Menu Icon

Debt Rattle September 27 2025

Sep 272025
 
 September 27, 2025  Posted by at 9:50 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  47 Responses »


René Magritte The song of the storm 1937

 

• Martyr or Liar? Comey Indicted on Two Counts (Turley)
• Former FBI Director James Comey Indicted on Three Counts (CTH)
• Days of Judgment (James Howard Kunstler)
• Yet Again, Deep State Attacks DNI Tulsi Gabbard (CTH)
• Leaked Memo Reveals FBI Deployed A Stunning 274 Agents On J6 (ZH)
• Kiev False-Flag Provocation Could Lead To World War 3 – Zakharova (RT)
• Kremlin Slams ‘Reckless’ NATO Threats To Shoot Down Russian Planes (RT)
• EU Moves To Bypass Hungary’s Veto On Russia Sanctions (RT)
• Crazy Idea On How To Steal Russia’s Assets: Make EU Taxpayers Pay For It (MoA)
• Kallas Insists US Shouldn’t Offload Ukraine On EU (RT)
• West Invented The ‘Russian Threat’ – And Kept It For 500 Years (Bordachev)
• Gaza Deal Near – Trump (RT)
• He Destroyed A Country and Half A Million Lives and Got Five Years (Fetouri)
• Elon Musk Says Charlie Kirk Was Shot From The Rear (Paul Craig Roberts)

 

 

https://twitter.com/Real_RobN/status/1971625536607940870

https://twitter.com/JesseBWatters/status/1971742140704096733

https://twitter.com/DD_Geopolitics/status/1971617889510715468

 

 

 

 

As I said yesterday, this will be a difffiult case to bring. They are all in it together, and all for one, one for all etc. But there’s a weakness to that too. The rats may try to be first to leave the ship if they expect rain. Several sources now say McCabe may turn on Comey, on whose orders he leaked.

“This is a city that floats on a rolling sea of leaks.”

“He is also a sophisticated player. Perhaps that is why he issued a videotaped message saying effectively “bring it on” and let’s go to trial. While an improvement over Comey’s bizarre seashell messages, the videotape may be too confident.”

• Martyr or Liar? Comey Indicted on Two Counts (Turley)

Yesterday, James Comey became the first former Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation to be indicted for a federal crime. That is likely the only fact upon which you will receive anything close to agreement in the country. For some, the two-count indictment is a long-overdue accountability for a man who pushed through the now-debunked Russian collusion investigation. For others, it is another abuse on President Donald Trump’s revenge tour. There are legitimate concerns about the targeting of a political critic of the President, particularly after he publicly complained just days ago that Attorney General Pam Bondi was not indicting Comey and others.

However, Comey is hardly the pristine model of “ethical leadership” that he described in his book. Putting aside his critical role in the Russian collusion investigation, Comey tossed aside even the pretense of ethics after Trump fired him. The Inspector General, Michael Horowitz, issued a scathing report that found Comey was a leaker and had violated FBI policy in his handling of FBI memos. On his way out of the Bureau, Comey stole FBI materials, including those containing the “code name and true identity” of a sensitive source. While he did not find that he disclosed the classified information, Horowitz found that Comey took “the unauthorized disclosure of sensitive investigative information, obtained during the course of FBI employment, in order to achieve a personally desired outcome.”

He further added that Comey “set a dangerous example for the over 35,000 current FBI employees—and the many thousands of more former FBI employees—who similarly have access to or knowledge of non-public information.” Comey later admitted that he asked his friend, Columbia Law Professor Daniel Richman, to leak information from the documents to the New York Times. Comey’s close associate, former Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, stated that Comey did instruct him to leak information to the media. Comey denied that repeatedly under oath. James Baker, FBI general counsel and a close adviser to Comey, also told investigators that he was “under the belief” that he was “ultimately instructed and authorized to [provide information to the Times] by then FBI Director James Comey.”

That sets up a straightforward question: who is lying? It could also set up a bizarre scene of McCabe testifying against his friend. McCabe despises Trump as much as Comey, so he may prove to be an overtly hostile witness for the prosecutors. Washington will be glued to any such trial. The only thing more unnerving than the alleged targeting of a political critic in Washington is the prosecution of a leaker. This is a city that floats on a rolling sea of leaks. The Justice Department is notorious for leaks made with lethal effect against targets. Now the former FBI director will stand trial to see if he is a leaker and a liar. There is one individual who is likely to be watching with particular interest and perhaps satisfaction: former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn.

Comey is facing two counts of making false statements and obstructing a congressional proceeding. The first count under 18 U.S.C. 1001 (a)(2) is the exact charge that Comey engineered against Flynn. Comey gave a book tour where he thrilled audiences about how he secured a criminal charge against Flynn for making false statements. In one event, an audience cheered as Comey took credit for the controversial charge. He explained that what he did was not exactly proper. It was, he explained, “something we’ve, I probably wouldn’t have done or maybe gotten away with in a more organized investigation, a more organized administration…I thought, ‘It’s early enough, let’s just send a couple of guys over.’”

The actual agents who interviewed Flynn did not believe that he intentionally lied about a meeting with Russian diplomats, but Comey and his investigators pushed for charges anyway. They drained Flynn of resources, threatened to indict his son, and ultimately secured a guilty plea. Now it will be Comey in the dock, facing a charge of making a false statement. He will do so as someone who has admitted to improperly removing FBI material and leaking information to the media. The odds still favor Comey. He will have a jury taken from a generally liberal, Democratic jury pool. He is also a sophisticated player. Perhaps that is why he issued a videotaped message saying effectively “bring it on” and let’s go to trial. While an improvement over Comey’s bizarre seashell messages, the videotape may be too confident.

Perjury or false statements can be challenging to prove, particularly when vague or nuanced language is used. This is neither vague nor nuanced. Comey repeatedly swore that he never asked anyone at the FBI to leak information. That is either true or it is not. Comey will continue to be vilified and lionized by different parts of the population. Yet, this is an ignoble moment that he helped bring about. Notably, this indictment comes 50 years after the only Attorney General was convicted of crimes (including false statements and obstruction). That was John Mitchell after the Watergate scandal. Now the man who bragged about nailing Michael Flynn will face the same false statement charge. The man who celebrated the charging of Donald Trump (including obstruction-related charges) will face his own obstruction charge. Whether karma or lawfare, Comey will now have his day in court.

Read more …

“This count could open the door to public testimony by McCabe, Rice, Mook, Brennan and even Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton herself as to Comey’s knowledge; each was a first-hand witness.”

• Former FBI Director James Comey Indicted on Three Counts (CTH)

Newly appointed U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan, from the Eastern District of Viginia, has released a criminal indictment of former FBI Director James Comey . The indictment alleges three counts. Counts one and two are ‘false statements’ to congress on September 30, 2020, [18 U.S.C. § 1001(a)(2)] and count three is ‘obstruction of a federal proceeding’ stemming from the same testimony. [18U.S.C. § 1505] The first false statement charge surrounds Hillary Clinton’s “approval of a plan concerning” Donald Trump and the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election.

COUNT #1 – James Comey claimed he could not remember being made aware of the Trump-Russia collusion plan, and there is ample evidence from his own previous public statements, from public and sworn statements by former CIA Director John Brennan, from former statements by officials in the January 5, 2017, meeting memorialized by Susan Rice, from statements that remain sealed as recounted by former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, and from statements under oath by the former Clinton campaign team -including campaign manager Robby Mook- that James Comey was well aware of the plan. While this first count is based on the tenuous “I don’t remember” aspect, this count holds more material benefit than simply Comey’s recollection.

This count could open the door to public testimony by McCabe, Rice, Mook, Brennan and even Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton herself as to Comey’s knowledge; each was a first-hand witness. This first count holds strong material value in a public trial regardless of the outcome. This first count establishes the baseline for USAO Lindsey Halligan to bring all material witnesses into court and publicly put them on record outlining the Trump-Russia collusion scheme. You could say, I hope the intent is not just to incarcerate Comey per se’ – but rather to use what Comey represents to indict the entire enterprise around him. The facts behind Count #1 make this possible. Let’s all hope this strategic intent unfolds.

Count #2, involves James Comey falsely testify he did not direct former his FBI Special Government Employee (SGE) Daniel Richman to leak information to New York Times reporter Michael Schmidt. This second count is easily evidenced through the prior investigation of Office of Inspector General Michael Horowitz and all prior witness statements therein. Again, that includes testimony to Horowitz given by former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe. Additionally, the second count is evidenced by the direct testimony of Daniel Richman himself, who was hired by James Comey and given special access privileges to classified information systems. Richman was likely a grand jury witness during the assembly of the case against Comey. Count #2 is the easiest to prove beyond any reasonable doubt.

BIG PICTURE – One of the frustrations felt by many people who have researched or followed the Trump-Russia collusion nonsense, is the lack of accountability for the internal actors who operated within a highly weaponized DOJ and FBI system. Perhaps this indictment is the first step in holding those to account. I am often asked about why the second term cabinet members of President Trump do not take action. My response is consistent. They refuse to acknowledge or assert the corruption within the institutions they lead. They are fraught with fear. The administration of President Donald Trump does not have the same institutional operations in place that Joe Biden visibly deployed post January 6, 2021.

President Barack Obama spent eight years working with Attorney General Eric Holder, Attorney General Loretta Lynch, Deputy AG Sally Yates, former FBI Director James Comey, former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe and former FBI Chief Legal Counsel James Baker, on a process of weaponizing the Dept of Justice and FBI. All of the agents and attorneys within the Obama network, in addition to their private sector media and Lawfare partners, spent over a decade building out their ideological targeting tools. Bondi, Patel and to a lesser extent Bongino, spent a ridiculous amount of time denying the institutional constructs that sit beneath them. Still, to this day, they do not publicly admit the internal challenge with each organization. All institutional change first requires a public admission of the problem.

Main Justice and FBI remain -to this day- in private acceptance but public denial of the problem. In essence they are stuck in a pretending loop. Each day that follows grows the Gordian knot their denial & fear creates. It is a self-fulfilling prophecy; an outcome born of both fear and inability. Those who created the weaponized institutions are heavily reliant upon the retention of pretense. We the people, are continually witnessing this dynamic and frustrated at the lack of accountability. Yet even within that frustrated annoyance, too few boldly outline exactly how comprehensively corrupt the institutions are – by former design. Pam Bondi and Kash Patel are afraid of the organizations they lead. Their fear stems from a desire to be viewed as effective, and yet their ineffectiveness at correcting the problem is driven by their fear. Thus, the loop.

Yes, Main Justice and the FBI can change the dynamic, but it starts -as all massive institutional reform efforts must- with a seismic release of sunlight upon the toxic corruption that sits at their feet. As long as Pam Bondi and Kash Patel continue to maintain a pretense of top-down control, the embedded system operators will continue undermining them and acting maliciously. The effort to hold James Comey to account is highlighting just how corrupt THEIR SYSTEM is. It is not accidental that President Trump needed to shake them up and change this dynamic with the very public appointment of Lindsey Halligan.

How do Bondi and Patel stop entwining the knot and finally cut it? Well, that begins with sunlight, firings, investigations and criminal indictments of former officials AND current holdovers inside their agencies. In essence, they must purposefully and righteously ‘turn the tables‘ in their own temples. Perhaps the indictment of James Comey will finally begin the process.

Read more …

“If you’re want a friend in DC, get a dog. We’re coming for you.” —Dan Bongino, Deputy Director, FBI

• Days of Judgment (James Howard Kunstler)

You better believe Martha Stewart baked a cake last night — the lovely Gâteau Opéra perhaps? — when she got the news that the ham sandwich known as James Comey got indicted by a federal grand jury twenty-two years after that same ham sandwich indicted the goddess of hearth and home for lying to the FBI and the SEC over a trumped-up insider-trading rap, and sent her to federal prison for a five-month stretch plus five additional months of confined home-making and two years of supervised redecorating.

Mr. Comey’s indictment is probably just the opening salvo in what will be a barrage of indictments coming down against government officials who used their powers-under-law to harass, disable, cancel, dis-bar, bankrupt, persecute and ruin thousands of their fellow citizens, including especially the 45th president and the people who worked for him.

Jim Comey was the engine who pulled the choo-choo train of seditious fakery known as RussiaGate (Donald Trump colluding with Vladimir Putin) into America’s public life, which then expanded into the years-long ass-covering operations of the Mueller Investigation, then Impeachments One and Two, then the J-6 FBI-engineered “insurrection,” then Nancy Pelosi’s Congressional J-6 committee gong show, and then the four various fugazi prosecutions against Mr. Trump in 2024 designed to derail his re-run for office bankrupt his family, and stuff him in prison for the rest of his life.

Mr. Comey and his associates must be astounded that none of that worked. It really was a mighty organized criminal endeavor. And, as such, it stands to be prosecutable under the RICO statutes, which means that these current two charges against Mr. Comey should be a coming attraction of much more to come against him and many other familiar characters, possibly including his successor as FBI Director Christopher Wray. (The Blaze reports overnight that the FBI deployed roughly 275 plainclothes agents into the J-6 protest crowd at the US Capitol, as opposed to the 26 agents that Mr. Wray testified about to Congress.)

The smuggery of this gang in the years since all this business started in 2016 has also been out of this world. Mr. Comey dropped one rancid video after another either making threats or sanctimoniously declaring his sainthood, as if he expected the dreadful day would never come that he might face charges. Likewise, former Acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe ran his mouth all over CNN for years, former CIA Director John Brennan spun fibs on MSNBC, while FBI RussiaGate straw-boss Peter Strzok rode shotgun regularly with fake news confabulator Rachel Maddow. All of it was designed to bamboozle the public, and it worked!

You can expect more than one RICO case to come because these crimes against our country occurred in many discrete episodes of organized misconduct over many years. The RussiaGate op involving Comey, Brennan, Hillary, Obama, Biden, et al., was quite separate from Adam Schiff’s orchestrated seditious Impeachment #1 featuring CIA mole Eric Ciaramella, Col. Alexander Vindman, and ICIG Michael Atkinson. As was the activity of the Mueller group actually supervised by Andrew Weissmann (because Robert Mueller was secretly non compos mentis). As were the J-6 shenanigans of Mr. Wray’s FBI, including the DNC Pipe Bomb sideshow.

As were the Lawfare exploits of Norm Eisen and Mary McCord conniving with “Joe Biden’s” White House to arrange the Trump prosecutions by DA Alvin Bragg and AG Letitia James in New York and DA Fani Willis in Fulton County, GA. As were the dark deeds of Merrick Garland and his Special Counsels Jake Smith, David Weiss, and Robert Hur. As were the 2020 and 2022 election-rigging capers of Marc Elias & Company. As were whatever peculiar directives were ordered by Alejandro Mayorkas to throw the US borders wide open. As was the “autopen” abuse by the White House staff and their cover-up of “Joe Biden’s” mental decline.

Read more …

“It is certainly true that AG Pam Bondi and FBI Director Kash Patel have refused to look internally; and it is also true that DNI Tulsi Gabbard has spent much of her focus time looking internally.”

• Yet Again, Deep State Attacks DNI Tulsi Gabbard (CTH)

It is difficult not to notice the strategy of how certain Trump administration officials are targeted. Any cabinet member that looks inward to reveal the status of corrupt activity within the information silo itself becomes a target. Cabinet officials who focus externally, meaning the majority of their effort looks outside government, are seemingly left alone. HHS Secretary RFK Jr and Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, are examples of those receiving the worst ideological targeting from operations within HHS and the Intelligence Community respectively. Conversely, CIA Director John Ratcliffe faces almost no scrutiny or targeting by the Intelligence Community as the silo operators frame narratives almost exclusively against DNI Gabbard.

The latest effort surfaces as embeds within Main Justice and the CIA frame a storyline that Tulsi Gabbard’s action in removing the security clearances of 37 current and former officials, has now resulted in those same officials being incapable of testifying against former CIA Director John Brennan (and others). The premise of the narrative is ridiculous. If we are to accept some current or former IC officials are willing to testify against Brennan (or others), regardless of whether Tulsi Gabbard has revoked their security clearances, their retroactive knowledge is still pertinent. They are completely free to give statements and testimony based on their prior conduct. What the leakers to Axios and the New York Times are trying to establish, is groundwork for the removal of Tulsi Gabbard.

This stops her objective of investigating internal corruption. I suspect most of the people trying desperately to undermine Gabbard are from within the CIA Directorate of Analysis, or at least in alignment with the directorate’s agenda. The narrative’s author, Marc Caputo, claims AG Pam Bondi is hampered in her effort to criminally indict John Brennan because the witnesses Main Justice would use have lost their security clearances. Again, the game of leveraging internecine friendships in/around the office of Trump becomes an overlay. It is certainly true that AG Pam Bondi and FBI Director Kash Patel have refused to look internally; and it is also true that DNI Tulsi Gabbard has spent much of her focus time looking internally. Bondi and Patel continue the preferred game of institutional blame-casting in Main Justice. Meanwhile, Gabbard is busy focused on cleaning up her IC house.

The Fourth Branch embeds do not fear the approach of Bondi/Patel, but the Fourth Branch embeds are petrified by the approach of Tulsi Gabbard. That reality underpins the baseline of opposition against the Director of National Intelligence. As the dynamic unfolds, CIA Director John Ratcliffe is certainly not corrupt; however, nor is he brave. Director Ratcliffe is willing to let Director Gabbard clean up his house, and then he takes credit for the reform. As the weeks unfold into months, this is becoming increasingly obvious.

Mark Zaid is the current anti-Trump Lawfare operative likely seeding the narrative to Axios/New York Times. “Mark Zaid, a Trump administration critic who represents six of the intelligence professionals whose clearances were revoked, said administration officials fretting about the Brennan case have “valid concerns.” “This seems to be, as usual, an unforced error by Trump administration officials who don’t think things through in the long game in favor of a quick-pass completion,” he said. “If I were the defense counsel [for Brennan], I would raise the revocation in an attempt to undermine the credibility of the witnesses.”

Mark Zaid knows the game-changing process that DNI Tulsi Gabbard is using. Gabbard is directly going into each IC agency to review and retrieve information. When she finds something that connects to the overall plots being used by the Fourth Branch, the DNI takes that information directly to President Trump who subsequently declassifies it and then she releases it. Zaid and the Deep State operatives he represents, want to stop Tulsi Gabbard with urgency. They are throwing every available IC narrative into the media flow in the hope that something stops Tulsi’s effectiveness.

Read more …

And then lie about it 1,000 times…

• Leaked Memo Reveals FBI Deployed A Stunning 274 Agents On J6 (ZH)

The FBI deployed nearly 300 plainclothes agents to the US Capitol during the Jan. 6, 2021 riot, in an effort that became so chaotic it caused an internal schism within the agency that led many rank-and-file at the bureau that core competencies had been lost to “wokeness,” and that employees had become “pawns in a political war,” according to an after-action report hidden from the public for over four years until it was obtained by Just the News. Anonymous complaints were sent to the after-action team by scores of FBI agents and other personnel – many from the bureau’s premier Washington field office (WFO) – detailing how agents were sent into a dangerous situation without proper safety equipment or even the ability to identify themselves as armed officers to other police agencies.

