT)
Putin, Zelensky Ready To Make A Deal – Trump (RT)
Putin Envoy Visits Washington (RT)
Third Parties Attempting To Derail US-Russia Talks – Putin Envoy (RT)
House Panels Press Probe of ActBlue Campaign Fundraising Operations (Adams)
Dr. Oz Will Save Medicare, Strengthen Medicaid, Secure a Healthier America (DS)
War With Iran ‘Almost Inevitable’ – France (RT)
Hungary to Abandon ICC Over Concerns of Political Bias – Orban (Sp.)

 

 

 

 

WH tariffs

Batya Ungar-Sargon
https://twitter.com/DC_Draino/status/1907606593509769654

Lutnick

https://twitter.com/TONYxTWO/status/1907779787730378838

BeckBoasberg

KUHN

Vance

Bernie
https://twitter.com/mazemoore/status/1907883583228051964

Beck

 

 

 

 

What Marine Le Pen and Trump’s tariffs have in common is they are both anti-globalist. The world is changing and everyone will have to adapt.

Here is “sundance” the lawyer:

This Is Good. Very, Very Good. (CTH)

If it was weak, I would tell you it was weak. If it was a construct that contained dangerous consequences, I would warn you of them. If this trade/tariff regime was going to be harmful to the economy I would say so. This global trade reset (as outlined) doesn’t create doom – not even close, it creates discipline. What we’re seeing isn’t a reckless trade war. It’s a strategic recalibration targeting the structural imbalances that hollowed out American industry. The tariffs are reciprocal, calculated based on actual trade deficits. That’s not random or punitive—it’s mathematically fair. And they’re targeted: this isn’t a broad tax on everything. The focus is on finished goods, not the raw materials and components we need to build here. That protects domestic production and supply chains—not disrupts them.

Some worry this will destabilize capital markets. But this plan doesn’t touch interest rates, credit channels, or core financial plumbing. It doesn’t burden U.S. manufacturers or trigger input price spirals. Quite the opposite—it creates revenue and predictability; two things capital markets thrive on. It also closes loopholes like de minimis, reins in corporate arbitrage, and forces trading partners to play fair. If that creates discomfort for companies built on outsourcing and imbalance, that’s not doom. That’s a long-overdue correction. This isn’t the collapse of global trade. It’s the end of surrender and the beginning of mutual accountability.

This is good. Very, Very good.

Read more …

China had it good for a few decades. So of course they’re not rejoicing today.

“The era of Asia’s export manufacturing-led development has come to an end, and the region will need to develop markets closer to home.”

Beijing Slams Trump’s “Unilateral Bullying” Tariffs, Signals Retaliation (ZH)

President Trump’s late afternoon announcement on Wednesday—”Liberation Day”—unveiled a far more aggressive tariff policy than top Wall Street analysts had anticipated, prompting panic dumping in global equities and futures markets overnight. Of particular concern is Trump’s stance toward China. The total effective tariff rate on Chinese imports surged to 54%, a dramatic increase of 34% from the previously imposed 20% in additional levies tied to fentanyl and earlier duties. Trump’s Liberation Day has drawn swift condemnation from Beijing, which has described the escalating tariff war as “unilateral bullying.” Nikkei Asia quoted China’s Ministry of Commerce, warning that it “firmly opposes” Trump’s tariffs and “will resolutely take countermeasures to safeguard its own rights and interests.”

The Commerce Ministry noted that the US “ignored” the benefits of a global trading system, adding, “The so-called ‘reciprocal tariffs,’ which are based on subjective and unilateral assessments by the United States, are not in line with the rules of international trade, seriously jeopardize the legitimate rights and interests of the parties concerned, and are typical of unilateral bullying.” The ministry did not discuss specifics on the countermeasures. A ministry spokesperson told reporters that Beijing hopes to “resolve various issues through equal consultation.” In other words, it’s just a matter of time before Beijing mounts a countermeasure against the US, whether that’s targeted tariffs, export controls, or other measures (such as targeting US Big Tech). Or as we’ve recently seen: Beijing Derailing Panama Port Deal.

Guo Jiakun, a spokesperson for China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, sang the same tune: China “firmly opposes” Trump’s trade war escalation, which “seriously undermines” the rules-based global trading system. He urged Washington to resolve trade differences through talks. However, President Trump tried that with the Chinese Communist Party in his first term with the so-called “Phase One” agreement. Beijing committed to purchasing $200 billion of additional US exports. Yet, the phase one deal with the CCP was derailed by Covid disruptions. The Trump administration’s goal with reciprocal tariffs against literally the entire world, including some cases of near triple-digit reciprocal tariffs that will lead to a historic emerging markets shock, is to reverse a half-century or more of de-industrialization policies in the US that have hollowed out the nation’s core and produced a national security threat as the world fractures into a bipolar state.

In financial markets, the People’s Bank of China set the daily reference rate for the yuan at 7.1889 per dollar, weakening the currency. This allows the yuan to depreciate and support export competitiveness. A move like this will only draw accusations of currency manipulation from Trump. “We maintain our view that the PBOC will not allow a sharp [yuan] depreciation given capital outflow risks and the government’s objective to restore confidence in the Chinese economy,” HK Mizuho Securities analyst Ken Cheung wrote in a note earlier. Goldman analysts Andrew Tilton and others told clients:

“On April 2, President Trump announced “reciprocal” tariffs on trading partners with exclusion of products that are subject to sectoral tariffs, resulting in what we estimate to be an increase of 26pp in the average effective US tariff rate on China, which would bring the total effective tariff rate on Chinese goods to 58%. This is much higher than we and the market had expected. Similar to the experience when the previous two 10% tariff increases were imposed on China earlier this year, we think the Chinese government is likely to retaliate with some targeted tariffs on US products as well as non-tariff measures like export controls.

We expect policymakers to continue to resist significant CNY depreciation. We believe the government will step up easing measures to offset the additional growth drag from higher tariffs. We are not changing our 2025 full-year GDP growth forecast of 4.5% at this time due to better-than-expected Q1 data and increased policy easing expectations, as well as remaining uncertainties regarding whether some of the tariffs could be negotiated down in the coming months. That said, we acknowledge downside risk from slowing global growth after the large, across-the board US tariff increases.”

S&P Global Ratings credit analyst Ming Tan warned that Trump’s tariffs could exacerbate China’s weak economy: “The drag on China’s economy from higher tariffs will transmit to banks. We expect problem loans will rise over the next few years and could leap as high as 6.4% of total loans in a downside scenario.” Fred Neumann, chief Asia economist at HSBC, had a big-picture view for clients: “The era of Asia’s export manufacturing-led development has come to an end, and the region will need to develop markets closer to home.”

Read more …

No paper work for cheap trinkets picked up on a holiday. Makes sense. But when it becomes anything under $800, that sense changes profoundly. Now we’re talking laptops.

President Trump Ends Duty-Free De Minimis Treatment for All Chinese Goods (CTH)

The de minimis loophole comes from back in the 1930s. The idea back then was, say you went on a vacation to Paris, you shouldn’t have to file customs paperwork or pay taxes if you decided to ship some little Eiffel Tower statues to your friends back home. Congress in 2015 then raised the de minimis threshold from $200 to $800. However, the e-commerce world exploded, and Chinese companies began using the de minimis loophole to ship cheap goods (ex. Temu and Shein) into the USA direct to consumers without paying any customs duty. Yesterday as part of the global trade reset and tariff structure, President Trump revoked authorization for Chinese goods to transfer to the USA using the de minimis rule.

The de minimis exemption has been cancelled for all products coming out of China. The rule change only targets China and Chinese shippers. No one else. The minimum duty is $25, and the tariff rate is 30% for all products mailed from China into the USA that previously qualified under the de minimis rule. Beyond tariffs or sector specific countervailing duties, the removal of China to use the $800 de minimis exemption will destroy their economy. There is no way for manufacturers in China, marketed into the USA, to be able to survive if they are forced to collect and organize the requirements for U.S. custom and import duties. They will simply dissolve.

FACT SHEET – […] “Following the Secretary of Commerce’s notification that adequate systems are in place to collect tariff revenue, President Trump is ending duty-free de minimis treatment for covered goods from the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and Hong Kong starting May 2, 2025 at 12:01 a.m. EDT. Imported goods sent through means other than the international postal network that are valued at or under $800 and that would otherwise qualify for the de minimis exemption will be subject to all applicable duties, which shall be paid in accordance with applicable entry and payment procedures. All relevant postal items containing goods that are sent through the international postal network that are valued at or under $800 and that would otherwise qualify for the de minimis exemption are subject to a duty rate of either 30% of their value or $25 per item (increasing to $50 per item after June 1, 2025).

This is in lieu of any other duties, including those imposed by prior Orders. Carriers transporting these postal items must report shipment details to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), maintain an international carrier bond to ensure duty payment, and remit duties to CBP on a set schedule. CBP may require formal entry for any postal package instead of the specified duties. The Secretary of Commerce will submit a report within 90 days assessing the Order’s impact and considering whether to extend these rules to packages from Macau.”

Read more …

They can all make the deal to abolish their own tariffs.

World Leaders React To Trump’s Tariff Onslaught (RT)

US President Donald Trump on Wednesday rolled out a sweeping new wave of “reciprocal tariffs” as part of his so-called “Liberation Day” plan, sparking concerns over a potential global trade war. Trump announced that Washington would impose tariffs ranging from 10% to 49% on all countries based on the principle of reciprocity, declaring it a day of economic independence for the United States. Trump said the tariffs would be used to boost US manufacturing and that the measure would “make America wealthy again.” Many countries have reacted with dismay and have pledged retaliation. While a 10% base tariff was applied to all imports, many of the top US trading partners were hit with much steeper duties.

China China – branded one of the “worst offenders” by Trump – was hit with a new 34% tariff on its goods, in addition to an existing 20% levy, raising total duties to at least 54%. The US decision ignores the balance of interests established through years of multilateral trade negotiations and overlooks the fact that it has long reaped significant benefits from global trade, the Chinese Commerce Ministry said in a statement on Thursday. “China firmly opposes this and will take countermeasures to safeguard its own rights and interests,” the ministry said. “There are no winners in trade wars, and there is no way out for protectionism. China urges the US to immediately lift unilateral tariffs and properly resolve differences with its trading partners through dialogue on an equal footing,” the ministry added.

Canada Canada, already subject to US tariffs, was spared the additional 10% baseline tariffs applied to many other countries due to its membership in the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA). It’s unclear how much last week’s “extremely productive” call between Trump and Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney influenced the decision to grant Canada a reprieve. Last month, Trump imposed a 25% tariff on Canadian goods and 10% on energy products, citing concerns over drugs and migrants crossing the border. Exceptions were made for importers who can prove their products comply with USMCA. Carney stated that while Trump had preserved key aspects of the commercial relationship between Canada and the US, the tariffs on steel, aluminum, and automobiles were still coming into effect. “We are going to fight these tariffs with countermeasures, we are going to protect our workers, and we are going to build the strongest economy in the G7,” Carney said.

Mexico Another major US trade partner, Mexico, also avoided Trump’s global tariff. The US president had earlier slapped 25% tariffs on its southern neighbor, citing failures to address migration and fentanyl trafficking, but later carved out exemptions for USMCA-compliant goods. Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum said the country has no plans to impose retaliatory tariffs on the US and will “announce a comprehensive program, not a tit-for-tat on tariffs.” “Let’s see what announcement they make, but we have a plan to strengthen the economy under any circumstance,” Sheinbaum added.

EU European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen described the universal duties as a “major blow to the global economy.” She claimed that a new 20% US tariff on the EU would see “uncertainty spiral,” causing “dire” consequences “for millions of people around the globe.” The move will “trigger the rise of further protectionism,” von der Leyen argued, warning that the bloc is prepared to respond. “If you take on one of us, you take on all of us,” she stated. Echoing her remarks, European Council President Antonio Costa said a trade war between the EU and the US would “affect everyone,” and called Trump’s decision a “major economic mistake.” Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, a close ally of Trump, criticized the decision as “wrong” but expressed her commitment to negotiating a deal with the US to “prevent a trade war.”

In Germany, the EU’s major economic powerhouse, which has been grappling with a downturn over the past two years, Economy Minister Robert Habeck slammed the US “obsession” with tariffs, warning that it “could put a spiral in motion that can tear countries into recession.” In France, President Emmanuel Macron is set to convene representatives from all business sectors affected by the import tariffs as producers are already counting future losses. Sales of French wine and spirits are expected to drop by at least 20% in the US, spirits exporters group FEVS told Reuters.

“We are indeed going to see an adverse effect on production,” French government spokeswoman Sophie Primas told broadcaster RTL. Trump “thinks he is the master of the world” but the EU is “ready for this trade war” and has a “whole range of tools,” she insisted. The sweeping tariffs will put jobs at risk on both sides of the Atlantic, according to Irish Taoiseach (Prime Minister) Micheal Martin, who believes there is “no justification for this.” Goods from Ireland will be hit with a 20% tariff as part of measures Trump has imposed on the EU. “More than €4.2 billion worth of goods and services are traded between the EU and the US daily. Tariffs drive inflation, hurt people on both sides of the Atlantic, and put jobs at risk,” Martin said.

UK Britain was hit less hard than most other countries with a 10% duty imposed on its exports. Prime Minister Keir Starmer said “nobody wins in a trade war” and vowed to “fight for the best deal for Britain.” He argued that there’s a “range of levers at our disposal” stressing, however, that the UK’s “intention remains to secure a deal” with the US. ‘Reciprocal’ duties, action against ‘pathetic’ EU: Key points from Trump’s global tariff announcementREAD MORE: ‘Reciprocal’ duties, action against ‘pathetic’ EU: Key points from Trump’s global tariff announcement

Japan Japan has “serious concerns” about the consistency of Trump’s tariffs with the WTO agreement and the Japan-US trade deal, Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba said in a statement. Japanese Trade Minister Yoji Muto described the measures as “extremely regrettable” and stated that all options were under consideration. When asked whether Japan would retaliate against the 24% tariff imposed by the US, he said: “We need to decide what is best for Japan, and most effective, in a careful but bold and speedy manner.”

Israel Economic officials in Israel, a key US ally, were reportedly in “complete shock” over the 17% tariff imposed by Trump, according to local media. The country had eliminated all tariffs on American imports ahead of the announcement to ensure that Israel was exempt from new levies. “We are working to understand the motivation behind this move,” Ron Tomer, president of the Manufacturers Association of Israel, said on Wednesday.

Ukraine The new 10% tariff announced by Trump on Ukrainian imports is “economic cynicism,” said Daniil Getmantsev, head of the Ukrainian Parliament’s Finance Committee. According to Getmantsev, the levy is unlikely to have a major negative impact on Ukraine, given the relatively small exports to the US. “But imposing such tariffs when our trade balance with the US shows a $2.6 billion deficit is, frankly, economic cynicism of the highest order,” he added.

Read more …

“Well, I would say they’ve been doing it to us for a long time. And, if they don’t like tariffs, then why do they have them?”

Here’s Why Trump Will Win the Tariff Standoff (Margolis)

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent made it clear in an interview with CNN that the era of trade imbalances is over, and under President Trump, the U.S. will no longer tolerate unfair treatment. During a discussion with CNN’s Kaitlan Collins, Bessent confidently explained the administration’s position on tariffs and trade policy, signaling that Trump’s economic strategy is deliberate and well thought out. When pressed on how the administration’s policies could impact the auto industry, particularly regarding vehicles made with foreign parts, Bessent was blunt. “If half the cars coming into the United States are foreign-made, that’s hard to turn around overnight, as you know,” Collins said. “So what would you say to people in the auto industry who are worried about that timeline and how quickly that could shift?”

“Buy American,” Bessent said bluntly. He also clarified that the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) exempts certain vehicles and parts from the new tariffs. Collins attempted to raise concerns from U.S. allies, questioning what the administration would say to countries like South Korea and Japan, which are now facing increased tariffs. Bessent’s response was direct: “Well, I would say they’ve been doing it to us for a long time. And, if they don’t like tariffs, then why do they have them?” His answer underscored the administration’s stance that America has been on the losing end of trade deals for too long.

As for whether the tariffs should be considered permanent, Bessent took a wait-and-see approach. “I think we’re gonna wait and see how this plays out,” he explained, suggesting that adjustments could be made based on how the policy unfolds. Collins also asked about the possibility of retaliation from other countries. Some foreign leaders have hinted at potential countermeasures, while others have opted to observe before making a move. Bessent urged patience. “One of the messages that I’d like to get out tonight is everybody sit back, take a deep breath, don’t immediately retaliate, let’s see where this goes. Because if you retaliate, that’s how we get escalation.”

When Collins pressed him on whether such escalation could turn into a full-fledged trade war, Bessent dismissed the idea. “Not a trade war. Depends on the country,” he said, before explaining that history favors the United States in such disputes. “Remember that the history of trade is, we are the deficit country. The deficit country has an advantage,” he explained. “[The others] are the surplus countries. The surplus countries traditionally always lose any kind of a trade escalation.”

His message to foreign governments was clear: Acting hastily would be a mistake.“ As a student of economic history or a professor of economic history, I’d advise against it,” he said. When Collins sought further clarification, he reinforced the point: “I would say that doing anything rash would be unwise.” Bessent’s remarks leave no doubt that Trump’s trade policies are rooted in historical precedent and strategic calculation. While globalists may panic, the Trump administration remains confident that America is in a stronger position than its trade partners. And history is on our side. Bessent’s message is clear: Trump knows exactly what he’s doing.

Read more …

Carney has elections coming. And his party polls great on anti-Trump thetoric. But he’ll still have to walk it back.

Kevin O’Leary Slams Canada’s ‘Sheer Stupidity’ in Trade Standoff With Trump (Margolis)

Famed entrepreneur and “Shark Tank” star Kevin O’Leary eviscerated Canada’s leadership for its defiant stance against U.S. trade policies, calling the rhetoric from Interim Prime Minister Mark Carney “sheer stupidity” and warning that the country is in no position to win a trade war with President Trump. Speaking on CNN, O’Leary, who is himself Canadian, reacted to Carney’s inflammatory remarks. The prime minister declared, “We are cutting off all ties to the United States. There’s no cooperation anymore.” O’Leary dismissed the statement as political posturing with no basis in economic reality. “That, of course, is sheer stupidity,” he said. “Seventy-five percent of the output of the Canadian market for over a hundred years has been sold to the U.S., and 17 states in the U.S. call Canada their number one trading partner.”

O’Leary pointed out that despite Carney’s tough talk, Canada is economically dependent on the United States and cannot afford to play a game of brinkmanship with its largest trading partner. He argued that Carney’s remarks were more about political theatrics than sound economic policy. “If you wanna be tough and you wanna sound important and you’re trying to get elected and you’re the only person that can save every Canadian from the evil Trump, that’s exactly what you say,” O’Leary said, accusing Carney of exploiting anti-Trump sentiment to bolster his own political image. He likened Carney’s rhetoric to that of Trump trade advisor Peter Navarro, who has declared that U.S. tariffs would remain in place indefinitely. O’Leary was equally dismissive of such claims, calling them nothing more than political noise meant to rally supporters rather than provide real solutions.

“Navarro’s saying the same thing. ‘These tariffs are in perpetuity. We will fix this. We will push back the world’. All of this rhetoric and noise, it’s not the signal.” O’Leary argued that the best path forward would be a trade framework in which tariffs are removed entirely. “It’s all noise. And in the end, I think everybody’s better off if we get to reciprocal tariffs of zero,” he said. I think we all know that this is Trump’s goal, too. He wants free trade to actually be free trade. O’Leary emphasized that serious investors like himself look at the long-term picture rather than get caught up in the short-term panic created by political leaders. “So the countries you care about, that you wanna do business with, you end up with zero tariffs and you support a free trade mandate. It’s very hard to see that outcome in the cloud we’re in right now and all the rhetoric and jawboning, but if you’re an investor like I am, you think long term.”

While some have expressed concerns about rising inflation and housing prices, O’Leary cautioned that such economic shifts take time to unfold. “Not two weeks, not two months,” he said, pushing back against the notion that immediate catastrophe was looming. O’Leary noted that similar political grandstanding is happening in other countries as well. “Britain’s doing the same thing right now,” he pointed out. “You should hear the rhetoric in London today.” Ultimately, O’Leary was confident that the current wave of economic fearmongering would subside. “It too will pass,” he concluded, reinforcing his belief that Canada’s leadership needs to drop the empty threats and focus on practical solutions.

Read more …

“..the US’s Cold War era-based foreign policy perfectly suits European elites, who want Trump back into “the fold of the historical West..”

How Could Trump Tackle Trap Set Up by Europe? (Sp.)

The US president earlier said that “from the standpoint of America, the EU treats us very, very unfairly, very badly. The US’s European allies set up a trap for the Trump administration to contain its “drastic” foreign policy shift, Alexander Yakovenko, Deputy Head of Rossiya Segodnya International Media Group, told Sputnik. Trump could get out of the trap if he “masters enough political will” and doesn’t “put up with the US foreign policy strategy of the Cold War era”, Yakovenko, who is also head of the Russian Security Council’s Expert Advisory Committee on global problems and international security, stressed. The expert noted that the US’s Cold War era-based foreign policy perfectly suits European elites, who want Trump back into “the fold of the historical West, as we have known it over the past 80 years.” The European elites are unwilling to change “their mentality and their worldview, they’d rather live in the world of their own, which I think doesn’t exist any longer,” Yakovenko emphasized.

Read more …

“President Trump had the courage to allow us to go across databases. He signed an executive order. It’s never been done before, where agencies could talk to each other and databases could talk with each other.”

Trump Teases Bombshell DOGE Finding: ‘What They Found Is Incredible’ (ZH)

President Donald Trump teased another explosive revelation from the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), as Democrats and legacy media escalate their ongoing campaign against the cost-cutting initiative and its leader, Tesla CEO Elon Musk. While speaking with the press aboard Air Force One en route to South Florida for the weekend, Trump said: “They found something today that’s horrible,” adding. “You’ll find out very soon. What they found is incredible.” Trump also gave Musk credit for his leadership at the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which has so far achieved an estimated savings of $140 billion, amounting to roughly $869.57 per taxpayer.

“Elon is fantastic,” the president said. “He’s a patriot. He found millions of dollars of fraud.” “He loves the country that’s why he does it,” he added. Addressing speculation about Musk’s future, Trump responded to reporters, “I want him to stay as long as possible.” The president also commented on the recent wave of violent attacks targeting Tesla vehicles and dealerships, incidents he has previously labeled as “terrorism.” “It’s a shame what they are doing with his car company,” he said. “It’s a great car, great product.” According to a since debunked Politico report citing unnamed sources, Trump has privately indicated to close associates that Musk plans to scale back his involvement as an advisor in the near future. While Musk and the White House denied the report, Trump told reporters on AF1 that “Elon is fantastic,” but he has “a number of companies to run.”

“I want him to stay as long as possible,” said Trump. “There’s going to be a point where he’s going to have to leave.” Over the weekend, at a Wisconsin rally aimed at boosting voter turnout, Musk and DOGE volunteer Antonio Gracias disclosed that millions of noncitizens were granted Social Security numbers under former President Joe Biden’s administration. They presented a chart illustrating a consistent annual rise, peaking at over 2 million in FY 2024, which concluded on September 30. In both FY23 and FY25—the latter starting in October and running through September of this year—approximately 1 million noncitizens received Social Security numbers.

“None of this would have happened without President Trump,” Gracias told Fox News. “President Trump had the courage to allow us to go across databases. He signed an executive order. It’s never been done before, where agencies could talk to each other and databases could talk with each other.” “That allowed us to connect all this data, to find these people across the system, across the benefit system, all the way to the voting records. It really took a lot of courage,” he added. Now the question is; what’s this ‘horrible’ thing DOGE found? And is it just a ‘LOOK, SQUIRREL!’ to distract from all the ‘fun’ we’re having in response to new tariffs?

Read more …

US must make Norway rich because they’re both in Nato?!

Trump Tariffs Breach NATO Rules – Norway (RT)

Recently imposed US tariffs could breach NATO’s founding principles by undermining economic cooperation among allies, Norwegian Foreign Minister Espen Barth Eide has said. He raised the issue during the NATO foreign ministers’ meeting in Brussels on Thursday, public broadcaster NRK has reported. The official reportedly pointed to Article 2 of the North Atlantic Treaty, which commits members to strengthen economic ties to foster peace and stability within the alliance. “If you want a strong NATO, you should ensure that there is as much economic growth as possible in the NATO countries,” NKR quoted him as saying. “That was the insight of those who established NATO, that economic cooperation would be good for the entire alliance,” the diplomat added.

According to the outlet, Eide raised the matter directly with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio during the meeting, saying “We must be clear that protectionist measures between allies are a serious problem.” On Wednesday, US President Donald Trump announced sweeping tariff increases on numerous trading partners, including NATO countries. Norway is among those affected, facing a 15% duty on selected exports to the United States. Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Store told NKR on Thursday that Oslo would seek to negotiate with the US over the tariffs.

“This is bad news, it is very serious,” Store said. “There is an opening for negotiations here, the Americans say, and we will use that in every possible way that we can,” he added. Trump’s announcement has sparked concern across the EU, with several NATO allies voicing fears that the tariffs could harm both trade and alliance unity. French President Emmanuel Macron has called the tariffs “brutal and unfounded,” and warned that retaliation could include a digital tax on American tech companies.

Read more …

“Europe has not been successful in dealing with President Putin, but I think I will be successful.” Well, to be honest, Europe is not trying.

Putin, Zelensky Ready To Make A Deal – Trump (RT)

The leaders of Russia and Ukraine are ready to make a peace deal, US President Donald Trump claimed on Thursday. He has been trying to broker a ceasefire between the two neighbors since February. A reporter asked Trump on Air Force One about his communication with Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky. “I think he’s ready to make a deal. And I think that President [Vladimir] Putin is ready to make a deal,” Trump said. He declined to go into specifics but added that the US was having “a lot of good conversations about Ukraine and Russia.” “We like to see [the conflict] stopped as soon as possible because thousands of people have been killed in a week,” Trump said. “Europe has not been successful in dealing with President Putin, but I think I will be successful.”

Trump made his comments as Putin’s investment envoy, Kirill Dmitriev, traveled to Washington, where he reportedly met with America’s Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff. The sides mostly continued discussing steps to normalize bilateral relations frozen by the Biden administration in 2022, Dmitriev told reporters on Thursday evening. He noted the “positive dynamic” of the talks, adding that more meetings need to take place to resolve the differences. Trump’s Ukraine envoy, Keith Kellogg, told Fox Business on Wednesday that Trump has been “frustrated” with both Putin and Zelensky. He remained optimistic about the negotiations, saying that the sides were “on the precipice” of a comprehensive ceasefire.

Moscow has accused Kiev of multiple violations of the energy truce brokered by Trump last month. According to the Russian Defense Ministry, the Ukrainian troops struck fuel depots, gas facilities, and the electrical grid, despite promising to respect a 30-day pause on such attacks. Kiev, for its part, claimed that Russia was breaching the same agreement. Russia has maintained that any long-term settlement would be viable only if the US and Ukraine address the “root causes” of the conflict. Moscow demands that Kiev abandon its plans to join NATO and recognize Crimea and four other former Ukrainian regions as Russian territory.

Read more …

Note that Putin didn’t send his political envoy, but his business man.