Most common among the complaints was that under former directors Chris Wray and just-indicted James Comey, the bureau had become infected with political bias and liberal ideology that treated the Trump-supporting Jan. 6 protesters much differently from Black Lives Matter rioters from the summer of 2020. “The FBI should make clear to its personnel and the public that, despite its obvious political bias, it ultimately still takes its mission and priorities seriously,” wrote one employee. “It should equally and aggressively investigate criminal activity regardless of the offenders’ perceived race, political affiliations, or motivations; and it should equally and aggressively protect all Americans regardless of perceived race, political affiliations, or motivations.”

The agent suggested that leaders “identify viable exit options for FBI personnel who no longer feel it is legally or morally acceptable to support a federal law enforcement and intelligence agency motivated by political bias.” Another agent suggested that the problem was widespread throughout the FBI. “Currently, the US Attorneys office is dictating what it is that gets investigated. This is a dangerous precedent because we can barely get them to prosecute investigations that clearly meet thresholds needed for Federal prosecutions,” the agent wrote. “However, their willingness to conduct a search warrant on someone’s life for a misdemeanor seems ridiculous. It is unreasonable for the FBI to conduct investigations involving misdemeanor violations at a federal level… it is not our role.”

Several employees directly mentioned the Washington Field Office (WFO) and its culture. “WFO is a hopelessly broken office that’s more concerned about wearing masks and recruiting preferred racial/sexual groups than catching actual bad guys,” wrote one worker. “I wish you all would pay more attention to our safety than what type of masks we wear. If you are going to deploy us to a riot situation, then give us the proper damn safety equipment–helmet, face shield, protective clothing–and training!” wrote another. In total, the after-action feedback spanned 50 pages, which were located by current FBI Director Kash Patel’s office and turned over to the House Judiciary Committed and its subcommittee

As Just the News notes further; the document has proven a bombshell to lawmakers, revealing for the first time that the FBI had a total of 274 agents deployed to the Capitol in plainclothes and with guns but no clear safety gear of way to be recognized by other law enforcement agencies working in the chaos of the riot. Wray, Patel’s predecessor, steadfastly refused to tell Congress how many if any agents went to the Capitol that day. And a prior DOJ Inspector General Report did not divulge the number, referring only to a SWAT team the bureau sent into the Capitol and having more than two dozen informants in the crowd. The existence of mass FBI agents at the Capitol on Jan. 6 could also be a problem in many of the cases that were subsequently brought in court. If agents were witnesses at the Capitol and did not disclose it in the subsequent affidavits during prosecutions it could create grounds for defendants to appeal.

The document also reveals for the first time that there were widespread concerns for years inside the bureau – sentiments that boiled over after the FBI began sending SWAT teams to arrest Jan. 6 participants on misdemeanor charges – that the FBI had become biased in favor of liberals and against conservatives. Despite the pre-existing report, Wray rejected that notion in testimony before Congress. “The idea that I’m biased against conservatives seems somewhat insane to me, given my own personal background,” Wray told Congress in 2023. “I have found almost invariably, the people screaming the loudest about the politicization of the FBI are themselves the most political, and more often than not, making claims of politicization to advance their own views or goals, and they often don’t know the facts or are choosing to ignore them,” Wray added in an episode of the podcast “FBI Retired Case File Review” that aired the same year.

Read more …

MO: take a downed Russia drone, repair it, use it to attack Europe. Everyone will think Russia did it.

• Kiev False-Flag Provocation Could Lead To World War 3 – Zakharova (RT)

Ukraine is planning a possible false-flag operation in Romania or Poland that could escalate into a third world war, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has said. In a Telegram post on Friday, she pointed to reports in Hungarian media alleging that Kiev intends to stage acts of sabotage in neighboring NATO countries and place responsibility on Moscow. ”Europe has never been so close to the outbreak of World War 3 in modern history,” Zakharova wrote. According to the information available, the Kiev regime’s plan is to repair several downed or intercepted Russian UAVs, fit them with lethal warheads, and – controlled by Ukrainian specialists – send them disguised as “Russian drones” to major NATO transport hubs in Poland and Romania, Zakharova continued.

https://twitter.com/MyLordBebo/status/1971614761889726746

At the same time, they would run a disinformation campaign across Europe to pin the blame on Moscow and thereby try to provoke an armed conflict between the Russian Federation and NATO, she added. In order to carry out this alleged provocation, Russian-made ‘Geran’ drones were reportedly delivered on September 16 to the Yavorov training ground in western Ukraine, which hosts the International Center for Peacekeeping and Security of the Hetman Petro Sagaidachny National Academy. The UAVs had reportedly earlier been repaired at the LORTA plant in Lviv.

Zakharova cited Hungarian journalists as saying that the reason for these actions by Vladimir Zelensky is straightforward: the Ukrainian armed forces are suffering a crushing defeat. The collapse of the army, they argued, is no longer limited to the tactical level but has taken on a strategic dimension. If all this is confirmed, it means that Europe has never been so close to the start of World War 3, Zakharova concluded.

https://twitter.com/Alex_Oloyede2/status/1971655097034633621

Read more …

You can bet the Russian pilots are under strict orders NOT to breach protocol.

• Kremlin Slams ‘Reckless’ NATO Threats To Shoot Down Russian Planes (RT)

Threats by NATO member states to shoot down Russian warplanes are “reckless and irresponsible,” Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov has said. He insisted that no hard evidence has been presented to back up allegations that Russian fighter jets violated bloc members’ airspace. Earlier this month, Poland alleged that multiple Russian drones had entered its territory. Estonia made similar claims of airspace violations last Friday, requesting urgent consultations with fellow NATO member states. Moscow has denied any breaches of the military bloc’s airspace. Responding to the Estonia claim, the Russian Defense Ministry said three MiG-31s were conducting a routine flight from Karelia Region, east of Finland, to an airfield in Kaliningrad Region, a Russian exclave bordering Poland and Lithuania, and that they strictly flew over neutral waters of the Baltic Sea.

https://twitter.com/DD_Geopolitics/status/1971640205116654076

When asked to comment on a report by Bloomberg, in which Western diplomats were cited as threatening to shoot down intruding Russian warplanes, Peskov said on Friday that “this is a very reckless and irresponsible statement.” “Allegations against Russia that its warplanes have violated someone’s airspace are groundless,” the official said, noting that “no credible evidence has been produced” to corroborate the claims. The Bloomberg report cited anonymous officials as claiming that earlier this week, British, French, and German representatives had held a closed-door meeting with Russian officials in Moscow. According to the publication, the Western diplomats warned that NATO was prepared to shoot down Russian warplanes in the event of airspace violations.

Earlier this week, NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte said he would not rule out such a scenario, but that decisions are made strictly on a case-by-case basis. In an interview with France’s RTL radio station on Thursday, Moscow’s ambassador to Paris, Aleksey Meshkov, cautioned that such an incident would trigger a “war” between NATO and Russia.

Read more …

Democracy and sunlight. This sort of thing always reminds me of Groucho: ‘These are my principles, and if you don’t like them, well, I have others’.

• EU Moves To Bypass Hungary’s Veto On Russia Sanctions (RT)

The European Commission has proposed extending sanctions against Russia by qualified majority rather than unanimity in order to prevent Hungary from blocking them, Politico reported on Friday, citing an EC document.EU diplomats are due to discuss the proposal and a new sanctions package later on Friday, the outlet said. Currently, Brussels renews anti-Russian sanctions every six months with unanimous approval. Hungary has consistently opposed the bloc’s unconditional support for Kiev, favoring peace talks over continued military aid, and has repeatedly used its veto to block EU financial and military assistance. Under the Commission’s plan, only a qualified majority would be needed to extend the restrictions, curbing Budapest’s ability to wield its veto and demand concessions such as releasing frozen Russian assets.

The outlet said that ahead of Friday’s meeting of EU permanent representatives, the Commission also outlined a plan to provide Ukraine with a €140 billion loan backed by frozen Russian central bank assets, to be disbursed in tranches for defense and budget support. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz endorsed the idea this week, but said the funds should go solely to pay for military equipment and only be repaid when Russia compensates Kiev for damages. Earlier this month, the Commission floated a proposal to use Russian assets to back a reparation loan to Ukraine, repayable only if Kiev receives “compensation” from Moscow.

Reuters earlier put the plan at €130 billion, describing it as a “reparations credit” replacing Moscow assets with zero-coupon bonds issued by the Commission, guaranteed by all EU states or a coalition of willing countries. Diplomats for the bloc are expected to debate these initiatives alongside a 19th sanctions package. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said the measures would target Russian banks, liquefied natural gas, the Mir payment system and vessels in what Brussels calls Moscow’s “shadow fleet.” Russia, which has denounced Western sanctions as “illegal,” has warned that any attempt to seize or redirect its assets would deliver a “very serious blow” to the international financial system and has vowed to retaliate.

Read more …

“If countries see that central bank money can disappear when European politicians see fit, they might decide to withdraw their reserves from the eurozone.”

• Crazy Idea On How To Steal Russia’s Assets: Make EU Taxpayers Pay For It (MoA)

The war hawks have long tried to steal Russian assets held in West to then use the money to finance the proxy war against Russia. The sums involved are serious: “Nearly three years after the start of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Belgium holds €258 billion in frozen or immobilised Russian assets. The General Administration of Treasury at the Ministry of Finance confirmed the figures on Wednesday to La Libre and De Tijd.” Some of these assets belong to institutions not sanctioned by the European Union. Frozen assets amount to €65 billion, with an additional €193 billion in immobilised transactions, primarily from the Central Bank of Russia.”

The money is not really held by Belgium but by the Belgium company Euroclear which acts as depository for international central bank assets denominated in Euros. Currently the EU is confiscating the interest, not the principal, of that money to distribute it to Ukraine. That step is likely already illegal and Russia will certainly use the courts to get it back. There were also talks to invest the Russian assets in junk bonds with aim of achieving a higher yield:

“Euroclear chief executive Valérie Urbain told the Financial Times that European Union plans to raise additional revenue from frozen Russian assets by investing them in higher-risk securities would amount to “expropriation.” Urbain also warned that such a move could prompt “Russian retaliation in all sorts of forms,” as well as damage Euroclear’s reputation. The majority of Russian assets frozen after Moscow’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine are currently held at Euroclear. The E.U. has reportedly been discussing the possibility of transferring these assets to a special E.U.-administered fund that would make higher-risk investments. The goal is to generate greater returns to support Ukraine.”

That move was blocked as no one was ready to accept the potential liability for it. Not only Belgium, but also Germany and other fiscal conservative states, have warned that such a move would endanger their own assets. Russia has announced that it will retaliate against any confiscation of its money. It threatens to confiscate whatever European companies own or hold in Russia. Those companies would then have to sue their own governments for cover of their losses. Now a new idea has crept up. How it is supposed to work is not clear to me but it seems to have the support of the German Chancellor Friedrich Merz.

In a Financial Times op-ed Merz claims (archived): “Germany has been, and remains, cautious on the issue of confiscating the Russian central bank’s assets that are frozen in Europe, and with good reason. There are not only questions of international law to consider, but also fundamental issues concerning the euro’s role as a global reserve currency. But this must not hold us back: we must consider how, by circumventing these problems, we can make these funds available for the defence of Ukraine. In my view a viable solution should now be developed whereby — without intervening in property rights — we can make available to Ukraine an interest-free loan of almost €140 billion in total. That loan would only be repaid once Russia has compensated Ukraine for the damage it has caused during this war. Until then, the Russian assets will remain frozen, as decided by the European Council. Such extensive assistance will require budgetary guarantees from member states. Those bilateral guarantees should, as soon as the next Multiannual Financial Framework is in place in 2028, be replaced by collateralisation under the EU’s long-term budget.”

What sounds like AI slop is not Merz’ own idea but a plan that had been proffered earlier by the EU commission. But no one seems to understands how its is different from an outright confiscation of those assets: “Frustration has been building in EU capitals around the lack of details surrounding the so-called reparations loan, which Commission President Ursula von der Leyen first pitched in her State of the European Union speech Sept. 10. The bulk of the Russian assets are held by the Brussels-based financial firm Euroclear and are invested in Western government bonds that have matured into cash. The cash is sitting in a deposit account with the European Central Bank.

The idea is for the EU to redirect the cash to Ukraine and “enter into a tailored debt contract with Euroclear at 0 percent interest,” according to the note. Euroclear holds €185 billion in cash balances linked to the Russian assets, a part of which will pay back a preexisting G7 loan to Ukraine. The remaining €140 billion will be paid out to Ukraine in tranches and used for “defense cooperation” as well as supporting Kyiv’s ordinary budget needs.” Reuters has more details on it: “To avoid seizing the Russian assets, the idea is to transfer the cash from Euroclear to a newly created Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) owned by EU governments, or G7 governments as well. In exchange, the European Commission would issue Euroclear with zero-coupon bonds guaranteed by the owners of the SPV.

The EU bonds would cover Euroclear’s risk against Russian litigation while the cash in the SPV could be invested more profitably than overnight deposits in the ECB and thus generate a higher return for Ukraine. Why would this scheme, as Merz say, ‘require budgetary guarantees from member states’? Doesn’t that mean that the tax-payers of those member state will eventually have to pay it? Who’s money is at risk when Russia wins its litigation? Who pays if something goes wrong? Some 62% of German voters disapprove (in German) Merz’ policies. Only a record low 35.5% says that he is right in what he is doing. In the fiscal conservative Germany any attempt to borrow more money for the war in Ukraine will further sink his and his party’s chances of ever being reelected.

Merz knows that the scheme has little chance to find unanimous EU approval. He plans to circumvent opposition to it: “I propose that, at the European Council at the end of October, we give the mandate to prepare this instrument in a legally secure manner. That decision should, ideally, be unanimous — failing that, it should be adopted by the large majority of member states who are firmly committed to Ukraine. We should also invite partners around the world that have frozen Russian assets to join the instrument. To this end, we will co-ordinate closely with our partners in the G7”. Luckily it is Belgium which has the last says in this. It is, naturally, opposing the scheme:

Speaking in the margins of the UN General Assembly, Mr De Wever said that Chancellor Merz’s proposal “will never happen”. The Belgian Prime Minister argues that seizing central bank assets of a third country would set a dangerous precedent “If countries see that central bank money can disappear when European politicians see fit, they might decide to withdraw their reserves from the eurozone.” De Wever added Chancellor Merz’s public statement regarding this is regrettable. “I’ve told everyone that I am happy to discuss this. But let’s talk and come up with something, rather than sharing an opinion on it every day. I find it quite frustrating.” It is, in the end, Russia’s money. Any attempt to seize is outright thievery. How long will it take for sane people to intervene and to shoot this idea down?

Read more …

Scared shitless that the US will distance itself from Kiev.

• Kallas Insists US Shouldn’t Offload Ukraine On EU (RT)

Brussels is not solely responsible for helping Ukraine end its conflict with Russia, EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas told Politico on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in New York on Thursday. The comments follow US President Donald Trump’s recent apparent change of stance on Ukraine, after he suggested that Kiev, “with the support of the European Union,” was “in a position to fight and win.” Some observers saw the remark as Trump stepping back from the conflict after failing to make good on his pledge to end it quickly. “He was the one who promised to stop the killing,” Kallas said. “So it can’t be on us.”

After taking office in January, Trump engaged in brokering peace negotiations while suspending military aid to Kiev and refraining from imposing sanctions on Russia. He has insisted that the EU countries take greater responsibility for their own security, urging European NATO members to increase military spending to 5% of their GDP. Brussels’ top diplomat insisted that there is no NATO without the US, adding that America is one of the military bloc’s key members and any discussion of NATO’s role must reflect Washington’s responsibilities. The EU has faced challenges in financing long-term support for Ukraine, limited by constraints in its budgetary mechanisms and resistance from some members.

Kallas, a long-time Russia hawk, put forward an ambitious plan in March to mobilize new military aid for Ukraine worth €40 billion via EU member states. Several countries, including France, Italy, Spain, and Portugal, resisted the proposal, wary of the formidable commitments. After weeks of negotiations, the package was scaled back to €5 billion for ammunition, underscoring both the limits of EU unity and the challenges Kallas faces in translating her hawkish stance into collective action. Russia has repeatedly accused the EU of undermining the peace efforts around Ukraine and militarizing in preparation for any conflict with Moscow. Moscow’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said on Thursday that the EU and NATO have declared “an actual war” on Russia, accusing the West of orchestrating the Ukraine conflict.

Read more …

“The myth of the bogeyman from Moscow was born of cowardice and kept alive by greed..”

• West Invented The ‘Russian Threat’ – And Kept It For 500 Years (Bordachev)

In recent weeks, tensions between European political elites and Russia have flared once more. A drone incident in Poland, an alleged violation of Estonian airspace by Russian jets, and calls from Eastern European politicians to shoot down Russian aircraft all point to a deliberate effort at escalation. This sudden surge of provocation is less about Moscow and more about the EU’s own insecurity. With the United States steadily reducing its security guarantees, the bloc’s governments are grasping at their oldest weapon: the myth of the ‘Russian threat’.It is a myth that has lingered in the European imagination for over 500 years, and it tells us more about Western Europe’s cowardice and greed than about Russia itself

Two realities drive the EU’s current posture. First, Washington’s appetite for underwriting European defense is waning. Reports in Western media suggest that US officials recently told their European counterparts that direct military aid to Eastern Europe may soon be scaled back. For elites in the Baltics and former Soviet republics, this is a nightmare scenario. Their foreign policy has always revolved around one thing: provoking Russia to extract protection and resources from abroad.Second, the EU has no alternative strategy. Without US leadership, it cannot conceive of a foreign policy beyond confrontation with Moscow. Reviving the Russian bogeyman provides a convenient way to retain Washington’s attention – and money.

Yet the irony is obvious. Russia has no interest in punishing its smaller neighbors. Moscow does not seek revenge on the Baltics, Poland, or Finland for decades of anti-Russian rhetoric. Their importance in world affairs is negligible. But for their elites, clinging to the myth of Russian aggression has been the only foreign policy achievement of their independence. The roots of this myth lie not in the Cold War or the 19th century rivalry between empires, but in the late 15th century. Historians trace its emergence to the cowardice of the Baltic barons and the opportunism of German knights in Livonia and Prussia. In the 1480s, Poland’s kings considered sending these knights south to fight the expanding Ottoman Empire. The plan terrified them.

For centuries, they had lived comfortably in the Baltics, bullying local populations and skirmishing with Russian militias at little risk. Facing the Turks was another matter. The memory of Nicopolis – where Ottoman forces executed nearly all captured knights – was still fresh. Unwilling to face a real war, the Livonian and Prussian knights launched a propaganda campaign. Their aim was to convince the rest of Europe that Russia was as dangerous as, or even more dangerous than, the Turks. If successful, they could keep their privileges at home, avoid Ottoman swords, and secure papal approval to treat their border clashes with Russians as a holy war. The strategy worked. Rome granted indulgences and support, ensuring the knights could stay put while still enjoying the prestige of crusaders.

As historian Marina Bessudnova notes, the 1508 Livonian chronicle ‘The Wonderful Story of the Struggle of the Livonian Landgraves against the Russians and Tatars’ provided the finishing touches to this propaganda. Tellingly, the Baltic barons’ private letters contain no mention of a Russian threat. The danger was never real on the ground – only in the stories they sold to Europe. Thus, the myth was born: a fusion of fear, convenience, and profit. Over time, Western Europe, particularly France and England, absorbed it into a broader Russophobia – equal parts contempt and anxiety over a vast empire they could neither conquer nor ignore.

Read more …

I don’t think you can save Netanyahu anymore. Best you can do is to argue he is not Israel.

• Gaza Deal Near – Trump (RT)

US President Donald Trump announced on Friday that a deal on ending the war in Gaza is close, but without providing any details. His comments came just hours after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told the UN General Assembly he would “finish the job” of eliminating Hamas in the enclave. “I think we have maybe a deal on Gaza, and very close to a deal on Gaza, it’s looking like we have a deal,” Trump told reporters at the White House on Friday. Trump and Netanyahu are planning to meet in Washington on Monday. ”I think it’s a deal that will get the hostages back. It’s going to be a deal that will end the war,” Trump added.

Earlier this week, Trump and senior US officials presented a 21-point peace plan to Arab and Islamic leaders, the president’s Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff said at the UNGA. The plan calls for a permanent ceasefire, the release of all hostages, new governance for Gaza without Hamas, and a phased Israeli withdrawal, according to media sources. ”I think it addresses Israeli concerns and, as well, the concerns of all the neighbors in the in the region,” Witkoff said. “And we’re hopeful, and I might say, even confident, that in the coming days, we’ll be able to announce some sort of breakthrough.”

Trump’s position on the future of Gaza has not been consistent. In March, Trump said that “nobody is expelling any Palestinians” from the enclave, but later in May, he reiterated his desire for the US to take over the territory and “make it a freedom zone,” urging residents to leave. However, ahead of Netanyahu’s UN speech on Friday, Trump said he would not allow the annexation of the occupied West Bank, rejecting calls from some far-right politicians in Israel who want to extend sovereignty over the area. “It’s not going to happen,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office, adding: “There’s been enough. It’s time to stop now.” Netanyahu signed a controversial West Bank settlement expansion plan this month.

Read more …

“The former French president’s conviction is a rare glimpse of justice – but his true crime goes unpunished..”

• He Destroyed A Country and Half A Million Lives and Got Five Years (Fetouri)

Former French President Nicolas Sarkozy was found guilty and sentenced to five years in jail for campaign finance violations, a historic ruling in a case that has long captivated Parisian politics. The court concluded that Sarkozy had exceeded legal spending limits during his 2007 presidential election campaign, and engaged in a conspiracy to obscure the sources of illicit funds he received from Libya’s late leader Muammar Gaddafi, as various evidence has demonstrated. However, while the conviction targets money, it leaves untouched the far heavier human toll of his foreign policy decisions – from the 2011 Libya intervention to its cascade of wars, state collapse, and crises brought on by migration across the Mediterranean and Sahel. In other words, France’s courts can punish illicit euros, but fails to account for the blood spilled in the pursuit of regime change.

Earlier this year, while discussing the saga surrounding Sarkozy’s campaign funds, a source speaking to me anonymously, and corroborated by a former Libyan intelligence official, revealed for the first time that “a portion of the money reportedly came from Libyan intelligence, delivered across the Italian border by a female operative.” While the court did not definitively link these funds to Sarkozy’s campaign expenditures, the claims echo earlier allegations by Ziad Takieddine, who passed away in Beirut on September 23. He had maintained that he transported cash from Libyan officials to Paris. The murky trail of intermediaries underscores the complexity of the financial networks and how covert foreign influence can intersect with domestic politics, even when the legal system stops short of proving direct use.

The fallout from Sarkozy’s Libyan intervention extends far beyond financial scandals. By leading France – and later the entire NATO alliance – into the 2011 regime-change operation against Muammar Gaddafi, he helped dismantle Libya’s institutions, creating a vacuum that allowed jihadist networks to expand across the Sahel. Fourteen years on, Libya has yet to recover from that invasion. The resulting instability triggered waves of displacement, forcing thousands of migrants to risk crossing the Mediterranean in search of safety. What began as a “humanitarian intervention” became a cascade of unintended consequences: weakened states, regional insecurity, and a humanitarian crisis that Europe continues to grapple with more than a decade later. Sarkozy’s decisions illustrate how foreign policy choices can have profound, long-term effects reaching far beyond the immediate political or financial sphere.

Sarkozy’s Libyan gamble continues to reverberate across Africa, where resentment toward France has deepened amid coups, political instability, and ongoing foreign interventions. From Mali and Niger to Burkina Faso, anti-French sentiment has surged, fuelled by perceptions of neo-colonial arrogance and broken promises. At the UN General Assembly on September 23, 2023, Mali’s Foreign Minister Abdoulaye Diop recalled the 2011 UN Security Council authorization for NATO’s military intervention in Libya, noting that it went against the objections of African leaders and resulted in “consequences [that] have permanently destabilized this fraternal country as well as the entire region.”

The betrayal of Gaddafi, once considered a potential strategic ally, has become a symbol of Western leaders’ disregard for African sovereignty, illustrating how regime-change adventures can leave a continent grappling with the fallout for years. Sarkozy’s conviction for campaign finance violations, while significant in Paris, cannot erase the broader geopolitical upheaval his decisions unleashed – a reckoning with the enduring shadow of neo-colonial interference. Many believe French intelligence played a role in Gaddafi’s murder in order to cover up the campaign funding scandal.

Read more …

“I think all that we really know is that the official narrative is false.”

• Elon Musk Says Charlie Kirk Was Shot From The Rear (Paul Craig Roberts)

Much of what Musk says makes sense, but not the globalism part that the assassination of Kirk is a way of dividing us. We have been divided for decades by the teaching of critical race theory, aversive racism and by the DEI policy created by Blumrosen in the EEOC in the 1960s, by abortion, by the legalization of sexual perversity, by the feminist attack on men, and so on. Division has long existed and worsened. Musk’s “globalism” explanation is an effort to rationalize division that has long existed and grown. Liberal-left American professors had done a thorough job of creating division. It is all they are good for.

The globalism theory assumes that the US is the only obstacle to the WEA’s global management of the world. But of course there is Russia, China, and the rest of the world. As for division it is the neoconservatives that have the US aligned against Russia, China, Iran, India, and in Israel’s pocket. Perhaps it is Israel that is attaining world control.

As for forensic evidence, the front neck wound is too small to be an exit wound. Possibly it could be an exit wound of a small caliber such as .17 or .22. But it is most certainly not an exit wound of a powerful round. Moreover, Kirk’s right hand man says the surgeon said there is no exit wound and that the surgeon found the bullet inside Kirk’s neck. Musk did not give evidence for the trajectory he asserts of rear entry and front exit. Still no one has identified the caliber of the bullet. It clearly is not a 30-06 as the official narrative asserts. I find the video of the palm pistol shot more convincing, at least convincing enough to be investigated. Indeed, all explanations should be investigated.

As we already have multiple explanations of Kirk’s assassination, it reminds me of what James Jesus Angleton once told me. When the CIA pulls off an event it has a pre-packaged cover story that instantly becomes the explanation, and several more pre-packaged stories in reserve. If the first narrative wears thin, a couple more narratives are released. People then argue over which is correct and the focus is shifted off the question why the first narrative was wrong. I think all that we really know is that the official narrative is false. The important question is why is the FBI satisfied with a false narrative?

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1971324014279917971

https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1971432886633972153

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle September 15 2025

Sep 152025
 
 September 15, 2025  Posted by at 10:22 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  45 Responses »


Édouard Manet Woman with a jug 1858-60

 

• Suspected Assassin Has Not Confessed To Killing Charlie Kirk – Utah Gov. (RT)
• “He Was A Savant” – Charlie Kirk Challenged and Inspired a Generation (Morgan)
• Three Background Facets in the Charlie Kirk Assassination (CTH)
• Bill Maher Shreds Left’s Disgraceful Response to Charlie Kirk Death (Margolis)
• White House Plans Security Boost On Civil Terrorism Fears (ZH)
• Trump Shares Call For ‘Charlie Kirk Act’ To Hold Media Accountable (RT)
• Antifa Defaces Memorial For Zarutska and Kirk In Vienna (RT)
• Teacher Forces Students To Watch Charlie Kirk Murder Video (Margolis)
• Europe On “High Alert” As Polish Moms Train For War Against Russia (ZH)
• France Is Only The Front Line In A Crisis Gripping The G7 (Lukyanov)
• ‘Unite The Kingdom’ Is a Harbinger of a Western European Cataclysm (Amar)
• EU Must Mend Relations With Trump – Kallas (RT)
• EU NATO Members Displeased With US Reaction To ‘Russian Drone Incursion’ (RT)
• IMF Warns Of Major Gap In Ukraine’s Finances – Bloomberg (RT)

 

 

https://twitter.com/TaraBull808/status/1967219282556891401
https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1967384759257981334

https://twitter.com/MAGAVoice/status/1966943388072366543

https://twitter.com/DogRightGirl/status/1967242013398741271

https://twitter.com/TRUMP_ARMY_/status/1967176703886954895

https://twitter.com/TRobinsonNewEra/status/1966956948194292004

 

 

“All we can confirm is that those conversations definitely were happening, and they did not believe it was actually him. It was … all joking until… he admitted that it actually was him.”

• Suspected Assassin Has Not Confessed To Killing Charlie Kirk – Utah Gov. (RT)

The suspected assassin of conservative activist Charlie Kirk is refusing to cooperate with the investigation, Utah Governor Spencer Cox has told ABC. The authorities are currently gathering evidence from “people around him” and his online activities, according to the governor. Tyler Robinson, 22, the alleged shooter, remains in custody. He is expected to face formal charges on Tuesday, Cox said. “He has not confessed… to authorities. He … is not cooperating,” the governor stated, adding that “all the people around him are cooperating.” Cox noted that the suspect had a trans partner, confirming earlier media reports. “We can confirm that… his roommate was indeed a boyfriend who is transitioning from… male to female,” which was also verified by the FBI, he said. This person is cooperating with the authorities, according to the governor.

The investigators also established that the suspect talked to acquaintances about the shooting after the incident on Discord and claimed responsibility for it, Cox stated. “All we can confirm is that those conversations definitely were happening, and they did not believe it was actually him. It was … all joking until… he admitted that it actually was him.” The motive of the murder remains unclear, according to ABC. Cox previously told the Wall Street Journal that Robinson was “deeply indoctrinated with leftist ideology.” Asked by ABC to comment on the statement, he replied: “so far, that has come from his acquaintances and his family members.”

Kirk, 31, the founder of Turning Point USA, was fatally shot in the neck while addressing students in Orem, Utah. Robinson was arrested on Friday after his father reportedly recognized him in surveillance footage and persuaded him to surrender. Police recovered a Mauser .30 caliber bolt-action rifle and ammunition engraved with slogans such as “Hey fascist! Catch!” near the shooting scene. US President Donald Trump said in the wake of the incident that Kirk’s murderer should face the death penalty. Cox also previously said the authorities would seek capital punishment for the assassin.

Read more …

“..we actually filmed a video together where he said that he, you know, supports the gay community, and that e pluribus unum, represents all Americans,..

• “He Was A Savant” – Charlie Kirk Challenged and Inspired a Generation (Morgan)

By the time he set off on his final campus speaking tour, Charlie Kirk had built an organization of some 250,000 members, all the while engaging in conservative political organizing, engineering get-out-the-vote efforts, drawing tens of millions of dollars in funding, and growing a media influence machine. A driving force behind Kirk’s movement, Turning Point USA, has been his focus on engaging young minds in political debate and setting an example for new generations of political influencers like himself. Through this mission, Kirk often found himself on a college campus, delivering a speech or sitting down with a table and a microphone and defying his critics with the prompt “prove me wrong,” even in the face of insults and threats. He continued this mission until the very end.

“Charlie Kirk could’ve been running his multi-million dollar operation from a fancy suite or a fancy office, and he could’ve just hired the dangerous part of what he did out to other activists, and instead of doing that, he always stayed in the trenches. And I think that’s one of the most admirable things about him,” said Gunnar Thorderson, a former Turning Point USA organizer who helped establish the organization’s presence at Utah Valley University in Orem, Utah, where Kirk was assassinated on Sept. 10. Thorderson rose from the Turning Point USA chapter president at UVU to a state-level director for the organization in Utah. Now, Thorderson is a sitting member of the Utah Republican State Central Committee. He attributes his trajectory, in large part, to Kirk’s personal mentorship.

“I really got to view him as a mentor and as a personal friend, as he would invest in me one-on-one, on many occasions,” he told The Epoch Times. Thorderson is among many whose political voices Kirk amplified since co-founding Turning Point USA in 2012. “I owe my entire political career to Charlie Kirk,” Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) said in an X post the day after Kirk’s death. “I would quite literally not be in office today if it weren’t for him. Even when my own party was working against me, Charlie endorsed me and campaigned to help me win election.” Luna’s communications director, David Leatherwood, also came into his own, politically, through Turning Point USA and Kirk’s personal support. Leatherwood, 37, a self-described gay conservative, first met Kirk in 2017.

“I met Charlie at one of his campus tours in Fort Lauderdale, and we actually filmed a video together where he said that he, you know, supports the gay community, and that e pluribus unum, represents all Americans,” Leatherwood told The Epoch Times. “And ever since that day, he was always supportive of me, and he invited me to be an ambassador for his organization.” Hallie S., 26, from Gainesville, Florida, credits Kirk’s organization with helping her and other conservative students at Santa Fe College be more outspoken with their views. “I’ve always been more conservative. I was raised conservative, but was never big about speaking up, especially in Gainesville, which is such a liberal area, and you never know how people are going to react,” she said.

Hallie said she was able to revamp the College Republicans chapter at Santa Fe College in Gainesville, thanks in large part to the influence of Kirk and Turning Point USA. “Charlie Kirk was a huge portion of that. He had a huge impact on politics on college campuses, especially in Santa Fe,” she told The Epoch Times. “You had all these students that were like, ‘wow, my conservative values are being represented in a way that really had never been represented before.’” Kelly Shackelford, a First Amendment attorney and president and CEO of First Liberty Institute, said he invited Kirk to speak at a fundraising event in Houston, Texas, shortly after discovering the young influencer. “Typically at fundraisers, everybody’s 60-and-older,” Shackelford told the Epoch Times. “And so I wanted to encourage these older people that there are younger people who are coming behind them, and it’s not going to die with them.”

With much of his content shared online, Kirk’s influence spread beyond the numerous college campuses he visited over the years and reached millions online. Tucker, a teenager who requested his surname not be revealed due to fear of retaliation, told The Epoch Times that Kirk was among a limited number of political influencers whose content he liked to engage with. “I don’t really like watching political stuff. I mean, it’ll come up like on TikTok or something like that, and I just scroll past it,” Tucker said. “But when I saw his stuff, I would always click on it cause it was always interesting and he was just somebody that you could look up to.” During an interview on California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s podcast in March, the Democratic governor confessed that his 13-year-old son wanted to skip school for a chance to meet Kirk. “Literally last night, trying to put my son to bed, he’s like, ‘Dad I just—what time, what time is Charlie gonna be here? What time?’” Newsom said. “And I’m like, ‘dude, you’re in school tomorrow.’”

Leatherwood said he was comforted knowing how many moments of Kirk’s life were captured on camera, preserving his thoughts and views. “The beautiful thing about today and modern technology and our access, our access to media, is that, you know, there are literally hundreds, if not thousands, of hours of footage of him speaking. And those will live on, and I think they’ll actually memorialize his legacy in an even greater way than people can anticipate,” he said. Kirk made debate a core component of his mission. As he visited college campuses around the country, he often did so with a pop-up tent emblazoned with the words “prove me wrong,” and he offered up a microphone to those with differing points of view to confront him directly through dialogue.

“He went from campus to campus, engaging with students that he didn’t really view as the enemy ever. It was just that he felt they needed to be educated and that they needed to have proper discourse,” Thorderson said. “And it was through that that they would end up being convinced of our ideas.” Not all of Kirk’s interlocutors were swayed by his arguments, but they credited him for allowing a discussion. “I stand by so little of everything that [Kirk] said, but one of the things he stood by was conversation,” Hunter Kozak said in a video post the day after Kirk’s death. Kozak, 29, is a student at UVU and was the last person to debate with Kirk before he was shot. Kirk was just minutes into what was meant to be the first stop of his latest campus speaking tour when he was assassinated.

Dean Withers, who had debated Kirk, broke down in tears while filming a livestream on Sept. 10, as he learned Kirk had been shot. Addressing his initial reaction, Withers filmed another video that evening, acknowledging his disagreements with Kirk. “Does that mean I think he deserved to lose his life? No. Does that mean I think his two young children, who were in attendance at the event where he was shot, deserved to watch their father die? No. Does that mean I think they deserve to grow up without him? No. Does that mean I think that his wife, who was also there, deserved to lose her husband? No,” Withers said. “And honestly, if you answered yes to any of those questions, there’s a very clear line drawn between me and you. I don’t want your support, and I don’t support you either.”

Throughout his stardom as a conservative political influencer, Kirk frequently looked beyond politics and emphasized his Christian faith. Speaking with The Epoch Times, Thorderson recalled a morning when he and Kirk were traveling for an event and went for a workout in the hotel gym. It wasn’t long before their exercise turned philosophical. “I remember at the time, I was struggling with my own faith and kind of just playing devil’s advocate with him,” Thorderson recalled. “And he was just so steadfast in his faith and impressive with his knowledge. And that was a moment where I didn’t feel like he was necessarily preaching to me, but really just trying to connect on a personal level and trying to see me where I was at.”

At other points, Thorderson described Kirk being able to hold a knowledgeable conversation on matters beyond politics and articulate a connection back to his core values.“He was a savant,” Thorderson said. Thorderson also recalled having the chance to know Kirk when the Turning Point USA leader was getting to know his wife, Erika. “He just always valued family and wanted to start a family. And that was just, even before he had kids, that was a core value for him,” Thorderson said. Kirk leaves behind his wife Erika and two children.

Read more …

“Yes, Charlie Kirk had become openly critical of the decisions being made by the Israeli government. No, Charlie Kirk did not stop supporting Israel.”

• Three Background Facets in the Charlie Kirk Assassination (CTH)

There are three background facets worth discussing in the Charlie Kirk assassination. To wit, a fulsome historic reference is likely worth creating, so we can all evaluate information with a similar baseline. (1) The background of events in the lead to Charlie Kirk’s murder; (2) the post-shooting activity of the FBI; and (3) the reality of motive carried by the 22-year-old assassin, Tyler Robinson. All three of these issues are separate and distinct; however, some people are dangerously merging them together. This should be avoided.To help avoid conflation that happens, it is worth addressing all three issues separately and comprehensively. In this outline we address the first, the background events swirling around TPUSA and Kirk prior to the shooting.

Turning Point USA (TPUSA) is a donor funded organization. Within the business of engaging causes of worth it takes money, often a lot of money, to run the core logistics of the operation. With Charlie Kirk removed from TPUSA’s mission, I hope their donors and supporters remain fully engaged and are able to expand on his life’s work. Back in 2022, the same background financial interests who were structuring the presidential run of Florida Governor Ron DeSantis also supported TPUSA. Part of that collaboration surfaced in mid-August ’22, when DeSantis exited his five-days of silence in the aftermath of the FBI raid on President Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate (August 8, 2022).