Putin Envoy Visits Washington (RT)

Russian President Vladimir Putin’s investment envoy, Kirill Dmitriev, visited Washington on Thursday. He is the highest Russian official who traveled to the US since diplomatic contacts were suspended in 2022. Dmitriev, the head of the Russian Direct Investment Fund, previously participated in the Russian-US talks in Riyadh on February 18, where both sides agreed to start gradually normalizing the ties severed by the Biden administration. Speaking to reporters on Thursday evening, Dmitriev noted that President Donald Trump and his team have a better understanding of Russia’s terms than his predecessor, former President Joe Biden. “We are seeing absolutely clearly that, unlike President Biden, the Trump administration is determined to resolve the whole spectrum of bilateral issues,” the diplomat said.

“They are very respectful. They are listening to Russia’s position, and are understanding Russia’s concerns. They are asking a lot of questions and finding compromises,” he added. “Naturally, there are differences. But there is dialogue, which we believe will help to overcome these differences,” Dmitriev said. The envoy said that he had discussions about restoring trade and normal business relations between the states. “Many American companies would like to replace European companies that have left Russia,” he said. Dmitriev stressed that Moscow is ready to work on business projects that would be beneficial to both countries. He added that the sides talked about potential cooperation in the Arctic and the development of rare-earth minerals. “We are actively working on the resumption of direct flights” between Russia and the US, he said. Dmitriev said that more rounds of talks will be needed to hammer out the deal.

Read more …

“We are seeing a coordinated campaign in the media, attempts by various politicians to undermine the relations between Russia and the US, and attempts to distort the statements made by Russia,” the diplomat said. “It happens on a daily basis.”

Third Parties Attempting To Derail US-Russia Talks – Putin Envoy (RT)

Certain countries want to throw a wrench into the normalization of Russian-American relations, President Vladimir Putin’s investment envoy, Kirill Dmitriev, has said. He made his comment during a rare trip to Washington, where he met with top US officials. “Different countries are trying to derail this dialogue, derail the restoration of the Russian-American relations,” Dmitriev told reporters on Thursday evening. He noted that the negotiations have been accompanied by “a lot of rumors, incorrect quotes, and incorrect interpretations.” “A lot of people are interested in preventing the development of our relations. We are seeing a coordinated campaign in the media, attempts by various politicians to undermine the relations between Russia and the US, and attempts to distort the statements made by Russia,” the diplomat said. “It happens on a daily basis.”

“The best way to overcome disinformation is direct dialogue,” he stressed. Dmitriev reportedly met with Trump’s Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff, who has been one of the key US negotiators on Ukraine. According to NBC News, the Russian diplomat also met with Republican Senators Lindsey Graham and Markwayne Mullin. According to Dmitriev, the sides mostly discussed steps to gradually amend the cooperation severed by the Biden administration in 2022. The agenda included possible partnership in the Arctic, the development of rare-earth minerals, and the resumption of direct flights between the countries, he said.

Some EU and Ukrainian politicians have attempted to dissuade Trump from restarting negotiations with Moscow. The EU’s top diplomat, Kaja Kallas, claimed last month that “Russia cannot really be trusted.” Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky suggested in February that Trump was trapped in a “disinformation bubble.” Trump has blamed Zelensky for the conflict, while his Ukraine envoy, Keith Kellogg, argued that the EU should be sidelined during negotiations.

Read more …

Cue DOGE.

House Panels Press Probe of ActBlue Campaign Fundraising Operations (Adams)

Top Republican House leaders have formally requested that ActBlue, one of the Democratic Party’s largest political action committees, turn over documents related to its governance and operations. In a letter dated April 2 to ActBlue President and Chief Executive Officer Regina Wallace-Jones, the chairmen of the House committees on the Judiciary, Oversight and Government Reform, and Administration requested documents and testimony from two employees of the organization. The names of the employees whose testimony was requested were redacted in the version of the letter that was made public. A source familiar with the investigation told The Daily Signal, “We expect ActBlue employees to participate in the transcribed interviews and submit the required documents.” The source explained, “If they fail to comply, all options are on the table.”

An ActBlue spokesperson told The Daily Signal, “As we have historically done, ActBlue will continue to respond to requests from the House committees.” In their letter, the committee chairs said that they were seeking “to investigate ActBlue’s fraud-prevention policies and practices, which may allow bad actors to make fraudulent political donations, including from foreign sources.” ActBlue is one of the largest fundraisers for the Democratic Party, and claims to have raised more than $16.7 billion for Democrats since it was founded in 2004. Prior to the recent turmoil in leadership, it was a widely trusted source for liberal giving. ActBlue has come under increasing scrutiny since it announced a wave of departures of top staff in February. The resignations included the organization’s highest-ranking legal officer, the chief revenue officer, and the assistant research director.

ActBlue has received donations from some of the Democratic Party’s most important fundraisers, including thousands of dollars from LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman. The Daily Signal has previously reported that the group may have received millions of dollars through fraudulent donations, according to testimony from some elderly Americans. One such individual, a retired Yale University professor, testified in a signed affidavit that he believed the donations in his name did not reflect his actual donation frequency or dollar amount. ActBlue charges a 3.95% processing fee on donations to it.

The organization also reportedly locked out Zain Ahmad, the last remaining member of the group’s general counsel’s office as of Feb. 26, from his email and other internal platforms. The letter from the House chairmen highlighted the organization’s actions toward Ahmad, who has been put on leave, and noted that ActBlue’s union reportedly told the group’s board that “those of us who work with our legal team in our day-to-day do not have clear direction on how to proceed with our work in their absence.” The House letter noted that fraudulent political donations “could amount to interstate criminal conduct,” citing a legal case that resulted in a Chinese national’s criminal conviction for improper donations.

Read more …

By Senator Roger Marshall. The idea is that Oz will execute RFK’s MAHA vision.

Dr. Oz Will Save Medicare, Strengthen Medicaid, Secure a Healthier America (DS)

Medicaid and Medicare are on a path that should concern all Americans, but with the right leadership, we can turn their trajectory around. On its current course, Medicare, the government-run health insurance program for seniors, will fall off a financial cliff in as little as a decade—maybe even sooner. Meanwhile, Medicaid, the program that pays for health care for the poor, now covers more people than Medicare, placing an enormous strain on both state and federal budgets. As a nation, we face a chronic disease epidemic, and along with it, a crisis of unsustainable rising costs, high demand, and worsening patient outcomes. Over the past five years, Medicaid spending has surged by some 50%—another unsustainable trend that diverts funds from schools, roads, bridges, and high-speed internet.

Together, Medicare and Medicaid will each spend roughly a trillion dollars this year. That’s why we urgently need a Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services administrator who can rescue Medicare and fortify Medicaid. As both programs fall under the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, we need a leader with a fresh perspective—one who prioritizes patient care while ensuring financial stability. This role demands someone who has experienced these programs at the grassroots level, where patients, doctors, and hospitals intersect. This person must be an exceptional communicator, capable of managing a $2 trillion budget and transforming an organization of 6,000 employees who oversee the health needs of 140 million Americans. This budget accounts for nearly a quarter of federal spending in a system that already overspends by $2 trillion annually.

Above all, we need someone who can help us in our mission to Make America Healthy Again. Thankfully, we have just the person for the job: Dr. Mehmet Oz. To America, he’s Dr. Oz: a world-renowned heart surgeon and the trusted star of a hit TV show. Some may also recognize him as an innovative inventor of lifesaving heart devices, holding both an M.D. and an MBA. But to me, Dr. Oz is a fellow physician and a good friend. He’s a devoted father of four and grandfather of four. He’s a person who cares deeply about finding solutions—a problem-solver ready to tackle the challenges of Medicaid and Medicare head-on, focusing on the health and safety of every American and ensuring those who rely on these programs continue to receive the care they deserve.

Dr. Oz is uniquely equipped to modernize health care. He will harness cutting-edge technology and responsibly integrate artificial intelligence to meet patients’ needs. He’ll champion transparency and prioritize quality outcomes over mere quantity of care or coverage. By empowering patients and providers with choices, he’ll drive higher-quality care. He’ll strengthen telehealth and address the distinct challenges of rural communities, along with those of the inner city. Thinking outside the box, he’ll uncover innovative solutions to our health care woes with full transparency.

Put simply, Dr. Oz is the right leader at the right time to execute President Donald Trump’s and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert Kennedy’s vision to Make America Healthy Again. With his expertise, compassion, and bold leadership, he will transform the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services into a beacon of fiscal responsibility and patient-centered care. There’s no one better suited to save Medicare, strengthen Medicaid, and secure a healthier future for all Americans. I look forward to his swift confirmation and the work he will do to address our health crisis. With Dr. Oz, Secretary Kennedy, and President Trump at the helm, the best is truly yet to come for our health care system and its patients.

https://twitter.com/Holden_Culotta/status/1907927964131668210

Read more …

Only Israel wants it.

War With Iran ‘Almost Inevitable’ – France (RT)

A military conflict with Iran would be highly likely if attempts to renegotiate a new nuclear deal fail, French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot has warned. US President Donald Trump has threatened Tehran with a bombing campaign if it does not concede on its nuclear program, which Washington alleges is aimed at developing atomic weapons. The Iranian government, which vehemently denies the claims, has vowed to retaliate against any attack. Addressing French MPs on Wednesday after an Iran-focused government meeting led by President Emmanuel Macron, Barrot stated that without a new agreement, “a military confrontation would appear almost inevitable,” warning that such a scenario could further destabilize the Middle East.

In 2015, Iran and major world powers signed the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) accord which restricted Tehran’s nuclear activities in exchange for sanctions relief. However, in 2017 Trump unilaterally withdrew from the arrangement, which he and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu labeled “the worst deal ever,” opting instead for a campaign of “maximum pressure” through sanctions. The EU sought to provide Iran with means to bypass American pressure to preserve the JCPOA, but negotiations have since stalled. The standoff has bolstered a hardline foreign policy approach in Tehran, which refused to uphold its commitments in retaliation for Western failure to deliver on its part of the nuclear pact .

Since beginning his second presidential term in January, Trump has repeatedly issued threats of military action unless Tehran agrees to a new nuclear deal. In a recent interview, he stated, “If they don’t make a deal, there will be bombing. And it will be bombing the likes of which they have never seen before.” Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei defiantly responded to Trump on Monday, warning that the US and Israel “will definitely receive a strong, reciprocal blow” if they attack Iran. Amid the escalating tensions, the Pentagon announced on Tuesday it had deployed additional assets to the Middle East. According to Reuters sources, four B-2 bombers have been relocated to a base on Diego Garcia Island, positioning them for potential missions against Iran.

Read more …

“..the ICC is becoming a political entity rather than an impartial court upholding the rule of law..”

Hungary to Abandon ICC Over Concerns of Political Bias – Orban (Sp.)

Hungary has decided to withdraw from the International Criminal Court (ICC), as it believes the institution has shifted from an independent judicial body to a politically motivated one in recent years, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban announced on Thursday. “We are convinced that the ICC is becoming a political entity rather than an impartial court upholding the rule of law. This has been particularly evident in its recent decision regarding Israel,” Orban stated at a press conference alongside Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. According to Orban, Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto will present a bill to parliament on Thursday, officially initiating Hungary’s withdrawal from the Rome Statute.

Earlier in the day, Orban’s chief of staff, Gergely Gulyas, confirmed that the Hungarian government had made the decision to leave the ICC, with the formal withdrawal process set to begin later on Thursday. The ICC’s disregard for the immunities of heads of state from countries that are not parties to the Rome Statute violates international law and thus undermines the court’s own legitimacy as an independent party in disputes. Moreover, its actions destabilize global security, making it difficult to view the ICC as a body acting on behalf of the international community.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

CO2

 

 

Calley Means
https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1907512164933320833

 

 

Bowden
https://twitter.com/McCulloughFund/status/1907511535078936726

 

 

autism

 

 

Canaia
https://twitter.com/ContrarianTribe/status/1907779479168016572

 

 

Pi
https://twitter.com/gunsnrosesgirl3/status/1907831288691614116

 

 

Car

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Mar 302025
 
 March 30, 2025  Posted by at 10:00 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , ,  33 Responses »


David Hockney A Bigger Splash 1967

 

How Donald Trump Is Reshaping America in Just 7 Weeks (Victor Davis Hanson)
It Wasn’t a Leak, It Was a Devious “Charlie Foxtrot” (Larry Johnson)
Vance Asked Trump To Fire Waltz – Politico (RT)
Why Did Jeffrey Goldberg Leave The ‘Bomb Yemen’ Signal Chat? (Max Blumenthal)
Trump Puts the System on Trial (RCW)
The Best Response For Developing Countries To US Tariffs: Sell US Debt (Proud)
xAI & X Merger Defuses Musk’s Tesla Share Liquidation Risk (ZH)
Iran ‘Doesn’t Care’ About Trump’s ‘Threats’ – Senior Commander (RT)
Federal Judge Halts Shutdown of Voice of America (ET)
Ex-Italian PM Reveals ‘Secret Mission’ For Zelensky (RT)
Zelensky Is a ‘Demon’ – Ukrainian MP (RT)
EU To Reject Russia-US Black Sea Deal – von der Leyen (RT)
The EU Wants to Use War as an Excuse for More Debt (Andreen)
Joe Rogan Guest Completely Shatters the Vaccine Narrative (VF)

 

 

 

 

1994

Birth rate

Painful homework
https://twitter.com/cb_doge/status/1905912268111360510

Details

Not
https://twitter.com/Sassafrass_84/status/1905679457160925611

No. 4

 

 

 

 

“.. it’s a revolutionary achievement. There’s nobody going across the border illegally, or at least, it’s statistically insignificant.”

How Donald Trump Is Reshaping America in Just 7 Weeks (Victor Davis Hanson)

Hello, this is Victor Davis Hanson for The Daily Signal. How should we characterize the first seven weeks of the Trump administration because we get so much information and misinformation? Almost a day doesn’t go by where The Wall Street Journal is predicting that we are headed for a recession, that our allies are furious at us, that the economy is on the brink. So, what are we gonna make of all this? I think it’s time to take a deep breath and envision the first seven weeks is something like the following: President Donald Trump is in a race. He’s in a race to enact fundamental, disruptive change, a counterrevolution, and it’s going to be rough for a while, as he pointed out. But the things that he has already done are going to have, shortly or maybe even midterm, fundamental advantages for the United States. The question is, can he message and can he explicate and explain what he’s doing so people hang on? Because the eventual reward will be great.

Now, what do I mean? We’re talking about tariffs, tariffs, tariffs, but even the mere mention of tariffs for all of these countries that have not been reciprocal and have imposed tariffs on us in a way that we would never think of imposing on them, that idea that we might return to parity, it’s had an enormous effect. Some $4 trillion of announced investment from the Europeans, from the Saudis, from the Chinese, from the Mexican government, from the Canadians even. That will create hundreds of thousands of jobs. And that is in the process of working out. When Donald Trump entered office in 2017, we were only pumping about 9 million barrels. When he left, we were pumping 12 million. The Biden administration immediately cut back. And then it decided, before the midterms, “Hey, Americans like affordable oil.” So then they continued the Trump plan and got up to 12, almost 13 million barrels.

Already in just seven weeks, we have increased the amount of oil produced per day in the United States by about a third of a million barrels. And we’re on schedule to get up to about 14 million barrels by the beginning of the year. And that is coordinated with an increase in Middle East production as well. So, we’re going to see a moderation of energy prices, which may explain, already, why the inflation rate was not nearly as high as was predicted. If we look at the border, it’s amazing. We were told that the border problem was unsolvable without comprehensive immigration reform. And there were 10,000 people swarming up per day. We don’t even—nonchalantly, nobody talks about it anymore. But it’s a revolutionary achievement. There’s nobody going across the border illegally, or at least, it’s statistically insignificant.

The big issue right now is the Left is cherry-picking judges to prevent, not the deportation of somebody who’s working, who’s never been arrested, who’s been here for five or six years, but criminals and people who already have been ordered out of the country or pro-Hamas, pro-terrorist supporters. But the point I’m making is, what we’re doing now is Phase Two. The border is essentially solved, as far as security, and in seven weeks. Now, we’re having a difficult task of trying to find out who these 12 million people were that former President Joe Biden deliberately and with intent—malicious intent—allowed to come into the country. But the point I’m making is this is an incredible success.

There’s a final point that I want to make. We hear about Elon Musk is not authentically American. He is a nepo baby. And we hear Rep. Jasmine Crockett, D-Texas, threatening his person, along with threatening Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas. All of this chaos and nihilism coming about Elon Musk and what he’s doing, but what he’s finding out, almost every day, in the Treasury, in the IRS, in the Department of Energy, in the intelligence communities, is a vast unreported siphoning off of hundreds of millions of dollars, if not billions, to favorable and mostly left-wing entities, both abroad and here in the United States.

And already, he has cited areas where the Cabinet officers can cut $200 billion. That’s a fifth, only after seven weeks. He’s got a fifth of the way to go. He thinks he can cut a trillion dollars without touching entitlements. I don’t know if he can. But let me just sum up. If Donald Trump is able to fulfill this promise of commitment by foreign entities of $4 trillion in investment—$4 trillion—if he is able to cut a trillion dollars within a year or two, if he’s able to solve the Ukraine war, and if he is able to have a general peace in the Middle East, that will be the most substantial presidency—if he does nothing else—that we’ve seen in 50 years. Final word, everybody, keep calm. There’s events in process that if they are brought to fulfillment and fruition, this country will be a radically different and radically better place.

Read more …

They come off as a platoon of newbie nitwits. Run by Israel. Not pretty.

It Wasn’t a Leak, It Was a Devious “Charlie Foxtrot” (Larry Johnson)

Charlie Foxtrot is a polite euphemism for a crude military term — Clusterfuck. That describes the first scandal of the Trump Administration. Somehow, whether deliberate or accidentally, a Zionist journalist by the name of Jeffrey Goldberg was added to a Signal chat by Trump’s National Security Advisor, Michael Waltz, or by someone who worked for Waltz. Goldberg suddenly found himself part of a group chat of Trump’s top defense, diplomatic and intelligence officials. The group included CIA Director Ratcliffe, DNI’s Tulsi Gabbard, and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, among other luminaries.

If you are not familiar with Signal, you create a group chat by naming a group and then adding members from your list of contacts. This tells us that Goldberg was part of Waltz’s list of contacts. Goldberg is a particularly slimy character, not because he published portions of the chat, but because he behaved as a political hack instead of a journalist. A journalist with that unexpected access, would have written an immediate story announcing that the US was going to start bombing Yemen just to make an example of it. What did Goldberg do? He waited till the bombing happened and then hoisted the Trump gang on its own petard. He made the story about Charlie Foxtrot, which he published on Monday in The Atlantic magazine.

This was not a leak. This was a gift to Goldberg. While the contents of the chat are not officially classified, the information being discussed was operationally sensitive. The chat exposed most of the Trump team as shallow and dismissive of the military and diplomatic implications of the decision to start bombing Yemen. If Waltz and company wanted to discuss the pros and cons of bombing Yemen, he should have convened a Secure Video Conference, aka SVTC (pronounced, CIVITS). Pete Hegseth’s remarks to the press, responding to the Goldberg article, makes a solid case that he is not qualified to serve as Secretary of Defense. Instead of admitting that this was a fuckup on the part of Waltz, he decided to attack Goldberg. Moreover, he pretends that the US was hitting hardened, military targets. That is a lie:

While I agree with Hegseth that Goldberg is a partisan hack, Goldberg did not insinuate himself into the chat or steal the material. Waltz, or one of his staff, did that. We will have to wait and see if the Trump team has learned anything from this debacle. I suspect Signal will no longer be used for sensitive topics. The portion of the chat that Goldberg published shows that JD Vance is not a Zionist crazy. He at least had reservations about the plan to bomb Yemen. The same cannot be said for the others — Pete Hegseth in particular. The following snippets from Goldberg’s article makes it clear that the decision to bomb was not based on some actual provocation or attack by Yemen. Nope, it was a malevolent symbolic gesture:

“The account labeled “JD Vance” responded at 8:16: “Team, I am out for the day doing an economic event in Michigan. But I think we are making a mistake.” (Vance was indeed in Michigan that day.) The Vance account goes on to state, “3 percent of US trade runs through the suez. 40 percent of European trade does. There is a real risk that the public doesn’t understand this or why it’s necessary. The strongest reason to do this is, as POTUS said, to send a message.” The Vance account then goes on to make a noteworthy statement, considering that the vice president has not deviated publicly from Trump’s position on virtually any issue. “I am not sure the president is aware how inconsistent this is with his message on Europe right now. There’s a further risk that we see a moderate to severe spike in oil prices. I am willing to support the consensus of the team and keep these concerns to myself. But there is a strong argument for delaying this a month, doing the messaging work on why this matters, seeing where the economy is, etc.”

The account identified as “JD Vance” addressed a message at 8:45 to @Pete Hegseth: “if you think we should do it let’s go. I just hate bailing Europe out again.” “I will say a prayer for victory,” Vance wrote. . . . Hegseth’s counter to Vance’s concern that the American public won’t understand why were bombing the shit out of another faraway country is this: “Nobody [in America] knows who the Houthis are, so [we can just say] Biden failed and Iran funded them.” Well, guess what, boys and girls? Trump failed, just like Biden. The bombings over the last nine days have not deterred the Houthis from renewing their attacks on ships and Israel. And it has put US naval vessels in harm’s way without a good reason. Hegseth gives the game away… this is about blaming Iran.

It is incumbent on Goldberg to release the entire electronic conversation. Maybe I am being too harsh. Maybe Tulsi Gabbard or John Ratcliffe or the Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency raised some objections. But it appears that everyone was supportive of the proposed operation. Shameful.

Read more …

“Like hell he’d give the liberal media and pearl-clutching Democrats a win..”

Trump’s no. 1 task right now is to stand up for his team. Loyalty.

Vance Asked Trump To Fire Waltz – Politico (RT)

Vice President J.D. Vance and other senior officials “gently offered” President Donald Trump to fire National Security Adviser Mike Waltz during a private discussion about the blunder in which Waltz accidentally included a reporter in a confidential chat about US military strikes in Yemen, according to anonymous insider sources cited by Politico. Two individuals allegedly familiar with the closed-door meeting at the White House on Wednesday night told Politico that Vance, Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, and personnel chief Sergio Gor advised Trump that it might be time to cut Waltz loose. The president reportedly agreed that Waltz had “messed up,” but ultimately decided against a dismissal.

“Like hell he’d give the liberal media and pearl-clutching Democrats a win,” Politico wrote on Friday, citing one insider as saying the administration “don’t want to give the press a scalp.” The leak, first reported by The Atlantic on Monday, revealed that Waltz had inadvertently invited editor-in-chief Jeffrey Goldberg to a confidential Signal chat where senior administration officials were discussing upcoming airstrikes on Houthi militants in Yemen. Waltz has taken “full responsibility” for the incident, calling it “embarrassing” in a Fox News interview and attributing the inclusion to a technical “glitch.”

President Trump has largely downplayed the controversy, dismissing the media response as a “witch hunt” and questioning the reliability of Signal. He also emphasized that no classified information was compromised and praised the military operation as “unbelievably successful.” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt voiced the administration’s stance, stating on Monday that “President Trump continues to have the utmost confidence in his national security team, including National Security Advisor Mike Waltz.” Vance, for his part, has publicly aligned himself with the president’s decision. On Friday, he brought Waltz along for a high-profile trip to Greenland, where he dismissed media speculation and defended the national security team.

“If you think you’re going to force the president of the United States to fire anybody, you’ve got another thing coming,” Vance told reporters. Yet Politico claimed that Waltz’s position remains tenuous, citing one Trump ally who said, “They’ll stick by him for now, but he’ll be gone in a couple of weeks.” Other unnamed sources described longstanding personal and political tensions, alleging that Waltz has alienated colleagues by overstepping boundaries and acting more like a principal than a staffer. A spokesman for Waltz, Brian Hughes, pushed back against the narrative, calling the reports “gossip from people lacking the integrity to attach their names.” He emphasized that Waltz “serves at the pleasure of President Trump” and continues to have the president’s support.

Read more …

“..a gargantuan empire bombarding a poor, besieged country because it is controlled by a popular movement that is currently the only force on the planet taking up arms to stop Israel’s genocide in Gaza..”

Why Did Jeffrey Goldberg Leave The ‘Bomb Yemen’ Signal Chat? (Max Blumenthal)

Atlantic Magazine editor-in-chief Jeffrey Goldberg has won the admiration of his Beltway peers for the conduct he displayed after being accidentally invited into a smoke-filled “bomb Yemen” Signal chat with Trump’s national security honchos and top advisors. “Props to Jeffrey Goldberg for his high standards as a professional journalist,” declared Ian Bremmer, the trans-Atlanticist foreign policy pundit on his Bank of America-sponsored GZero podcast. “When he realized the conversation was authentic he immediately left, informed the relevant senior official, and made the public aware without disclosing intelligence that could damage the United States.” But what exactly did Goldberg do to deserve such high praise?

With a once in a lifetime opportunity to view and report on high level discussions on the US launching an illegal war on Yemen, Goldberg chose to avert his gaze and leave the scene as soon as he could, apparently because maintaining such unparalleled access would have compelled him to report on discussions that might have complicated a war being waged on behalf of the Israeli apartheid state to which he emigrated as a young man. Instead of exploiting his front row seat to the Trump admin’s war planning – a vantage point that would have yielded countless scoops and a bestselling book for any adversarial journalist – Goldberg bolted and dutifully informed the White House about the unfortunate situation.

From there, the story became a palace intrigue over an embarrassing failure of “opsec,” or operational security, and not one about the policy itself, which entails a gargantuan empire bombarding a poor, besieged country because it is controlled by a popular movement that is currently the only force on the planet taking up arms to stop Israel’s genocide in Gaza. In the fourth paragraph of Goldberg’s Atlantic article about the principals’ Signal group, he strongly implied that he supports the war’s objectives, describing Ansar Allah, or the Houthis, as an “Iran-backed terrorist organization” which upholds a belief system that is (what else?) antisemitic. Given Goldberg’s admission that Waltz first reached out to him at least two days prior to mistakenly adding him to the Signal group, it appears the NSC director had been leaking to the Atlantic editor on behalf of the neocon faction in the Trump White House. And it seems clear why Waltz would have sought to cultivate Goldberg.

During the run-up to to the Iraq war, then-Vice President Dick Cheney cited Goldberg’s bunk reporting alleging deep ties between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda during multiple media appearances hyping up the coming invasion. Under Obama, Goldberg served as Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu’s errand boy, churning out tall tales about Tel Aviv’s imminent plan to attack Iran’s nuclear sites – unless the US did it first. Since the October 7, 2023 attack on Israel, the once-failing Atlantic has suddenly turned a profit, as Goldberg unleashed a firehose of propaganda against the keffiyeh-clad enemies of the magazine’s Upper East Side donor base. This month, with momentum for a strike on Iran building within the Trump White House, Goldberg was summoned once again move to the neocon message, and wound up with more access than he bargained for.

When asked in a March 24 interview with CNN’s Kaitlan Collins why he left the Trump principals’ Signal group voluntarily, Goldberg ducked the question. But as Ian Bremmer suggested, he did so out of deference to power and an abiding belief in a US empire hellbent on protecting Israel. And in the culture of Beltway access journalism, that’s considered a laudable trait.

Read more …

“..the judges’ resistance is expected—they’re bound up in and rewarded by the system Trump seeks to reform.”

Trump Puts the System on Trial (RCW)

President Trump’s supporters have denounced the federal judges seeking to stall or stop this administration’s government overhaul. But there is at least one person who, despite a show of outrage and condemnation, is neither surprised nor intimidated: Trump himself. The politically appointed judges have ordered, among other actions, that federal agencies reinstate thousands of fired probationary employees; that billions of taxpayer dollars be paid to questionable USAID projects and contractors; and that foreign-born criminals deported to their native countries be returned and granted due process. Regardless of the legal merits, the American people recognize these orders as obstructions to what Trump said he would do if elected, and what voters elected him to do. Yet the judges’ resistance is expected—they’re bound up in and rewarded by the system Trump seeks to reform.