In the lead to the election campaign, DeSantis came out of his bunker directly into a promotional tour for his book, The Courage to be Free. The Florida governor joined TPUSA as several events to increase his national profile. As a natural outcome TPUSA was funded for a short time by the same people funding the DeSantis long-term launch. Many of these donors were already part of the TPUSA financial system; it was a natural convergence.

To his credit, Charlie Kirk viewed the DeSantis effort as supporting a solid conservative, a fellow in the bigger battle, and yet remained supportive of Donald Trump throughout the collaboration and into the presidential primary once DeSantis formally announced over a year later. Recently, when discussing the tragic event of Kirk’s assassination, Tucker Carlson noted Charlie Kirk took a lot of donor backlash for a shift in his position around the issue of Israel and the overwhelming retaliation taking place in Gaza. Both groups, professional evangelicals and strong Israel supporters, took exception to Kirk questioning the attack on Iran and the ongoing decisions by the Israeli government to continue bombardment of Gaza. WATCH:


.
The donor backlash Tucker Carlson is referencing, is also evident in an earlier podcast segment Charlie Kirk did with Megyn Kelly about a month before his murder. Again, for fulsome understanding it is worth watching the entire segment.

.

The reference Megyn Kelly and Charlie Kirk are outlining was/is a cultural shift amid a great deal of young people as it related to how they perceive Israel. The issue was weighing on Charlie Kirk who was a strong supporter of Israel and was known as a voice for Gen-Z independent thinkers. The issue was such an important topic for Kirk, he did an entire focus group discussion on it. From the perspective of Kirk, a distinction needed to be made between support for the nation state of Israel to exist, and criticism for the way the government of Israel was conducting the war against Hamas. However, the pro-Israel donor class do not permit this nuance. Additionally, Charlie Kirk was calling out secular Jews for funding the radical left.

Put the three issues together, (1) a reluctance for conflict with Iran, (2) concerns about how Israel had extended the Gaza conflict, and (3) direct criticism of Jews funding the radical left, and what you get is an overreaction by the Israel-first lobby calling Charlie Kirk ‘antisemitic’.Charlie Kirk was not ever an antisemite. However, his soft touches on the third rail of criticism toward Israel created massive backlash from his donor base; again, hard-core evangelicals and wealthy donors of the Jewish faith. This is not coincidentally the same donor base who funded the launch and 2024 primary effort of Ron DeSantis. Again, to his credit, in the two-months prior to his murder Charlie Kirk did not waiver from his position; a position that was entirely in alignment with the voice of the Gen-Z audience to whom he was connected most deeply.

However, due to Kirk’s history of unwavering support for Israel a shift in opinion was viewed as a risk. The need for control is a reaction to fear. A pressure campaign against Charlie Kirk was created by the aforementioned donor group. This is the context that surrounded the assassination. This context is not connected to the motive of the murderer, nor is it connected to the motive of the FBI in the aftermath. This background just sits alone as the accurate context for some of the external pressures that were upon Charlie Kirk for the two months that preceded his death.

Against this context, the donor groups, individuals and organizations that were participating in the pressure campaign, then had another concern in the aftermath of the shooting. Would they be blamed? Would this, once again, feed yet another conspiracy theory against Jews? That aspect explains the openly obvious media campaign that was waged by the donor groups, individuals and organizations in the aftermath of the shooting. What we saw was coordinated praise for Charlie Kirk by the same people who were criticizing him for a shift in tone and opinion toward Israel and waging the pressure campaign.

Obviously, the people who were pressuring Charlie Kirk would be very nervous about being blamed, and that aspect directly surfaces in the way members of the Jewish community and Israeli government reacted to his murder. The intent of this post is to create an honest record of what was taking place in the background prior to Kirk’s assassination. The reason clarity becomes important is because without it, dangerous conspiracies thrive.There is ZERO EVIDENCE any of these background ‘donor pressure’ issues had anything to do with the murder of Charlie Kirk, yet already online people are making direct and inferred connections that do not exist. Israel did not kill Charlie Kirk.

An unstable ideological leftist named Tyler Robinson, who was living with his transgender boyfriend Lance Twiggs, killed Charlie Kirk because they hated him.Tyler Robinson hated the purity of Christian values that Charlie Kirk represented. Every day that Charlie Kirk spoke to their peers and dismantled the lies, was another day Tyler and Lance felt threatened by the return of a moral society that was the foundation of Kirk’s advocacy. Do not let the issues conflate. Yes, Charlie Kirk had become openly critical of the decisions being made by the Israeli government. No, Charlie Kirk did not stop supporting Israel.

Yes, Charlie Kirk was facing significant backlash by the very influential Evangelical and Jewish donors to his TPUSA organization. Yes, the influential donors were trying to convince Kirk to stop being critical of the Israeli government. However, no, there is no evidence Israel had anything to do with the crazed behavior of a mentally unstable leftist who assassinated him. If that changes, we will openly and honestly outline it as we do with all subjects of great interest and consequence; but right now, there is no evidence of any connection. Pray for Charlie Kirk and his family. Honor his legacy and support all the new awakenings happening as a consequence of this tragic and violent event. Do not allow yourself to be drawn into the dark imaginings of those who have an ulterior agenda.

Read more …

“The people who mocked his death or justified it, I think, ‘You’re gross. I have no use for you,’” he said. “The people who are saying now we’re at war, I have no use for you.”

• Bill Maher Shreds Left’s Disgraceful Response to Charlie Kirk Death (Margolis)

Bill Maher used his HBO show “Real Time with Bill Maher” Friday night to call out the disgraceful reaction from some on the left to Charlie Kirk’s assassination. The discussion, which featured Ben Shapiro, quickly turned into a defense of free speech and a condemnation of the toxic rhetoric surrounding Kirk’s murder. “I didn’t realize this was gonna be kind of a theme show because we write our editorial before the week starts, and so it was all about freedom of speech,” Maher said. “Then the assassination occurred, so this is turning into a theme show. But it is kind of interesting that this guy was shot.” Maher noted that Kirk had appeared on both his TV show and podcast. “I talked to him, I liked him,” he said. “I like everybody. I talk to everybody that I think… Um, I’m glad I took that approach.”

Kirk’s death, Maher pointed out, occurred while he was doing exactly what he was known for. “He was shot under a banner that said, ‘Prove me wrong,’ because he was a debater,” Maher explained. “And too many people think the way to do that, to prove you wrong, is to just eliminate you from talking altogether.” Maher didn’t hold back in condemning those who mocked or justified Kirk’s killing. “The people who mocked his death or justified it, I think, ‘You’re gross. I have no use for you,’” he said. “The people who are saying now we’re at war, I have no use for you.” While it was nice for him take this position, he couldn’t help himself and had to sneak in a little of the “both sides” argument that many on the left have been making the past few days. “I think the real war is not between left or right,” he said. “It’s between the people on both sides who want a war and the people who don’t.”

Ben Shapiro, who was close friends with Kirk, offered a personal perspective. “I knew Charlie for 13 years,” Shapiro said, recalling meeting him as a teenager in Palm Beach. “I watched him, you know, grow into a man and watched him, you know, get married and have a couple of very young kids.” Shapiro reminded viewers that Kirk’s work was about engaging with opposing views: “Whatever you thought of Charlie’s views is irrelevant. The fact is that what he made his living doing and what he actually did quite well… was just going and talking to people on the other side. And that’s, you know, what he was killed doing. He was literally in the middle of answering a question and picked up the microphone and was shot in the throat.” The broader issue, Shapiro warned, is a growing cultural acceptance of violence as a response to speech.

“We do have a serious problem in this country with people who believe that violence is the proper response to speech, and that does skew young,” he said. “What the polls tend to show is that of Gen Z, only 58%… believes that there is no excuse for violence in response to speech, meaning that 42% believe that there are some times that… violence ought to be a response.” “That is deeply terrifying,” he added, noting that he has required round-the-clock security for a decade. “Even the assassination of political figures is not the same thing as just being shot in the throat for the crime of debating issues in the public square.” For Shapiro, Kirk’s assassination marked a dark moment in American life. “I thought that that’s not what America is or what it should be about, and we’ve come to some place incredibly dark in our nation’s history,” he said. “And, you know, I weep for the country. I weep for Charlie. It’s, it’s horrific.”

Maher deserves some credit for calling out the ghouls on the left who laughed at or excused Charlie Kirk’s assassination. That kind of honesty is rare in Hollywood, and it’s refreshing to hear someone with his platform say out loud what so many Americans are thinking. I’ve long been critical of Democrats who posture as if they oppose political violence while claiming some moral high ground on the issue. Most of the time, I don’t buy a word of it. But Maher is different. He’s been consistent in warning the left that their rhetoric is toxic and counterproductive. He’s openly pushed back on the lazy habit of calling Trump a Nazi, and he even had dinner with Trump and walked away with decent things to say. That track record gives him credibility where others have none.

Still, his instinct to retreat into the tired “both sides” trope misses the point. The real threat isn’t some abstract culture of division — it’s the left itself, which has made clear it’s at war with anyone who dares to disagree with them. Charlie Kirk was murdered for the simple act of debating ideas in public, and the response from too many progressives has been to cheer or justify it. That tells you everything you need to know. The modern left doesn’t want to win arguments; it wants to silence and destroy the people making them. Kirk’s assassination was an attack not just on one man but on the very foundation of free speech in America.

Read more …

St. George, Utah, looks like a crazy place. No wonder it radicalizes people that are young, easily impressionable.

• White House Plans Security Boost On Civil Terrorism Fears (ZH)

The Trump administration has sounded the alarm on what we’ve openly described as “civil terrorism” – revolutionary left-wing political violence – following the assassination of Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk. In a sign of urgency, the White House requested an extra $58 million in security funding for the executive and judicial branches, according to a Bloomberg News report. Here’s the threat landscape:
• Kill-List Risks: Kirk’s assassination should be interpreted by America First leaders and thought leaders as the potential beginning of a sequential campaign of targeted political violence. The message is obvious: revolutionary armed Marxist radicals won’t stop at Kirk.
• Overnight Federal Response: The FBI disclosed, as per Axios, that agents have opened investigations into leftist groups believed to have had prior knowledge of the attack. No names were released, but the admission marks a significant concern among investigators. Hence, the White House’s move to request $58 million security boost.
• Organized Conspiracy In Kirk’s Assassination? GPS-based research flagged by analyst Tony Seruga suggests as many as a dozen co-conspirators may have been involved – raising the odds of a coordinated network rather than a lone-wolf incident.

More detail on the White House’s request for a $58 million security boost for top officials (via Bloomberg): The request to include the extra funding in an upcoming stopgap bill comes ahead of a Sept. 30 deadline when the current federal spending law runs out. Punchbowl News first reported on the funding request.

The administration also signaled support for expanding resources to safeguard lawmakers, though it left the specifics of that decision to the legislative branch, the outlet reported. Further detail from Axios’ report on federal and state law enforcement honing in on radical leftist groups that may have been involved in Kirk’s assassination – or at least had prior knowledge of the plan: Between the lines: Federal and state law enforcement officials also are examining leftist groups in Utah to see whether they had knowledge of the alleged shooter’s plans beforehand, or if they lent material support to him afterward. One of those groups eliminated its social media profile after the shooting, Axios has learned.

Latest profiling of the Kirk’s alleged shooter:
Charlie Kirk Assassination Suspect Lived With Transgender Partner, Discord Denies Use
Alleged Kirk Assassin A “Radical Left ANTIFA-Adjacent Creep” Wrote “Hey Fascist” On Bullet Casing

Before the assassination of Kirk, we had already assessed and warned of an emerging radical leftist threat environment with potential threat risks to the Trump administration, America First leadership, and individuals holding any opposing viewpoints to those of the left. There were some indicators of escalation visible well in advance, suggesting that the attack on Kirk could be part of a broader wave and a new era of civil terrorism, versus what was previously thought as an isolated event:

Read more …

“She accused the media of bringing “chaos, hatred, division, and anarchy all across this country” and also linked Kirk’s death to “constant hateful rhetoric”..”

• Trump Shares Call For ‘Charlie Kirk Act’ To Hold Media Accountable (RT)

US President Donald Trump has shared a video calling for a law that would make media outlets, content creators, and social media networks financially liable for making false claims and unsubstantiated accusations against anyone. The president reposted a short clip on Truth Social that was originally published on TikTok by a woman going by the name Elly May. There, she calls on him and his administration to reinstate the Smith Mundt Act, which, according to her, “held news corporations accountable for lying to the American people and spreading propaganda instead of truth.”

A piece of Cold War-era legislation, the Smith- Mundt Act was aimed at preventing domestic dissemination of US media content intended for foreign audiences, such as from Voice of America or Radio Liberty. Contrary to what May said in her video, it was not repealed under former US President Barack Obama and is still in force. It also has nothing to do with holding US news media accountable for spreading false narratives at home. In the video, May also urged Trump to name it “the Charlie Kirk Act” after the conservative activist murdered this week. She accused the media of bringing “chaos, hatred, division, and anarchy all across this country” and also linked Kirk’s death to “constant hateful rhetoric” he faced online and in the media.

Trump did not comment on May’s video in his repost. A petition of a similar nature launched on Change.org on Saturday got nearly 43,000 signatures in about a day. Directed at Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance, it also called on them to introduce strict penalties against news media, content creators, and social networks for spreading “false narratives,” baseless accusations or employing “unfair” censorship. Kirk, 31, the founder of Turning Point USA, was killed while addressing students at a college in Orem, Utah, on Wednesday. A suspect arrested in connection to the case was “deeply indoctrinated with leftist ideology,” according to Utah Governor Spencer Cox. In the wake of the incident, Trump vowed to pursue not only Kirk’s murderer but also what he called the “radical left” networks that fuel political violence.

Read more …

But of course…

• Antifa Defaces Memorial For Zarutska and Kirk In Vienna (RT)

Antifa has vandalized and defaced a memorial dedicated to the late conservative commentator Charlie Kirk and Ukrainian refugee Iryna Zarutska in Vienna, Austrian Freisinnige (Freelance) party chairman Christian Ebner said on Sunday. The makeshift memorial had been set up outside the US Embassy in the Austrian capital following the murders, both of which have inflamed partisan divisions in the US. During a vigil for Zarutska and Kirk on Friday, people placed photographs, flowers US flags and letters at the wall of the embassy, and lit candles. The memorial has been vandalized and torn down by Antifa activists as of Sunday, according to Ebner.

https://twitter.com/SebBax7799/status/1966562039762964580

“Antifa vandalized it; these inhumane left-wing extremists don’t even respect a memorial service,” he wrote on X on Sunday. Footage circulating on social media shows black-clad demonstrators chanting slogans as they stand opposite people taking part in the vigil on Friday. According to Austrian influencer Alexander Ehrlich, who was at the vigil, the group interrupted a moment of silence for the two murder victims by chanting slogans. Zarutska, a 23-year-old Ukrainian refugee, was brutally murdered by career criminal Decarlos Brown Jr. on a North Carolina train last month. The graphic video of the unprovoked stabbing was released by the local transit system last week and went viral.

Conservative influencer Kirk was fatally shot during a public appearance at a Utah university on Wednesday. The murders have sparked intense debate over media bias, public safety, and the increasingly violent culture war, with conservative figures accusing liberal media of ignoring Zarutska’s death until long after it had gone viral on social media. US President Donald Trump has strongly condemned both killings and promised to pursue those he accused of funding and fueling “radical left” political violence in the US. He has also said he would push for the death penalty for both killers.

Read more …

“.. hatred of conservatives becomes so normalized that a teacher feels emboldened to show snuff films to children and justify murder in the name of “justice.”

• Teacher Forces Students To Watch Charlie Kirk Murder Video (Margolis)

What happened in Toronto last week should send a chill down the spine of every parent, not just in Canada but worldwide. On September 11, a teacher at Corvette Junior Public School in Toronto allegedly showed a classroom of ten- and eleven-year-olds the horrific assassination video of Charlie Kirk. According to a report from the New York Post, the teacher didn’t just show the video once—he played it repeatedly, forcing children to relive the violence over and over while delivering a tirade on “antifascism” and transgender politics, and declaring that Kirk “deserved this fate.” Let that sink in: a public school teacher seized on the brutal murder of a political figure to indoctrinate children, twisting a tragedy into a platform for radical propaganda.

Parents were understandably outraged when their kids came home shaken and traumatized by what they had been put through. Imagine being a child in fifth grade, expecting a normal day at school, only to be subjected to the graphic sight of a man being assassinated—then told the victim somehow earned it. A letter was sent home on Friday to all students affected by the showing of the video, calling the teacher’s alleged behavior “extremely troubling and completely disturbing,” the Toronto Sun reports. “During class, students were said to have been shown a portion of a violent video in response to questions being asked about a recent tragic event in the United States,” read the letter signed by Corvette Junior Public School Principal Jennifer Koptie.

The letter stated that the video was allegedly shown to students in grades 5 and 6 — typically aged 10-11 — by a staff member who was supervising a French immersion class and was not the regular teacher. “While an investigation must still be conducted to learn all of the details, the report of this incident is extremely troubling and completely unacceptable,” the letter continued. “We recognize the seriousness of this matter and have taken immediate steps to follow all appropriate policies and procedures,” Koptie wrote. “The teacher has been relieved of all teaching responsibilities pending the outcome of the investigation and will not be at the school,” the letter continued. Assistance is being offered to any children traumatized by the incident, Koptie said.

This is what the political left does when ideology trumps decency. Instead of treating the murder of a human being as a moment to grieve or counsel, this teacher turned it into a grotesque object lesson in leftist identity-driven politics. A tragedy became a weapon to bludgeon students with lectures on antifascism and gender utopianism. It wasn’t about teaching; it was about grooming young minds to see political opponents as subhuman, their deaths as justified, and their suffering as deserved. Evil like that doesn’t just come out of nowhere. It’s the result of years of cultural decay, where radical politics take precedence over morality, and hatred of conservatives becomes so normalized that a teacher feels emboldened to show snuff films to children and justify murder in the name of “justice.”

What this teacher did to his students is unimaginable, yet at the same time, it’s a reflection of the vile hatred that comes from the left. And sadly, this isn’t an isolated incident. Schools have become battlegrounds where left-wing activists, armed with the language of “equity” and “social justice,” manipulate children into absorbing their worldview. And when tragedies occur, they pounce—not to heal, not to comfort, but to spread hate. Showing elementary school kids the assassination of Charlie Kirk wasn’t a lapse in judgment. It was the inevitable endpoint of an ideology that devalues conservative lives and sanctifies violent resistance against them.

Read more …

“Only three to four drones are confirmed to have been shot down. This means that either Poland has possibly the worst air defenses in NATO, or, the reported number of drones is greatly inflated..”

• Europe On “High Alert” As Polish Moms Train For War Against Russia (ZH)

A recent incident in Polish airspace involving at least three Russian drones has inspired hysteria in greater Europe (stoked by EU politicians and the media). The event, which involved what appear to be Russian reconnaissance drones, is similar to previous incidents of purported Russian UAVs shot down after crossing into NATO skies. No attacks, no casualties and no clear intent of invasion. However, the presence of these drones in Polish skies, even if their flight path was only meant to take them to Ukraine, is enough to fuel European calls for possible escalation. The EU and UK continue to insist on deployment of “peace keeping” troops to intervene in the Ukraine war, with France, Germany and Britain suggesting boots on the ground to reinforce the now faltering Ukrainian front lines.