Two-thirds of Americans believe the “system” is broken, but for years progressive politicians and their mouthpieces posited that the system couldn’t be fixed. Intellectuals on the Left, including New York Times columnist David Brooks, said America’s flaws were “systemic” in nature: systemic racism, systemic sexism, and systemic injustice. They whined and preached but offered no solutions for the millions of Americans of all races and both genders struggling and failing to unlock their potential to succeed. When Trump announced his candidacy for president in 2015, he too claimed the system was broken, but not because we are racist or sexist by nature, but because the system itself is old, soft, and corrupt, with leaders grown unresponsive to the people they are supposed to serve. That core belief guided his first term and remains unchanged at the start of his second.

For decades, politicians failed to respond to real problems because their agendas, even their identities, were phony, crafted by consultants and pollsters who aimed not for the truth, but for whichever lies or provocations were most efficacious in winning the next election. But one need not resort to craven and conspiratorial explanations of this sort, which hint that elected officials deliberately ignore the public will. The truth is simpler. They have to ignore voters, if only because they have no idea how to fix the problems we face. In one sense, the elites’ ineptitude is understandable: we have a highly complex society that has undergone a recent, rapid, destabilization brought on by technological advance. But to admit that they simply don’t know how to address any contemporary issue would be to concede that it is only their mere status as “elites” that qualifies them to rule.

Thus, to conceal their befuddlement, they explain their inaction by a vague demand that we address the “root causes” of every issue – which further justifies them in doing nothing. The bad faith inherent to the “root causes” strategy was nowhere more obvious than at the border. For years, establishment voices told us that border security measures would fail without addressing the “root causes” of the problem: central American poverty and climate change. These appeals allowed the political class to avoid doing what they didn’t want to do (securing the border) and to manufacture a duty to do the things they did want to do (diverting American revenue to foreign aid “relief programs” and enacting more restrictive environmental policies). Aside from those interventions, they assured us, there was nothing we could do about the illegal immigration crisis.

Speaking about politicians in 2015, Trump said: “I hear their speeches. They don’t talk jobs. [They] have no competence. [They] don’t know what’s happening.” His message of “America First” was clear and authentic, and it implied real action and solid outcomes: protect jobs, livelihoods, and futures of Americans. The hapless politicians had nothing to counter. “The Resistance” to the first Trump administration was advanced by the machinations of bureaucrats in the vast regulatory state. But with the president rapidly dismantling that apparatus, a new strategy was needed. For the Resistance 2.0, it seems the establishment will depend on the courts to thwart the democratically-expressed will of the people. But there is a higher court in this land, where American voters serve as judge, jury, and executor.

Earlier this month at the Department of Justice, Trump warned of the “violent, vicious lawyers” who persecute the president and bully the American public to get their way. Expect these lawyers to “play the ref,” Trump said, weaving in a story about former Indiana University basketball coach Bobby Knight, who once threw a chair across the court and screamed like a madman at the referees for a call to be overturned. The referee wasn’t going to change the first call, Trump said of Knight’s rationale for throwing the tantrum. “But he’s going to change for the next play. And sure as hell, he did.” Trump understands that activist lawyers and progressive pundits will put heat on the judiciary, and that, on occasion, they’ll get their way.

For 10 years, Trump has confronted the political class, calling out their incompetence and dishonesty, and the voters continue to reward him. Federal judges, egged on by the politically-motivated legal establishment, may try to frustrate the president in his pursuit of long-held promises to build a better country. But Trump is building his case outside the courts – and he’s betting on a sympathetic hearing with the American people, who will note the overt evidence of bias, corruption, and incompetence, whether it occurs in the media, executive branch, or the judiciary. Judges will rule on procedure and technicalities, but the people will evaluate the legitimacy of our institutions and credibility of our leaders.

In 2028, the jury will render its verdict.

Read more …

In theory perhaps. But how much US debt do you have to spare?

The Best Response For Developing Countries To US Tariffs: Sell US Debt (Proud)

As President Trump threatens the world with sweeping tariffs, he is trying to change the fundamental laws of economics through force of will. He won’t succeed. Rather than fighting back with reciprocal tariffs, developing countries should sell off U.S. debt. The Austrian American economist Ludwig von Mises once said that ‘the balance of payments theory forgets that the volume of trade is completely dependent on prices.’ The United States has such a gigantic trade deficit, at over $1 trillion each year, because it can buy foreign goods more cheaply than it can produce them domestically. Some countries may subsidise production to lower prices, others might export goods that are further down the value chain compared to what American producers will make.

But, stepping back, the U.S. dollar is so powerful, that it renders American exports more expensive, irrespective of any distortions created by its trading partners. This is part of the exorbitant privilege in which the U.S. dollar acts the world’s leading reserve currency, amounting to 58% of total reserves. Foreign countries put their capital into the U.S. because it is a stable and safe, increasing the price of the dollar on foreign exchange markets because demand is always high. A strong exchange rate makes foreign imports cheaper and that helps to manage inflation in America.

President Trump clearly wants to boost his support in the blue collar heartlands of America, driving job creation in traditional American industry that has been undercut by foreign imports over many years. But he can’t have two cakes and eat them both. He can’t simultaneously slash the huge U.S. balance of payments deficit – helping blue collar workers – while at the same time maintaining the U.S. as the destination of choice for foreign capital. That would be to defy the logic of economics. To oversimplify slightly, America has built its bloated Federal apparatus on the back of cheap imports. The huge current account surpluses that exporting powerhouses like China, India, European and ASEAN countries have built up has produced a torrent of easy capital to prop up the U.S. state.

The U.S. has a debt mountain of around $35 trillion which is roughly the equivalent sum of debt held by foreign investors. Of that debt, around $8.5 trillion is in the form of U.S. Treasuries, literally loans to the U.S. government, with a similar amount invested in corporate debt and the rest largely in equity. That’s why Trump is going in so hard with Elon Musk’s DOGE initiative. He’s desperate to reduce the size of the U.S. state apparatus because he knows that the Federal house of cards is built on fiscal quicksand. He also probably figures that there’s a greater propensity among federal workers – who are facing massive job cuts – to lean democrat, than among factory workers.

That’s why the idea of a BRICS currency is so terrifying to Trump, because BRICS now accounts for 41% of the global economy by purchasing power parity. A BRICS currency poses a longer-term risk of making the dollar less appealing and, therefore, weaker, driving up inflation. Because the real challenge to the U.S. is not the federal debt itself but its ability to service its debt. The exorbitant privilege, coupled with the massively disinflationary tidal wave of the global financial crisis, ushered in a period of historically low inflation and low interest rates.

That era has ended, as ratings agency Moody’s pointed out this week. U.S. interest rates are now higher, at 4.25-4.5% driving up the costs of servicing the country’s enormous debt mountain. The threat to the U.S. right now is inflation and what that means for its debt servicing bill, if interest rates are held or, even, forced higher. There are parallels here for the 1970s, when rampant inflation, triggered by a number of factors including the oil crisis and America’s move to a fiat currency, led U.S. interest rates to soar at one point to 20%. During this period, foreign countries withdrew their investments, and the dollar slumped to 45% of total global foreign exchange reserves. And herein Trump’s challenge. He can’t export more without a weak dollar, and a weak dollar will make U.S. debt harder to service.

Read more …

“The combination values xAI at $80 billion and X at $33 billion..” Is that $80 billion together or $133 billion?

xAI & X Merger Defuses Musk’s Tesla Share Liquidation Risk (ZH)

Elon Musk secured a multibillion-dollar margin loan using Tesla stock as collateral to finance his acquisition of Twitter (now rebranded as X). In recent months, Tesla’s share price has been cut in half due to a confluence of factors—slowing EV demand amid high interest rates, shifting electric vehicle policies under the Trump administration, market volatility driven by trade tensions, and pressure from a coordinated NGO-driven color revolution known as “Tesla Takedown,” aimed at crashing the stock to trigger loan repayment obligations tied to Musk’s pledged equity. In short, volatility in Tesla shares left Musk heavily exposed to potential loan repayment thresholds being triggered – which was set to occur at or below $114 according to reports – until now.

On Friday evening, Musk announced the merger of X with his AI startup, xAI, in an all-stock transaction that strengthens his financial position, protects Tesla shareholders, and renders the Tesla Takedown color revolution largely ineffective in achieving its intended goal. Musk outlined xAI’s acquisition of X: “xAI has acquired X in an all-stock transaction. The combination values xAI at $80 billion and X at $33 billion ($45B less $12B debt). Since its founding two years ago, xAI has rapidly become one of the leading AI labs in the world, building models and data centers at unprecedented speed and scale. X is the digital town square where more than 600M active users go to find the real-time source of ground truth and, in the last two years, has been transformed into one of the most efficient companies in the world, positioning it to deliver scalable future growth.

xAI and X’s futures are intertwined. Today, we officially take the step to combine the data, models, compute, distribution and talent. This combination will unlock immense potential by blending xAI’s advanced AI capability and expertise with X’s massive reach. The combined company will deliver smarter, more meaningful experiences to billions of people while staying true to our core mission of seeking truth and advancing knowledge. This will allow us to build a platform that doesn’t just reflect the world but actively accelerates human progress. I would like to recognize the hardcore dedication of everyone at xAI and X that has brought us to this point. This is just the beginning.”

Musk privately owns and controls both xAI and X. The transaction is structured as a stock swap, with X investors receiving xAI shares in return. Both companies share overlapping investors, including Fidelity Management, Saudi Arabia’s Kingdom Holding Co, Andreessen Horowitz, Sequoia Capital, and Vy Capital. Musk, also the CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, purchased Twitter in a $44 billion deal in 2022. X CEO Linda Yaccarino wrote on X last night: “The future could not be brighter.” Musk’s X post announcing the acquisition stated that the deal was about “blending” the AI startup and social media platform to create “a platform that doesn’t just reflect the world but actively accelerates human progress.” However, the move also eliminates the risk of Musk undergoing a forced liquidation of the $12.5 billion margin loan backed by his Tesla shares.

As we previously described at the beginning of the note, Tesla shares were halved for a number of reasons: Goldman Trading Desk Views “Trump As Bearish For US EV Market”. “Weak Demand”: Goldman Lowers Tesla Vehicle Delivery Estimate For Quarter. And this…”Tesla Takedown Revolutionaries Prepare Mobilization Nationwide, Tesla Takedown Organizers Plan Color Revolution To “Kill” Brand & “Death Spiral” For Investors. Last week, the Democratic Party and their Communist revolutionaries spelled out their sinister plans… “If we kill the Tesla brand” and “drive down the stock price low enough. We can force him to sell his stock to pay back the billions of dollars of debt he took on to buy Twitter.

“This will drive Tesla into a death spiral,” Micah Lee, The Intercept’s former Director of Information Security, explained on a recent Tesla Takedown teleconference with other far-left revolutionaries. Musk’s indebtedness from leveraging Tesla shares to fund the X deal is no longer a concern for Tesla shareholders. This strategic move also renders the Tesla Takedown color revolution funded by rogue Democrats less likely to force a liquidation.

Read more …

Irann Doesn’t think the US would be stupid enough. But Israel?!

Iran ‘Doesn’t Care’ About Trump’s ‘Threats’ – Senior Commander (RT)

Iran will not bow to US pressure to resume talks over its nuclear program, a top naval commander has said, stressing that Tehran is ready to strike back in the event of an American attack. In an interview with al-Mayadeen TV channel on Saturday, Alireza Tangsiri, commander of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Navy, pushed back against US President Donald Trump’s recent ultimatum urging the country to enter new nuclear talks. “I have no knowledge of Trump’s message, nor do I care to analyze it,” Tangsiri said. “I hear his threats, I observe his actions, and I prepare myself to counter them. We have the capability to strike all enemy bases, wherever they may be… No one can strike us and escape. Even if we have to chase them to the Gulf of Mexico, we would.”

Tangsiri also rejected any negotiations over Tehran’s missile arsenal or its backing of groups in the region. “Iran will never negotiate over its missiles or the capabilities of the Resistance Front,” he said. He also emphasized that the Islamic Republic seeks peaceful relations with its neighbors: “We always extend a hand of friendship to the countries in the region. As Muslims, we do not pose any threat to our neighboring countries.” The remarks came in response to Trump’s comments on Friday, in which he confirmed sending a letter to Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, seeking to negotiate a nuclear deal. “You’re gonna have to make a decision one way or the other,” Trump said. “We’re gonna either have to talk and talk it out, or very bad things are gonna happen to Iran. And I don’t want that to happen.” He added that if the US has “to go in militarily, it’s going to be a terrible thing.”

Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi has said that while the letter seemed threatening, it still contained “some opportunities” for Tehran. The standoff follows years of tension over Tehran’s nuclear program. In 2015, Iran signed a deal with the US, the EU, Russia, and other world powers in which it agreed to limit its nuclear activities in exchange for sanctions relief. However, in 2018, Trump unilaterally withdrew America from the landmark agreement, calling it “a horrible one-sided deal” that had failed to achieve its goals. Iran has not ruled out indirect talks on the matter but has refused to do so under duress. It also maintains that its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only.

Read more …

$1 billion a year for a woke relic.

Federal Judge Halts Shutdown of Voice of America (ET)

A federal judge has temporarily blocked the Trump administration from dismantling Voice of America (VOA), the government-funded international news service whose 1,200 reporters and employees were placed on paid leave earlier this month. The judge, J. Paul Oetken of the Southern District of New York, on Friday issued a temporary restraining order in favor of VOA employees and their unions. The order prevents the U.S. Agency for Global Media (USAGM), which oversees VOA, from shutting down the broadcasting network and its associated radio programs. VOA employees filed the lawsuit against USAGM, its acting Director Victor Morales, and special adviser Kari Lake on March 21.

The complaint accused the agency of failing to fulfill its legally mandated missions and violating both press freedom and the separation-of-powers doctrine when it took a “chainsaw” to the outlet, ordering the entire staff not to report to work, turning off the service, and locking the agency’s doors. In his ruling, Oetken stated that VOA was likely to succeed on its claims, noting that USAGM’s actions appeared unconstitutional. He said that Lake lacked legal authority to withhold congressionally appropriated funds or terminate USAGM staff, programming, or contracts. “By withholding the funds statutorily appropriated to fully administer USAGM, VOA, and its affiliates … the executive is usurping Congress’s power of the purse and its legislative supremacy,” he wrote.

The judge did not require VOA to resume broadcasts, but made it clear that employees must not be terminated while the court determines whether the shutdown violates the Constitution or other federal administrative laws. Friday’s order echoed a similar ruling by another district judge earlier in the week, which granted a temporary restraining order to Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, blocking its funding freeze. The Trump administration has since stated in court filings that it has resumed funding for these outlets. President Donald Trump and his supporters have been critical of VOA for years over alleged bias against conservative Americans and in favor of America’s adversaries.

In 2020, the White House sent an email accusing VOA of spending taxpayers’ money to “speak for authoritarian regimes.” It took issue with, among other things, a VOA social media post featuring a video of a light show celebrating the end of the lockdown in Wuhan, the Chinese megapolis where the COVID-19 virus first emerged; as well as the agency’s characterization of China’s effort to control the outbreak as a “model” for other nations. “VOA too often speaks for America’s adversaries—not its citizens,” The White House said. “Journalists should report the facts, but VOA has instead amplified Beijing’s propaganda.”

The VOA first began broadcasting in 1942 in German-occupied territories as part of the Allies’ effort to engage Axis propaganda broadcasts with counterpropaganda. In the following decades, it became a staple in the propaganda war against the Soviet Union and other communist regimes. Over time, it evolved into a global news organization, now operating in more than 40 languages. Elon Musk, a tech billionaire and Trump’s top adviser for downsizing the federal government’s spending and workforce, has echoed calls to shut down VOA and its sister networks, arguing that they have outlived their purpose. “Yes, shut them down. Europe is free now (not counting stifling bureaucracy). Nobody listens to them anymore,” he wrote on X, accusing the outlets of being “radical left” and “torching $1B/year of US taxpayer money.”

Read more …

“You know, you are the first European who came to talk to us about this. The others are just asking us not to support Russia.”

Ex-Italian PM Reveals ‘Secret Mission’ For Zelensky (RT)

Former Italian Prime Minister Massimo D’Alema has claimed that he undertook a secret diplomatic mission to Brazil and China on behalf of Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky to garner international support, amid fears that Kiev would be abandoned by its Western backers. The revelation was made during a conversation with Italian politician Gianfranco Fini published by La Repubblica on Thursday. According to D’Alema, Zelensky approached him sometime in 2024, expressing fears of a potential catastrophe as Western support waned. “I happened to speak with Zelensky on the sidelines of an initiative on the Balkans. And he told me clearly that his country was at risk of disaster because ‘the Americans will withdraw sooner or later, and the Europeans are not reliable,’” the former prime minister told Fini.

“He asked me to go to Brazil and Beijing to find out if Lula and Xi Jinping could do something,” D’Alema claimed. Neither Brazil nor China has publicly confirmed any visits by the former Italian official. In Brasilia, President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva reportedly dismissed the initiative outright, insisting that Ukraine is an “American problem.” “I went there, but Lula almost showed me the door, telling me that Ukraine was a problem for the Americans and that, according to him, I should be interested in Palestine instead,” D’Alema said. In China, D’Alema reportedly met with one of the Communist Party’s top foreign policy officials, and discussed the idea of an international peacekeeping force for Ukraine. At the end of the meeting, the Chinese official is said to have remarked: “You know, you are the first European who came to talk to us about this. The others are just asking us not to support Russia.”

The former prime minister also criticized the EU for fueling what he described as unrealistic expectations about the conflict. “Europe has done nothing but repeat that Russia could be defeated, when it was clear to everyone that the war could not be won by anyone,” he said.

Read more …

“They want to inspect the holy relics of our saints. They plan to carve them up, to open them up, to break them into pieces. To perform this sacrilege over them. It’s a huge tragedy for the entire Orthodox world..”

Zelensky Is a ‘Demon’ – Ukrainian MP (RT)

Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky is waging a campaign of terror against his own people by signing off on a crackdown targeting the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church (UOC), particularly the iconic Kiev Pechersk Lavra monastery, lawmaker Artyom Dmitruk has said. In an interview with RT on Friday, Dmitruk responded to reports that Ukrainian officials and police have entered the catacombs of the Kiev Pechersk Lavra, the nation’s most significant monastery and the final resting place of several Christian saints. During the raid, authorities unlocked doors, broke into the caves, and changed locks. Dmitruk described their actions as sacrilegious and suggested that Zelensky was directly complicit.

“Zelensky is perpetrating genocide of the Ukrainian people. What we are seeing now and what we are witnessing now is the continuation of terror policies of Zelensky’s against [the] Ukrainian people. Zelensky is a demon in the body of a human being. You can call him whatever you want, a godless person, a terrorist, and so on and so forth. The gist of his actions is the same. Zelensky is following a demon’s will,” he asserted. According to the legislator, who claims to have fled the country over the persecution of the UOC, the stated goal of the “inventarization” of the monastery’s possessions is nothing more than a pretext. “They want to inspect the holy relics of our saints. They plan to carve them up, to open them up, to break them into pieces. To perform this sacrilege over them. It’s a huge tragedy for the entire Orthodox world,” he said, recalling that the results of the review would be classified.

“They are raiding the Lavra. They are trying to seize the property of the Lavra… If we speak from a legal point of view, it’s a crime,” Dmitruk stressed. The Ukrainian government has been cracking down on the UOC for months, which it views as having ties to Russia. This effort has included attempts to take over the Lavra, as well as church raids and arrests of clergy. The UOC, the largest religious institution in the country, severed ties with the Moscow Patriarchate following the start of the conflict. Zelensky has defended the move, insisting on the need to protect Ukraine’s “spiritual independence” from Russia. Moscow has condemned the measures, accusing Kiev of suppressing the canonical Orthodox faith and alleging that the West is encouraging these efforts.

Read more …

Nobody cares.

EU To Reject Russia-US Black Sea Deal – von der Leyen (RT)

The EU will not lift its sanctions against Russia for as long as the Ukraine conflict continues, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has said. During talks in Saudi Arabia on Monday, Russia and the US agreed to move towards reviving the Black Sea Grain Initiative, which, according to the Kremlin, should include the removal of Western restrictions against Russian Agricultural Bank and other financial institutions involved in the international sale of food and fertilizers. In her interview with French broadcaster LCI on Friday, von der Leyen made it clear that Brussels will not support the idea of a maritime truce between Moscow and Kiev put forward by the administration of US President Donald Trump.

“The sanctions are very significant; they are painful; they have an impact on the Russian economy, and they represent a powerful lever,” she said when asked about the possibility of the EU fulfilling Russian demands to lift some of the curbs. According to the head of the European Commission, the restrictions “will remain in effect until a just and lasting peace is established in Ukraine.” However, she noted that “when the war is over, the sanctions might be removed.” Von der Leyen also said that for the conflict to end, “security guarantees for Ukraine” are needed as well as “a solid defense industrial base and a deterrent force” in the EU. The Black Sea Grain Initiative, originally brokered in July 2022 by the UN and Türkiye, envisioned the safe passage of Ukrainian agricultural products in exchange for the West lifting its restrictions on Russian grain and fertilizer exports.

Moscow withdrew from the deal a year later, citing the West’s failure to uphold its obligations. The Americans and Russians now see its revival as a step towards settling the Ukraine conflict altogether. Earlier this week, President Vladimir Putin asserted that the Russian economy has become the fourth largest in the world in purchasing power parity terms after those of China, the US and India, despite a record 28,595 sanctions being placed on it by Washington, Brussels and their allies. According to the Russian government’s data, the country’s economy grew 4.1% in 2024, surpassing the official forecast of 3.9%. Putin previously urged the Russian business circles against expecting the sanctions to be fully lifted, describing them as a mechanism of strategic systemic pressure on the country that the West intends to keep using.

Read more …

Eurobonds are a huge threat to every European: “The EU Debt Plan is About Centralizing Financial Control.”

The EU Wants to Use War as an Excuse for More Debt (Andreen)

The European political and financial elite knows that the war in Ukraine is lost but wants to use it as an opportunity to reach strategic independence from the United States. As the future chancellor of Germany Friedrich Merz said right after his electoral win on Feb 23: “It will be an absolute priority for me to strengthen Europe as soon as possible so much that it gradually really achieves independence from the United States.” Such strategic independence needs money and investment—a lot of it—not only to boost defense but much else, like energy and innovation; areas in which Europe is lagging behind the US and China. In order to have the pretext to implement this spending plan, the idea among the EU elite is to make sure that the war in Ukraine does not end too quickly. That way the conflict can be used to justify artificially injecting much needed money into the moribund EU economies.

First, there was a question of providing €20 billion euros of additional military support for Ukraine and that the EU self-imposed fiscal rules to be loosened using the existing “escape clause” in the event of “exceptional” circumstances, such as the bogus “defense of Ukraine” excuse. As Bloomberg stated, “under this plan, EU nations would be exempt from debt and deficit limits when financing military expenditures. This marks a fundamental shift in EU financial policy, as such exemptions have previously been impossible under EU rules.” Indeed, the EU elite does not want to follow the arbitrary EU fiscal rules: for Paris, the 3 percent limit of budget deficit to GDP is politically painful, and for Berlin, the limit of max 60 percent of GDP in terms of federal public borrowing seems like an artificial constraint.

Then there was a talk of a €700 billion euro defense package. Newsweek stated that: “Baerbock said the package could be worth some 700 billion euros ($732 billion).” French President Emmanuel Macron also confirmed this on March 2, 2025. “We will give a mandate to the European Commission to define our capacity needs for a common defense,” Macron said in an interview published in several French newspapers. “This massive funding will probably reach hundreds of billions of euros.” The official slogan of “help Ukraine defend itself” will give the EU political and financial elite an excuse to turn on the spigots of the European Central Bank at full thrust again; to shower the entire European economy with “free” money, and shore up its fragile economies, like it did after the euro crisis of 2011, with the enormous covid recovery fund in 2021, as well as with the Green New Deal.

This time, the idea seems to be to use joint EU bonds. Reuters writes: “The bigger amounts will have to come from some type of centralized funding, because most budgets in Europe are relatively stretched, particularly in Italy and France.” As was stated in the infamous Draghi Report from Sept 2024: “the EU should move towards regular issuance of common safe assets to enable joint investment projects among Member States and to help integrate capital markets.” Therefore, “common issuance should over time produce a deeper and more liquid market in EU bonds.”

Joint EU bonds are essentially bond issuances against the whole euro economy and would thus entail a low risk and a lower interest rate than country level EU bonds. This is perceived as necessary in order for the EU to hold its own in competition with the US and China that already have unified capital markets, as a speech Draghi gave to the EU Commission last year made clear. There are three main sources of war financing: printing money, increasing taxes, and borrowing. Making available “hundreds of billions” for the EU would likely be based on debt issued from joint EU bonds. Bloomberg noted that, if the spending were funded with tax increases, or cuts in other areas, that could wipe out any positive impact—or worse. Any immediate spending on the military would not help Europe because it would be mostly spent buying US weapons.

Therefore, what the EU elite has in mind now is likely to put in place what F. Merz said; a strategic independence from the US through a huge investment by joint EU bonds, released and used over the long term in order to slowly build up Europe’s industry, not only in the defense sector but also in other sectors. In a sense, this would-be debt plan is just the European Union emulating the United States playbook of using war for crony capitalist benefits, finally “understanding” how to cynically exploit the Ukraine war, just as the US has been doing since 2022 by feeding its military-industrial complex. But, in order for this to happen, the war must not end too soon for the European elite, which is why efforts are made in order to—outrageously—spoil any US peace plans and get the war to continue for now.

Read more …

All of a sudden, everybody knows Dr. Suzanne Humphries. Her X followers went from a few hundred to 62,000 overnight.

Joe Rogan Guest Completely Shatters the Vaccine Narrative (VF)

Everything you’ve been told is a lie—especially when it comes to polio. Dr. Suzanne Humphries reveals what really made all those polio cases disappear after the vaccine was introduced. Dr. Suzanne Humphries, former board-certified nephrologist and co-author of Dissolving Illusions: Disease, Vaccines, and the Forgotten History, just made a bombshell appearance on The Joe Rogan Experience and what she shared will completely change how you think about vaccines. Most people are told vaccines are “safe and effective” with no real downside. But Dr. Humphries pulled back the curtain on decades of deception, starting with a major turning point in 1986—when President Reagan signed the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act into law.

https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1905055320449442103

Before that, vaccine manufacturers were getting hammered with lawsuits. Humphries explained that after the 1976 swine flu vaccine disaster, Guillain-Barré cases were piling up. It got so bad that the companies couldn’t even get insurance. They ran to the government and basically said: “Bail us out, or we’re done making vaccines.” So the government stepped in. First, it agreed to cover the lawsuits. Then came the 1986 law—sold to the public as a way to help injured families get compensation faster, but in reality, it became a kangaroo court system that rarely paid families deserving of vaccine injury claims. Companies like Wyeth (now Pfizer) admitted their vaccines were “unavoidably unsafe,” yet instead of making them safer, they were handed blanket immunity.