The Polish Foreign Minister, Radoslaw Sikorski, asserts that the drone incursion is part of a Russian plot to “test NATO reactions without triggering a full scale war”. The Polish claim that at least 19 drones were involved in the incursion and that the devices had traveled “hundreds of miles” before they were intercepted. Only three to four drones are confirmed to have been shot down. This means that either Poland has possibly the worst air defenses in NATO, or, the reported number of drones is greatly inflated.

“The drones didn’t reach their targets and there was minor damage to property, nobody was hurt. If it happened in Ukraine, by Ukrainian definitions, that would be regarded as a 100% success,” Silorski said. But the drones had no ordnance attached and there is no evidence that they were targeting anything or anyone. As President Donald Trump noted, the crossing into Poland was more likely a mistake. This response has angered the Europeans, who are desperate for US involvement in the war. Poland’s response has set the country on “high alert”. Troops have been reinforced and the border with Belarus has been closed. The government is now sponsoring voluntary military training for civilians. Open to the public, the training has attracted over 20,000 recruits including Polish mothers, who say they want to “protect their children”.

The idea is logical enough, though the deployment of women for front line combat is generally an act of desperation rather than sound strategic policy. It is interesting that a country which practices strict gun control and eligibility requirements for citizens is suddenly so interested in using those citizens as a militia reserve against a hypothetical Russian invasion. Ukraine suffered from similar restrictions on its citizens before they were invaded and this stunted their defensive capabilities. EU officials say the drone event is an “aggressive, reckless act” and is “part of a serious escalation by Russia,” only reinforcing the bloc’s “support and resolve to support Ukraine.” The problem, though, is a matter off logistical realities.

Europe’s contributions to NATO defenses are minimal and the vast majority of military spending has long been covered by US taxpayers. Europe’s ability to manufacture the weapons needed to fight a prolonged conflict with Russia is next to nil and the means to supply their forces with enough equipment and resources to engage in an attrition war does not exist. The US military is the only force with the resources to manage a long term war in Ukraine, which is why the EU continues to demand that the Trump Administration commit to escalation. European officials have been encouraging Volodymyr Zelensky’s ambitions to take back lost Ukrainian territory with talk of potential EU troops. This has extended the life of the war and sabotaged efforts to organize diplomatic talks. Currently, Russian forces are surging on the Eastern front and Ukraine is facing the loss of the entire Donbas region. Central Ukraine is also at risk as Ukrainian troop strength dwindles. Analysts outside of typical western propaganda networks argue that Ukraine is facing a total loss unless a resolution is achieved in the near future.

Read more …

“Economic interdependence and ideological constraints ensure that problems not only go unsolved but reinforce each other.”

• France Is Only The Front Line In A Crisis Gripping The G7 (Lukyanov)

France is once again in crisis. Francois Bayrou’s government failed to win a vote of confidence in the National Assembly and has resigned. President Emmanuel Macron has promised to quickly propose another candidate. But after calling early elections last spring, he created a parliament with no stable majority. Now he must try to form a cabinet for the third time in little more than a year. If he fails, new elections will follow, and this time not even Macron’s usual tricks may save him. Both the far right and the far left have been waiting for this moment, sharpening their teeth for the embattled president for years.The spectacle in Paris is not unique. It is part of a wider malaise across the political systems of the G7.

In Japan, Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba long insisted he would not step down. Yet his party’s losses in two parliamentary elections left him no choice. In Britain, a scandal forced the resignation of the deputy prime minister and left the Labour Party floundering at approval levels no better than the discredited Conservatives. Nigel Farage’s Reform Party now leads in the polls. In Germany, Chancellor Friedrich Merz is recording record-low ratings while the anti-establishment Alternative for Germany remains stable at CDU levels.Italy and Canada are steadier, but barely. Canada’s Liberals were rescued not by their own strength but by Donald Trump. His coarse attacks on Ottawa provided a rally-round-the-flag effect, sparing them a near-certain defeat.

The result was continuity in power, though with Mark Carney replacing Justin Trudeau. As for the United States itself, the picture is clear enough: Trump’s supporters face little resistance. His opponents are simply lying low, waiting for better times. Each of these cases has local causes, yet together they reveal something larger. For countries with deep democratic traditions, turmoil is not new. They have endured crises before. But the simultaneity of today’s upheavals makes this moment extraordinary. The world is in open unrest, and no major power is insulated. The question is not whether the turbulence will continue, but how well political systems can withstand the waves.

Here there is a crucial difference between the United States and its allies, on the one hand, and the European Union on the other. The US, Canada, Britain, and Japan remain sovereign states. Their degree of sovereignty can be debated, but their governments retain legitimacy and can act quickly when circumstances demand it. Those decisions may be good or bad, but they are at least their own, and they can change course if the results prove ineffective. For the EU states, the situation is different. Their sovereignty is deliberately limited by the framework of European integration. In the second half of the 20th century, this was the Union’s great strength: by pooling authority, its members gained leverage they could never have achieved alone. But the same framework now acts as a brake. In a world where speed of decision is vital, Brussels makes it harder, not easier, to act.

Economic interdependence and ideological constraints ensure that problems not only go unsolved but reinforce each other. Worse, there is no vision of how the system might be changed under current institutional rules. As a result, rather than rethink course, leaders try to bulldoze through with even more energy in the same direction. Opposition forces are excluded even when they win elections. And the Ukrainian issue has been turned into the central pillar of EU politics. Should that issue fade, a mass of uncomfortable domestic questions will come to the surface – and Western Europe’s rulers know it.

Manipulation and muddling through remain possible, of course. France and Germany may once again stagger past their current difficulties. But each time it becomes harder, and the gap between society’s demands and the establishment’s interests grows wider. This is why the “moment of truth” for EU politics is approaching. No one can predict what follows. The bloc will not return to the pre-integration era. But the political forces cast as outsiders today may soon be the ones defining the new order.

Read more …

“..it makes little sense to get stuck once again reiterating what a very dubious figure Robinson cuts. Instead, let’s focus on why he is capable of causing such a stir.”

• ‘Unite The Kingdom’ Is a Harbinger of a Western European Cataclysm (Amar)

Seen from its former empire, riots in Great Britain may look wretchedly atavistic. Not to speak of a tiny bit of Schadenfreude. For the Times of India, the recent Unite the Kingdom rally and riots have turned London “into a stage for Britain’s anxieties.” And not just anxieties. While many protesters remained peaceful, there also was, in best old English tradition, some energetic fighting: Kicks, fists, and bottles flew as if at a football match or late at night outside a not-yet-gentrified pub around last call. There ended up being 26 police officers injured and 25 protesters arrested. For now. The authorities have promised to catch even more. Clearly so as to make an example of the uppity ruffians and keep the rest of the common people in check. That, too, is good old English tradition.

Organized by “far-right activist” (The Hindu) Tommy Robinson (aka Stephen Yaxley-Lennon), Unite the Kingdom was billed as a “free speech” demonstration, but its real and explicit core agenda was a protest against immigration and Islam (or rather the daft, mean caricature of Islam that Robinson and his followers propagate). Still a fairly young man at 42 years of age, Robinson has a well-known and ingloriously petty criminal record: assault, passport and mortgage fraud; yet another conviction, for contempt of court, was arguably political. He also has stacked up serious credentials as a right-wing influencer, organizer, and troublemaker. None of that, however, has stopped him or is ever likely to do him any political harm. On the contrary, just as with other recent break-out figures – Trump in the forefront – the very deserved bad-boy rep is only making him stronger.

Unfortunately, even Robinson’s aggressive siding with genocidal Israel (his really unforgivable crime, in my book) – a pattern now common with the far right in the West – and plausible assessments that he is functioning as a “Zionist asset” (and benefitting from it) won’t hurt him. Even if it sits extremely, comically badly with his constant complaining about foreigners subverting Britain. That is just the horribly corrupt way the West is now. And to be fair, in that respect, Robinson is de facto as mainstream as the whole ruling Labour Party and the rest of Britain’s establishment, too, from BBC to NHS. That’s why, here, it makes little sense to get stuck once again reiterating what a very dubious figure Robinson cuts. Instead, let’s focus on why he is capable of causing such a stir. That will tell us much about the current state of Britain and the West more broadly.

Read more …

“US President Donald Trump, the “most influential man in the world..”

• EU Must Mend Relations With Trump – Kallas (RT)

The EU must improve relations with US President Donald Trump, the “most influential man in the world,” and adapt to his way of doing business and politics, the bloc’s foreign policy chief, Kaja Kallas, has said. Kallas made the remarks in an interview with German outlet RND published on Friday. She was asked whether the EU can still trust Trump after a much-criticized trade deal that imposed a 15% tariff on most exports from the bloc while lifting tariffs on US industrial goods. The deal, which also involved shifting from Russian energy to US imports, sparked backlash from EU officials, who said it favors Washington.

“The US is and remains our most important partner. But the new administration has clearly changed how it conducts policy and official business. We Europeans must adapt and adjust to their way of working,” Kallas said, adding that Trump’s tariffs have become a “new benchmark for how well a country gets along with the US.” “Trump is the most influential man in the world… We simply have to learn how to work with him.” Kallas also said any settlement of the Ukraine conflict is unlikely without Trump’s involvement, claiming that only the US “has the power to force Russia into serious peace negotiations.” She expressed hope that Trump will follow through on earlier threats and impose further sanctions on Moscow.

Russia has not been targeted with US tariffs due to the existing sanctions, but Trump has threatened tariffs on its trade partners if the Ukraine conflict is not resolved quickly. Last month, he doubled the tariffs on India to 50%, accusing it of aiding Moscow by buying Russian oil and defense equipment, and hinted at new measures against China. This week, Trump signaled that he could further sanction Russia if NATO members stop buying its oil, arguing that the military bloc’s commitment to Ukraine peace efforts is insufficient. Russia has denounced the Western sanctions as illegal, and has said it is open to talks on Ukraine, but stressed that any peace deal must address the root causes of the conflict and include Ukrainian neutrality, demilitarization, and recognition of the new territorial realities.

Read more …

What do you mean you don’t want to go to war? We try so hard..

• EU NATO Members Displeased With US Reaction To ‘Russian Drone Incursion’ (RT)

European NATO states are reportedly ‘dismayed and confused’ by Washington’s reaction to an alleged Russian drone incursion into Polish airspace, according to Reuters. Some members of the bloc view US President Donald Trump’s reluctance to outright blame Moscow for the incident on Wednesday as a sign that he is not committed enough to their defense, the news agency reported on Saturday, citing unnamed European officials. US aircraft also played no role in repelling the alleged attack, according to Reuters. US officials said it was because the Dutch military was responsible for Polish airspace within NATO at the time.

“Trump’s handling of the incident has ranged from dismay to confusion and unease,” Reuters said. A German official told the news agency that European NATO members “cannot rely on anything” with the Trump administration.An Eastern European diplomat called Washington’s “silence” on the matter “almost deafening,” while an Italian official told Reuters that NATO members were mostly displeased with the US reaction. The Polish government stated that its military tracked at least 19 alleged violations of its airspace by Russian drones over a seven-hour period on Wednesday, describing the episode as “deliberate” and “unprecedented.” It also convened an emergency UN Security Council meeting over the incident.

Trump downplayed the accusations, suggesting that the alleged incident “could have been a mistake.” He also said he was “not happy about anything having to do with that whole situation” and expressed hope that it would just “come to an end.” Moscow responded by saying Warsaw’s claims were not supported by evidence and hyped up by the “European party of war.” Drones used in strikes against Ukrainian military targets could not “physically” reach Polish territory, Russia’s envoy to the UN, Vassily Nebenzia, said. European leaders, including French President Emmanuel Macron and European Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen, condemned the alleged incursion as “reckless” and expressed solidarity with Poland.

Read more …

There are no finances. There’s only a gap.

• IMF Warns Of Major Gap In Ukraine’s Finances – Bloomberg (RT)

Ukraine faces a growing funding gap that could require billions more in outside support to finance its conflict with Russia, Bloomberg has reported, citing sources from the International Monetary Fund. Ukraine, which spends around 60% of its budget on the conflict, relies heavily on Western assistance to cover pensions, public wages, essential services, debt, and humanitarian needs. It obtained a $15.5 billion loan from the IMF in early 2023 to cover some of the expenses and has already received around $10.6 billion, but the financing program was based on the assumption that the conflict would end this year and expires in 2027.

Kiev requested a new funding plan earlier this week, estimating that it will need up to $37.5 billion over the next two years if the conflict continues. But according to the Bloomberg report on Thursday, the IMF believes Ukraine may need $10-20 billion more than this, raising the total to $57.5 billion. IMF spokeswoman Julie Kozack confirmed on Thursday that the agency has begun talks with Kiev on a new support program, but did not acknowledge the reported shortfall. Sources told Bloomberg that Kiev and the IMF are expected to settle on a figure for the new loan next week. Ukraine’s cabinet and Finance Ministry declined to comment on the report.

Ukraine has struggled to secure new aid from its main backers. US contributions have dwindled since President Donald Trump’s return to office, leaving the EU as the biggest donor. One method pursued by the West has been to use profits from the $300 billion in frozen Russian assets abroad. Last year, the G7 backed a $50 billion loan plan to be repaid from these earnings.Some Western countries have called for the full confiscation of Russian assets, while others warn of legal risks. Nevertheless, the profits have already been tapped, with the EU, which pledged $21 billion under the program, disbursing roughly half of the amount so far this year.Russia has warned that financial and military aid to Ukraine only prolongs the conflict and has denounced the use of frozen assets as “robbery” which violates international law and erodes trust in the Western financial system.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle September 9 2025

Sep 092025
 
 September 9, 2025  Posted by at 10:16 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  68 Responses »


Utagawa Yoshitoshi Ariko weeps as her boat drifts in the moonlight 1886

 

• Britain’s Spirit of Freedom Is Dying (Chris Queen)
• French Government Collapses (RT)
• French Debt A Danger To Eurozone – DW (RT)
• EU Top Diplomat Kallas ‘Critically Uneducated’ – Moscow (RT)
• Zelensky Claims ‘Victory’ Is Avoiding Total Loss Of Ukraine (RT)
• Zelensky Has Insulted Trump. Is He Suicidal? (Romanenko)
• Russia Has No Desire For Revenge – Lavrov (RT)
• Orban Outlines EU Security ‘Guarantee’ Plan (RT)
• Democrats ‘Hate’ Trump More Than They ‘Love’ Their Communities – Homan (DS)
• ‘The Politics Will Figure Itself Out’: JD Vance (Pero)
• Days of Thunder (James Howard Kunstler)
• Appeals Court Upholds E. Jean Carroll’s $83.3 Million Judgment Against Trump (ZH)
• Trump Admin Asks Supreme Court to Allow Withholding of Foreign Aid Funds (ET)
• Another Tremendous Supreme Court Victory for Trump! (Margolis)
• Is the Western World Degenerating Into Communism? (Paul Craig Roberts)
• Chuck Schumer Tested FAFO and the GOP Will Make Him Pay the Price (Margolis)
• Did Johnson Really Say Trump Was an Informant Against Epstein? (Margolis)
• Elite UK Divers Likely Behind Nord Stream Sabotage – Patrushev (RT)

 

 


https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/1965073853576831472

https://twitter.com/TRUMP_ARMY_/status/1965058356647002444

100s of arrests for Palestine Action protesters. Banksy is quick. Just as quickly, a fence was erected in front of the artwork.
https://twitter.com/GBPolitcs/status/1965030113332056143

 

 

Nap Ritter

 

 

 

 

Britain itself is dying along with that spirit.

• Britain’s Spirit of Freedom Is Dying (Chris Queen)

I’m writing this on the third anniversary of the death of Queen Elizabeth II. I still remember that day so distinctly since I was on breaking news watch for her certain passing. The death of such a long-reigning monarch was heartbreaking to the nation she led, but it was also a sad day for Anglophiles like me.I’ve been an Anglophile as long as I can remember. It’s literally in my DNA; the vast majority of my heritage comes from the British Isles. But British culture, entertainment, and politics have fascinated me for decades (although I have to admit that I’m not as enamored with the royal family after Elizabeth’s passing as some people are). British politics has gotten frustrating in recent years for true conservatives, and watching Britain slide into authoritarianism on free speech is something even a dyed-in-the-wool Anglophile like me can’t support. And I’m not alone.

Last week, Lee Cohen wrote a column in The Spectator that resonated deeply with me: “Today, for the first time, I find Britain indefensible. The affection and historical respect remains. The confidence is gone. Britain now prosecutes her own citizens, not for violence or treason, but for words. Lucy Connolly was sentenced to 31 months in prison for a tweet in the wake of the Southport murders last year. Her crime was expression, harsh perhaps, but still speech. This week, Graham Linehan, the award winning creator of Father Ted, was arrested at Heathrow Airport by armed officers for online comments defending women’s spaces. Arrested, by police carrying weapons, for his opinions. This is the country that gave the world John Stuart Mill.

“Such cases expose what Britain has become: a two tier system of justice. Those branded far right, nationalist, or Islamophobic are persecuted with zeal, Cohen added. Those spreading incendiary rhetoric from Islamist or minority factions are, all too often, met with indulgence. ” Cohen cited not just the crackdown on social media users who express conservative views, but also local governments cracking down on patriotic Britons who fly the Union Jack or St. George s Cross. The same nation that survived the Great Fire of London, the Blitz, and the Falklands War can t handle patriotism in the face of unchecked Muslim immigration. “Meanwhile, foreign flags fly freely across London without question, he wrote. The message is unmistakable: pride in your own country is suspect. Allegiance to any other is acceptable.”

He continued: “From abroad, the shift is impossible to ignore. Elon Musk has called Britain’s censorship Soviet style. JD Vance has condemned its crackdown on speech. The US State Department now lists Britain as a country presenting significant risks to free expression. I never imagined America would place Britain alongside nations that treat liberty as a nuisance. That day has come. For those of us who have long defended Britain, it is heartbreaking. This is the country whose strong institutions enabled America’s own rise and whose commitment to liberty inspired ours. Yet under its current leadership, Britain has stumbled into repression, constraint, and fear, where ordinary citizens look over their shoulders before speaking.”

Cohen appeared on The Spectator’s “Americano” podcast over the weekend, and he told host Freddy Gray that he’s never seen Americans as interested in British politics as they are right now. He mused whether Donald Trump’s Anglophilia and JD Vance’s earnest engagement with British politics might drive the two American leaders to urge the British government to stem the anti-free speech tide. It’s tempting to hope so, but it’s equally tempting to despair that Britain is too far gone. For someone who loves the British and their history and culture, I hope Britons can reverse course and return to shining as a beacon of freedom and hope to the world.

Read more …

Another PM gone. They go through them like candy.

Still, Macron stays. But: “..the latest Le Figaro poll showing nearly 80% of French no longer trust the president.”

The only person they trust is Marine Le Pen. Who is prohibited from running.

• French Government Collapses (RT)

The French government has fallen after Prime Minister Francois Bayrou lost a crucial confidence vote in parliament on Monday. Bayrou is the second consecutive prime minister under President Emmanuel Macron to be ousted, throwing the nation into political and economic turmoil. A no-confidence motion in the National Assembly requires at least 288 votes to pass. Monday’s motion received 364 votes, with the left-wing New Popular Front and the right-wing National Rally uniting in opposition to end a months-long standoff over Bayrou’s austerity budget. Having previously survived eight no-confidence motions, Bayrou called this vote himself, in a bid to secure backing for proposals that forecast almost €44 billion ($52 billion) of savings to ease France’s debt burden before the budget is presented in October.

The prime minister, who has repeatedly warned that France’s national debt poses a “mortal danger” to the country, appeared to acknowledge his fate. In a bitter remark on Sunday, Bayrou lashed out at rival parties that he said “hate each other” yet joined forces “to bring down the government.” Bayrou is the second French prime minister in succession to be brought down following Michel Barnier’s ejection last December after just three months in office – and the sixth to serve under Macron since he was first elected in 2017. Bayrou’s ouster reportedly leaves the French president to choose between appointing a Socialist prime minister to steer a budget through parliament, effectively ceding control of domestic policy, or call snap elections that polls suggest favour Marine Le Pen’s National Rally.

With Macron’s approval ratings already hitting historic lows, either choice risks further weakening his presidency. Analysts warn that if markets lose confidence in France’s ability to rein in its deficit and mounting debt, the country could face turmoil reminiscent of the UK during the brief Liz Truss premiership. Public discontent with Macron’s leadership has deepened, with the latest Le Figaro poll showing nearly 80% of French no longer trust the president. Thousands marched through Paris at the weekend demanding Macron’s resignation and carrying placards reading ‘Let’s stop Macron’ and ‘Frexit.’

Read more …

Why Macron needs a war with Russia.

But be careful: he’s a Rothschild banker. He knows people.

• French Debt A Danger To Eurozone – DW (RT)

France’s ballooning sovereign debt coupled with political infighting could threaten the fiscal stability of the Eurozone, Deutsche Welle has reported, citing an expert. France has one of the highest national debts in the EU, currently standing at €3.35 trillion ($3.9 trillion) — about 113% of GDP. The ratio is expected to climb to 125% by 2030. Its budget deficit is projected at 5.4–5.8% this year, well above the bloc’s 3% limit. Friedrich Heinemann of the ZEW Leibniz Center for European Economic Research in Mannheim, Germany, told the outlet in an article published on Saturday “we should be worried. The eurozone is not stable at this point.”

A drastic austerity plan proposed by French minority government Prime Minister Francois Bayrou triggered a no confidence vote that he lost on Monday evening. The plan involved slashing public sector jobs, curbing welfare spending, as well as axing two public holidays. The right-wing National Rally, the Socialists, and the leftist France Unbowed vehemently opposed the proposal. An Elabe poll ahead of the vote also showed most respondents were against the measures. Heinemann told DW he doubts France will find a way out soon, given the bitter political infighting.

In July, Bloomberg, citing ING Groep NV experts, similarly claimed that France’s rising debt could be a “ticking bomb” for EU financial stability. Despite the considerable budget deficit, France plans to hike military spending to €64 billion in 2027, double what the country spent in 2017. President Emmanuel Macron has repeatedly cited a supposed Russian threat. The Kremlin has consistently dismissed the claims as “nonsense,” accusing the EU of rapidly militarizing. In May, member states approved a €150 billion ($169 billion) debt program for arms procurement.

Read more …

One job requirenent: hatred of Putin. Not even Russia, just Putin. Can we blame her for not knowing much else?

• EU Top Diplomat Kallas ‘Critically Uneducated’ – Moscow (RT)

Remarks by EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas stereotyping Russians and Chinese expose her as “critically uneducated,” Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said on Sunday. Speaking at an event organized by the EU Institute for Security Studies last week, Kallas argued that the two nations complement one another in their opposition to the West, describing Russians as strong in social sciences but weak in tech, and the Chinese as the reverse. “Chinese are very good at technology but they are not that good in social sciences,” Kallas said. “The Russians… are not good at technology at all, but super good in social sciences.” Zakharova mocked the remarks in a Telegram post, asking who built the Crimean Bridge or launched rockets from Russia’s Vostochny Cosmodrome if it’s true that Russians lack technological expertise.

“On the same note, China would not be able to govern a billion citizens without being strong in social sciences,” Zakharova wrote. “Kallas is critically uneducated.” The top EU diplomat made the comments while lamenting Western disunity, in contrast to what she described as Russia and China’s unified front. She also claimed that when the two nations highlight their roles in defeating the Axis powers during World War II, it “raises a lot of question marks” for a person who knows history. Moscow has frequently accused officials in the EU of scapegoating Russia for the bloc’s internal problems, arguing that this rhetoric is used to divert public attention from their own failures.

Read more …

Russia never laid claim to all of Ukraine. So yeah, some victory. But it’s great media fodder, they eat it up, as do their readers and viewers. Who have no clue what really goes on. The same media made sure of that.

• Zelensky Claims ‘Victory’ Is Avoiding Total Loss Of Ukraine (RT)

Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky has claimed Russian President Vladimir Putin wants to occupy the whole of the country, and that Kiev can claim “victory” in the conflict as long as this does not happen. Russia has long stressed that it has no intention of occupying Ukraine in full. Putin reiterated this when the conflict escalated in February 2022, and again later that year when Russian troops reached Kiev but then withdrew. Since then, Moscow has consistently said any peace settlement requires Ukrainian neutrality, demilitarization, and recognition of Crimea, Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson, and Zaporozhye as Russian territory. Zelensky, however, insisted in an interview with ABC News’ Martha Raddatz which aired on Sunday that Moscow’s ambitions go further.

“Putin’s goal is to occupy Ukraine, it is to destroy us… For him that’s victory,” he claimed. “And until he can do it, the victory is on our side… For us to survive is a victory.” He also accused Putin of “playing games” by holding a summit with US President Donald Trump in Alaska while allegedly refusing to meet with him, and claimed the Russian leader is not truly interested in peace. Putin and Trump met in Anchorage on August 15. Although the summit produced no breakthroughs, both sides described it as a positive step. Trump’s remarks afterward fueled speculation of a potential Putin-Zelensky meeting. Kremlin aide Yury Ushakov later said no agreement had been reached, although Putin has not ruled out a meeting, despite questioning Zelensky’s legitimacy after his presidential term expired.

Putin has stressed, however, that talks can only occur after tangible progress in negotiations. Last week, Putin struck a cautiously optimistic note about the prospects for peace, saying “there is light at the end of the tunnel” given the US shift to peace mediation. Kirill Dmitriev, Putin’s aide on international economic affairs, echoed the sentiment on Sunday, saying that “peace is close precisely because of Trump-Putin dialogue.” On Sunday, Trump told reporters he planned further talks with Putin “over the next couple of days,” vowing “to get it done – the Russia-Ukraine situation” soon.

Read more …

“Ukraine is exhausting its people, its infrastructure, and its economy. If survival truly is the goal, then ending the war must be the only priority.”

• Zelensky Has Insulted Trump. Is He Suicidal? (Romanenko)

In a weekend interview with ABC News, Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky accused US President Donald Trump of giving Russian President Vladimir Putin “what he wanted” at the Alaska summit in August. Whether a passing complaint or a calculated jab, it may come at a steep cost for Zelensky. To suggest that Trump bent to Putin’s will is to imply weakness, and weakness is something Trump never tolerates being accused of. This rhetorical swipe was directed at a man who holds significant sway over the trajectory of the Russia-Ukraine war. For Zelensky, the insult may prove more damaging than cathartic.

Zelensky appears to believe that he has become indispensable in Trump’s calculations, that Washington’s policy revolves around Kiev’s demands. But this overstates his importance. Trump has been consistent about one priority: he wants the war to end, and more than that, he wants the US disentangled from it. His approach reflects the sentiment of much of the American public – weary of sending weapons and aid overseas while domestic problems fester. By framing Trump’s summit with Putin as a giveaway, Zelensky risks alienating the one Western leader positioned to actually shift the direction of the war. Trump is sensitive to personal slights. For years, allies and adversaries alike have learned that once he feels personally insulted, he hardens, not softens. To tell Trump, in effect, that he’s Putin’s stooge is to court precisely that reaction.

Trump’s efforts at the Alaska summit were grounded in a political reality that Zelensky refuses to acknowledge. The battlefield is not tilting in Kiev’s favor. Russia’s position, bolstered by sheer resources and strategic depth, is proving resilient. Ukraine’s European backers continue to speak in lofty terms of standing “as long as it takes,” but they lack the power to deliver a Ukrainian victory. Trump, by contrast, pursued a path that might actually move events forward: direct talks with Russia, engagement on security concerns, and the search for a negotiated framework. It is not an approach designed to satisfy Zelensky and the Europeans’ maximalist goals but rather one rooted in ending an exhausting conflict. To dismiss this effort as capitulation is to ignore that it may be the most realistic option still on the table.

In the same ABC interview, Zelensky says his vision for a Ukrainian victory is Ukraine’s survival. Yet his strategy as evident from his actions appears geared less toward survival and more toward dragging the war on for as long as possible. Each new demand for weapons, each new appeal for escalated sanctions, pushes the conflict forward without changing the battlefield reality of Russia grinding forward toward its objectives – and whatever Zelensky claims, total occupation of Ukraine is not one of those objectives. In the name of “survival,” Ukraine is exhausting its people, its infrastructure, and its economy. If survival truly is the goal, then ending the war must be the only priority. Right now, Trump has the best shot at it, because he is realistically engages with the interests of Russia – the side that has the clear upper hand on the battlefield. And Zelensky is pushing that opportunity away.

Read more …

“We have never turned away or pushed anyone out. Those who want back in are welcome..”

• Russia Has No Desire For Revenge – Lavrov (RT)

Russia has no plans to exact vengeance on Western countries that cut ties and pressured Moscow over the Ukraine conflict, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said. Speaking at the Moscow State Institute of International Relations on Monday, Lavrov stressed that Russia did not intend to “take revenge or vent anger” on companies that decided to support Western governments in their push to support Kiev and impose economic sanctions on Moscow, adding that hostility is generally “a poor adviser.” “When our former Western partners come to their senses… we will not push them away. But we… will take into account that, having fled at the order of their political leaders, they have shown themselves to be unreliable,” the minister said.

According to Lavrov, any future market access would also depend on whether the companies would pose risks to sectors vital to Russia’s economy and security. The minister stressed that Russia is open to cooperation and has no intention to isolate itself. “We live on one small planet. It was Western-style to build Berlin Walls… We do not want to build any walls,” he said, referring to the symbol of the Cold War that split the German capital from 1961 to 1989. ”We want to work honestly, and if our partners are ready to do the same on the basis of equality and mutual respect, we are open to dialogue with everyone,” he said, pointing to the Alaska Summit between Russian President Vladimir Putin and his US counterpart, Donald Trump, as an example of constructive engagement.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said, on Saturday, that Western businesses would be welcomed back if they had not supported the Ukrainian army and had met obligations to the state and their Russian staff, including paying due salaries. Putin this month also rejected isolationism, stressing that Russia would like to avoid closing itself off in a “national shell” as it would harm competitiveness. “We have never turned away or pushed anyone out. Those who want back in are welcome,” he added.

Read more …

“.. the outcome would only slightly differ from the pre-conflict balance, when Ukraine itself acted as a buffer between Russia and NATO with “50% influence” each..”

• Orban Outlines EU Security ‘Guarantee’ Plan (RT)

Partitioning Ukraine into Russian and Western zones of influence is the likely outcome of the conflict and the only reliable guarantee of the EU’s security, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has said. Kiev has pressed its Western backers for security guarantees as a precondition for a settlement with Russia, first pushing for NATO membership and later floating ideas such as ‘peacekeepers’ and a buffer zone with Western military patrols. Moscow has rejected Ukrainian membership in NATO or Western troops on its territory, stressing that any settlement must include Kiev’s neutrality, demilitarization, and recognition of Crimea, Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson, and Zaporozhye as Russian territory.

Orban, however, has suggested it is time for the West to acknowledge Russia’s “inevitable” military victory and to begin deciding how Ukraine should be partitioned. ”Europeans all so elegantly talk around security guarantees, but the security guarantee actually means the division of Ukraine,” Orban told guests at the annual Civic Picnic in Kotcse on Sunday. “The first step has already been taken – the Westerners have accepted that a Russian zone exists.” He referred to earlier remarks by US President Donald Trump that Ukraine regaining Crimea was “impossible.”“The result would be a Russian zone, a demilitarized zone and, eventually, a Western zone…The only question is how many kilometers away from the border of the Russian zone a demilitarized zone should be established,” he stated.

Orban noted the outcome would only slightly differ from the pre-conflict balance, when Ukraine itself acted as a buffer between Russia and NATO with “50% influence” each in the country. He said this division would help end the conflict and benefit all sides, particularly the EU, which he warned is on the verge of “collapse” and lacks the means to fund the conflict further. The Hungarian leader has long criticized Brussels over its “warmongering” stance on Russia and support for Ukraine. In his speech, he repeated his warning that Ukraine’s EU accession would trap the bloc in a permanent conflict with Moscow, calling instead for an EU-Russia security pact.

Read more …

“.. they’re sanctuary cities and they’re releasing criminals every hour, so that’s where we’re going,” Homan said. “That’s where we’re going to flood the zone.”

• Democrats ‘Hate’ Trump More Than They ‘Love’ Their Communities – Homan (DS)

Trump administration border czar Tom Homan says Democrat leaders in sanctuary states and cities hate President Donald Trump more than they care for their communities. Homan spoke to the State Freedom Caucus Network Summit in Dallas, Texas, Friday night and reiterated the plan to deport illegal aliens in Chicago. While Democrats say Trump is targeting Democrat run cities for political reasons, Homan said that’s not the case. “It’s not because they’re blue, it’s because they’re sanctuary cities and they’re releasing criminals every hour, so that’s where we’re going,” Homan said. “That’s where we’re going to flood the zone.”

Weeks ago, Homan had said they will “flood the zone” with immigration enforcement in Chicago. Last month, Trump said he would send in the National Guard to address public safety, but later hedged that and insisted Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker call for help. Pritzker said he would not call Trump to ask for help, saying there is not an emergency. Saturday, Trump posted a graphic to Truth Social, depicting him as a character in the film Apocalypse Now, but it said “Chipocalypse Now,” “I love the smell of deportations in the morning” and “Chicago about to find out why it’s called the Department of WAR.” Pritzker posted on social media in response that “this is not a joke” and “this is not normal.”

Pritzker and other Democratic leaders also posted on social media over the weekend “know your rights” campaign messaging, with tips like remaining calm, denying entry without a warrant, remaining silent, and declining to sign anything. Homan tried to make sense of the Democrats’ resistance to cooperating with ICE. “They hate President Trump more than they love their communities, there’s no other reason,” Homan said. “I can’t think of why you would not join forces with us.” Illinois law prohibits state and local law enforcement from cooperating with federal immigration officials. State law also prohibits police from inquiring about an individual’s immigration status. Pritzker said if Trump deploys the National Guard in Chicago, they will immediately take the administration to court.

Read more …

Peter Thiel and four different names. That’s JD Vance.

• ‘The Politics Will Figure Itself Out’: JD Vance (Pero)

Vice President JD Vance joined “My View with Lara Trump” Saturday where he discussed everything from his best-selling book “Hillbilly Elegy” to whether he will run for president in 2028. Since it’s been 10 years since Vance wrote “Hillbilly Elegy,” he reminisced on his life before he became vice president of the United States. “I was raised by a grandmother who—we didn’t go to church a whole lot—but she prayed everyday. She read the Bible everyday, and she gave me this sense that there was some purpose to this. We might not understand it. God works in mysterious ways, but there was some deeper meaning to what we were experiencing, and that gave me the perseverance to go through it.” Vance said a major motivation for him growing up was knowing his grandmother was very sick and that someone was going to have to step up and hold the family together when she was gone.

“I kind of wanted that person to be me. I wanted to be the person in my family that other people could rely on.” Vance said his wife Usha Vance is starting to “hit her stride” as second lady, getting involved in projects like John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts and children’s literacy. Usha is the anchor of their family, Vance said, and she’s making sure their children are having as normal a life as possible as their family’s life has drastically changed with Secret Service protection and living in the vice president’s residence. “This is really weird for the kids. This is really weird for the whole family unit. [Usha’s] main job more than anything else is just to make the kids have as normal a life as possible.

She makes us do normal family stuff as much as possible.” When it comes to working with President Donald Trump, Vance said there are so many surprising things. One surprise has been that Trump “doesn’t have an off switch.” “Sometimes the president will call you at 12:30 or 2:00 in the morning, and then he’ll call you at 6:00 in the morning about a totally different topic.” Trump is also very good about delegating work, empowering his people to do it, and also trusting them to do the work, Vance said. “What’s made this so much fun is that the president all the time is just saying, ‘JD, you go and do this,’ or ‘JD, you go and talk to these leaders about this particular issue … You don’t have to have me looking over you all the time.’”

When it comes to the 2028 presidential election, many people are viewing Vance as a top Republican candidate. Vance said there are a lot of great people and that if he does decide to run, the job won’t be handed to him “either on the Republican side or on the national side.” “I don’t like thinking about it because I like thinking about the job that I have right now,” Vance said. He added that he thinks ”the American people are so fed up with folks who are already running for the next job seven months into the current one.” “If we do a good job in 2025 and 2026, then we can talk about the politics in 2027,” Vance said. “I’m going to try to do my best job, and I think if I do that, the politics will figure itself out.”

Read more …

“If we hadn’t won this election we would have all been vaxxed to death and censored so no one could hear our dying screams” — Mike Benz on “X”

• Days of Thunder (James Howard Kunstler)

That reckoning you’ve heard about lo these many years? It’s here now. We’re in it. You just can’t see all the moving parts, and if you did, you might not understand how or where they are moving, and what they are fixing to do next. Aside from certain US senators playing their pre-scripted mad scenes for the cameras, a disquieting quiet blankets the swamp like a miasma. It feels like a long, still moment before some shaking of the earth. Everyone senses it and the guilty must feel it most keenly.

That’s why they are laying low and keeping their traps shut. Every criminal defense lawyer inside the beltway is burning the midnight oil (and racking up the billable hours, ka-ching). Meanwhile, where are their clients? No longer peddling alibis on MSNBC (MSNOW), at least. I doubt that John Brennan is even in the country. My guess would be he’s cooling his heels in Abu Dhabi, where the extradition protocols with the USA remain comfortably squishy to his advantage. (He reportedly became a Muslim while running the CIA station in Riyadh between 1996-99, just in time for 9-11. . . hmmmm. . . .)

Hillary Clinton has been keeping her pie-hole closed for weeks now while rattling around that big house in Chappaqua, NY, like a BB in a packing crate. Is anyone counting the wine-boxes coming and going from the place? It must be maddening to be HRC — but that new extra edge of prosecution terror would just be larding the lily, considering what Vlad Putin learned about her mental state way back in 2016: deeply unstable. . .diabetic. . . on tranqs. . . often plastered. . . bursts of rage. . . . Comey and Clapper? No more cute pranks on the beach for Big Jim, 86 on the menacing messages in seashells and putting out Taylor Swift fan-boy Tik-toks. Was that some attempt to not be taken seriously? Like you’re some kind of overgrown, harmless child?