Humphries explained that this opened the floodgates for “creativity” by the vaccine makers. They could now play with adjuvants without fear of being sued. Profits soared, and the childhood vaccine schedule expanded rapidly. That freedom also meant cutting corners in safety testing. Most people assume vaccines are tested like other drugs—with placebo controls. But that’s not the case. Instead, vaccines are actually tested against other vaccines, which obscures negative outcomes. “The few studies that exist with saline placebos show how bad the vaccine actually is and how it makes you not only not respond to the disease when it comes around, but more susceptible to it in many cases,” Dr. Humphries explained.

When the conversation turned to polio, Dr. Humphries blew just about everyone’s mind on the internet. She challenged one of the most sacred beliefs in modern medicine: that vaccines eradicated polio. The truth is that polio wasn’t actually eradicated. “Polio is still here. Polio is still alive and well,” Dr. Humphries declared. It’s just that a few sleights of hand made the world believe otherwise. The real change that happened, according to Humphries, wasn’t the vaccine’s impact—it was the definition. “Polio is called different things today,” Humphries explained. “Whereas back in the 1940s, 1950s, the criteria for diagnosing polio were completely different to the year that the vaccine was introduced. The playing field, the goalposts—everything was changed… they were able to show a complete cascading drop of paralytic polio simply because of the way they changed the definitions of what polio is and what could cause it. After the vaccine rollout, cases that would’ve been diagnosed as polio were now labeled as Guillain-Barré syndrome, coxsackievirus, echovirus, or chalked up to lead or mercury poisoning.

https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1905055665367986241

She also pointed to another key factor: environmental toxins. The rise in polio diagnoses, she said, mirrored the use of toxic chemicals like DDT. When the conversation turned to polio, Dr. Humphries blew just about everyone’s mind on the internet. She challenged one of the most sacred beliefs in modern medicine: that vaccines eradicated polio. The truth is that polio wasn’t actually eradicated. “Polio is still here. Polio is still alive and well,” Dr. Humphries declared. It’s just that a few sleights of hand made the world believe otherwise. The real change that happened, according to Humphries, wasn’t the vaccine’s impact—it was the definition. “Polio is called different things today,” Humphries explained. “Whereas back in the 1940s, 1950s, the criteria for diagnosing polio were completely different to the year that the vaccine was introduced. The playing field, the goalposts—everything was changed… they were able to show a complete cascading drop of paralytic polio simply because of the way they changed the definitions of what polio is and what could cause it.”

https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1905056072642998351

After the vaccine rollout, cases that would’ve been diagnosed as polio were now labeled as Guillain-Barré syndrome, coxsackievirus, echovirus, or chalked up to lead or mercury poisoning. She also pointed to another key factor: environmental toxins. The rise in polio diagnoses, she said, mirrored the use of toxic chemicals like DDT. As use of neurotoxic pesticides like DDT, arsenic, and lead declined, so did toxic exposures that mimicked polio symptoms. Fewer kids were bathing in poisons that caused spinal nerve damage, so naturally, paralysis decreased. “The tonnage of production of DDT absolutely mirrored the diagnosis for polio,” Dr. Humphries explained. Even today, she added, “The countries that still make DDT… are where we’re still seeing this paralytic polio situation happen.”

And when it comes to the poliovirus itself? It’s not quite as harmful as people think. Humphries explained that polio is actually a “commensal”—a virus that lives in most people without causing harm. “95 to 99% of all polio is asymptomatic.” Dr. Humphries described a study of the Javante Indians, where “98 to 99% of every person they tested… had evidence of immunity to all three strains of polio,” yet none of the children were crippled. “They were like, ‘We don’t have any of that problem,’” she recalled. Dr. Humphries also cited a chilling story in history. In 1916, a Rockefeller lab in Manhattan set out with “the specific stated goal… to try to create the most pathological, neuropathological strain of polio possible.” Researchers injected monkey brains and human spinal fluid into monkeys.

https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1905056279409651724

And that experimentation came with devastating consequences. “There was a big problem with that, which was [polio] released into the public by accident,” Dr. Humphries explained. “And the world experienced the worst polio epidemic on record. 25% mortality.” In short, Humphries argued that polio didn’t vanish because of vaccines. It disappeared under a mountain of redefinitions, environmental triggers, manmade disasters, and a lot of propaganda. Dr. Humphries also raised concerns about a link between vaccines and food allergies. “It’s very well known that the vaccines that have aluminum in them skew the immune system,” she said. Aluminum is added to many vaccines to make the immune system react more strongly. But when that reaction happens, the immune system can mistakenly target other things in the body, like food proteins.

For example, if a baby is exposed to something like peanuts or eggs around the time of vaccination, the immune system might mistakenly tag those foods as threats, potentially leading to a long-term food allergy. “So that’s kind of the paradox there [with vaccines],” Dr. Humphries explained. And then there’s mercury. Did you know that if a mercury-containing vaccine drops on the floor, “the HAZMAT people have to come and take that away”? Yet we inject it into 3-month-old babies.

https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1905056642837643586

Read more …

 

 

 

 

RFK vaccines
https://twitter.com/ChildrensHD/status/1905757292546462177

 

 

Bhakdi

 

 

Cows
https://twitter.com/AMAZlNGNATURE/status/1905842442693186021

 

 

Maruay
https://twitter.com/Rainmaker1973/status/1905998384189854189

 

 

Lovebird

 

 

Ninja

 

 

Coral forest
https://twitter.com/buitengebieden/status/1905674058189975930

 

 

Tartaria
https://twitter.com/wakenminds/status/1905352502939099184

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Dec 162024
 


Pablo Picasso Female bust 1922

 

Trump Team Studying Orban’s Ceasefire Initiative (RT)
UK PM Calls For ‘Maximum Pain’ On Russia (RT)
Ukraine Will Have To Trade Land For Peace – Slovak President (RT)
The New Time Of Troubles, Part III – Don’t Worry, Be Happy (Helmer)
Germany ‘Cornered’ – Economy Minister (RT)
Hungary Dismayed At ‘Unprecedented Gesture In Diplomacy’ By Zelensky (RT)
Syria: The Death of a Civilization (Karganovic)
Trump Transition Team Considering Strikes on Iran (Antiwar)
20 (or So) Obvious Questions about January 6 (Jack Cashill)
Cuomo Accuser Drops Case Against The Former New York Governor (Turley)
Milei Admin. Posts Record Reductions in Deficit and Inflation Numbers (Turley)
House GOP Vows To Refer ActBlue Fundraising Probe To Incoming Trump DOJ (JTN)
Offshore Wind Opponents From Deep Blue States Hope For Trump (JTN)
Trump Considers Privatizing US Postal Service (ZH)
Cold War Tactics With New Anti-Communism School Curriculum (Alan MacLeod)

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/i/status/1868392496083923221

Meloni
https://twitter.com/i/status/1868019091434521077

Lindsey

Hegseth

Logan

Drones
https://twitter.com/i/status/1868303280956113093

 

 

 

 

A Christmas Day truce is of course very appealing.

Trump Team Studying Orban’s Ceasefire Initiative (RT)

US President-elect Donald Trump is taking “a hard look” at a proposal for a Christmas truce and prisoner swap between Russia and Ukraine put forward by Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, Trump’s nominee for national security adviser Mike Waltz has said. Orban met with Trump and Waltz at the incoming president’s Mar-a-Lago estate on Monday, two days before he spoke to Russian President Vladimir Putin by phone. After the conversation, the Kremlin announced that Orban had proposed a Christmas Day truce and a large-scale prisoner-swap between Moscow and Kiev, and that the Russian government had responded by sending its ideas for the exchange of POWs to the Hungarian embassy in Moscow. Speaking to CBS News on Sunday, Waltz refused to say whether Orban had passed on a message from Trump to Putin.

However, he said that Trump’s administration-in-waiting wants to “stop the fighting” and that if there is “some type of ceasefire as a first step…we’ll take a hard look at what that means.” “Orban has regular engagement with the Russians, and he clearly has a good relationship with President Trump, and I would hope the entire world would want to see some type of cessation to the slaughter,” Waltz told CBS’ Margaret Brennan, calling the Donbass battlefield “a meat grinder of human beings.” In a social media post on Wednesday, Orban said that Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky had “clearly rejected” his proposed ceasefire. In a post of his own, Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky belittled Orban’s diplomatic activities, claiming that the Hungarian leader was only trying to “boost personal image at the expense of unity” in the EU concerning support for Kiev.

Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto then revealed that the Ukrainian leadership turned down a phone call request from Orban and had done so in a manner that was “quite unprecedented in diplomacy.” In an interview with public broadcaster Kossuth Radio on Sunday, Szijjarto said that the request was refused in “a somewhat strained” manner, without elaborating on the exact wording used by the authorities in Kiev.Trump has repeatedly promised to end the Ukraine conflict within a day of taking office. However, he has not elaborated on how he plans to achieve this, and both Moscow and Kiev have cast doubt on his ability to single-handedly stop the fighting.“Trump is really serious about wanting to get to a ceasefire on day one,” a source supposedly close to the incoming president told NBC News on Friday.

Zelensky insists that his ten-point ‘peace formula’ is the only viable roadmap for ending the conflict. The Kremlin has dismissed this document – which demands that Russia restore Ukraine’s 1991 borders, pay reparations, and surrender its own officials to war crimes tribunals – as “delusional” and “divorced from reality.” Moscow maintains that any settlement must begin with Ukraine ceasing military operations and acknowledging the “territorial reality” that it will never regain control of the Russian regions of Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson, and Zaporozhye, as well as Crimea. In addition, the Kremlin insists that the goals of its military operation – which include Ukrainian neutrality, demilitarization, and denazification – will be achieved.

Read more …

Desperately seeking relevance. If you talk tough, at least you look like a man.

UK PM Calls For ‘Maximum Pain’ On Russia (RT)

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer has called on his fellow G7 leaders to “continue maximizing Putin’s pain” through economic sanctions on Russia and increased military aid to Ukraine. During a video conference on Friday, “the Prime Minister said that with [Russian President Vladimir] Putin showing no sign of relenting, it is vital that we bolster our support to put [Ukraine] in the best possible position for the future,” according to a readout released by his office. “He called on fellow G7 leaders to continue maximizing Putin’s pain by increasing military support to the Ukrainians and ramping up economic pressure, including via further sanctions where possible,” the statement continued. Two days earlier, the US and UK announced a new round of sanctions on Moscow, targeting what the British government called Russia’s “illicit gold trade.”

At the same time, EU ambassadors agreed on a 15th package of economic penalties, this time targeting Russia’s petroleum industry and Chinese companies allegedly producing drones for the Russian military. Repeated rounds of sanctions have failed to “crater” the Russian economy, as US President Joe Biden predicted they would in 2022. Instead, the Russian economy grew by 3.6% this year, while Britain’s grew by 1.1%, according to figures from the International Monetary Fund (IMF). ”We learned a lot after the sanctions started,” Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov told American journalist Tucker Carlson earlier this month. “But what doesn’t kill you makes you stronger, you know. They would never kill us, so they are making us stronger.”

Amid an historic decline in living standards at home, the UK has given £8.34 billion ($10.52 billion) in military aid to Ukraine since February 2022, according to figures from Germany’s Kiel Institute for the World Economy, which tracks Western aid to Kiev.Starmer claimed last month that this outpouring of arms and ammunition will help the Ukrainians “secure a just and lasting peace on their terms.” However, the Kremlin has argued that any future peace terms will be worse for Ukraine than those rejected by Kiev during peace talks in Istanbul in April 2022. While Russia was prepared to settle the conflict in 2022 with Ukraine agreeing to stay out of NATO and grant autonomy to the regions of Donetsk and Lugansk, Kiev must now accept the “realities on the ground,” Lavrov told Carlson, referring to the fact that Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson, and Zaporozhye are now parts of the Russian federation and will not be ceded back to Ukraine.

Read more …

“The Russians are gaining more and more territory, the sanctions are not working, and Ukraine is no longer strong enough for possible negotiations..”

Ukraine Will Have To Trade Land For Peace – Slovak President (RT)

The Ukraine conflict will not be resolved until Kiev accepts some “partial territorial losses,” Slovak President Peter Pellegrini has said. Pellegrini and Prime Minister Robert Fico have both called on Russia and Ukraine to enter immediate peace talks. Speaking to Slovakia’s STVR broadcaster on Sunday, Pellegrini said that daily updates from the front line have convinced him that Ukraine cannot hope to achieve its territorial goals – the return of Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson, Zaporozhye and Crimea – by force.“When it comes to peace, I believe that we need to remain realistic,” he told the network. “Today, probably no sane person in Europe believes that it will be possible to achieve peace without some partial territorial losses for Ukraine.” The president then called on Ukraine and Russia to sit down at the negotiating table as soon as possible.

Pellegrini’s comments echo those made by Fico earlier this week. Speaking to Brazil’s Folha de Sao Paulo news outlet, the Slovak prime minister said that it is necessary to be “at least a little realistic” and to “admit that Russia will never leave Crimea, Donetsk and Lugansk.” After taking office last year, Fico immediately halted military aid from Bratislava to Kiev, and vowed to veto Ukraine’s potential accession to NATO. He has also accused “Ukrainian Nazis and fascists” of starting the conflict by “murdering the Russian population of Donbass,” and has condemned his fellow EU leaders for prolonging the fighting with military aid and sanctions on Moscow.

“What is the result? The Russians are gaining more and more territory, the sanctions are not working, and Ukraine is no longer strong enough for possible negotiations,” he told Folha de Sao Paulo. Fico also predicted that Kiev will likely be “betrayed” by its Western backers and possibly end up losing a third of its territories without being invited into NATO, receiving security guarantees only in the form of a foreign troop presence in the country. Moscow maintains that any settlement must begin with Ukraine ceasing military operations and acknowledging the “territorial reality” that it will never regain control of its former regions. In addition, the Kremlin insists that the goals of its military operation – which include Ukrainian neutrality, demilitarization, and denazification – will be achieved.

Read more …

Helmer enters PCR territory.

The New Time Of Troubles, Part III – Don’t Worry, Be Happy (Helmer)

President Vladimir Putin gave a party rally speech in Moscow on Saturday in which he omitted to mention seven of the eight domestic issues most troubling Russian voters – inflation; high interest-rate caused stagnation in the economy; corruption; low quality education; poor public health care; terrorism; and illegal immigrants. He made an exception for the Special Military Operation and “the front to fight for the Motherland”.To Russians who tell pollsters the protracted war and the casualty rate are their biggest concerns, Putin said not to worry — he and his party are taking care of both: “The United Russia party has been supporting our troops literally from the first day of the special military operation: it submits important draft laws to create legal and social guarantees for our heroes and their families; assists the recovery of the liberated regions; collects and delivers everything the civilians there need.

“The party also does much for the veterans who are back from the combat areas, helps them realise themselves in civilian professions, in public and political life.” Reading methodically without departing from his script, Putin told delegates at the 22nd Congress of United Russia that the party stands for “the unity of people, faith in the country and in our victory…the desire to ensure the safety of the Motherland, to protect our sacred historical memory, spirituality, traditions.” This is political boilerplate — and it’s bullet-proof. The polls reinforce Putin’s message with the assurance that Russian voters see and fancy no alternative. In the current State Duma, elected in September 2021 to a five-year term, United Russia holds 324 of the 450 seats. The opposition is led by the Communist Party with 57 seats; Just Russia with 28, and New People with 16. In the Levada polling, support for United Russia is stable at 42%; the other political parties are polling between 4% and 10%.

No other Russian politician represents a challenge to the president; he does not face a new election until 2030. Public approval for Putin remains at 87% according to the Levada Centre; 79% according to the All-Russian Centre for the Study of Public Opinion (VTsIOM), and stable. There is no government or party figure drawing current voter support in opposition, and no public canvassing for the succession. Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin and Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov trail after Putin in the polls but far behind; their political profiles and approval ratings are based on the frequency of their media appearances. But public trust for them is a fraction of Putin’s rating, and they are not candidates to succeed him. Trust in former President Dmitry Medvedev is a fraction of that for Mishustin and Lavrov because Medvedev – though head of the United Russia party and deputy head of the Security Council — is almost invisible in the mainstream media.

The general public mood, as measured by Levada between November 2 and 27, is overwhelmingly positive and confident – 72% of Russians believe the country is going in the right direction; only 18% think it’s headed in the wrong direction. In this domestic atmosphere, Putin is calculating there is no good reason for him to mention the Russian military withdrawal from Syria, or to answer press questions of why he decided to evacuate Russian bases in the country, allow Israel to destroy Syria’s military and industrial infrastructure, and accept Israeli, Turkish and American takeover of Syria’s sovereignty, territory, and natural wealth, particularly water and oil. A Moscow source comments: “I think the Russian public will not be convinced to risk a presence there especially when the propaganda has changed its tune to the line, ‘it’s impossible to help those who can’t help themselves.’ With Syrian statehood gone, this battle is lost.”

This is the rationale, several Moscow sources believe, for Putin to cut his losses and run from Syria without risking the appearance to Russian voters of having done either. The military and strategic implications of Putin’s decision-making on Syria, argued behind closed doors with the General Staff, are unmentioned in the Duma and the media. The Moscow source adds: “What happens in Ukraine and when are the main questions now. There could well be more surprises from the US. There might be a new ground assault into Russian territory and continuing missile attacks deep into Russian territory. So far, these are not disturbing the national mood of confidence and optimism. So for the time being Russians are not expecting and are not prepared for any escalation on any front – at least not on the ground.

“If Putin can negotiate to keep the four [Donbass] regions and a demilitarisation accord with [President Donald] Trump, there will be what the Defense Ministry calls retaliation, but no escalation. At least not for now, not for six months after Trump takes office if the talks head nowhere.” “What is needed now from Russian point of view is time to build the army and the economy for a bigger war. That, according to everyone I talk with, is going to be war with Turkey when the stakes will be much higher than they are with Ukraine. Putin is adopting a wait-and-see stance. Russian military sources believe that Putin and the General Staff have agreed to restrict their operations to electric war targeting; to avoid decapitation strikes at the Ukrainian leadership or US, French and British forces operating long-range Ukrainian missile units; and to characterize current air operations as “retaliation”, not “escalation”.

Read more …

They will never admit they cornered themselves.

Germany ‘Cornered’ – Economy Minister (RT)

Germany has been forced into a corner by underinvestment and policies pursued by other leading economies, Economy Minister Robert Habeck has said, after the central bank warned of a difficult year ahead. In an interview with Bild newspaper published on Sunday, the politician, who intends to run for chancellor next year, insisted that Germany can turn the situation around. “Our business model is really cornered. Will it no longer work? It would be too early for me to throw in the towel,” Habeck said. The minister noted that Germany has failed to make sufficient investment in its infrastructure, tax system and workforce skills, resulting in a “negative impact” on its economy.

Germany is an export-oriented nation that needs open markets, Habeck argued, in reference to US President-elect Donald Trump’s threats of major tariff increases. Trump warned in November that he would impose steeper duties on foreign-made cars to protect US jobs, a move that would disproportionately affect Germany. Habeck also pointed to Chinese-made electric cars flooding the EU market and causing “a big problem” for the German automotive industry. Car manufacturing is one of the key drivers of the German economy, accounting for approximately 5% of GDP. The Munich-based Ifo Institute for Economic Research estimates that future tariffs could cost Germany €33 billion ($34.6 billion), and that exports to the US could fall by 15%.

Germany does have a problem, “but one that can be solved,” Habeck told Bild, without elaborating. On Friday, the German central bank slashed its growth forecast for next year to 0.2%, from the 1.1% level it had predicted in June. The regulator also said it expects the economy to contract by 0.2% this year, having previously predicted modest growth of 0.3%. It would mark a second consecutive year of decline, after gross domestic product shrank by 0.3% in 2023, according to the Federal Statistics Office, Destatis. The agency attributed last year’s contraction to persistent inflation, high energy prices, and weak foreign demand. A snap federal election will be held in Germany on February 23. Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s three-party coalition collapsed earlier this month after he fired Finance Minister Christian Lindner.

Read more …

“Ukraine was not ready to start any talks with Russia as there is insufficient support from the West to conduct negotiations from a position of strength..”

Hungary Dismayed At ‘Unprecedented Gesture In Diplomacy’ By Zelensky (RT)

The Ukrainian leadership turned down a phone-call request from Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orban in a manner that was “unprecedented” in nature, Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto has revealed. The rebuff followed an hour-long conversation between Orban and Russian President Vladimir Putin. In an interview with public broadcaster Kossuth Radio on Sunday, Szijjarto said that he had approached Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrey Sibiga and Vladimir Zelensky’s top aide Andrey Yermak, asking for the authorization of a telephone conversation between Orban and the Ukrainian leader. ”In a gesture that was quite unprecedented in diplomacy,” the request was refused in “a somewhat strained” manner, Szijjarto said, as quoted by the Magyar Nemzet newspaper.

Hungary’s top diplomat did not elaborate on the exact wording used by the authorities in Kiev. Hungary has tried “everything” during the past six months of its EU presidency to use it “for a good cause, to initiate a ceasefire and peace negotiations,” Szijjarto noted. Budapest has held the rotating presidency of the EU Council in the second half of this year. Earlier this week Orban said he’d put forward a proposal for a Christmas ceasefire and a major prisoner exchange between Russia and Ukraine. ”One side accepted it, the other rejected it,” the Premier told Kossuth Radio on Friday. Zelensky, in turn, claimed that the Hungarian leader was only trying to “boost personal image at the expense of unity” in the EU in terms of supporting Ukraine.

The authorities in Kiev have sent mixed messages about their readiness for negotiations with Russia. On Wednesday, Zelensky’s top adviser Mikhail Podoliak said Kiev could engage in talks with Moscow if they are not based on Russia’s conditions. Andrey Yermak said on Friday that Ukraine was not ready to start any talks with Russia as there is insufficient support from the West to conduct negotiations from a position of strength. Moscow has repeatedly stressed that it’s ready to resume the negotiations. It has urged Kiev to accept the new realities “on the ground,” with President Vladimir Putin citing the complete withdrawal of all Ukrainian forces from all Russian territories as a key prerequisite for peace talks.

Read more …

“Syria was an imperfect yet incontestably successful pattern of civilisation, at least in the perspective of those who in human relations strive for a semblance of peace, cooperation, and harmony..”

Syria: The Death of a Civilization (Karganovic)

Pepe Escobar was spot on when he stated that the downfall of Syria signified the “death of a nation.” Is it premature to chant a requiem for that marvellous land and its intriguing people, not just their virtues but also their flaws having duly been taken into account? And ought we to do it so soon, as the black flag of Syria’s latest conquerors, matching the darkness of its present circumstances, flutters over it, having just been raised in its capital? Time will tell, but reputable observers appear to be partial to precisely such a sombre conclusion. An argument could be advanced that Syria’s tragedy may prove to be even greater in scope than Pepe avers. Syria surely never was a “nation” in the conventional sense, signifying the homogeneity of shared ethnicity, faith, and moral purpose. It was in fact largely the opposite. Historically, however, Syria was an entity and perhaps even an idea much loftier than a mere homogeneity.

It was a concept of conviviality, not of the simple and easy kind, founded upon commonalities, but of the truly challenging and infinitely more complicated sort. Syria throughout the ages was a precarious, yet for the most part sustainably functional cultural crucible, consisting of a combination of disparate components thrown inexplicably together by the whims of fate. Yet astonishingly, and contrary to virtually every lesson of human interaction taught and learned elsewhere, Syria was an impossible combination that for the most part worked reasonably well. This patchwork of manifestly incompatible elements, of diverse faiths, often incongruous ethnicities, and real or imagined identities, willy-nilly and probably more by trial and error than by design, had developed a unique modus vivendi, a formula for practical coexistence from which the world has much to learn.

Instead of watching idly as freakish barbarians armed with sledgehammers pound it to smithereens, we should perhaps have reacted, contrary if need be to the tenets of geopolitical logic, to preserve this ancient land and cultural treasure from defilement and devastation. We can do no better now than to study for our own profit and edification that remarkable historically conditioned mechanism that Syria used to be, to emulate its spirit and apply its principles wherever practicable. I would argue, without idealising, that the now apparently defunct Syria, rather than being merely a nation whose death it is proper to mourn, as Pepe rightly does, conceptually was much more than the sum of its constituent parts. Syria was an imperfect yet incontestably successful pattern of civilisation, at least in the perspective of those who in human relations strive for a semblance of peace, cooperation, and harmony. Whether or not that pattern can ever be reconstituted is a question to which a ready answer is not at hand.

That having been said, we may skip the analysis of how Syria’s tragic and unexpected Untergang has come about, that topic being competently expounded by other commentators. There is, however, an aspect of the current events that needs to be particularly highlighted. That is the human dimension of the horror. Under the guise of opposing the excesses of a dictatorship, a combination of countries which purport to occupy the high moral ground in world affairs (the allusion is to the collective West and its lackeys, of course) have waged a relentless proxy war of attrition and extinction not against the Syrian “regime,” as they contemptuously referred to the legitimate government of that country, but against the people of Syria en masse, irrespective of their particular affiliation.

The objective was to oppress them and to destroy their common heritage in order to render them helpless and obedient to globalist masters and their regional collaborators, determined to impose their rapacious schemes in the form of oil pipelines, territorial recomposition, or whatever corrupt and self-serving goals they may have set. In that nefarious operation, the Syrian people, and even the jihadist condottieri themselves, the militia of goons trained and equipped to destroy the tranquillity and devastate the material and cultural assets of that unfortunate land, are all expendable.

Read more …

Just don’t.

Trump Transition Team Considering Strikes on Iran (Antiwar)

Strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities are being seriously considered within the Donald Trump transition team, according to the Wall Street Journal. While there is no proof Tehran is trying to make a nuclear weapon, Washington and Tel Aviv are threatening to attack Iran’s nuclear energy infrastructure. “The military-strike option against nuclear facilities is now under more serious review by some members of his transition team,” the WSJ explained. “Iran’s weakened regional position and recent revelations of Tehran’s burgeoning nuclear work have turbocharged sensitive internal discussions, transition officials said.” Tel Aviv is undergoing a similar debate. “The Israel Defense Forces believes that following the weakening of Iranian proxy groups in the Middle East and the dramatic fall of the Bashar al-Assad regime in Syria, there is an opportunity to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities,” the Times of Israel reported on Thursday.

Adding, “The Israeli Air Force has therefore continued to increase its readiness and preparations for such potential strikes in Iran.” According to WSJ, President-elect Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have recently discussed potentially attacking Iran. “Trump has told Netanyahu in recent calls that he is concerned about an Iranian nuclear breakout on his watch.” The report continues, “The president-elect wants plans that stop short of igniting a new war, particularly one that could pull in the US military.” The sources explained that the administration is considering two options. The first is bolstering American military presence in the Middle East while providing Israel with the ability to destroy Iranian nuclear sites without US assistance. The other option calls for American threats to force Tehran to make concessions at the negotiation table.

Whichever option Trump chooses, he is also expected to increase sanctions on Iran given his belief that he must economically cripple Tehran. While the US intelligence community, the IAEA, the Pentagon, and Tehran all say Iran is not developing nuclear weapons, the incoming Trump administration and Tel Aviv say they are concerned the Islamic Republic will obtain a nuke. Additionally, Trump believes Tehran was behind an assassination attempt on his life. However, Trump and Netanyahu may perceive Iran as weak, given Bashar al-Assad’s ouster in Syria and Hezbollah’s concessions in its truce with Israel. Emboldened by recent events, Washington and Tel Aviv could attempt to strike Iran, believing Tehran is vulnerable. Mark Dubowitzchief executive of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, told WSJ, “If you were going to actually do something to neutralize the nuclear-weapons program, this would be it.”

On Wednesday, Netanyahu published a video on X in English telling the Iranian people that regime change may come a lot sooner than many people think.

Clawson

Read more …

“..the accused were allowed no change of venue and faced juries pulled from a pool 95 percent anti-Trump. This needs to change.”

20 (or So) Obvious Questions about January 6 (Jack Cashill)

Even before Donald Trump ascends to the presidency on January 20, his appointees should ask themselves the questions that follow — all of them simple and straightforward. With Christopher Wray stepping down from the FBI directorship, they will have a much better chance of getting straight answers quickly. Trump’s team should then share those answers widely. This information will make President Trump’s pardon of more than 1,500 Americans much more comprehensible to the American public and much less controversial.

–Although now the FBI admits to having 26 confidential human sources in the crowd on January 6, how many total “assets” did the FBI and other entities plant, and what roles did they play?
–Was Ray Epps working for an entity? And if so, under what terms?
–Who planted the pipe bombs outside the DNC and near the RNC headquarters?
–Who instructed Kamala Harris to conceal the fact that she was at the DNC when the bomb was found and why?
–Why did Harris allow hundreds of J6ers to be prosecuted for threatening her designated space at the Capitol when she wasn’t at the Capitol?
–Who were the “two law enforcement officials” who told the New York Times that “pro-Trump rioters” fatally struck Capitol Police officer Brian Sicknick with a fire extinguisher, inflicting “a bloody gash in his head”?
–Who orchestrated the 100-day-plus suppression of Sicknick’s autopsy report?
–If Sicknick was not murdered, as the DOJ finally conceded, why did a federal judge give Julian Khater an 80-month prison sentence for spritzing Sicknick with an over-the-counter pepper spray?
–Has there been an official inquiry into the subsequent suicide deaths of four USCP officers, and if not, why has the DOJ routinely blamed the J6ers for causing those deaths?
–Why was there no crime scene investigation in the likely homicide of Rosanne Boyland?
–Who chose to ignore the obvious video evidence of Boyland being suffocated as a result of a police action and to falsely blame her death on an amphetamine overdose?
–Who suppressed the Boyland autopsy report for 90 days and stonewalled her family at every turn?
–Why was Lila Morris, the Metropolitan P.D. officer caught on video repeatedly bashing the unconscious Boyland over the head with a tree branch, not even disciplined?
–Why was Metropolitan P.D. lieutenant Jason Bagshaw promoted despite having been caught on video bashing the defenseless Victoria White bloody?
–Why did the DOJ not interview the eyewitnesses to the shooting death of Ashli Babbitt?
–Why did the USCP coddle and promote Babbitt’s killer, Michael Byrd, despite a shooting that, according to use-of-force expert Stan Kephart, “violated not only the law but his oath”?
–Who ordered the “shock and awe” raids on the homes of hundreds of non-violent protesters and why?
–Why has the so-called “Scaffold Commander” not been arrested despite multiple clear images of his face?
–Why has the man who constructed the mock gallows on the Capitol grounds not been arrested despite multiple clear images of his face?
–Why did the USCP allow the gallows to stand unmolested on Capitol grounds for more than four hours before the crowds gathered?
–Why was Emanuel Jackson quickly set free despite having been caught on video swinging a baseball bat at police officers over a two-hour period?
–If there was no insurrection, as the DOJ conceded, why were the sentences given to the J6ers so much more severe than the $30–50 fines given to the protesters who physically obstructed the Kavanaugh hearings?

These are the simple questions, the ones off the top. I am sure readers will think of others I may have overlooked. To be sure, more probing questions need to be asked about the January 6 Select Committee report as well as the charging documents for the J6ers. Having read through much of this material, I am impressed by how casually — and routinely — our elected officials and federal jurists distort the facts to protect the party line. In short, they lie, and some have done so under oath. I am impressed, too, by the shamelessness of a DOJ that can boast of its success rate in securing convictions, knowing that the accused were allowed no change of venue and faced juries pulled from a pool 95 percent anti-Trump. This needs to change.

More questions need to be asked as well about the security failures at all levels on January 6. In his otherwise worthy book, Government Gangsters, Kash Patel more or less exonerates the Pentagon. He should not have. Incompetence explains much of what went wrong on January 6, but so does treason. Nearly 1,600 American citizens were arrested for exercising their First Amendment rights on January 6, and roughly half of them have been incarcerated. Save for the insurrectionists among them — if there were any — the rest deserve not just commutation of their sentences, but a full pardon. Many may deserve compensation. And all deserve the truth.

To learn more, see Jack Cashill’s newest book, Ashli: The Untold Story of the Women of January 6.

Read more …

…But Continues Case Against New York..

“..should require the public release of all the evidence so that New Yorkers finally know the truth: Governor Cuomo never sexually harassed anyone.”

Cuomo Accuser Drops Case Against The Former New York Governor (Turley)

A curious thing just happened in the sexual harassment lawsuit against former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo: accuser Charlotte Bennett just dropped her claims against Cuomo despite continuing with litigation against the state over the alleged conduct of Cuomo. While the state has its own obligations as an employer, it is odd that you would drop the claim against the alleged actor himself. That is like dropping your product liability claim against Tesla while suing the electric company for powering the car. A significant number of women alleged sexual harassment against the former governor. They previously gave evidence in criminal investigations and spoke to state and federal investigators. However, in 2022, Albany County District Attorney David Soares dropped a criminal complaint against Cuomo for lack of evidence. Later, five additional criminal cases were dropped.

He has been facing pending civil litigation over the allegations of sexual harassment for years. The state is reportedly paying Cuomo’s legal fees. The strange profile of the litigation with this withdrawal may reflect the strikingly different interests of the legal teams representing Cuomo versus the state. Bennett was the second of several former aides to accuse Cuomo of sexual harassment. She complained that Cuomo was harassing her with “invasive” demands of her medical records and pursuing testimony from friends. However, when you accuse someone of being a sexual harasser, such discovery is not just expected but often essential for the defense. The defense took a victory lap while responding to rumors of a settlement in the making with the state. It noted that the move came shortly before Bennett would appear for deposition:

“After falsely smearing Governor Cuomo for years, Ms. Bennett suddenly withdrew her federal lawsuit on the eve of her deposition to avoid having to admit under oath that her allegations were false and her claims had no merit. If New York State does give in to her public pressure campaign and settles, it will not be on the merits and should require the public release of all the evidence so that New Yorkers finally know the truth: Governor Cuomo never sexually harassed anyone.” The deposition was expected to be brutal, including questions raised by videotapes in which Bennett calls Cuomo “amazing” and “wonderful” to work with. The defense has also cited prior allegations against others that were later dropped. The settlement talks could amplify the different interests of the two legal teams.

The state team is answerable to Gov. Kathleen Hochul, who may have an interest in not only killing the case but also creating a record of a settlement over the allegations. Her office previously settled with the Biden Administration over federal claims. I previously expressed concern over the lack of fairness and due process for Cuomo in that case and how the settlement was being portrayed. The dropping of the case may undermine negotiations with the state unless they have reached an undisputed agreement. Between the settlement with the federal government and settlements with these accusers, Cuomo may be left without an adjudication on specific claims that he wants to clear his name. Such settlements create a stain of presumptive guilt for many. The only thing that is clear is that the case against Andrew Cuomo seems to get “curiouser and curiouser.”

Read more …

He appears to be successful. But from the MSM, crickets only.

Milei Admin. Posts Record Reductions in Deficit and Inflation Numbers (Turley)

Argentinian President Javier Milei has long been an irresistible target of the press and pundits. When he came into power with his famous “Afuera” (or Out!) platform to dramatically shrink government spending. Argentina was viewed as a basket case that was well past the red line for recovery. He was mocked as a clown for seeking to apply libertarian policies on the economy. Milei may have the last laugh. After only a year, his government has wiped out the deficit and reduced inflation from 25% to 2.4%. Argentina’s monthly inflation rate slowed to 2.4% in November, the lowest in over four years. Inflation had slowed to 2.7% in October. Instead of a disastrous deficit, the country now posts a fiscal surplus of approximately 0.4% of GDP.

For the media outlets, there is a begrudging recognition. The Associated Press reported the economic improvement by first detailing how “Milei’s lack of government experience, unkempt hairdo, sexual boasts and missionary-like zeal for his dead dog, the Rolling Stones and the free market didn’t inspire much confidence in a country with a history of failed economic reforms.” After discussing the unemployment and “brutal” measures, the article finally get to the statistics roughly half way through by noting that “signs have emerged that Argentina’s bizarre and long mismanaged economy is starting to look a little more normal. Monthly inflation has plummeted, bonds have rallied and the closely watched gap between the black market dollar and the official rate has shrunk as much as 44%. Argentina’s country-risk index, an influential measure of the risk of default, is at its lowest point in five years.”

Read more …

“Once Pam Bondi comes in as attorney general under the Trump administration, we then have a partner at the United States Department of Justice to look at this..”

House GOP Vows To Refer ActBlue Fundraising Probe To Incoming Trump DOJ (JTN)

House Administration Committee Chairman Brian Steil said he will refer findings from his ongoing probe into the progressive fundraising platform ActBlue to the incoming Trump Justice Department. Steil believes the new Attorney General Pam Bondi, if confirmed, will be more than willing to probe the Democratic fundraising powerhouse over allegations it failed to implement sufficient security measures on its platform to prevent illegal foreign monies from flowing into U.S. political campaigns. “Once Pam Bondi comes in as attorney general under the Trump administration, we then have a partner at the United States Department of Justice to look at this, to do the investigation into bad actors, and to hold anyone who is engaged in this activity accountable,” Steil told the Just the News, No Noise TV show on Thursday.

“The good news is President [Donald} Trump’s coming to office in just a few short weeks. We’re going to have an opportunity to move forward on the prosecutorial side, and then we in Congress have to continue this work, moving legislation forward.” Steil’s committee has probed ActBlue over lax security measures that may have allowed foreign entities to donate to U.S. political campaigns, which is illegal. In October, Steil and Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson, a fellow Republican, wrote to Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, FBI Director Christopher Wray and Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines about concerns that four U.S. adversaries may have donated through the platform. “We write to you to raise an urgent concern regarding potential illicit election funding by foreign actors,” the lawmakers wrote Yellen in a letter dated Thursday.

“CHA has been investigating claims that foreign actors, primarily from Iran, Russia, Venezuela, and China, may be using ActBlue to launder illicit money into U.S. political campaigns.” They also said: “Our investigation has indicated that these actors may be exploiting existing U.S. donors by making straw donations without their knowledge.” The lawmakers specifically demanded access to any Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs) related to money passing through the fundraising platform generated by any U.S. financial institution as part of their anti-money-laundering activities. ActBlue recently acknowledged to Congress that it has updated its donor verification policy to automatically reject donations that “use foreign prepaid/gift cards, domestic gift cards, are from high-risk/sanctioned countries, and have the highest level of risk as determined,” by its solution provider, Sift.

The change occurred just three days after Steil introduced the Secure Handling of Internet Electronic Donations (SHIELD) Act on Sept. 6 to ensure foreign money stayed out of online political fundraising. Before the change, Steil said, donations made with foreign gift cards were not automatically rejected by ActBlue before the change, Just the News reported. ActBlue has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing and says that it is fully cooperating with ongoing investigations. “Democratic and progressive campaigns have trusted ActBlue’s two-decade-long track record of innovation and dependability to deliver during big fundraising moments,” ActBlue said in a statement in June celebrating its 20th anniversary in business. Steil also argues the Justice Department does not appear to be interested in conducting an investigation into what his committee has uncovered so far. “If they were, they would have started about four years ago,” he said.

Read more …

“..the projects will have “no measurable influence on climate change.”

Offshore Wind Opponents From Deep Blue States Hope For Trump (JTN)

Shortly after taking office in 2021, President Joe Biden set a goal of developing 30 gigawatts of offshore wind by 2030. Along the coasts, grassroots, community-based organizations concerned about the impacts of offshore wind development sprang up to express their opposition to the plan. They say they found their concerns ignored and dismissed as the federal government pushed full-steam-ahead with Biden’s goals. President-elect Donald Trump stated repeatedly during his campaign that he would end Biden’s offshore wind vision. Now offshore wind opponents in Democratic strongholds of the East and West coasts, while they may not be fans of Trump, they’re hopeful the new administration will finally give them a seat at the table.

In February 2024, the first phase of Vineyard Wind, a 62-turbine project 15 miles south of Nantucket and Martha’s Vineyard became the first large-scale offshore wind project to deliver power to the grid. Amy DiSibio, board member for ACK For Whales, told Just the News that people on Nantucket had, prior to this year, been supportive of Biden’s offshore wind agenda. ACK for Whales is a nonpartisan nonprofit representing Nantucket community members who are concerned about the negative impacts of offshore wind development off the coast of the island. DiSibio said there are a lot of misperceptions about Nantucket. “People think this is an island filled with a bunch of rich people. It’s actually a very economically diverse community. People don’t recognize that, especially the year-round population, these people work two and three jobs to make ends meet. It’s very expensive living 30 miles out to sea,” DiSibio said.

She said about a year ago, people on the island started seeing giant offshore wind turbines covering their ocean views. Concerns were growing about impacts of the industry to the viewshed and marine wildlife, DiSibio said, but when a blade broke off one of the turbines in July and scattered shards of debris across New England shores, the tide of public opinion turned against the industry. “People are like, ‘Are you kidding?’ This is expected to happen on a regular basis. This is an environmental disaster. People are still picking up stuff on the beach. This is a small target in a big ocean. So imagine what’s still out there,” DiSibio said. While the impacts have hit the island hard, the election outcomes suggest Trump’s vows against offshore wind weren’t a selling point for the state or the island.

Massachusetts residents voted 61% in favor of Democratic candidate Kamala Harris, and in Nantucket nearly 67% of votes went for Harris. DiSibio said that as a 501(c)3, ACK for Whales is limited in what it can do, in terms of lobbying. She said that the organization will proceed now with what it’s been doing — educating the public and elected officials on the issue. She said they’ve got people in Congress who have been sympathetic to the issue, such as New Jersey Reps. Jeff Van Drew and Chris Smith, as well as Maryland Rep. Andy Harris in Maryland — all Republicans — who are listening.

“There are people in Congress who have concerns. They’ve got concerns around the environment, economic concerns to what this does to not just coastal communities, but how this will impact the whole state. Concerns around this means for rate payers, concerns around search and rescue, for the Coast Guard, national security. There are many, many questions that are out there,” DiSibio said. She’s hoping there will be more questions not only about the impacts, but also if they’re worth it. Environmental impact statements for offshore wind projects, which are required as part of the federal permitting process, note that the projects will have “no measurable influence on climate change.”

Read more …

“The government is slow, slow, slow — decades slow on adopting new ways of doing things, and there’s a lot of [other] carrier services that became legal in the ’70s that are doing things so much better..”

Trump Considers Privatizing US Postal Service (ZH)

Donald Trump is fired up about finally giving the money-losing US Postal Service its long-overdue shove into the private sector, according to three sources who talked to the Washington Post. Trump is said to have discussed the idea with Howard Lutnick, who’s co-chairing his transition team and who’s been tapped to serve as Commerce secretary in the new administration. He also held a meeting with various transition officials to exchange thoughts on privatization of the huge organization. Separately, the Department of Government Efficiency, led by Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, has held its own discussions about drastic action. Last month, USPS disclosed that it posted a net loss of $9.5 billion for the 2024 fiscal year — a loss that was 46% worse than the service’s $6.5 billion deficit in 2023.

The plunge came alongside a slight uptick in revenue enabled by the latest annual increase in postage rates, pursuant to the 2021 Delivering for America plan. That program was supposed to help the perennially-profitless behemoth “achieve financial sustainability and service excellence.” The service also has a crummy balance sheet, with nearly $80 billion in liabilities. After reviewing the numbers, Trump stated his opinion that the Postal Service shouldn’t be subsidized by the government, the Post’s sources said. Casey Mulligan, a University of Chicago economics professor who served on Trump’s Council of Economic Advisers, tells the Post it’s time for a major change: “The government is slow, slow, slow — decades slow on adopting new ways of doing things, and there’s a lot of [other] carrier services that became legal in the ’70s that are doing things so much better with increased volumes and reduced costs. We didn’t finish the job in the first term, but we should finish it now.”

The Postal Service is politically powerful — starting with its raw headcount: While you may not guess it given the long lines that typify a visit to a post office, USPS has a staggering 650,000 employees, who become very active whenever privatization gains momentum. It’s also popular among Americans — 72% view it favorably, compared just 21% who view it unfavorably, according to a 2024 Pew Research poll. Meanwhile, though a belief in small government is supposedly a GOP cornerstone, the postal service is particularly valued by people living in rural, Republican districts. Earlier this month, Missouri Republican Sen. Josh Hawley angrily confronted Postmaster General Louis DeJoy over a plan to save costs by slowing delivery for some mail, something that would affect rural areas more than urban ones. “I hate this plan and I’m going to do everything I can to kill it,” said Hawley in a Senate hearing.

In addition to having GOP control of the Senate and the House in the next legislature, Trump is positioned to fill three vacancies on the Postal Service’s 11-member board. (Biden has submitted nominees, but you can expect the Senate to ignore them through Jan 20.) Of the incumbents, three are Republicans, with two of them appointed by Trump in his first term. Even if privatization doesn’t happen, Trump’s mere threat of pursuing it could help drive changes to the organization. As the Lexington Institute’s Paul Steilder tells the Post…

“At the end of the day, the Postal Service is going to need money, it’s going to need assistance, or it’s going to have to come up with some radical, draconian measures to break even in the near term. That gives both the White House and Congress an awful lot of power and an awful lot of leeway here.” Sound good on paper…but, as evidenced by the “profit”-and-loss chart above, Congress has long shown a lack of urgency about seeing the USPS “break even in the near term.” Even with a president who’s fired about it — for now — we’re not convinced it will be any different this time.

Read more …

“The wording of the bill has many worried that this will be a centerpiece of a new era of anti-communist hysteria, similar to previous McCarthyist periods.”

Cold War Tactics With New Anti-Communism School Curriculum (Alan MacLeod)

Congress has just passed a new bill that will see the U.S. spend huge sums of money redesigning much of the public school system around the ideology of anti-communism. The “Crucial Communism Teaching Act” is now being read in the Senate, where it is all but certain to pass. The move comes amid growing public anger at the economic system and increased public support for socialism. The Crucial Communism Teaching Act, in its own words, is designed to teach children that “certain political ideologies, including communism and totalitarianism…conflict with the principles of freedom and democracy that are essential to the founding of the United States.” Although sponsored by Republicans, it enjoys widespread support from Democrats and is focused on China, Venezuela, Cuba and other targets of U.S. empire. The wording of the bill has many worried that this will be a centerpiece of a new era of anti-communist hysteria, similar to previous McCarthyist periods.

The curriculum will be designed by the controversial Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation and will ensure all American high school students “understand the dangers of communism and similar political ideologies” and “learn that communism has led to the deaths of over 100,000,000 victims worldwide.” It will also develop a series titled “Portraits in Patriotism,” that will expose students to individuals who are “victims of the political ideologies” in question. The 100 million figure originates with the notorious pseudoscience text, “The Black Book of Communism.” A collection of political essays, the book’s central claim is that 100 million people have perished as a result of the communist ideology. However, even many of its contributors and co-writers have distanced themselves from it, claiming that the lead author was “obsessed” with reaching the 100 million figure, to the point that he simply conjured millions of deaths from nowhere.

Its methodology was also universally panned, with many pointing out that the tens of millions of Soviet and Nazi losses during World War II were attributed to communist ideology. This means that both Adolf Hitler himself and many of his victims are counted towards the vastly overinflated figure. The book was condemned by Holocaust remembrance groups as whitewashing and even lionizing genocidal fascist groups as anti-communist heroes. The principal organization promoting the 100 million figure today is the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, which has shown a similar level of both anti-communist devotion and methodological rigor. The group, set up by the U.S. government in 1993, added all worldwide COVID-19 deaths to the victims of communism list, arguing that the coronavirus was a communist disease because it originated in China. It is these people who will be designing the new curriculum that will be taught in social studies, government, history, and economics classes across the country.

One of the central goals of the bill is also to “ensure that high school students in the United States understand that 1,500,000,000 people still suffer under communism.” This is a clear reference to China, a rapidly developing country that, in just two generations, has gone from one of the poorest on Earth to a global superpower, challenging and even surpassing the United States on many quality-of-life indicators. The bill goes on to detail how the school curriculum will “focus on ongoing human rights abuses by such regimes, such as the treatment of Uyghurs in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region” by the Chinese “regime” and its “aggression” towards “pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong,” and Taiwan, who it labels “a democratic friend of the United States.”

Read more …

 

 

 

 

 

 

Malhotra

 

 

Bone cancer

 

 

3d
https://twitter.com/i/status/1868136468335730729

 

 

Lynx

 

 

Fox

 

 

Bowhead

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Oct 102024
 


Vincent van Gogh Peasant burning weeds 1883

 

Chaos is Coming – John Rubino (USAW)
60 Minutes Under Fire For Deceptively Editing Kamala Harris Interview (ZH)
Harris Attempts To Blame Trump For FEMA Hurricane Relief Failures (MN)
US in Dangerous Hiatus Amid Biden’s Lame Duck Period – Jeffrey Sachs (Sp.)
Trump Is Making A Mistake That Could Cost Him The Presidency (Marsden)
Russian Victory Will Liberate Europe – Emmanuel Todd (RT)
EU Running Out Of Time On Ukraine – Orban (RT)
Refusal to Buy Russian Energy Endangers EU’s Economic Growth – Orban (Sp.)
What Is Russia Deciding For Terms To End The War In The Ukraine (Helmer)
Zelensky Cancels November ‘Peace Summit’ (RT)
Russia Could Seek War Reparations From Ukraine (RT)
US Global Economic Share Dips Below 15% For First Time (Sp.)
US Spending on Mideast Conflict Tops $22 Billion in One Year (Sp.)
Israel Seeks To Fix 2006 Failures, While Hezbollah Lies In Wait (Mehdi)
Israel’s Collective Punishment Turns the World Against It (DeMartino)
Iran ‘Fully Prepared’ For War – FM (RT)
US Navy Was At Scene Of Nord Stream Blasts – Media (RT)
US Antitrust Officials Consider Google Breakup As ‘Trustbusting Era’ May Return (ZH)
Crypto Exchange Sues US Market Regulator (RT)

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/i/status/1843706162509951236

JD RFK

DeSantis

Trump Elon MAGA
https://twitter.com/i/status/1843999824359919850
https://twitter.com/i/status/1844015811054477363

Tulsi
https://twitter.com/i/status/1843991681072566642

Doocy

60m
https://twitter.com/i/status/1843859310679601401

Megyn Day 1

Doral
https://twitter.com/i/status/1844088909078352250

Tampon Tim

 

 

 

 

“There’s no reason to protect speech that everybody agrees on..”

John Rubino is a long time fan of TAE. The idea he uses here of the “shrinking trust horizon” was first defined by Nicole Foss right here at TAE at least ten years ago.

Chaos is Coming – John Rubino (USAW)

Analyst and financial writer John Rubino has long warned of a massive financial crisis. With unstoppable wars in Ukraine and the Middle East, Rubino says one thing is for sure, “Chaos is coming.” Rubino explains, “This does not get fixed easily, and to the extent this gets fixed at all, this gets fixed via chaos. Prepare for a really interesting decade. This is going to be unlike anything we have seen in our lifetimes. Not since the Great Depression, nothing like this has happened.”

This all feeds into what Rubino calls the “shrinking trust horizon.” Rubino points out, “When everybody is lying to you, you reach a point where you only trust your city councilman, or your mayor and your local farmers. . . . So, you just don’t put any stock in what your doctor tells you. You stop taking the vaccinations they tell you to take. . . . You stop doing the . . . statins for high blood pressure and cholesterol. You stop doing that because you don’t trust those people anymore. . . . Starting with the “weapons of mass destruction,” which the government lied to us to get us into a multi-trillion dollar war in Iraq, it’s been one big lie after another.

In 2016, there was Trump/Russia collusion. . . . It turned out to be Hillary Clinton opposition research. With the CV19 pandemic, it was just lie, after lie, after lie. . . . Now, you have what is going on in North Carolina and Tennessee after Hurricane Helene. People are figuring out they are being lied to one issue at a time. . . . You’ve got a whole new set of people watching the government screw up and behave incompetently or corruptly, and they are learning they cannot trust the guys in charge anymore. So, the trust horizon is shrinking everywhere you look.”

There are so many parts of the economy that are quietly facing huge trouble and big losses. Nothing could start a total all-sector market crash faster than an attack by Israel on Iran’s nuclear sites. Rubino says, “There you go. That could be the thing that sets everything off. Bombing nuclear weapons facilities or a nuclear power plants is one of those things that has so many unintended consequences. Iran would have to respond to that in a serious way. It’s possible that China and Russia would step in on the side of Iran. . . . Then you get something much bigger. . . . I think the financial markets would respond to that.

Oil would go to $150 a barrel. That would crash the stock market. Then you get all the other dominos falling: commercial real estate, residential real estate, government bonds, derivatives and everything starts blowing up. That could be the catalyst for a market crash much bigger than 2008 and 2009. This would be something we have not seen since the Great Depression. We are not far from that. I think Trump said he thinks Israel should bomb Iran’s nuclear facility. . . . Biden is the demented figurehead for the neocons who want WWIII because they think they can win it. Chaos is definitely coming, but I am hoping it is survivable chaos, and I am not sure that it will be.”

Read more …

Did they think no-one would notice?

60 Minutes Under Fire For Deceptively Editing Kamala Harris Interview (ZH)

CBS has come under fire for deceptively editing Kamala Harris’ “60 Minutes” interview – replacing her word-salad answer from a pre-interview teaser with a completely different answer in the version that aired. When asked by host Bill Whitaker why it seemed like Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu wasn’t listening to the United States, Harris originally replied: “Well Bill, the work that we have done has resulted in a number of movements in that region by Israel that were very much prompted by, or a result of, many things, including our advocacy for what needs to happen in the region.” But in the version that aired, Harris’ answer was: “We are not going to stop pursuing what is necessary for the United States to be clear about where we stand on the need for this war to end.” Watch:

The Trump campaign has demanded that the network release the full interview. “On Sunday, 60 Minutes teased Kamala’s highly-anticipated sit-down interview with one of her worst word salads to date, which received significant criticism on social media,” said Karoline Leavitt, the Trump campaign’s national press secretary. “During the full interview on Monday evening, the word salad was deceptively edited to lessen Kamala’s idiotic response.” “Why did 60 Minutes choose not to air Kamala’s full word salad, and what else did they choose not to air?” she asked. “The American people deserve the full, unedited transcript from Kamala’s sit-down interview. We call upon 60 Minutes and CBS to release it.”

Trump also posted about it on Truth Social, writing “I’ve never seen this before, but the producers of 60 Minutes sliced and diced (“cut and pasted”) Lyin’ Kamala’s answers to questions, which were virtually incoherent, over and over again, some by as many as four times in a single sentence or thought…” Trump suggested that the network helping Harris may have been a “major Campaign Finance Violation,” and is a “stain on the reputation of 60 minutes that is not recoverable.” Trump also called for an investigation.

Several have called out the network over the propaganda. Investor Bill Ackman took to X, where he said: “And how could @60Minutes’ manipulation occur without the consent of @KamalaHarris? Let’s not forget she is the Vice President of the United States and she is being asked about our foreign policy in the Middle East and our relationship with the leader of our principal ally in the region. Thinking about this more, the only plausible explanation is that the Vice President herself and/or her administration found that her original answer, which implied that Israel’s actions in the region were a direct result of the Biden/Harris policy, would harm her campaign and would therefore need to be expurgated from the public record.