James Clapper, of course, would be voted most likely to flip on his compadres, if such a canvass were taken on Coup island. He was the first to publicly announce his lawyering-up in the Russia collusion affair. He never expected it would come to this, this ordeal of interrogation. . . his “good soldier” self plopped ignominiously in the witness chair. . . the odor of his own fear. . . the proffer (just tell us what really happened). . . the US attorneys appearing to leer at him, his house mortgaged to pay the attorney’s fees. . . what’s a poor boy to do. . . ?

Adam Schiff has gone radio silent. A miracle! Alas, the autopen pardon granted for his J-6 Committee doings apparently does not apply to matters such as mortgage fraud and wire fraud. He realizes with chills and sighs of despair that this ain’t no foolin’ around. People go to jail for these things. . . gulp! His attorney absolutely forbids any televised appeals to his fan-base, as if the glamorati of Rodeo Drive could do anything to stop what’s coming. Too bad Ed Buck and his magic checkbook are no longer around.

Even the seeming untouchables, Blinken, Jake Sullivan, Lisa Monaco, Norm Eisen, Mary McCord, Anrew Weissmann, Marc Elias must be listening hard for shoes to drop. They thought they had it made in the shade after 2020. They had the USA on a string, they thought. Home free. The trouble with the smarty-pants way of life is sometimes you out-smart yourself and your pants fall down. But all they can do in this late hour is induce a bunch of federal judges — recently imported from countries where justice means casting goat neckbones across the dusty floor of a mud hut — to gum up every executive action coming out of the White House with a poorly-argued TRO. They might as well be on a U-haul box truck throwing furniture off the back at a fleet of pursuing cop cars.

Mr. Trump is having sport with them now. Their crimes spanning the decade past are being bundled into one big coup case against the country, a color revolution on their own citizens and against “the democracy” that they never stop pretending to tout. If I am perceiving all this correctly, the days and weeks ahead will be as consequential a train of events as ever rolled down the tracks into Union Station, DC.

Read more …

“.. even though a jury ruled that she lied about her rape allegations..”

“.. has reportedly accused at least six prior men of raping her..”

• Appeals Court Upholds E. Jean Carroll’s $83.3 Million Judgment Against Trump (ZH)

A federal appeals court has upheld a civil jury’s finding that President Donald Trump must pay $83.3 million to E. Jean Carroll for his repeated social media attacks against the longtime advice columnist after she accused him of sexual assault – even though a jury ruled that she lied about her rape allegations. Carroll, whose advice column ran in the women’s magazine Elle from 1993 to 2019, has reportedly accused at least six prior men of raping her, including former CBS President Les Moonves. Her bizarre social-media history also included posts making light of sexual trauma and even asking her followers if they found Trump sexually attractive. Trump was prevented from submitting that evidence in his trial.

Despite her dubious track record, on Monday the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected Trump’s appeal of the defamation award, finding that the “jury’s damages awards are fair and reasonable.” Trump had argued that he should not have to pay the sum as a result of a Supreme Court decision expanding presidential immunity. His lawyers had asked for a new trial. A civil jury in Manhattan issued the $88.3 million award last year following a trial that centered on Trump’s repeated social media attacks against Carroll over her claims that he sexually assaulted her in a Manhattan department store in 1996. That award followed a separate trial, in which Trump was found liable for sexually abusing Carroll and ordered to pay $5 million.

That award was upheld by an appeals court last December. In a memoir, and again at a 2023 trial, Carroll described how a chance encounter with Trump at Bergdorf Goodman’s Fifth Avenue in 1996 started with the two flirting as they shopped, then ended with a violent struggle inside a dressing room. Carroll said Trump slammed her against a dressing room wall, pulled down her tights and forced himself on her. A jury found Trump liable for sexual assault, but concluded he hadn’t committed rape, as defined under New York law. Trump repeatedly denied that the encounter took place and accused Carroll of making it up to help sell her book. He also said that Carroll was “not my type.”

Read more …

Lawfare at its finest.

“Solicitor General D. John Sauer said in the new application that this is the third time in this case that Ali “has issued an unlawful injunction that precipitates an unnecessary emergency and needless interbranch conflict.”

• Trump Admin Asks Supreme Court to Allow Withholding of Foreign Aid Funds (ET)

The Trump administration asked the U.S. Supreme Court on Sept. 8 to permit it to withhold billions of dollars in foreign aid previously authorized by Congress. The Department of Justice (DOJ) asked the justices to pause a ruling by U.S. District Judge Amir Ali, who ordered the federal government to spend about $4 billion in previously appropriated funds. The money is earmarked for foreign aid and United Nations peacekeeping projects. The emergency application was filed in two cases, Trump v. Global Health Council, and U.S. Department of State v. AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalitions. Solicitor General D. John Sauer said in the new application that this is the third time in this case that Ali “has issued an unlawful injunction that precipitates an unnecessary emergency and needless interbranch conflict.”

In February, Ali gave the federal government 36 hours to pay roughly $2 billion in invoices for past foreign-aid work, which Sauer called “an impossible task,” and one that the judge lacked authority to order. The Supreme Court ended the dispute by granting an administrative stay, a court order that gives the justices more time to consider a matter. After the deadline was lifted, the government paid “virtually all of the contested amounts,” Sauer said. Next, Ali issued a “novel injunction requiring the government to obligate tens of billions of dollars in foreign-aid appropriations on the theory that failing to do so constituted an unlawful impoundment in violation of the Constitution and the Impoundment Control Act of 1974,” Sauer said. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit lifted that injunction and that court allowed its ruling to come into effect on Aug. 28, Sauer said.

Now that its original theory has been “decisively rejected,” the district court precipitated a new emergency “by issuing a version of the same injunction near midnight on September 3,” Sauer stated. Again, the district court is forcing the government to obligate about $10.5 billion in foreign-aid funding that was due to expire on Sept. 30, according to Sauer. But now the government has been left “with even less time for further review or compliance, with even more deficient legal theories,” Sauer said. Sauer said the government already intended to obligate $6.5 billion of that funding by Sept. 30, but Ali’s order regarding the remaining $4 billion “raises a grave and urgent threat to the separation of powers,” a constitutional doctrine that divides the government into three branches to prevent any single branch from accumulating too much power.

After the D.C. Circuit canceled Ali’s injunction, the president proposed rescinding that $4 billion in funding under the Impoundment Control Act. Under fast-track procedures, Congress has 45 days to consider the rescission request and during that period the president cannot be required to spend the money, Sauer said. Ali’s new injunction would compel the Executive Branch to begin “obligating those funds at breakneck speed to meet the September 30 deadline, even as Congress is considering the rescission proposal” and before Congress’s 45 days to do so elapse, Sauer said. A panel of the D.C. Circuit denied by a vote of 2–1 a stay of the judge’s order late on Sept. 5, Sauer added.

Also on Sept. 8, Global Health Council and other litigants that want the $4 billion to be released filed a brief opposing the government’s application for an administrative stay of Ali’s order. “The government’s theory that the agencies need not comply with enacted legislation mandating that they spend funds, because the President has unilaterally proposed legislation to rescind those statutory mandates, would fundamentally upend our constitutional structure,” the brief reads. It is unclear when the Supreme Court will act on the government’s application.

Read more …

“The order, crafted to appease immigration activists, accused officers of running “roving patrols” and floated the idea that their actions violated the Fourth Amendment. But on Monday, the Supreme Court wasn’t buying it.”

• Another Tremendous Supreme Court Victory for Trump! (Margolis)

The Supreme Court handed President Donald Trump a major victory on Monday, greenlighting his push for tougher immigration enforcement in Los Angeles. In a 6-3 ruling, the Court lifted a lower-court injunction that had barred federal agents from conducting raids without what the judge had called “reasonable suspicion.” With that order gone, Trump’s record-setting deportation efforts are back on track. The liberal justices predictably fumed in their dissent, warning of supposed risks to “constitutional freedoms,” blah, blah blah. But the conservative majority was having none of that garbage. For now, immigration agents can resume their sweeping operations while the case winds through the courts—a clear sign that Trump’s agenda won’t be derailed by activist judges.

Conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote in Monday’s decision that the lower court’s restraining order went too far in restricting how Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents could carry out stops or questioning of suspected unlawful migrants. “To be clear, apparent ethnicity alone cannot furnish reasonable suspicion,” he wrote. “However, it can be a ‘relevant factor’ when considered along with other salient factors.” The Supreme Court’s three liberal justices issued a strong dissent penned by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who wrote that “countless people in the Los Angeles area have been grabbed, thrown to the ground, and handcuffed simply because of their looks, their accents, and the fact they make a living by doing manual labour.” “Today, the Court needlessly subjects countless more to these exact same indignities,” she wrote.

The decision undoes a ruling by US District Judge Maame E Frimpong in Los Angeles, who had said that there is a “mountain of evidence” showing the raids were violating the US Constitution. Back in July, Judge Frimpong tried to hamstring immigration enforcement by ordering Trump’s raids halted. His ruling claimed the administration couldn’t rely on “apparent race or ethnicity” or “speaking Spanish” as grounds for questioning someone. He even barred agents from acting based on whether individuals were found at bus stops, farms, or car washes—places long known as hubs for illegal labor. The order, crafted to appease immigration activists, accused officers of running “roving patrols” and floated the idea that their actions violated the Fourth Amendment. But on Monday, the Supreme Court wasn’t buying it.

The justices ruled 6-3, that Trump’s policies stand a strong chance of being upheld as constitutional, clearing the way for raids to continue. Trump’s crackdown began in June with large-scale raids in Los Angeles at places like Home Depot and other worksites. Predictably, activists launched protests that quickly spiraled into unrest. Trump responded by deploying nearly 2,000 National Guard troops and 700 Marines after California’s Democrat leadership refused to act. This ruling is more than just a win for Trump—it’s a crushing humiliation for Gavin Newsom. The California governor spent weeks smugly touting the lower court injunction as proof that Trump had been reined in by the courts. He mocked the president, framing the lower-court order as a permanent roadblock to ICE enforcement, like this post on X that didn’t age well at all:

Now, with the Supreme Court’s decisive smackdown, Newsom is left looking foolish and powerless. His big talking point has evaporated overnight, replaced by the hard reality that Trump’s immigration agenda is moving forward stronger than ever.

Read more …

“Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) is communism.”

• Is the Western World Degenerating Into Communism? (Paul Craig Roberts)

Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) is communism. During the past year I have read on various websites articles that the West has become the Communist State that it once opposed. Various legitimate examples are offered: the use of law as a weapon as in Stalin’s show trials of the Bolsheviks who made the Russian Revolution; suppression of free speech and protest as all over the Western world; fake election results as in the 2020 US presidential election and in Europe by banning opposition candidates from running for office; focus on “foreign enemies” instead of the domestic institutionalization of tyranny; designation of Trump’s supporters as domestic enemies and insurrectionists. As of yet, no one has put all of these concerns into one formula. Allow me to try.

For 60 years liberals have transitioned the United States from merit to race and gender based entitlements. The United States, whose foundational basis is English common law and the accountability of government achieved by the English Glorious Revolution of 1680, has been beset by progressives and liberals for many decades for being a society based on merit and equality under law. Equality under law requires just that and thus prohibits DEI-based preferences. A merit-based society allows and encourages those best able and qualified to take the leading positions. But this excludes those less capable and, thereby, violates “diversity, equity, and inclusion,” which the liberal-left has raised as the new standard. The “solution” is to put the less capable in charge.

This requires demonizing merit as “racist” which has resulted in merit no longer being the requirement for admissions to Ivy League universities and formerly merit-based high schools. Instead, admission is based on racial privilege. Progressives and liberals since the regime of Franklin D. Roosevelt have succeeded in elevating DEI above merit, today dismissed as “white racism.” The entire purpose of the Democrat Party is to destroy a merit-based society. Trump is hated by the liberal-left for trying to restore a merit-based society. For the liberal-left merit is discriminatory and thereby racist. To escape racism, DEI must supplant merit as the basis of American society. DEI is the Democrat Party’s weapon to overthrow a merit-based society. Communism precludes incomes, influence, and status based on merit in theory but not in practice.

In practice, Communist Party membership was the ladder to upward mobility. But for ideologues it is theory that counts. Under communism equality regardless of merit is the standard. Capitalistic, bourgeois society is based on merit with income, influence, and status based on success. Therefore a merit-based society precludes equal results. A merit-based society is “unfair” in the modern parlance. A fair society is one in which merit receives no reward and is handicapped by preferences for those who are without merit. Kurt Vonnegut describes the liberal-left ideal in his short story, “Harrison Bergeron.” Vonnegut thought it would be 2081 before the American liberal-left would be able to establish the Cabinet Department of Handicapper General. But the transition began in 1965 when the EEOC stood the 1964 Civil Rights Act on its head and imposed racial preferences for blacks known as “affirmative action.”

These preferences were explicitly prohibited by the 1964 Civil Right Act. But the American liberal-left elevated its ideological agenda above the law. Such a society will, of course, be mediocre and a laggard in intellectual and cultural advancement. But as such advancements are merit-based, they don’t count. DEI is achieved when individual achievement becomes a criminal offense against society. In Vonnegut’s story, Harrison Bergeron is shot by the Handicapper General. I once read a science fiction story in which at a certain age children were tested for intelligence. If their intelligence was above the norm, they were terminated. Already today September 8th, 2025, we have laws or regulations that penalize merit-based admission, hiring, and promotion decisions and criminalize disagreement with some official narratives, such as the Holocaust.

Various Democrat cities have passed laws that give legal immunities to non-whites. Yet the West continues to claim free speech–obviously a false claim–and to redefine equality under law as equality of result. As free speech guaranteed by the American Constitution is now impermissible, how does truth survive? As truth is impermissible, how can good decisions be made? As recent decades have made completely clear, good decisions cannot be made in the Western world. Enemies are created instead of peace. Law breakers are protected while their victims are punished. Borders are undefended at the expense of the ethnic citizens of the country. As the immigrant invasions continue, the more entitlement takes over from merit and the less Western governments represent their ethnic base. Thus we have arrived at The Camp of the Saints.

Read more …

“The solution they’ve crafted draws inspiration from an unlikely source—a 2023 proposal by Democrat Amy Klobuchar that would allow up to 10 nominees from the same committee to be confirmed together.”

• Chuck Schumer Tested FAFO and the GOP Will Make Him Pay the Price (Margolis)

Chuck Schumer is about to learn the hard way what happens when you block and stall for too long. After seven months of throwing a tantrum and holding up more than 100 of President Trump’s nominees, the Senate Minority Leader’s obstruction has finally pushed Republicans to the breaking point. Senate Majority Leader John Thune has had enough, and he’s preparing to unleash the nuclear option to break Schumer’s blockade, ram through confirmations, and get Trump’s team in place before the September 19 recess. In Washington, this is FAFO politics at its finest—Schumer tested his luck, and now he’s about to pay the price.

As PJ Media previously reported back in August, Thune has warned that Republicans would change the rules if Democrats refused to cooperate on speeding up confirmations. Schumer chose to ignore those warnings, apparently believing he could continue his obstruction indefinitely without consequences. That calculation is about to prove spectacularly wrong. After negotiations with Democrats predictably went nowhere, Thune assembled a working group in August featuring Republican Senators Katie Britt, James Lankford, Ron Johnson, Eric Schmitt, and Ted Budd. Their mission was simple: find a way around the Democratic roadblock. The solution they’ve crafted draws inspiration from an unlikely source—a 2023 proposal by Democrat Amy Klobuchar that would allow up to 10 nominees from the same committee to be confirmed together.

The Republican version promises to be far more comprehensive, removing artificial caps on how many nominees the Senate can confirm simultaneously. While judges and Cabinet nominees would remain exempt from this streamlined process, the change represents a fundamental shift in how the Senate handles executive branch confirmations. Schumer’s obstruction strategy has been as petty as it is unprecedented. He openly told The Wall Street Journal that he would instruct his entire caucus to vote against every single Trump nominee, effectively grinding the confirmation process to a halt. In August, he actually bragged about his caucus’s commitment to delaying Trump’s confirmations as long as humanly possible.

The numbers show just how far Democrats have taken their obstruction campaign. Trump is now the first president since Herbert Hoover—almost 100 years ago—to have zero civilian nominees confirmed by voice vote or unanimous consent in the early months of his term. That’s not politics as usual; that’s pure spite. Of course, Chuck Schumer is out there defending this nonsense, claiming Trump’s picks are somehow “flawed” or “unqualified.” That’s rich coming from the party that shoved through Xavier Becerra, Pete Buttigieg, and Ketanji Brown Jackson—not to mention a slew of judicial nominees who couldn’t answer basic questions about the law. Republicans have seen this game before, and it looks like they’re finally ready to call Schumer’s bluff. For context, during Trump’s first term, 65 percent of his civilian nominees were approved by voice vote or unanimous consent. Biden managed 57 percent.

Today, only Secretary of State Marco Rubio has slipped past the Democrats’ blockade. That tells you everything you need to know about how shamelessly the left is weaponizing the confirmation process. Republicans aren’t thrilled about using the nuclear option, fully aware that this rule change will eventually benefit Democrats when they next control both the Senate and White House. But make no mistake: this is the inevitable result of the Democrats’ years-long weaponization of the confirmation process, dating back to George W. Bush’s presidency. If the nuclear option is invoked, it’s on them. Chuck Schumer built this trap with nothing but raw partisan spite, and now he’s about to feel the consequences. The nuclear option is coming, and it’s entirely his doing.

Read more …

“The Speaker is reiterating what the victims’ attorney said, which is that Donald Trump — who kicked Epstein out of Mar-a-Lago — was the only one, more than a decade ago, willing to help prosecutors expose Epstein for being a disgusting child predator..”

• Did Johnson Really Say Trump Was an Informant Against Epstein? (Margolis)

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) dropped a bombshell last week, only to take a cautious step back just days later. When CNN’s Manu Raju pressed him on President Donald Trump’s use of the word “hoax” regarding the controversy over the Epstein files, Johnson said that the president had once acted as an FBI informant against Jeffrey Epstein — a fresh detail in the saga. “What Trump is referring to is the hoax that the Democrats are using to try to attack him,” Johnson explained. “He has never said or suggested or implied; I’ve talked to him about this many times, many times. He is horrified. It’s been misrepresented. He’s not saying that what Epstein did is a hoax. It’s a terrible, unspeakable evil. He believes that himself.”

Johnson also recalled Trump’s decision years ago to ban Epstein from Mar-a-Lago, and that’s when he made the claim. “When he first heard the rumor, he kicked him out of Mar-a-Lago. He was an FBI informant to try to take this stuff down,” Johnson said, effectively revealing for the first time that Trump had cooperated with federal authorities in efforts to stop Epstein. On Sunday, Johnson’s office tried to clarify the remarks with a carefully worded statement. “The Speaker is reiterating what the victims’ attorney said, which is that Donald Trump — who kicked Epstein out of Mar-a-Lago — was the only one, more than a decade ago, willing to help prosecutors expose Epstein for being a disgusting child predator,” Johnson’s office said, according to a report from the Washington Post.