In order to execute such a violation of journalistic ethics, I would expect that CBS News CEO Wendy McMahon and possibly Shari Redstone herself would have had to approve the manipulated video. This is a story worthy of investigative journalism from real journalists. Where are they? Where are the whistleblowers? Or are all of them so ideologically compromised that they are prepared to sacrifice the truth and their integrity in an effort to elect their favored candidate?”

Read more …

“Trump hasn’t been in office since 2020, yet somehow a woeful federal government response to a hurricane that occurred in 2024 is his fault because he said some mean words.”

Harris Attempts To Blame Trump For FEMA Hurricane Relief Failures (MN)

Kamala Harris reverted to her default position when talking to the cackling hags on The View about FEMA’s disastrous hurricane relief efforts. She attempted to blame Donald Trump. “He puts himself before the needs of others. I fear that he really lacks empathy,” Harris said of Trump, also describing his criticism of her as “callousness.” Trump hasn’t been in office since 2020, yet somehow a woeful federal government response to a hurricane that occurred in 2024 is his fault because he said some mean words.

It’s pathetic. She repeated the same script on Colbert’s propaganda parade.

While Harris is on The View, Stern and Colbert, Trump is giving out free accommodation to first responders prepping for the massive storm heading toward Florida, yet he’s the selfish one with no empathy according to her. Harris also claimed that Trump is using the hurricane to play political games, yet she outright lied Monday in claiming that Florida governor Ron DeSantis wouldn’t take her calls. Let’s also not forget that while Americans were begging for help, Kamala was appearing on a sex podcast, laughing about tampons. Her response is always either laugh inanely, talk about her mother, or blame Trump. As we earlier highlighted, in the same appearance Harris admitted that she wouldn’t do anything different to pudding brain Biden given the opportunity.

Read more …

“I hope for rationality by the next government, because we need a completely new foreign policy, based on negotiation, mutual respect with other great powers, and peace..”

US in Dangerous Hiatus Amid Biden’s Lame Duck Period – Jeffrey Sachs (Sp.)

The United States is in a dangerous hiatus during outgoing President Joe Biden’s lame duck period, which several US allies are trying to exploit, Jeffrey Sachs, a world-renowned economist and president of the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network, told Sputnik. “President Biden is not really in full control anymore, both because of his waning mental status and his lame duck status,” Sachs said. “We are in a dangerous hiatus. [Israel’s Benjamin] Netanyahu is exploiting that hiatus, and [Volodymyr] Zelensky is trying to as well.” The United States backs Israel’s reckless behavior, talks openly about war with China, and continues a delusional policy in Ukraine that is bleeding that country while threatening to provoke more escalation, Sachs explained.

Zelensky has been pushing the Biden administration to allow Kiev to use US-supplied long-range missiles for deep strikes inside Russian territory, which Russia has warned could drag the United States directly into the conflict. To date, Biden has refrained from granting Ukraine its request. Meanwhile, in the Middle East, Netanyahu continues to expand his military operation in the region, shifting its focus from Gaza to Lebanon, which provoked Tehran to conduct its second aerial assault against Israel on Tuesday and left open the possibility for more military action by Iran. Sachs added that there is little chance Biden will steer the United States toward a “good direction” throughout the remainder of his term, but there’s also no guarantee that things will improve after either Republican candidate Donald Trump or Democratic candidate Kamala Harris comes into power on January 20.

“I hope for rationality by the next government, because we need a completely new foreign policy, based on negotiation, mutual respect with other great powers, and peace,” Sachs said. “The US doesn’t seem to have much sound thinking at the top right now.” Many other countries are trying to exploit US military power, including the United Kingdom, Poland, and the Baltic states, which are all urging reckless policies by the United States that could land it quickly in World War III, Sachs noted.

Read more …

Netanyahu is not Israel.

Trump Is Making A Mistake That Could Cost Him The Presidency (Marsden)

When Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky recently stood next to Trump in search of support against Russia, looking like a kid being chewed out by the school principal, Trump reminded him that “it takes two to tango.” But, when it comes to Israel, Trump only sees a soloist, minding its own business and inexplicably eliciting the wrath of its neighbors. And Trump just can’t seem to shut up about it. That isn’t what his base signed up for. On the anniversary of the events of October 7, 2023, when Hamas fighters from Gaza attacked Israeli civilians at an adjacent music festival following years of anti-Palestinian oppression, Trump had a variety of options. His base expects him mainly just to butt out and focus on problems that affect the daily lives of Americans – not all of whom live in Israel, contrary to perception.

Trump fancies himself such a peacemaker on Ukraine that he’s said he could resolve that conflict in a jiffy. He has no such ambition for the Middle East, apparently. Instead, he threw on a yarmulke and stood beside some giant tablets with Hebrew inscriptions, and riffed about how he would “remove the Jew haters” if elected in November, and how the “bond between the United States and Israel is strong and enduring” and that he would ensure that it was “closer than it ever was before.” Trump called on Israel to bomb Iran’s nuclear sites. “Isn’t that what you’re supposed to hit? I mean, it’s the biggest risk we have, nuclear weapons,” Trump said at a recent rally, ignoring the fact that nuclear weapons have a magical way of inciting respectful behavior all-around, in the same way that Trump’s beloved second amendment does in the US.

That remark alone places Trump in a more pro-Israel and pro-war posture than the Biden administration, which has explicitly objected to Israel attacking Iranian nuclear facilities. He’s also more aggressively pro-Israel than his Democratic opponent, Vice-President Kamala Harris, who at least routinely pays lip service to the need to protect Palestinian civilians in light of Israeli bombardments and glaringly dodged the question when asked whether Israel is even an ally. Who is Trump even trying to appeal to? The establishment? Why even bother? He has long lost their support on everything else, and this certainly isn’t going to bring them back aboard. Republican neocons? Same thing. Certainly not his “MAGA” base, whose position is non-interventionist and in favor of butting out of tiffs between countries on the other side of the planet. There was no shortage of them who noticed Trump’s October 7 pandering and announced on social media something along the lines of, “that’s it, I’m out.”

Maybe he’s trying to charm American voters, more generally? A new Pew Research survey published this month found that just 31% of them have confidence in Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, with 75% of them now concerned that US forces will somehow end up getting dragged into the melee. A YouGov poll has found that just 33% of Americans sympathize with Israel over Palestinians in the Gaza conflict. A Gallup poll from March also found that a majority of US voters oppose Israel’s actions in Gaza. And that was even before it kicked off similar action against Syria, Lebanon, and “Hezbollah pagers” exploding in the vicinity of civilians.

Read more …

“If, as I believe, the US is defeated, NATO will disintegrate and Europe will be left free..”

Russian Victory Will Liberate Europe – Emmanuel Todd (RT)

A Ukrainian defeat would represent a victory for Europe, French anthropologist Emmanuel Todd has claimed, in an interview with the Italian news outlet Corriere di Bologna published on Tuesday. According to Todd, who has stressed that he is not an explicit supporter of Moscow, if Russia were to lose in the Ukraine conflict, this would allow “European submission to the Americans to be prolonged for a century.” The leading intellectual has argued that Europe has effectively delegated the representation of the West to the US and has been paying the consequences ever since. He claims in the interview that nothing can be done to change this fact at the moment due to the ongoing Ukraine conflict, but suggests that its outcome will “decide the fate of Europe.” “If, as I believe, the US is defeated, NATO will disintegrate and Europe will be left free,” Todd told the outlet, noting that it is unlikely that Russia would be compelled to militarily attack Western Europe after establishing itself on the Dnieper River.

“Russia will have neither the means nor the desire to expand once the borders of pre-communist Russia are reconstituted. The Russophobic hysteria of the West, which fantasizes about the desire for Russian expansion in Europe, is simply ridiculous for a serious historian,” he said. A number of Western leaders have in recent months raised concerns that if Russia were allowed to defeat Ukraine it would eventually set its sights on other European and NATO countries. Moscow, however, has repeatedly stressed that it has no intention of attacking any other countries once it accomplishes its goals in Ukraine. Russian President Vladimir Putin has dismissed talk of a ‘Russian threat’ as “nonsense” being peddled by Western governments to scare the European population in order to “extract additional expenses” from them.

Read more …

“..he will not wait until the inauguration ceremony … in order to manage a peace” in Ukraine..”

EU Running Out Of Time On Ukraine – Orban (RT)

The European Union must act now to settle the Ukraine conflict or be consigned to irrelevance by the US, the Hungarian prime minister has warned. Viktor Orban predicted that if Republican nominee Donald Trump wins the US presidential election on November 5, he will start to deal with the crisis even before he takes office. The former US president has repeatedly claimed that if elected, he will persuade Kiev and Moscow to reach a diplomatic solution “within 24 hours.” His running mate, J.D. Vance, has suggested that Trump would likely freeze the conflict along the current frontline and offer Russia a guarantee that Ukraine will not join NATO. Speaking at a press conference in Strasbourg on Tuesday, Orban said that should Trump defeat his Democratic rival Kamala Harris, “he will not wait until the inauguration ceremony … in order to manage a peace” in Ukraine.

Trump “will act immediately, so we as European leaders don’t have any time to waste, because there would not be two or three months, as we usually have between the election and the inauguration of the new president,” Orban said. He urged European leaders to “react first intellectually, philosophically, then strategically, and then at the level of action as soon as possible.” The Hungarian prime minister also said he was glad that the EU leaders would convene for an informal summit in Budapest on November 7, describing the event as a good opportunity to discuss potential ways out of the Ukraine conflict. Orban also pointed to foreign policy differences between the current Democratic administration and the Trump team, and admitted that he is rooting for the GOP candidate. Unlike many EU member states, Hungary has long called for a diplomatic resolution to the conflict, and firmly opposed the delivery of weapons to Ukraine.

Last month, the Hungarian prime minister claimed that a growing number of EU nations were leaning toward abandoning their “pro-war” stance and “would like to join the peace camp.” According to the official, it was Hungary that “started this idea, because we stirred up a huge debate in Europe.” “Without the peace mission, such a debate would not have started and everyone would still only talk war,” Orban stressed. After Budapest took over the rotating presidency of the EU in June, the Hungarian prime minister visited Kiev, Moscow, Beijing and Washington as part of his “peace mission.” The initiative drew the ire of EU officials in Brussels at the time. According to Orban, “this war clearly has no solution on the battlefield… An agreement must be sought.” Earlier in September, he argued that Ukraine and Russia should first agree to a ceasefire before drafting a detailed peace plan.

After meeting with Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky late last month, Trump told reporters that he had not “changed from the standpoint that we both want to see this end and we both want to see a fair deal made.” He doubled down on his pledge to “get [the Ukraine conflict] resolved very quickly.” The last peace negotiations between Russia and Ukraine broke down in the spring of 2022, despite the sides pre-approving a proposed peace treaty. According to Russian President Vladimir Putin, as well as both Ukrainian and US officials, the West “ordered” Kiev to withdraw from the talks. He has also claimed that Kiev had initially agreed to transform Ukraine into a neutral country and restrict the size of its military. Moscow has since expressed its readiness to settle the conflict diplomatically on numerous occasions, insisting, however, on Kiev accepting the “territorial reality” of Russia controlling the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics as well as Kherson and Zaporozhye regions and Crimea.

Read more …

Very much.

Refusal to Buy Russian Energy Endangers EU’s Economic Growth – Orban (Sp.)

The fact that the European Union is refusing Russian natural gas has significantly endangered the bloc’s economic growth, forcing it to focus on its own energy infrastructure, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban said on Wednesday. He added that this move spurred on an increase of energy prices. “The EU productivity is growing at slower pace of our competitors, and our share of global trade is going down. EU businesses are paying two to three times more in energy prices than in the United States, and this is four to five times when it comes to natural gas. Moving away from Russian energy has endangered EU GDP growth and we now need to focus on energy support and building infrastructure for liquefied natural gas [LNG],” Orban said at the plenary session of the European Parliament.

The West stepped up sanctions pressure on Russia after the start of the special military operation in Ukraine in 2022. Russian President Vladimir Putin said that the West’s long-term strategy of containing Russia was hurting the global economy instead. In June, the EU approved the 14th sanctions package against Russia. For the first time it is targeting gas, banning re-exports of Russian LNG in EU waters and prohibiting new investments and services in LNG production projects in Russia.

Read more …

“..the terms of Istanbul-II for the politicians to draft and sign must follow the terms of armistice, unconditional surrender and disarmament to be dictated by the generals.”

What Is Russia Deciding For Terms To End The War In The Ukraine (Helmer)

The Russian history of end-of-war negotiations for the capitulation of Germany and for the World War II peace settlement requires it to be understood now: it was the Red Army’s defeat of the enemy on the battlefield all the way to Berlin which preceded and which was the precondition for the paper promises and pacts offered to Moscow by those allies whom Joseph Stalin understood to be permanent enemies of Russia — the United States, United Kingdom, and France. Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has just spelled this out in an especially timed essay published on October 2. Those lessons are being repeated now because they apply with equal force to the end-of-war negotiations with the US in the process nicknamed Istanbul-II. For Russian decision-makers in Moscow, and for the Russian people across the country, there can be no long-term security for the country without the military defeat of the enemy on the Ukrainian battlefield, capitulation of the Kiev regime, and withdrawal from Ukrainian territory of its US and NATO allies. This is first of all.

The political “guarantees”, “permanent neutrality” of the Ukraine, and treaty promises for the removal of foreign bases, forces, and weapons to continue war against Russia – terms spelled out in the pact of March 2022 known as Istanbul-I — come second. This is because the terms are unreliable and unenforceable, no matter what president of the US is elected next month and promises the day after — unless and until the Russian military has won the unconditional surrender of its enemies, and secured the battlefield against revival of the war in future. This battlefield security extends from the new Russian western border to the old Ukrainian borders with Poland, Hungary, Romania and Moldova. Which must come first now — war or politics?

The Russian answers to this question being debated in Moscow today are turning the old German theory of war and the state upside down, reversing the meaning of the well-known maxim of Carl von Clausewitz, “war is a continuation of politics by other means.” In Europe today — the Russian General Staff and Security Council insist — politics is the continuation of war by other means. Accordingly, the terms of Istanbul-II for the politicians to draft and sign must follow the terms of armistice, unconditional surrender and disarmament to be dictated by the generals.

Read more …

“Peace summit”, “victory plan”, f•ck off. Your people are dying.

Zelensky Cancels November ‘Peace Summit’ (RT)

Ukraine is no longer planning to hold a second peace conference on ending hostilities with Russia, a senior aide to Vladimir Zelensky has said. The meeting had been scheduled for November. Zelensky held an ambitiously-named ‘peace summit’ in June at the Swiss resort of Luzerne, where he sought support for his ‘peace formula’ – a ten-point wishlist that Moscow had rejected as delusional. The event, to which Russia was not invited, was widely seen as a failure. ”The Second Peace Summit will not take place in November,” senior presidential aide Darya Zarivna told the media on Tuesday. According to Zarivna, work is continuing on preparations for such a meeting, with “thematic conferences” dedicated to each point so that everything will be ready for an eventual conference. The last of those thematic conferences, dealing with humanitarian concerns, should take place in Canada at the end of October, Zarivna said.

During his visit to the US last month, Zelensky said he presented a “victory plan” to President Joe Biden and both presidential candidates in the upcoming election, Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump. While the exact details have not been made public, the five points leaked to the media amount to the West ramping up financial and economic aid to Kiev, admitting Ukraine to NATO and the EU, and allowing long-range missile strikes into Russian territory. Moscow has described the last point as direct participation of the US and its allies in the conflict, which would require an adequate response. Russia has since updated its nuclear doctrine accordingly.

On Tuesday, the White House announced that Biden would not meet Zelensky in Germany as previously scheduled, since he has canceled all of his travel plans due to Hurricane Milton impacting Florida. According to Ukrainian media, Zelensky and Biden were supposed to discuss the ‘victory plan’ this coming Saturday. Moscow has ruled out participation in Zelensky’s conferences, dismissing any discussion of the purported formula as futile and pointless. Russian President Vladimir Putin laid out a set of terms for a ceasefire with Ukraine in June, which included “denazification” and a legally binding rejection of membership in NATO.

Read more …

”Everything… is accounted for in a database for damage incurred to the economy, businesses and individuals..”

Russia Could Seek War Reparations From Ukraine (RT)

Russian officials are keeping track of damage caused by Ukrainian military actions, so that Moscow has accurate figures for potential reparation claims, a senior diplomat has said. Rodion Miroshnik, who is leading Moscow’s special mission to investigate alleged Ukrainian war crimes, discussed this aspect of the conflict with Izvestia newspaper on Wednesday. Much of this work is done on a regional level, but the data collection is coordinated by the central government, he explained. ”Everything… is accounted for in a database for damage incurred to the economy, businesses and individuals,” Miroshnik said. ”Much depends on the battlefield,” he added. “As we progress, an opportunity will arise to formulate our demands regarding those who committed crimes and to discuss realistic mechanisms for damage compensation.”

In February, Oleg Ustenko, who advises Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky on economic issues, estimated the total damages that the country would seek from Russia at $1 trillion. Last year, Prime Minister Denis Shmigal put the figure of prospective reparations at $750 billion, saying that “confiscated accounts of Russia and Russian oligarchs should be the key source.” In May, the US created national financial mechanisms, which can be used to finance Kiev now and to fund its eventual recovery using confiscated Russian assets. Western nations seized some $300 billion of Russian sovereign assets after the outbreak of hostilities in February 2022. Brussels has applied a windfall tax on profits generated by those funds to be spent on Kiev’s needs. Work is underway to create a $50 billion loan against future profits, which would then be transferred to Ukraine.

Russia has denounced those actions as theft of its property. Kiev wants the entire amount transferred to the country. Izvestia cited several estimates by Russian regions in relation to damage that could be claimed from Ukraine, ranging in value from roughly $200 million in the border Belgorod Region to $145 billion in Crimea. This was the biggest figure, set out in June by Vladimir Konstantinov, the parliament speaker of the former Ukrainian region. It included damages relating to Kiev’s economic blockade of the Crimean peninsula. The Ukrainian government cut water and power supplies to Crimea following a decision by its people to join Russia and reject the government that was installed in Kiev after the US-backed armed coup in 2014.

Read more …

“..a cumulative decline of 0.58% under Biden to 14.76%..”

US Global Economic Share Dips Below 15% For First Time (Sp.)

The US share of the global economy has tanked below 15% during Joe Biden’s presidency. By the end of his term, it is projected to hit a record low of 14.76%, according to Sputnik calculations based on data from the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. In 1990, the US accounted for 20.16% of the global economy, measured by purchasing power parity (PPP). That share peaked at 21.01% in 1999, with an economic output of $9.6 trillion, compared to a global output of $45.85 trillion. However, the US portion has steadily declined since, with the sharpest drop occurring between 2006 and 2008, when it fell by 0.6% annually. The US share temporarily increased during Barack Obama’s second term, reaching 16.26% in 2014 and 2015, but failed in sustaining the momentum.

By the end of Obama’s presidency, it fell to 16.04%. Subsequently, the US share declined by another 0.7% under Donald Trump. In Biden’s second year, the US share slipped below 15%, reaching 14.82% by the end of 2023. IMF estimates predict the trend will continue, with the US share falling by another 0.06% by the end of 2024, resulting in a cumulative decline of 0.58% under Biden to 14.76%. Meanwhile, China’s share of the global economy has surged to 18.76%, while Japan’s share has dropped by 4.33% over the past 33 years.

Read more …

“..it would take about $20 billion to end homelessness in the United States, or about $25 billion to end hunger in the country..”

US Spending on Mideast Conflict Tops $22 Billion in One Year (Sp.)

The Biden administration began the emergency supply of weapons and ammunition to Tel Aviv immediately after the start of the Israel-Hamas War a year ago, further ramping up its involvement in the conflict by deploying carrier battlegroups, aircraft squadrons, air defenses and boots on the ground at bases across the Middle East. The United States has spent $22.76 billion on the conflict in the Middle East between last October and now, $17.9 billion of this for security assistance to Israel, and $4.86 billion on beefed up US deployments throughout the region, including for the flagging campaign against the Houthis, a new report by Brown University’s Cost of War project has revealed. The university says its estimates – accounting for the period from October 7, 2023 through September 30, 2024, are “conservative,” and do “not include any other economic costs” associated with the crisis, such as heightened costs to global shipping resulting from the Houthis’ partial blockade of the Red Sea to Israel-linked maritime traffic.

The report says US weapons deliveries to Israel have included some 57,000 artillery shells, 36,000 rounds of ammunition for cannons, 20,000 M4A1 rifles, nearly 14,000 anti-tank missiles (though Israel’s Hamas, Hezbollah and Houthi adversaries possess no tanks), and 8,700 MK 82 500 pound bombs. Other assistance included $4 billion to replenish Israel’s Iron Dome and David’s Sling air and missile defense systems, $1.2 billion for the Iron Beam laser air defense system, still in development, and $4.4 billion to replenish US armories emptied by the emergency deliveries to Tel Aviv. US aid also included 4,127,000 kg of JP-8 jet fuel, 14,100 MK 84 unguided 2,000 bombs, 3,000 Joint Direct Attack Munition dumb-to-smart bomb conversion kits, 3,000 Hellfire missiles, 2,600 250-pound GBU-39 Small Diameter Bombs, 1,800 M141 bunker buster bombs, 3,500 night vision devices, 200 Switchblade drones, 100+ Skydio X drones, and 75 Joint Light Tactical Vehicles.

Brown’s report noted that the $17.9 billion in direct arms aid to Israel over the past year is “substantially more than in any other year since the US began granting military aid” to the country in 1959. Before 2023-2024, an average year’s-worth of US assistance amounted to approximately $3.3 billion, with total aid between 1946 and early 2024 topping $300 billion, adjusted for inflation. The study also broke down US expenditures related to the Pentagon’s beefed up footprint in the Middle East amid the Gaza conflict, including a $2.4 billion supplemental, another $2.4 billion for costs associated with operating carrier strike groups and other missions against the Houthis, and $50-$70 million for additional combat pay.

Washington’s largesse fueling the conflict in the Middle East contrasts sharply with its economic neoliberalism-driven penny-pinching on social programs at home, with aid organizations calculating, for example, that it would take about $20 billion to end homelessness in the United States, or about $25 billion to end hunger in the country. The crisis in the Middle East is just one of three major security emergencies the US has been actively engaged in over the past year, with others including the ongoing NATO-fueled proxy war against Russia in Ukraine, and the spat with Beijing in Asia amid Washington’s efforts to hem China in along its coasts and prevent the peaceful, negotiated reunification of Taiwan with the People’s Republic.

The Kiel Institute for the World Economy estimates that the United States has sent over $82 billion-worth of support to Ukraine over the past two-and-a-half years, including $56.6 billion in military assistance. Former President Donald Trump believes that figure is much higher, estimating that the actual number is closer to $300 billion. “So, we’re into almost $300 billion for Ukraine, and yet they’re offering people $750 for immediate aid for the worst hurricane than anybody has ever seen,” Trump said in an interview with Fox News on Monday, referring to federal assistance to the victims of Hurricane Helene, which laid a path of flooding and destruction across the US southeast in late September, killing at least 200 people and causing over $38 billion in damage.

Read more …

“Anyone dumb enough to push a tank column through Wadi Saluki should not be an armored brigade commander but a cook..”

Israel Seeks To Fix 2006 Failures, While Hezbollah Lies In Wait (Mehdi)

[..] in the wake of the assassinations of Nasrallah and other top Hezbollah commanders and strategists, the occupation state has ramped up its offensive in Lebanon, with devastating consequences. Targeted airstrikes on Hezbollah’s communication infrastructure and leadership compounds have claimed the lives of over 37 Hezbollah fighters, but it is the civilian casualties that have been most staggering. More than 2,000 Lebanese civilians, including women and children, have been killed – almost double the death toll of 2006 – and over 10,000 injured in less than two weeks, leading international organizations to consider these actions potential war crimes. In 2006, during 34 days of Israel’s aggressions, the total death toll was 1,300. The Israeli bombardment of southern Lebanon and Beirut today mirrors the devastation 18 years ago when villages in the Bekaa Valley and the southern suburbs of Beirut were similarly struck.

Despite the enormous setbacks, Hezbollah has continued to launch rocket attacks deep into Israeli territory, demonstrating a resilience that reflects its strategic gains from the 2006 war. In the last few days, the Lebanese resistance appears to have turned the tide further, striking key Israeli port city Haifa with over 200 projectiles in a historically unprecedented attack on the city and its environs. One of the key lessons Tel Aviv appears to have absorbed from its 2006 military campaign is to apply an excessive use of force, regardless of any accompanying international backlash. CSIS report author Daniel Byman points out that Israel’s war on Gaza and its recent assaults on Lebanon “have clearly shown that Israel’s doctrine of using force has also become more destructive.”

In 2008, the head of the Israeli military’s Northern Command, Major General Gadi Eisenkot, warned after the 2006 war that next time, Israel would destroy “every village from which it fires” and make Hezbollah pay a heavy domestic price for its actions. The CSIS report notes that Israel is less concerned about damaging its international reputation than it was in 2006: “After the deaths of tens of thousands of civilians in Gaza, killing more in Lebanon is not likely to make it worse.” Despite its overwhelming firepower, Israel’s ground invasion during the 2006 war exposed significant tactical failures. After two weeks of heavy airstrikes, Israel launched “Operation Change of Direction,” deploying thousands of soldiers into southern Lebanon to eliminate Hezbollah fighters.

However, the ground incursion proved disastrous for the Israeli army. The Lebanese resistance, deeply entrenched in underground tunnels and well-versed in guerrilla warfare, inflicted heavy losses on Israeli forces, most notably in the Saluki Valley ambush, where Hezbollah blocked the southern end of a column of tanks, then fired anti-tank missiles to devastate Israeli units who were helpless without artillery and infantry support. “Anyone dumb enough to push a tank column through Wadi Saluki should not be an armored brigade commander but a cook,” reflected Timur Goksel, a Turkish diplomat, military officer, and former spokesman for the UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL).

Read more …

“..the enemy at this point, honestly, not just of Lebanon, or of Palestine, or Syria, or Iran. Israel is becoming an enemy of humanity.”

Israel’s Collective Punishment Turns the World Against It (DeMartino)

In 2008, Israel Defense Forces colonel Gabriel Siboni described what would be named the Dahiyeh doctrine. ”In Lebanon, attacks should both aim at [Hezbollah’s] military capabilities and should target economic interests and the centers of civilian power that support the organization… [Israel] will have to respond disproportionately,” he wrote. The collective punishment carried out by the state of Israel on the people of Gaza, the West Bank, and Lebanon has turned the world against it and could be its undoing. The repercussions of Israel’s indiscriminate and murderous campaign can be seen both locally and across the globe. “There will be no electricity, no food, no water, no fuel, everything is closed [in Gaza]. We are fighting human animals and we are acting accordingly,” Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant said days after the October 7 attack. Inside Gaza, Hamas was facing a popularity crisis, with only 20% of the population supporting them before October 7 according to James Zogby of the Arab-American Institute.

By launching Operation Al-Aqsa Flood, Hamas hoped to change its image and increase its popularity. “Hamas sought to use October 7th as an attempt to reconfigure its image as an authoritarian militant group into a fighting force protecting Palestinians against Israeli aggression. Hamas believed that by framing October 7th as a revolutionary act of resistance against Israel, Palestinians would see them as protectors of their struggle and see Hamas in a favorable light,” wrote Abdelhalim Abdelrahman in an article for antiwar.com on the anniversary of Operation Al-Aqsa Flood. A recent poll by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research found that 56% of Palestinians in Gaza say that armed resistance is “the best means of achieving Palestinian goals in ending the occupation and building an independent state,” increasing from 50% in September 2023. The same trend is happening in Lebanon with Hezbollah, the editor of The Cradle told Sputnik’s Fault Lines on Tuesday.

“What has been happening in Lebanon I think is actually creating more support for Hezbollah because even among the people who dislike the existence of the Lebanese resistance, they dislike Israel more,” he argued. “You’re not all of a sudden gonna start taking the side of the people who are bombing your city, your capital, your country. So indiscriminately cutting off the land route to Syria, threatening to start bombing from the sea, as well as from the air… this is the Dahiyeh doctrine.” “They were hoping that at some point Palestinians would be like enough is enough, we are going to turn against Hamas, and that never happened. And, it’s never gonna happen here in Lebanon as well,” Carrillo continued. “Even if they spark some sort of color revolution, it’s gonna fizzle out because Israel, at the end of the day, is the enemy at this point, honestly, not just of Lebanon, or of Palestine, or Syria, or Iran. Israel is becoming an enemy of humanity.” In the region, Israel’s actions have erased decades of work that its government and the US put into normalizing relations with its neighbors.

“[October 7] sidelined what appeared to be an upcoming, soon to be realized, entente between Saudi Arabia and Israel. That would have sidelined… the notion of Palestinian self-determination. But, with October 7, the opposite is in play with the Saudi leadership now contending that no normalization with Israel is possible unless the question of Palestinian self-determination and statehood is on the table,” Dr. Gerald Horne, a historian that holds the John J. and Rebecca Moores Chair of History and African American Studies at the University of Houston told Sputnik’s The Critical Hour. “You can also say that October 7, 2023, weakened the Abraham Accords. Those are the accords initiated by US President, Mr. Trump, which called for normalizing of relations between Morocco and Bahrain and Sudan,” continued Horne. “We now know that with Sudan’s leadership inking those ill-fated accords, it was greeted with hostility on the streets of Khartoum, leading to what is now [a] de-facto civil war.” Across the globe, Israel is finding that countries that were previously satisfied with the status quo are no longer supportive of the zionist state.

Read more …

“We are ready for any scenario, the armed forces are fully prepared,” Araghchi stressed. He, however, noted that Iran’s policy is to stop the hostilities and reach an “acceptable ceasefire.”

Iran ‘Fully Prepared’ For War – FM (RT)

Iran does not want an escalation of tensions in the Middle East and supports efforts for a ceasefire but is fully prepared for war, the country’s foreign minister, Seyed Abbas Araghchi, has stated. The Islamic Republic launched a barrage of missiles at Israel last Tuesday, striking a number of military bases in what Tehran said was a response to recent Israeli killings of Hamas and Hezbollah leaders. Israel vowed a “serious and significant” strike in reprisal. “We have stated many times that Iran does not want to increase tension, although we are not afraid of war, we are fully prepared…” Araghchi told reporters on Tuesday in Tehran on the sidelines of the ‘Al-Aqsa Storm; The Beginning of Nasrallah’ conference. “We are ready for any scenario, the armed forces are fully prepared,” Araghchi stressed. He, however, noted that Iran’s policy is to stop the hostilities and reach an “acceptable ceasefire.”

According to Mehr News, the top diplomat said at the conference on Tuesday that Israel should not test Tehran’s will. He warned that any attack on Iran would be met with a crushing response. The Iranian military has prepared “at least ten” scenarios for a possible Israeli strike, according to media reports on Monday. The Iranian parliament is reportedly drafting a so-called ‘resistance pact’ to bolster regional security and counter potential external threats, particularly from the US and Israel. According to the Tehran Times, citing the text of the proposal, all member countries will be required to provide comprehensive support – including military, economic, and political assistance – should any member come under attack from Israel or its allies.

Monday marked the one-year anniversary of the raid into southern Israel by Hamas, which claimed some 1,200 lives. The Jewish State responded by declaring war on the Gaza-based militant group and imposing a near-total siege on the enclave. Nearly 42,000 Palestinians have been killed, most of them women and children, according to Gaza’s Health Ministry. Tensions have also risen between Israel and neighboring Muslim countries, which have sided with the Palestinians. Earlier this month, Israel launched a ground operation in Lebanon and has targeted the leadership of the Hezbollah organization.

Read more …

We know.

US Navy Was At Scene Of Nord Stream Blasts – Media (RT)

US Navy vessels were operating at the scene shortly before the explosions that crippled the Nord Stream 1 and 2 pipelines in the Baltic Sea, Danish newspaper Politiken has reported, citing a local harbormaster. The crucial energy infrastructure, built to deliver Russian gas to Germany and the rest of Europe, was ruptured by underwater blasts in September 2022. The piece by Politiken was published on September 26 but largely went unnoticed. However, it resurfaced on X (formerly Twitter) on Tuesday, with claims being reposted by Glenn Greenwald and other prominent independent journalists. According to the article, American warships had been operating in the area east of the Danish island of Bornholm with their transponders switched off. The paper spoke to John Anker Nielsen, the harbormaster at the Danish port of Christianso, located near Bornholm.

He said he had decided to share details of the events of September 2022, despite initially being “not allowed to say a thing” about them. According to Nielsen, he launched a rescue operation in the area four or five days before the Nord Stream blasts after spotting ships with their transponders switched off and assuming there was an emergency. However, when Danish rescuers approached the scene, they saw that the vessels in question were US Navy ships, Nielsen said. The Naval Command then told Nielsen and his colleagues to turn back, the harbormaster recalled. Politiken said Nielsen does not believe Western media claims that Nord Stream was sabotaged by Ukraine, supposedly using a yacht, named Andromeda, and a small crew to carry out the sophisticated attack. According to the paper, the harbormaster instead has “some faith” in the version of events provided by legendary investigative journalist Seymour Hersh.

In early February 2023, Hersh authored a report claiming that US President Joe Biden had given the order to destroy Nord Stream. According to an informed source who talked to the Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist, the explosives that were detonated on September 26, 2022 had been planted at the pipelines during the previous June by US Navy divers under the cover of a NATO exercise called ‘Baltops 22’. The White House denied the report, calling it “utterly false and complete fiction.” Senior Russian officials, including President Vladimir Putin, have previously pointed the finger at the US as the possible culprit behind the Nord Stream explosions. They have argued that Washington had the technical means to carry out the operation and stood to gain the most, considering that the attack disrupted Russian energy supplies to the EU and forced a shift to more expensive US-supplied liquefied natural gas.

Read more …

“Google will battle this in the courts for years.”

US Antitrust Officials Consider Google Breakup As ‘Trustbusting Era’ May Return (ZH)

The US Department of Justice and a group of states submitted a document detailing a proposed remedy framework in the ongoing antitrust case against big tech giant Google. The case centers around Google’s violations of Section 2 of the Sherman Act for illegally maintaining monopolies, including general search services and text advertising. On Aug. 5, US District Judge Amit Mehta, Washington, DC, ruled that Google violated antitrust law by spending billions of dollars to create an illegal monopoly as the world’s default search engine on smartphones, computers, and tablets. The ruling paved the way for antitrust enforcers to submit a 32-page document on Tuesday that explained the potential remedies for the judge to consider as the case moves into the remedy phase.

On page 9 of the remedy framework document, the DoJ specifies the government has a “full range of tools previously identified such as structural and additional behavioral remedies as well as term extensions” to restore competition in the marketplace that would modify Google’s business from using products such as its Chrome browser or Android operating system to create advantages for the big tech firm’s search engine. “Fully remedying these harms requires not only ending Google’s control of distribution today, but also ensuring Google cannot control the distribution of tomorrow,” DoJ said. Antitrust enforcers said Google colluded with other big tech companies to make its search engine the default option on devices.

Google quickly responded in a blog post titled “DOJ’s radical and sweeping proposals risk hurting consumers, businesses, and developers” to the remedy framework document on Tuesday evening. Google Vice President of Regulatory Affairs Lee-Anne Mulholland wrote in the post that the DoJ’s remedy framework is “radical” and could have “negative unintended consequences for American innovation and America’s consumers.” Google’s market capitalization (as of Tuesday’s close) of just a little over $2 trillion makes it the world’s fourth-largest company. Mounting legal pressure sent shares down around 1% in premarket trading in New York. Antitrust pressure has been building, with multiple cases being pushed against Google. It also faces the threat of breakup in a separate government lawsuit centered around its online advertising business.

Across the Atlantic, European Union watchdogs have voiced similar concerns with antitrust enforcers in the US about the need to break up Google’s businesses. EU competition chief Margrethe Vestager recently said that “divestiture is the only way” to settle these worries with the big tech firm. Daniel Ives, managing director and senior equity analyst at Wedbush Securities, commented on Google’s potential breakup, indicating it’s “unlikely at this point despite the antitrust swirls,” adding, “Google will battle this in the courts for years.” There has been a four-decade lull in the government breaking up major companies. The last major one came with the 1984 breakup of AT&T. Before that, the 20th century was considered the ‘trustbusting era’, with Standard Oil, American Tobacco, and a railroad trust known as Northern Securities forced to spit up by the government.

Read more …

The SEC was never fit for the task.

Crypto Exchange Sues US Market Regulator (RT)

The cryptocurrency exchange Crypto.com has filed a lawsuit against the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) for what it believes to be an overstepping of legal boundaries in regulating the crypto industry. The decision by Crypto.com to sue the SEC came after it received a so-called Wells Notice from the regulator, according to a statement issued on the company’s website on Tuesday. The company claims to be seeking to protect the future of the industry. A Wells Notice is a formal declaration that the regulator intends to recommend an enforcement action against it. According to Reuters, retail trading platform Robinhood’s crypto business, major US crypto exchange Coinbase, and NFT marketplace OpenSea are among the companies in the digital assets industry that have received such notices.

The SEC’s “unauthorized and unjust” actions towards the crypto industry have left no other choice than to file a suit, Singapore-based Crypto.com stated. “Our lawsuit contends that the SEC has unilaterally expanded its jurisdiction beyond statutory limits and separately that the SEC has established an unlawful rule that trades in nearly all crypto assets are securities transactions no matter how they are sold…” “We seek to stop the SEC’s illegal actions in excess of their authority and in violation of federal law in their tracks,” the statement reads. Separately, the company filed a petition with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) and the SEC, seeking a joint interpretation to confirm that certain cryptocurrency derivative products are solely regulated by the CFTC.

The crypto industry has faced a US regulatory crackdown since the 2022 collapse of FTX. The Bahamas-based exchange was exposed as a Ponzi scheme used to siphon investor funds into the pockets of executives and, via donations, to politicians. Crypto companies have since accused the SEC of overreach and of violating its jurisdiction, while the agency has claimed that it has the authority to regulate crypto under existing laws. The SEC’s cryptocurrency-related actions increased by more than 50% in 2023 over the previous year, according to the US law firm Troutman Pepper. The firms expects this trend to continue.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Dr. Phil

 

 

Bigtree

 

 

Trump Scots

 

 

Eva

 

 

“Where were you”

 

 

Dog cam
https://twitter.com/i/status/1844067125335556209

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Oct 052024
 


Francisco Goya Witches’ Sabbath 1797-98

 

Musk Says FEMA ‘Blocking’ Delivery Of More Starlinks In Devastated Areas (JTN)
The Regime Wants Appalachia To Suffer (Bishop)
October Surprise (Kunstler)
The Reprehensible Audacity Of FEMA Being Broke (QTR)
Elon Musk to Attend Trump Rally at Site of Attempted Assassination (ET)
Donald Trump Takes His Biggest Lead Yet In Daily Mail Election Model (DM)
Walz Makes the Case for the Most Anti-Free Speech Ticket in History (Turley)
There Is Only One Important Decision Waiting to be Made (Paul Craig Roberts)
Ukraine’s Mobilization Campaign ‘Gets Dirty’ – The Times (RT)
They lie. They cheat. They steal. They bomb. And they spin (Pepe Escobar)
Biden on Israel Response to Iranian Attack: ‘That’s Between Me and Them’ (Sp.)
US, UK Digging Their Grave In Catastrophic War In The Middle East (SCF)
US, Israel Reportedly Downplay Level of Destruction by Iran (Sp.)
US Secret Service Struggling To Keep Staff – NYT (RT)
New NATO Arctic Group is No Match for Russo-Chinese Cooperation (Sp.)

 

 

 

 

Alina: It’s called desperation

 

 

 

 

 

 


https://twitter.com/i/status/1841955852825063617

 

 

OMG

Line in the Sand

 

 

Assange

 

 

Presler

 

 

 

 

$42 billion, zero people connected. And then this.

Musk Says FEMA ‘Blocking’ Delivery Of More Starlinks In Devastated Areas (JTN)

Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk accused the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) of blocking the delivery of additional Starlink units to help residents in areas devastated by Hurricane Helene to stay connected to the Internet. “FEMA is not merely failing to adequately help people in trouble, but is actively blocking citizens who try to help!” Musk wrote Friday in a post on X which included the following note he received from a SpaceX engineer on the ground in North Carolina. “Hey Elon, update here on site of Asheville, NC. We have powered up two large operating bases for choppers to deliver goods into hands. We’ve deployed 300+ starlinks and outpour is it has saved many lives,” the engineer wrote.

“The big issue is FEMA is actively blocking shipments and seizing goods and services locally and locking them away to state they are their own. It’s very real and scary how much they have taken control to stop people helping. We are blocked now on the shipments of new starlinks coming in until we get an escort from the fire dept. but that may not be enough,” he added.

A text message Musk revealed in a second post said that the Federal Aviation Administration is throttling private flights in the North Carolina airspace which has made it harder to keep delivering more Starlink units and other emergency supplies. Former first daughter Ivanka Trump handed out Starlinks, hot meals and critical supplies in North Carolina on Wednesday. According to the texts from Musk’s team on the ground, FEMA showed up there and “starting blocking us.” The text message is consistent with comments made by Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg regarding “temporary flight restrictions” that have been imposed on private flights and drones over areas damaged by the storm.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1841946537170972786

Read more …

“The counties most impacted by the storm disproportionately vote in ways the current regime does not like.”

The Regime Wants Appalachia To Suffer (Bishop)

Americans from Florida to North Carolina continue to deal with the devastating consequences of Hurricane Helene, now the deadliest hurricane to hit the US since Katrina. The stories emerging from the region are heart breaking. The economic damage to property and the infrastructure will take years to recover from. Large parts of the area will never return to what they were. Many Americans may be unaware of the extent of the damage. Unlike Hurricane Katrina, which received non-stop coverage on cable news for weeks, with primetime anchors like Anderson Cooper visiting on location covering stories of human tragedy and government incompetent, Helene’s aftermath has received far less coverage. It is on social media platforms like X where folks will find horrifying stories of the stench of death still strong in difficult to reach areas, the lack of government assistance for those in need, and the courage of private efforts serving the area.

Some of this is explained by the time period we are living in. Escalation in the Middle East. A national election is on the horizon. A court decision releasing documents that allows the salivating press to re-litigate the events of January 6th, 2020 yet again. What cannot be ignored, however, is the extent to which the open hostility to which the nation’s most powerful institutions have had to the sorts of people that are overwhelmingly impacted by this storm, predominantly white, working class, and politically conservative. This horrific natural disaster is a reminder of the extent to which the regime hates the people who live there.

This was true prior to Helene, where Washington policies have impoverished this areas with policies ranging from the national impact of inflation and financialization to more specific regional impacts stemming from regulatory policy with specific impacts on the region impacted. The immediate aftermath, however, demonstrates the extent to which state reaction to a disaster impedes voluntary efforts to quickly mobilize and assist those in need. A combination of heavy-handed federal and state action has attempted to undercut recovery efforts, from grounding private helicopters seeking to rescue stranded victims, to the demands of Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg to stop citizens from flying drones near impacted areas seeking to locate those in need of help. Given the logistical strains that even the best organized response to a severe crisis would create, the voluntary organization of local human resources on the ground is essential to meaningful and quick recovery. Here, the priority of government actors has been to elevate their control over the situation at the expense of these efforts.

The allocation of emergency resources itself is deserving of extended scrutiny as well. The victims of this tragedy, like all Americans, have their wealth extracted by Washington to fill the coffers of large federal agencies like FEMA. This same agency, whose nominal priority is to assist Americans in the case of emergency, are already pleading poverty. Of course, these same agencies oversaw the redirection of over a billion dollars in recent years to subsidize migration into the country. The priorities are clear, emergency funds take a back seat to a regime that cares more about new arrivals than the families who lived in this country for generations. This predatory relationship between the regime and its citizens is systemic. The priorities of Washington will always stand in conflict with the people of Appalachia.

DC sees no problem with ordering the Tennessee National Guard to the Middle East at a time when their fellow Tennesseans are facing their own crisis. This relationship is also bipartisan in nature. Kentucky Senator Mitch McConnell, who has become very rich off the backs of the people who elevated him to political power, ignoring the victims of Helene on social media, while very focused on Israel and Iran. The regime will always prioritize its own interests, including the interests of what it has identified as their special privileged classes, over the interests of its people. Changing this parasitic relationship requires more than a change of political party in the White House, but a determined effort by those who seek to represent the interests of these people to strike at the root of this relationship.

Unfortunately, while elections alone are not adequate to address the victimization of Appalachia, it is reasonable to consider what impact the specter of politics is having on their current neglect. The counties most impacted by the storm disproportionately vote in ways the current regime does not like. Would America’s federal government deliberately undermine recovery efforts to try to achieve its own desired political ends? Would the corporate press deliberately fail to cover the inadequacy of these efforts, hoping to prevent a candidate it fears doesn’t win? For those that understand the true nature of the state, the answer is an obvious one. Our prayers are with the victims of Hurricane Helene, that they receive the help they need as recovery efforts continue, that they have the ability to build back their communities strong, and that they will one day be free of a regime that cares so little for them.

JD

Read more …

“Tim Walz, Kamala Harris’s brand-new VP pick, is a fanatical far-left lunatic wearing the friendly armor of hapless, bloated oaf from the sticks” — Peachy Keenan

October Surprise (Kunstler)

That same obvious void of conviction you see on Tim Walz’s labile face is on display with the feds’ response to mass tragedy in the Appalachian hurricane zone. It was a point in my book, The Long Emergency, that our national government would become increasingly impotent, ineffectual, and incompetent as conditions worsened — and now here it is. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), could not bestir itself to aid stricken citizens around the flood-ravaged region in North Carolina and Tennessee. Sec’y Mayorkas of Homeland Security said that FEMA was out of money which, in this season of political weirdness, is especially weird, seeing as how the nation’s fiscal year began Oct 1, and Congress’s continuing resolution for funding US agencies should assure that FEMA’s checkbook is full. What was up with that?

Well, everybody and his uncle has heard by now that FEMA (and many other agencies under Mayorkas’s DHS) commits tons of money to pamper the millions of mutts from foreign lands sneaking over the US border, with lots of assistance from NGO cut-outs funded by your tax dollars, who marshal groups of aliens south-of-the-border for the crossing, and then fly or bus them around our country for the special purpose of distributing them in swing voting districts to then coordinate with other NGOs devoted to registering non-citizens to vote in order to “harvest” their ballots. Quite an operation. Completely lawless and corrupt. And official! So, no aid for you, baskets of deplorables, shivering in the dark in your hills and hollows of Appalachia, your houses splintered, scant chattels lost, and your beloved hound-dogs carried away in the roaring torrents.

The money that might have helped you begin to recover from the complete devastation of your lives is paying for Guatemalans to bunk in the Roosevelt Hotel and order-in quesadillas and churros, and refill their government-issued debit cards so they can afford a few nice things as they wait for mysterious others to cast ballots in their names. This is the work of your Democratic Party, the party of chaos, party of the Woke mentally ill, party of wrecking the country, of America’s end times. And you’re going to vote for more of it? Of course not. And despite the attempts to knock him out of the arena with scores of utter bullshit lawfare cases, and efforts to shoot him dead, Mr. Trump keeps coming at them, an implacable, relentless force, the true Golden Golem conjured up by their catamite news media. Their inability to destroy him has wrecked their minds.

One surprising October surprise is advanced by whistleblower Mike McCormick on Substack (Midnight in the Laptop of Good and Evil). Mr. McCormick was White House stenographer under Presidents Bush II, Obama, and Trump. His job was to transcribe meetings, speeches, and interactions between major political figures. He was the proverbial fly-on-the-wall for years and years. He has seen and heard a lot and still hears a lot from people who know a lot. He says the Obama-Biden-Harris faction of the Deep State blob is anti-Israel and that Israel understands what this means. He says that Benjamin Netanyahu has told “Joe Biden” (or, let’s say, told errand-boys Tony Blinken and Jake Sullivan) that if the blob engineers a phony victory for Kamala Harris, he will blow up the oil fields in Iran and the anti-Israel Democrats will have to pick up the pieces.

There it is, raw power politics, like so much meat on the table. “Joe Biden” cannot control Bibi. “Joe Biden” is too far gone and two weak, and Israel does not aim to let itself get wiped off the map, as Iran’s leadership never tires of saying. The blob, McCormick says, has to ask itself: does it help rig the election for Harris or stand down on all its ballot harvesting and other trickery and actually allow a real election to roll out? Surprise! Now, take your Kit-kat bar and go home.

Read more …

“What FEMA being broke today means not just that we have pissed away the money that we could have allocated for it to non-U.S. citizens — it’s far more insulting than that.”

The Reprehensible Audacity Of FEMA Being Broke (QTR)

After the devastating effects of Hurricane Helene, FEMA has all of a sudden come out and said it doesn’t have enough funds to make it through hurricane season. Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas warned this week that FEMA is running low on funds. “We are meeting the immediate needs with the money that we have. We are expecting another hurricane hitting,” Mayorkas said. “FEMA does not have the funds to make it through the season.” While Mayorkas didn’t specify the exact funding needed, his comments reflect growing concerns from President Biden and lawmakers that a supplemental spending bill may be necessary this fall to support recovery efforts.

I’ve spent the last four years watching as millions of people have crossed unchecked through our southern border and have been treated like royalty by the Biden administration while everyday citizens struggle with rising prices, crumbling infrastructure, and the negative effects of suffocating regulation. I’ve also spent the last four years watching the United States dole out close to $50 billion in foreign aid, mainly to Ukraine to help it press on with a war that realistically it has little chance of winning, while shaking down waitstaff, Uber drivers and anybody using Venmo for purposes of more than $600 for tax receipts. And in my short time in the world of finance, I’ve seen enough omnibus spending bills—with funds allocated for things like border security in Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt, Tunisia and Oman and family planning to halt population growth that “threatens biodiversity or endangered species”—to have developed a deep loathing for how our government and our Treasury manage finances.

So when sorry-ass Alejandro Mayorkas—who has sworn up and down for the last three years that there’s no crisis at the southern border while parts of the country have been overrun and overwhelmed by unchecked, undocumented, and sometimes criminal migrants—takes to publicly decrying that FEMA is out of money in the midst of one of the largest domestic disasters in the country’s history, it’s absolutely revolting to watch. Not only is it grotesque because of how we have squandered away hundreds of billions of dollars on things that everyday U.S. citizens are not going to see an impact from, but it’s even worse when examined under the umbrella of how we run monetary policy in this country. There once was a day when, if you needed to fund government entities, you actually had to have the revenue coming in from taxpayers because we couldn’t just print dollars ad infinitum anytime we wanted. Those were the days of sound money, and they are long gone.

What FEMA being broke today means not just that we have pissed away the money that we could have allocated for it to non-U.S. citizens — it’s far more insulting than that. It means that in a day and age where we can theoretically print endless fiat dollars and have an ‘infinite amount of cash’—an idea that I think is completely batshit insane, but our Fed governors don’t—that we still have not stocked the coffers of our domestic agencies with the bare minimum necessary for them to help the American people when they need to. In other words, if the money is all fake, and we can conjure up as much of it as we want without any consequences, as both political parties would have you believe over the last several decades, why should FEMA ever be asking for more money to help hurricane victims?

Read more …

The Trump team comes together one at a time: RFK Jr, Elon Musk, JD Vance, Vivek Ramaswamy, Tulsi Gabbard, Tucker Carlson, Mike Flynn, etc etc.

“The martyr lived. Last time America had a candidate this tough was Theodore Roosevelt..”

Elon Musk to Attend Trump Rally at Site of Attempted Assassination (ET)

Elon Musk said on Oct. 3 that he will attend former President Donald Trump’s upcoming rally in Butler, Pennsylvania. “I will be there to support!” Musk wrote on X, the social media platform that he mostly owns. Trump has a rally scheduled for Saturday at the Butler Farm Show, where he was struck by a bullet during an event in July. Authorities say Thomas Crooks, who was shot dead by a U.S. Secret Service agent, attempted to assassinate Trump. About 30 minutes later, Musk shared video footage of Trump rising to his feet and holding a fist up after surviving the attempted assassination. Musk said he endorsed the former president. “I fully endorse President Trump and hope for his rapid recovery,” Musk wrote at the time. “The martyr lived. Last time America had a candidate this tough was Theodore Roosevelt,” he wrote in a follow-up post.

The business mogul, who is also CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, said in another post on Thursday that backing Trump has become “essential to saving America!” Musk’s posts frequently support Trump and Republicans while denigrating Vice President Kamala Harris and members of the Democratic Party. Trump welcomed Musk’s endorsement at the time and said in a September speech that, if elected, he would, on Musk’s advice, create a government efficiency commission tasked with improving government operations. The exact security protocols in place for Trump’s next Butler rally have not been disclosed but the U.S. Secret Service says it is prepared. A spokesman told The Epoch Times in an email that the agency has, since the attempted assassination attempt, “made comprehensive changes and enhancements to our communications capabilities, resourcing, and protective operations.” Trump, he said, is receiving heightened protection.

The agency has said previously that Trump is receiving the same level of protection as President Joe Biden and Harris in the wake of the assassination attempt by Crooks and another apparent attempt by a man at a golf course in Florida. “Regarding the October 5th event in Butler, PA, we are coordinating closely with the Pennsylvania State Police as well as local law enforcement in and around Butler Township. We are also leveraging other federal security resources to expand personnel and technology,” the spokesman said. “To maintain the integrity of our protective operations, we cannot go into the specifics regarding the security enhancements. Residents in the area should expect traffic delays and an increased presence of state, local, and federal law enforcement as part of our efforts to ensure a safe and secure event.”

Read more …

“..Trump moves out to a 13-point lead from just five points earlier in the week.”

Donald Trump Takes His Biggest Lead Yet In Daily Mail Election Model (DM)

With a month to go until the only poll that matters, former President Donald Trump has roared back into a substantial lead in our election model. A slew of recent surveys has shown him with leads in key battleground states. And when the data are processed through our DailyMail.com/J.L. Partners model it shows the former president winning in 56.7 percent of the simulations. As ever, the road to the White House appears to run through Pennsylvania, with its 19 electoral college votes. For weeks it has been in ‘tossup’ territory. Now the model moves it to ‘lean Trump’ in what could be a decisive moment in the election race. Lose that state, and Vice President Kamala Harris would struggle to triumph even if she wins Michigan, Nevada, and Wisconsin. With fewer paths to electoral college victory, Harris wins in only 43.2 percent of the simulations. It means that, overall, Trump moves out to a 13-point lead from just five points earlier in the week.

To be clear, this is not like a poll lead. Instead, it shows the frequency with which Trump wins the electoral college when our model crunches through all the thousands of possible permutations of states using all the latest available data (along with decades worth of election results combined with economic data.) Until now his highest point was a 10-point advantage last month, but that number has waxed and waned with fresh inputs of data. And the race remains incredibly close. Harris is on course to win the popular vote (as Democrats have done in seven of the last eight elections.) Minnesota is looking safer than ever for her, solidifying her electoral college floor, and she is two points stronger in Michigan, where both she and Trump campaigned Thursday. But the latest model outcome shows a clear direction of travel, said Callum Hunter, data scientist with J.L. Partners.

Read more …

“Harris and Walz are the dream team for the anti-free speech movement.”

Walz Makes the Case for the Most Anti-Free Speech Ticket in History (Turley)

In the vice presidential debate Tuesday, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz pulled the fire alarm. His opponent, Sen. JD Vance, R-Ohio, cited the massive system of censorship supported by Vice President Kamala Harris and her running mate. Walz proceeded to quote the line from a 1919 case in which Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes said you do not have the right to falsely yell fire in a crowded theater. It is the favorite mantra of the anti-free speech movement. It also is fundamentally wrong. In my book “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage,” I discuss the justice’s line from his opinion in Schenck v. United States. Holmes wrote, “The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic.” As I discuss in the book, the line was largely lifted from a brief in an earlier free speech case. It has since become the rationale for politicians and pundits seeking to curtail free speech in America.

For example, when I testified last year before Congress against a censorship system that has been described by one federal court as “similar to an Orwellian ‘Ministry of Truth,’” Rep. Dan Goldman, D-N.Y., interjected with the fire-in-a-theater question to say such censorship is needed and constitutional. In other words, the internet is now a huge crowded theater and those with opposing views are shouting fire. Goldman and Walz both cited a case in which socialists Charles Schenck and Elizabeth Baer were arrested and convicted of violating the Espionage Act of 1917. Their “crime” was to pass out flyers in opposition to the military draft during World War I. Schenck and Baer called on their fellow citizens not to “submit to intimidation” and to “assert your rights.” They argued, “If you do not assert and support your rights, you are helping to deny or disparage rights which it is the solemn duty of all citizens and residents of the United States to retain.” They also described the military draft as “involuntary servitude.”

Holmes used his “fire in a theater” line to justify the abusive conviction and incarceration. At the House hearing, when I was trying to explain that the justice later walked away from the line and Schenck was effectively overturned in 1969 in Brandenburg v. Ohio, Goldman cut me off and said, “We don’t need a law class here.” In the vice presidential debate, Walz showed that he and other Democratic leaders most certainly do need a class in First Amendment law. As I have said, the Biden-Harris administration has proved to be the most anti-free speech administration in two centuries. You have to go back to John Adams’ administration to find the equal of this administration. Harris has been an outspoken champion of censorship in an administration that supports targeting disinformation, misinformation and “malinformation.” That last category was defined by the Biden administration as information “based on fact, but used out of context to mislead, harm, or manipulate.”

In the debate, Walz also returned to his favorite dismissal of censorship objections by saying that it is all just inflammatory rhetoric. Recently, Walz went on MSNBC to support censoring disinformation and declared, “There’s no guarantee to free speech on misinformation or hate speech, and especially around our democracy.” That is entirely untrue and shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the right called “indispensable” by the Supreme Court. Even after some of us condemned his claim as ironically dangerous disinformation, Walz continues to repeat it. This is why, for the free speech community, the prospect of a Harris-Walz administration is chilling. Where President Joe Biden was viewed as supporting censorship out of political opportunism, Harris and Walz are viewed as true believers. We are living through the most dangerous anti-free speech movement in American history. We have never before faced the current alliance of government, corporate, academic and media forces aligned against free speech.

A Harris-Walz administration with a supportive Congress could make this right entirely dispensable. Others are laying the groundwork for precisely that moment. University of Michigan Law School professor and MSNBC legal analyst Barbara McQuade has said that free speech “can also be our Achilles’ heel.” Columbia law professor Tim Wu, a former Biden White House aide, wrote a New York Times op-ed with the headline, “The First Amendment Is Out of Control.” He told readers that free speech “now mostly protects corporate interests” and threatens “essential jobs of the state, such as protecting national security and the safety and privacy of its citizens.” Walz said in the debate that Vice President Harris is promoting the “politics of joy.” Indeed, the wrong people are perfectly ecstatic. Harris and Walz are the dream team for the anti-free speech movement.

Read more …

“The only relevant decision in the world at this time is whether Washington decides that Putin means what he says or that Putin is so averse to war that he will stand down..”

There Is Only One Important Decision Waiting to be Made (Paul Craig Roberts)

Except for the neoconservatives whose agenda it is, I sometimes wonder if I am the only other person who understands what the Ukraine conflict is about. While we await Washington’s decision about firing missiles into Russia, I will explain how we reached the current crisis. In 2007 Washington declared war on Russia without announcing it. Putin provoked Washington’s secret declaration of war when he rejected Washington’s uni-polar hegemony at the Munich Security Conference. Washington’s first attack was a year later when, while Putin was distracted at the Beijing Olympics, Washington sent a US trained and equipped Georgian army into South Ossetia. The purpose was not to defeat Russia militarily. Instead, it was a calculated risk that Putin might stand down and to avoid a military conflict that the West could misrepresent as restoring the Soviet Empire, and allow the Russian protectorate to be absorbed into Georgia.

The American neoconservatives were gambling with lives not their own that Putin and thereby Russia would be weakened by giving in, thus opening more paths of aggression against Russia. The neoconservatives’ plot against Putin might have worked except the Georgian invaders killed Russian peace-keepers. In 2008 Putin was trying to resurrect Russian pride, which was lost with the Soviet collapse 1991, and could not turn his back on dead Russian soldiers in South Ossetia. He returned from China, sent in an army, and smashed the US trained and equipped Georgian army in 5 days.

All of Georgia, a province of the Soviet Union until 1991, was in Putin’s hands. The Western propaganda is that Putin is dangerous because he intends to recover the Soviet empire. Obviously, this is a lie, because Putin pulled the Russian army out and left Georgia an independent state. Following the US neoconservative’s failure in South Ossetia, which they mischaracterized as a “Russian invasion of Georgia,” the neoconservatives began pouring billions of dollars into Ukraine in order to create cadres, NGOs, and purchased politicians that would support the “Maidan Revolution,” which was Washington’s overthrow of the democratically elected government of Ukraine that was living in profitable peace with Russia.

Again Putin was inattentive, this time distracted by the Sochi Olympics, and this time he did nothing. It is unclear why Putin allowed Ukraine to become Washington’s puppet state hostile to Russia and a candidate for NATO. The neo-Nazi state that Washington created began a number of operations against the Russian population in Donbas. The use of the Russian language was banned. Russians were accosted and killed in the streets by bands of Stepan Bandera’s followers. (Bandara fought for Nazi Germany against Russia during World War II.) The Russian parts of Ukraine, Donbas and Crimea, which were separated from Russia by Lenin and Khrushchev, asked Putin to protect them by re-admitting them to Russia. Putin accepted Crimea’s request as the Russian Black Sea naval base is in Crimea, but Putin refused the requests from Donbas, which had formed into two independent republics to protect themselves from slaughter by the Ukrainian army.

Putin, always cautious, was advised that if he accepted Donbass he would give credence to Western propaganda that Russia was restoring the Soviet Empire. Nevertheless, Putin knew he had to do something to protect the Donbas Russians. He concocted the Minsk Agreement. The Minsk Agreement kept Donbas as part of Ukraine, but gave the territory some autonomy, such as its own police and courts, to prevent persecution by Washington’s puppet in Kiev. Kiev and the two Donbas republics signed the Minsk agreement, and Germany and France promised to enforce it. Believing that the West had integrity, Putin was taken for a ride. Both the German Chancellor and French President later publicly admitted that they deceived Putin for eight years while Washington built and equipped a strong Ukrainian Army capable of conquering the two break-away republics in Donbas.

When during December 2021 and February 2022 Putin and Lavrov’s efforts to secure a mutual defense agreement between Russia and the West were met with extremely cold shoulders from Washington, NATO, and the European Union, Putin was faced with a large Ukrainian army about to invade the Donbas republics. Putin’s false hopes and mistaken belief in the West’s integrity left him unprepared, but he was forced to intervene and Russia, due to unpreparedness was forced to rely on a small private military force, the Wagner Group. As Putin had not prepared for the obvious conflict staring him in the face, he limited his intervention to Donbas to clearing out the Ukrainian forces, not to quickly prevailing in the conflict. The long conflict has given the West two years and eight months to involve itself and widen the conflict. As Putin never enforced any of the announced red lines, he has no credibility in the West. Recently, the NATO Secretary-General said NATO does not pay any attention to Putin, because he talks but never does anything.

Consequently, the world has reached the precise point I said would be reached. Putin has backed up so much that he has no more room. His back is to the wall. NATO, the British Prime Minister, and the neoconservatives are lobbying Washington to give a green light to US/NATO firing missiles into Russia from Ukraine territory. Understand, Ukraine hasn’t the capability and satellite targeting systems to fire the missiles. A missile attack on Russia can no longer be characterized as a “proxy war.” Putin himself has made this clear. Putin said that missiles fired into Russia means the US and NATO are at war with Russia and that Russia reserves the right to respond with nuclear weapons. A crisis is upon us. The only relevant decision in the world at this time is whether Washington decides that Putin means what he says or that Putin is so averse to war that he will stand down from his threat in order to avoid a wider conflict involving nuclear weapons.

Read more …

“..efforts to boost conscription are becoming increasingly deceitful, coercive and violent..”

Ukraine’s Mobilization Campaign ‘Gets Dirty’ – The Times (RT)

Ukraine’s mobilization campaign is falling far short of targets, while the effort remains marred by violence, mistrust and rampant corruption, The Times reported on Thursday, citing local officials. According to the paper, Kiev has so far called up about one million soldiers and plans to increase that number by another 200,000 by the end of the year, but that mark remains difficult to reach. Moreover, “efforts to boost conscription are becoming increasingly deceitful, coercive and violent,” the outlet noted, citing the example of an Odessa conscript who was technically exempt from the service due to a chronic kidney condition, but was lured to the conscription office and sent to a training base anyway. An unnamed conscription officer in Odessa told The Times that “we’re not mobilizing even 20% of what is required.”

He noted that there is little enthusiasm among potential soldiers to respond to the summons, while his department is plagued by corruption, mismanagement and disillusionment. The bribes, the officer, added, can reach thousands of dollars while staff shortage means that employees have to perform multiple duties at once, including patrolling the streets. In addition, employees are threatened with being sent to the front if they underperform. In other cases, many of those who answer the mobilization call are often found to be unfit for service due to serious health conditions, including tuberculosis, hepatitis or HIV, the Times’ source said. Meanwhile, a 47-year-old Ukrainian recalled that he was eager to be called up and go to the front early in the conflict, but was denied at the time, and now has no desire to do so.

“Our government doesn’t support soldiers. They don’t have proper equipment and are forgotten about if they get injured,” the man explained. Ukraine announced general mobilization in February 2022 shortly after the outbreak of hostilities, barring most men aged between 18 and 60 from leaving the country. This spring, faced with mounting losses, Kiev lowered the draft age from 27 to 25, and significantly tightened mobilization rules, obliging potential service members to report to conscription offices for “data validation,” which in practice often means a ticket to the front. “font-size:11px;color: #353535;”As Ukraine’s mobilization campaign intensified, so did draft evasion, filling social media with videos of recruiters trying to catch eligible men on the streets, in gyms, and in shopping malls, sometimes leading to clashes.

Read more …

“..the name of the (new, deadly) game is U.S./Israel vs. Russia/Iran..”

They lie. They cheat. They steal. They bomb. And they spin (Pepe Escobar)

Hezbollah has a seriously though spell ahead. Resources – especially supply of weapons and military equipment, through Syria and by air from Iran to Lebanon – will become increasingly scarce. Compare it to Israel’s unlimited supply chain from Exceptionalistan – not to mention tons of money. Israel intel is far from shabby – as commandos went deep, in secret, into Hezbollah territory collecting info on the fortification network. When – in fact if – they reach populated areas in Southern Lebanon, then it will be bombing dementia plus heavy artillery against residential areas. That operation might well be called Gaza-on-the Litani. It will happen only if Hezbollah’s complex network in southern Lebanon is cracked – a major “if”. Jeffrey Sachs, for all his good intentions, went as far as he could to characterize Israelis as judeo supremacist extremist terrorists. Virtually the whole Global Majority is now aware of it.

What comes next in Talmudic-Zio-con planning may include a ghastly false flag, possibly after the U.S. presidential election, for instance on a NATO vessel or on U.S. troops in the Persian Gulf, to lock up the new administration into the long-planned U.S. war on Iran. Dick Cheney will have an orgasm – and croak.The BRICS summit in Kazan under the Russian presidency is less than three weeks away. In sharp contrast to genocide and serial wars in West Asia, Putin and Xi will be standing by the – open – door on behalf of BRICS+, welcoming scores of nations that are fleeing the collective West like the plague. Russia is now fully behind Iran – and as much as in floundering Ukraine, that means Russia at war with the U.S./Israel; after all the Pentagon is directly shooting down Iranian missiles, while Israel is the U.S.’s de facto pre-eminent state, fully, fiscally supported by U.S. taxpayers.

It gets trickier by the minute. Immediately after a very important meeting between Alexander Lavrentiev, Putin’s special envoy to Syria, and Ali Akbar Ahmadian, the secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, Tel Aviv went Full Dementia – what else – and targeted warehouses of Russian forces in Syria.There was a joint Russia-Syria air defense response. What that shows is the Talmudic psychos not only obsessed on breathing fire against the Axis of Resistance but now also going after Russian national interests. This can get very ugly for them in a flash – and is yet one more illustration that the name of the (new, deadly) game is U.S./Israel vs. Russia/Iran.

Read more …

He’s real important.

Biden on Israel Response to Iranian Attack: ‘That’s Between Me and Them’ (Sp.)

When asked for his opinion on how Israel should respond to the latest Iranian missile strike, US President Joe Biden said on Friday that it was between him and the Israelis. “That’s between me and them,” Biden told reporters. Israel has not yet determined how it will strike Iran but they should consider other options than targeting oil fields, President Biden noted. “The Israelis have not concluded … what they’re going to do in terms of the strike, that’s under discussion,” he said during the press briefing. “If I were in those shoes, I’d be thinking about other alternatives than striking oil fields.” Biden also elaborated that the United States is considering imposing sanctions on Iran “right now”, including on the country’s oil sector. “That’s under consideration right now, the whole thing,” he elaborated, adding that he will not discuss the issue further at present.

POTUS also noted that he does not know whether Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is trying to influence the presidential election in the United States, adding that he is “not counting on that.” “Whether he’s trying to influence the election, I don’t know, but I’m not counting on that,” he told reporters during his first visit to the White House press briefing room. According to US media reports, Democrats, and in particular Senator Chris Murphy, have expressed their concerns that Netanyahu, with his harsh actions in the Middle East, is playing into the hands of Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, as this gives the latter the opportunity to accuse Biden of failing to resolve the conflict in the Middle East.

“I certainly worry that Prime Minister Netanyahu is watching the American election as he makes decisions about his military campaigns in the north end of Gaza. I hope this is not true, but it is certainly a possibility that the Israeli government is not going to sign any diplomatic agreement prior to the American election, as a means potentially to try to influence the result,” CNN quoted Murphy as saying in an interview for CNN. The Biden administration has made several attempts to resolve the conflicts in Gaza and Lebanon through ceasefire agreements, which have so far failed.

Read more …

“An attack by Israel and the U.S. is reportedly imminent on Iran’s oil industrial facilities. Biden has the braindead temerity to call this intended U.S.-Israeli aggravation a “proportionate response..”

US, UK Digging Their Grave In Catastrophic War In The Middle East (SCF)

The American and British leaders are fully backing Israel to escalate its criminal aggression in the Middle East. In so doing, Washington and London are being exposed for the arch-criminal regimes that they are. An all-out war against Iran is on the brink. The consequences will be abysmal, yet the U.S. and British rulers are shameless, reckless – and ultimately stupid – in their complicity. In a few days, on October 7, the Israeli regime will have conducted 12 months of non-stop genocidal destruction of Gaza. There is no sign of that monstrous war of extermination coming to an end. The Israeli regime is completely out of control, acting with impunity and shocking violation of all laws and moral norms. More than 41,000 Palestinian people have been killed. Some estimates put the real death toll at over 100,000 and even as high as 200,000.

This slaughter of women and children is supposed to be justified by the incursion of Palestinian militants on October 7 last year in which some 1,200 Israelis were killed – many of them by their own security forces using reckless firepower. The Hamas incursion was in response to years of inhumane, genocidal siege on the Gaza Strip by Israel. The actions of the Israeli regime are wholly indefensible. Benjamin Netanyahu and Israeli leaders have gotten away with mass murder because of the diplomatic and – more importantly – military support from the United States, Britain and other Western states. The genocide in Gaza and the other Palestinian enclave of the West Bank has been infernally compounded by Israel’s expansion of aggression in the region. The past two weeks have seen Israeli forces indiscriminately bombing Beirut and other Lebanese civilian areas, causing 2,000 deaths and over one million people displaced from their homes.

The orgy of violence is engulfing the entire region. The Israeli regime is also bombing Syria, Iraq and Yemen, as well as Iran in assassination missions. Israel’s murderous conduct has been going on for decades – indeed for 76 years since its inception as an illegal colonial state in 1948, established by British and American machinations at the then newly formed United Nations. Invasions, annexations, air strikes, terrorism, assassinations, and much more are routine for the Western colonialist project known as Zionist Israel. But now the regime is spinning out of control in its bloodlust and psychopathic mania fostered by the impunity afforded by Western sponsors. This history of state terrorism has – and is – all fueled by Western imperialist powers who also believe in supremacy (euphemistically called exceptionalism) and privilege despite their disingenuous virtuous rhetoric to the contrary.

The Israeli regime and its fascist barbarism are a manifestation of the Western powers in their fundamental nature. The same nefarious violence and plunder was – and is – carried out in every corner of the planet that had the misfortune of Western encounter. Zionism is but a variant of Western imperialism. Iran hit back this week with a massive attack involving at least 200 missiles, including hypersonic missiles, raining down on Israeli targets. The response from Iran has been up to now incredibly restrained despite the relentless provocations and acts of war perpetrated by Israel. Even in the latest Iranian attacks, the targets were mainly military centers and aimed at avoiding civilian casualties. Yet immediately, the United States and Britain rushed to condemn Iran for “barbaric aggression” and perversely declared their support for Israel’s right to self-defense. Such a travesty of lies and distortion. The truth is, that Iran was finally acting in legitimate self-defense.

U.S. President Joe Biden is coordinating with Israel to conduct “severe repercussions” on Iran. An attack by Israel and the U.S. is reportedly imminent on Iran’s oil industrial facilities. Biden has the braindead temerity to call this intended U.S.-Israeli aggravation a “proportionate response”. Iran has warned the United States that its policy of unilateral restraint is now definitively over. Tehran has repeatedly said it does not want a regional war, but if Israel follows through on its latest threats of retaliation, then Iran will hit back with even greater force than already shown. Ominously, Iran said it will deploy “unconventional” tactics. This is taken to mean closing the vital oil trade route through the Strait of Hormuz. The Middle East is the source of a third of the world’s oil supply. If Iran shuts down the global oil supply then the world economy is heading for an unprecedented calamity. Already oil prices have begun to spike. If a war should engulf the region, the impact on the world economy will be catastrophic.

Read more …

“But, make no mistake, this genocide is absolutely only happening because the US is allowing it to happen.”

US, Israel Reportedly Downplay Level of Destruction by Iran (Sp.)

At least two dozen long-range Iranian ballistic missiles were able to break through both Israeli and other Western air defenses on Tuesday night, the Washington Post reported. The missiles struck or landed near at least three military and intelligence installations, a review of videos and photos of the attack and its aftermath showed. “The findings raise questions about the full scope of the damage to Israeli military bases and suggest that Iran was more successful in evading Israel’s defenses than in April,” the report wrote. The Pentagon declined to comment on the report’s findings, the Post said. And the Israeli military did not respond to a request for comment, either. Phil Kelly, a political commentator and socialist activist based in Belfast joined Sputnik’s Political Misfits on Friday, and suggested that Western media is “struggling” to “give credence to Israeli propaganda”.

“…it’s interesting when the Washington Post […] newspaper, which is not a go-to read for me anymore, is starting to find itself struggling to give credence to Israeli propaganda and more and more things you’re starting to find that where the lurid kind of propaganda of the Israeli regime is just too much. It’s, the stenographers at the Washington Post and various Western media just struggle to bring themselves to go that far because of its ridiculousness,” Kelly explained. “It’s clear Israel was hit hard. The Iron Dome was not so secure that Iran made a point and will probably be forced to make further points, I would imagine, because Israel is hell-bent on escalation. It wants to drag other parties into this abyss with it,” he added.

Using commercial satellite imagery, researchers have identified more than 30 points where Iranian missiles may have impacted an air base in southern Israel, a report from NHPR (New Hampshire and NPR) revealed. The images showed damaged hangars, buildings, taxiways and a crater on one of the runways at Nevatim Airbase, the report writes. However, both Israel and the US have attempted to downplay the amount of damage that Israel has suffered: “This attack appears to have been defeated and ineffective,” said U.S. national security adviser Jake Sullivan. Sputnik’s Michelle Witte also noted that the US has a law that dates back to the 1990s which restricts the quality of commercial satellite imagery that US companies can sell if they depict Israel and Israeli-occupied Palestinian territories. An unusually specific restriction, she added, that seems to give Israel a special level of protection other countries do not receive from the US.

“But, in terms of that special relationship, it shouldn’t shock anyone when you look at the Israeli lobby that basically owns [the US] political system. It would seem that it would go to these lengths to stop people looking under the rock that is Israel, stop people seeing the reality of the situation, whether it is how much damage they’ve sustained or the mass graves that they are filling with innocent civilians.” “…when Israel commits its crimes, when Israel commits its invasion, when Israel keeps bombing different sovereign countries, the response of the West is to help them cover it up, help them help their propaganda dominate, make sure it’s the Israeli narrative that we hear and do not allow people to see the truth of what is unfolding in this conflict. It should set alarm bells ringing,” the analyst added.

At least 215 people in the US are believed to be dead as a result of the recent storm, Hurricane Helene. In May, NOAA National Weather Service forecasters at the Climate Prediction Center predicted above-normal hurricane activity in the Atlantic basin this year. Despite their prediction, Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas announced this week that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) will not have enough funds to last the rest of the hurricane season. Yet, just a week ago, Israel announced that it had secured an $8.7 billion aid package from the US to support its military goals. “The reality is that most US politicians, when they talk about putting country before politics, they’re talking about Israel,” Kelly explained. “And that should really enrage ordinary US citizens who have struggled for a long time, seeing that their living standards drop and wondering why in hell your government is sending billions of dollars to a racist, colonial regime, a small regime in the Middle East, which is committing genocide…”

“…the myth of America, I think, is over. It was struggling long before it went all in on genocide Joe’s watch to push Europe into World War III and to facilitate [Israeli Prime Minister] Benjamin Netanyahu in the ethnic cleansing of Palestine. But the rest of the world sees the US for what it is, and that is why you’re seeing real concrete moves in the global side to disengage,” he added. “That the war in Ukraine was really a starting point for that, and it’s gained momentum because the US cannot be trusted.” “Europe’s starting to get a bit worried. Macron made a few noises about how Europe needs to keep an eye on the US – slow learner there, Mr. Macron. As Kissinger said, the US doesn’t have friends, it has interests. The world’s awakening to that,” the analyst said. “But, make no mistake, this genocide is absolutely only happening because the US is allowing it to happen.”

Read more …

Cute excuse for two murder attempts.

US Secret Service Struggling To Keep Staff – NYT (RT)

The US Secret Service went into 2024 having lost almost a fifth of its veteran agents, with the rest overworked, underpaid, inadequately trained, and lacking the latest technology, the New York Times has reported. Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle resigned in July after an assassin nearly killed former President and current Republican candidate Donald Trump at a rally in Butler, Pennsylvania. “The service was not ready,” the Times noted on Thursday. The attempt on Trump’s life “revealed deep problems in the Secret Service,” from lack of technology to “failures in command” and communication. For instance, the Butler shooter scouted the venue with a drone, while the protective detail did not have one and their radios did not work properly.

The biggest problem, however, has been “an exodus of the best-trained people,” the Times reported, citing current and former agency employees. At least 1,400 of 7,800 Secret Service employees left in the fiscal years 2022 and 2023, the biggest loss in two decades. While the agency has expanded its workforce to 8,100 – the highest level ever – by this summer, this was still short of the numbers it said it needed. There were concerns about the fitness of new hires and the problems with how to train them and where. The main training facility is so “decrepit” that it often floods in heavy rains, according to the Times. The agency has resorted to using a scale model of the White House built in Atlanta by filmmaker Tyler Perry, because Congress would not authorize funds to build their own.

The chief reason most veterans quoted for leaving was “crushing amounts of overtime work,” sometimes for no pay, because of a federal salary cap. In a survey conducted by a federal police association 68 of the 153 agents who responded said they had “maxed out” on their overtime last year, missing as much as $30,000 in pay. “You ride your horse until it dies, and then you eat it,” Jonathan Wackrow, who left the Secret Service after 14 years, told the Times about management’s view of their workforce. Another former agent, Louis Fitzig, claimed that “nepotism, favoritism, [and] corruption” are part of the agency’s culture. Meanwhile, a scheme to make up the attrition by rehiring recently retired agents backfired spectacularly as agents rushed to retire early, so they could get both a pension and a salary, while not serving in the field where bodies were needed the most.

Read more …

“..they are all are NATO allies now after Finland and Sweden’s admission to the military bloc. “There are no neutral countries in the North any more..”

New NATO Arctic Group is No Match for Russo-Chinese Cooperation (Sp.)

The Western Arctic states are planning to coordinate on defense, intelligence and cyber activities, as they are all are NATO allies now after Finland and Sweden’s admission to the military bloc. “There are no neutral countries in the North any more,” Mikael Valtersson, former Swedish Air Defense officer told Sputnik, commenting on Canada’s push to form a security group to counter Russia and China in the Arctic. Earlier this week, Canadian Foreign Minister Melanie Joly told Bloomberg News that Canada and its allies need an “Arctic security dialogue” to discuss defense matters in light of Russia and China’s growing activities in the region. Russia, an Arctic state, maintains security cooperation with China in its territorial waters. It was reported on October 2 that patrol ships of the China Coast Guard entered the waters of the Arctic Ocean for joint patrols with coast guard vessels of the Russian FSB Border Service. Valtersson expects the new “security dialogue” to work closely with NATO.

“It might develop into an evolved Arctic military command within NATO and also a political body where politicians co-ordinate their actions before meetings in the Arctic Council,” Valtersson said. The pundit warned that NATO’s potential build-up in the region could “increase the risk for both an arms race in the Arctic and incidents in the region.” But Valtersson believes that the creation of the new Arctic body would neither upset the established balance of power in the Arctic nor endanger Russia’s positions in the region. “The Nordic countries and Canada are too small to challenge Russia, and even more a Russian-Chinese cooperation,” he said. “The US has a lot of other interests in the world and will not focus on the Arctic in the way Russia already does, and should increase doing.”

Read more …

 

 

 

 

EVs
https://twitter.com/i/status/1842044324260848040

 

 

Elon 21 years ago

 

 

IgG4

 

 

Potoo

 

 

P&K
https://twitter.com/i/status/1841945880129061270

 

 

Soul

 

 

 

 

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