We already knew that Trump was one of the few people willing to stand against Epstein’s depravity, but the revelation that Trump was an informant was a game-changing new detail. It’s not lost on me that the statement the Washington Post printed doesn’t actually retract the claim, but it doesn’t double down on it either. For years, Democrats have tried to turn the Epstein saga into a Trump scandal because they know many of their own allies have deep ties to Epstein. When they controlled the White House and Congress, they did squat about releasing Epstein files or pursuing real transparency. The Epstein scandal suddenly became the Left’s favored weapon only after Biden’s administration ignored it for so long. Now, they want to drag it out as a smear against Trump in the hopes of creating a distraction to derail his second term. Classic political maneuvering.

Johnson’s “informant” comment touched a nerve because it challenged the left’s carefully constructed lie. Did Trump formally inform on Epstein, or did he simply cooperate with authorities? The difference might matter to the media vultures and political spin doctors, but the real takeaway is Trump’s stance against Epstein, which includes kicking him out of Mar-a-Lago for inappropriate behavior and assisting authorities in exposing Epstein. Whether or not he was an actual FBI informant is unclear, but the Democrats still look foolish trying to make Epstein a Trump scandal.

Read more …

Just yesterday, another German report claimed it was Ukrainians. The particular novelty this time (every report needs one) is that it claims Zaluzhny was in charge.

Why do they do this? To cast doubt on Seymour Hersh’s report. They never say he’s wrong, or even mention him, it’s just an endless stream of “different” stories.

• Elite UK Divers Likely Behind Nord Stream Sabotage – Patrushev (RT)

The sabotage of the Nord Stream pipelines could not have been carried out without Western commandos, a top aide to Russian President Vladimir Putin has claimed, singling out Britain as the likely culprit. German prosecutors have attributed the explosions in international waters in September 2022, which disabled the twin pipelines supplying Russian gas to Germany via the Baltic Sea, to a group of Ukrainian nationals. In an article published Sunday in Kommersant, the former head of Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB), Nikolay Patrushev, argued that Ukrainians lack the expertise to carry out this complex operation independently.

The sabotage was likely “planned, overseen, and executed with the involvement of highly trained NATO special forces,” Patrushev wrote, adding that the perpetrators were experienced in deep-sea operations and familiar with working in the Baltic.“Few armies or intelligence services have divers capable of executing such an operation correctly and, above all, covertly. One unit with the necessary skills is the British Special Boat Service,” he said. Founded during World War II, the SBS is the Royal Navy’s elite squad specializing in amphibious warfare. Russia has criticized the German investigation for a lack of transparency and for not including the Russian authorities. In 2024, Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service claimed it had “credible information” that the US and UK were directly involved in the sabotage, a claim denied by both London and Washington.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/1964729425863282789

fauci

https://twitter.com/buitengebieden/status/1964927875116925373
https://twitter.com/Rainmaker1973/status/1965081470231511305

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle July 16 2025

Jul 162025
 
 July 16, 2025  Posted by at 9:34 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , ,  73 Responses »


Pablo Picasso Portrait de femme (Dora Maar) 1943

 

• Trump’s Ukraine Reversal Represents ‘Complete Betrayal Of America First’ (Sp.)
• Trump Believes Russia Will Win – Politico (RT)
• Trump Under ‘Improper Pressure’ From EU and NATO – Lavrov
• Ghislaine Maxwell Is ‘Ready’ to Testify (Margolis)
• Trump Asked Zelensky About Striking Moscow, Making Putin ‘Feel The Pain’ (NYP)
• Trump Tells Zelensky Not To Attack Moscow (RT)
• EU Welcomes Trump’s Ultimatum To Russia (RT)
• EU Tells US To ‘Share The Burden’ For Ukraine Weapons (RT)
• Slovak PM Fico Denounces Brussels’ ‘Imbecilic’ Russia Plan (RT)
• Tick Tock Co-Pilot John Solomon Says FBI Currently Investigating “Conspiracy” (CTH)
• The European Surprise—Why We Misread the Continent’s Shifts (ET)
• Bessent Says “Formal Process” To Find Successor To Jerome Powell Has Begun (ZH)
• Marc Andreessen: ‘Universities Declared War On 70% Of The Country’ (ZH)
• Trump Says He Spoke to Bongino Amid Reports of Infighting (ET)
• Media Runs Interference as Biden Autopen Scandal Explodes (Margolis)

 

 

 

 

Walsh

KIRK

vote
https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/1944982103470248326

 

 

 

 

Ex-US Army staff officer David Pyne gets it.

• Trump’s Ukraine Reversal Represents ‘Complete Betrayal Of America First’ (Sp.)

Donald Trump is on the brink of tearing up his ‘no foreign wars, pro-peace’ pre-election pledge on Ukraine, with plans to deliver more weapons, and threats against Russia edging him closer toward inheriting “Biden’s war.” Sputnik asked a renowned US geopolitics and military affairs expert to break it down. The president claims that his plans to ramp up arms deliveries to Ukraine and threaten Russia with secondary tariffs are designed to help end the conflict, “when in fact these steps are serving to prolong and escalate the war unnecessarily with no end in sight,” ex-US Army staff officer David Pyne says. “Trump fails to understand that it is US military assistance to Ukrainian dictator Volodymyr Zelensky that is the chief obstacle to achieving a realistic and durable peace settlement, not an unwillingness on the part of Putin to compromise,” Pyne, deputy head of the EMP Task Force, told Sputnik.

Since the policy reversal “represents a complete betrayal of Trump’s America First conservative voting base,” who elected him in part based on his pledge to end the crisis, it threatens to derail his presidency, according to Pyne. “If Trump continues in this foolish course of pursuing war instead of peace, not only will it increase the risk of a future direct military confrontation with Russia, but it will likely serve to further fracture his America First conservative base, enabling the Democrats to seize control of Congress in the November 2026 midterm elections,” the observer predicts. Pyne’s recommendation? End all US weapons and offensive intelligence support to Ukraine, pressure Zelensky to resign and hold elections, and broadly, accept Russia’s peace terms, so that Trump can get back to his “overriding grand strategic vision” of a “geostrategic partnership with Russia.”

Read more …

“The president’s view is Russia is going to win; it’s a matter of how long it takes,” the White House official told the outlet..”

• Trump Believes Russia Will Win – Politico (RT)

US President Donald Trump believes that Russian victory in the Ukraine conflict is inevitable, Politico reported, citing a senior White House official. On Monday, Trump threatened to impose secondary US tariffs of up to 100% on Russia’s trading partners unless progress toward a peace agreement is made within 50 days. He also authorized new weapons deliveries to Ukraine, which are to be paid for by European NATO members. Moscow has warned that Trump’s declaration could be seen by Kiev as a signal to continue the war. According to Politico, Trump decided to up the pressure on Moscow out of frustration with continued Russian strikes on Ukraine. The source noted that the US president believes that Moscow can secure military victory against Kiev thanks to its “bigger economy” and “bigger military.”

“The president’s view is Russia is going to win; it’s a matter of how long it takes,” the White House official told the outlet, noting Moscow’s progress on the battlefield. In recent months, Russian forces have continued to gain ground, fully liberating the Lugansk People’s Republic, as well as the Kursk Region, which was invaded by Ukrainian forces last year. Russia has rejected Trump’s latest ultimatum, while condemning attempts to pressure it. Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov asserted that this approach is “unacceptable” and demanded that Washington and NATO respect Russia’s interests and concerns.

Moscow has repeatedly stressed that it is open to conducting negotiations based on mutual respect with the aim of settling the Ukraine conflict diplomatically. However, Russian officials have also said they see no genuine effort on the part of Kiev or the West to pursue peace and repeatedly slammed calls by Western officials to inflict “strategic defeat” on Russia. Russia has emphasized that it remains determined to achieve the goals of its military operation in Ukraine and, while it would prefer to do so through diplomacy, it is prepared to use military means if necessary.

Read more …

“We are already dealing with an unprecedented number of sanctions, and I am certain we can handle more.” “..they are more likely to impact European economies than Russia’s.”

• Trump Under ‘Improper Pressure’ From EU and NATO – Lavrov

US President Donald Trump is facing “improper pressure” from the European Union and NATO leaders to adopt a hardline stance on the Ukraine conflict, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said on Tuesday. On Monday, Trump announced future deliveries of advanced weapons systems to Ukraine, which the US president said would be funded by European NATO members. Trump also issued an ultimatum threatening Russia and its trading partners with new economic sanctions unless the Ukraine conflict is resolved within 50 days. ”Clearly, [Trump] is under enormous – improper, I would say – pressure by the European Union and current NATO leaders,” Lavrov said during a press conference following a ministerial meeting of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization in Tianjin, China.

He added that the “regime” of Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky continues to request weapons donations “at the mounting expense of Western taxpayers.” Lavrov noted that Russia has previously received multiple ultimatums involving deadlines and demands for concessions on what it considers its core strategic objectives in the Ukraine conflict. He downplayed the effectiveness of new sanctions, arguing they are more likely to impact European economies than Russia’s.

”Trump clearly explained that Europe will be paying for all of that,” Lavrov said. “European economists and political experts who are objective acknowledge that this sanctions war is damaging the nations who initiated it. We are already dealing with an unprecedented number of sanctions, and I am certain we can handle more.” The minister reaffirmed Moscow’s position that NATO instigated the crisis by threatening Russia’s national security through its meddling in Ukraine. The West has pursued a containment strategy against Russia for decades and ignored repeated warnings from Moscow, Lavrov added.

Read more …

If they can bury the files, they can do the same with her.

• Ghislaine Maxwell Is ‘Ready’ to Testify (Margolis)

Well, isn’t this just the plot twist America’s corrupt ruling class was hoping you’d ignore? Ghislaine Maxwell is suddenly ready to spill the beans before Congress about Jeffrey Epstein’s whole operation. But, here’s where the story gets weird. “Despite the rumors, Ghislaine was never offered any kind of plea deal. She would be more than happy to sit before Congress and tell her story,” a source told The Daily Mail. “No-one from the government has ever asked her to share what she knows. She remains the only person to be jailed in connection to Epstein and she would welcome the chance to tell the American public the truth.” So, the only person ever jailed for Epstein’s monstrous crimes, and the government can’t be bothered to ask, “Hey, who else was involved?” Give me a break. If you believe that’s an accident, I’ve got a bridge to sell you.

Maxwell argues she should have been protected from prosecution as part of a Non Prosecution Agreement made by Epstein – her former lover and boss – in 2007 when he agreed to plead guilty to two minor charges of prostitution in a ‘sweetheart deal’ which saw him spend little time behind bars. And now, controversy continues to rage over the Department of Justice’s statement that there is no Epstein ‘client list’ and the release of videos from inside New York’s Metropolitan Correctional Center which the DOJ says proves he committed suicide in 2019 while being held in jail on sex trafficking charges. Critics have pointed to the fact that there is a crucial minute missing from the jail house video that also does not show the door or, indeed, the inside of Epstein’s jail cell.

The scandal – and alleged ‘cover up’ – has prompted a rebellion amongst President Trump’s loyal MAGA base. Some even believe Attorney General Pam Bondi should be fired after promising to release all files relating to Epstein and his high-profile male friends only to apparently renege on that promise. What’s really at stake here isn’t just the sordid details of Epstein’s operation. It’s the principle that in America, no one is above the law. Or at least, that’s what we’re supposed to believe. But every time Congress shrugs off a chance to get real answers—every time the Deep State buries evidence, every time the media gaslights the public—it becomes clearer that there’s one set of rules for the elites and another for the rest of us.

If Ghislaine Maxwell is willing to testify, how Congress handles it will speak volumes. The Epstein scandal isn’t just another controversy—it’s a litmus test for whether truth still has a place in American politics. If our elected leaders choose to look the other way, they’ve forfeited any moral claim to the power they hold. The Biden administration was happy to bury it, hoping the story would fade. But Trump made it clear on the campaign trail: he wants the truth exposed, and so does the MAGA movement. The American people deserve real answers—no matter how damning they might be for the elites pulling the strings. If we let this story die, we’re telling the swamp that they can get away with anything. And that, more than any memo or media spin, is the real threat to our republic.

https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/1945218096949604858

Read more …

If you look at the ruble or Moscow’s stock exchange, it doesn’t look like the economy is ‘cracking’.

• Trump Asked Zelensky About Striking Moscow, Making Putin ‘Feel The Pain’ (NYP)

President Trump privately questioned Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky about whether Kyiv could blast Moscow and St Petersburg if needed to make Russians “feel the pain” and come to the negotiating table, according to a report. “Volodymyr, can you hit Moscow? … Can you hit St Petersburg too?” Trump asked on a July 4 call with Zelensky, a day after the president had a disappointing phone call with Russian leader Vladimir Putin, the Financial Times reported, citing multiple sources. Zelensky, who has pressed Western powers for years to provide more long-range missiles, reportedly replied, “Absolutely. We can if you give us the weapons.”

The White House insisted in a statement to The Post that the comments should not be taken out of context, with press secretary Karoline Leavitt pushing back on the Financial Times’ framing of the call, which suggested Trump encouraged Zelensky to step up strikes deep into Russian territory. “The Financial Times is notorious for taking words wildly out of context to get clicks because their paper is dying,” Leavitt told The Post. “President Trump was merely asking a question, not encouraging further killing. He’s working tirelessly to stop the killing and end this war.” Trump’s reported query came after he spoke with Putin and was left convinced that the Kremlin wasn’t going to halt its war machine.

The reported question marks a significant turnaround from Trump’s explosive Feb. 28 Oval Office meeting with Zelensky, in which he raged that the Ukrainian leader was “gambling with World War III” and that “you don’t have the cards right now.” On Monday, Trump announced a deal with NATO for the US to step up its supply of weapons to Ukraine, including Patriot missile systems and what he called a “full complement” of firepower to the war-torn ally. The deal could also include offensive weapons, such as long-range missiles to strike deep into Russia, Axios reported Monday. This would be critical for Ukraine as it will enable Kyiv to attack Russian machinery and weapons that have been used to bombard its cities, rather than relying on defensive measures.

Ukraine had carried out a daring military strike deep in Russian territory last month, known as Operation Spiderweb, in which it snuck a fleet of suicide drones into Russia and destroyed about a dozen bombers. In addition to the plan to send weapons to Ukraine, Trump also gave Putin a 50-day ultimatum to achieve some sort of peace agreement or else face 100% secondary tariffs, meaning countries that do business with Moscow will face the stiff levies. That economic threat comes as Russia’s economy minister warned last month that his country is “on the brink of recession.” Over the past three years, Russia has tapped into its National Wealth Fund, printed money and worked to evade the crippling sanctions imposed against it over its bloody onslaught against neighboring Ukraine.

But there are signs that its economic resilience is beginning to crack as the US and Europe look to further tighten the screws and close off workarounds. Late last month, Putin publicly announced plans to cut Russia’s military budget for next year, but didn’t specify how much. Throughout his second term, Trump had aggressively sought to broker a peace deal between the two warring countries. In recent weeks, however, the US president vented that he felt Putin was tapping him along. “I speak to him [Putin] a lot about getting this thing done. And I always hang up and say, ‘Well, that was a nice phone call,’” Trump said of his calls with the Russian leader over the past six months. “And then missiles are launched into Kyiv or some other city. And I said, ‘Strange.’ And after that happens three or four times, you say the talk doesn’t mean anything.”

https://twitter.com/DD_Geopolitics/status/1945071924792451473

Read more …

“Leavitt insisted that Trump was “merely asking a question, not encouraging further killing..”

How does that rhyme with sending more weapons, like long range missiles?

• Trump Tells Zelensky Not To Attack Moscow (RT)

US President Donald Trump said on Tuesday that he told Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky not to target Moscow with military strikes. The statement comes in response to media speculation that he had encouraged Kiev to carry out long-range missile attacks deep into Russia. The Financial Times reported on Tuesday that Trump had privately asked Zelensky whether he could hit Moscow and St. Petersburg if Washington supplied long-range weapons. Zelensky reportedly replied that he could. Asked by reporters whether Zelensky ought to fire missiles at Russia’s capital, Trump replied “No, he shouldn’t target Moscow.” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt accused the FT of twisting the president’s words, saying it is “notorious for taking words wildly out of context to get clicks because their paper is dying.”

Leavitt insisted that Trump was “merely asking a question, not encouraging further killing,” stressing that the president was “working tirelessly to stop the killing and end this war.” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov also weighed in on the report, noting that “as a rule, all of this usually turns out to be fake.” He added, however, that “sometimes there are indeed serious leaks, even in publications we once considered quite respectable.” The FT report followed on Trump’s ultimatum to Moscow, in which he threatened to impose “severe” secondary tariffs on Russia’s trade partners if no progress towards peace is made within 50 days. Trump also announced future deliveries of advanced weapons systems to Ukraine, which are to be funded by European NATO members.

Since taking office in January, Trump has maintained that he wants the neighboring countries to make peace and has had several phone calls with Russian President Vladimir Putin that were focused on settling the conflict s
Moscow says it remains open to negotiating with Kiev but has yet to receive a response on when new peace talks will take place. The two sides have held two rounds of direct negotiations in Istanbul so far this year, but no breakthroughs were achieved, other than agreements to carry out large-scale prisoner exchanges. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov stated on Tuesday that EU and NATO leaders have put Trump under “improper pressure” to adopt a hardline stance on the conflict.

Read more …

Russia wants peace badly, but not on western terms.

• EU Welcomes Trump’s Ultimatum To Russia (RT)

EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas has welcomed US President Donald Trump’s threat to impose tariffs on Russia’s trading partners unless a deal with Ukraine is reached within 50 days, calling it a “positive” step. Moscow, however, has warned that Trump’s declaration could be seen by Kiev as a signal to continue the war. Trump said on Monday that he was “very, very unhappy” with the protracted negotiation process, warning Moscow of “severe” secondary tariffs of up to 100% unless the sides move towards a settlement. “It is very positive that President Trump is taking a strong stance on Russia,” Kallas, known for her hawkish stance on Moscow, said at a press briefing. She suggested, however, that Trump’s deadline may not be enough to “pressure” Russia.

”50 days is a very long time… It is clear that we all need to put more pressure on Russia so that they would also want peace,” she stated, calling for Washington to continue supporting Kiev militarily.Russia has repeatedly denounced Western arms supplies to Ukraine, saying they prolong the conflict without changing its course. Moscow has also condemned sanctions as illegal under international law. Russia and Ukraine have held two rounds of direct talks in Istanbul over the past two months. Both sides agreed to major prisoner swaps and exchanged proposals on potential ways towards a settlement. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Tuesday that Moscow remains open to negotiations but has not received a response on the timing of the next round from Kiev.Peskov described Trump’s ultimatum as “quite serious,” but noted that Russia needs time to analyze it. He also warned that the shift in Washington’s tone could be seen in Kiev “not as a signal toward peace, but as a signal to continue the war.”

https://twitter.com/DD_Geopolitics/status/1945164213019623661

Read more …

That took less than one day. Trump’s entire domestic sales pitch out the window.

• EU Tells US To ‘Share The Burden’ For Ukraine Weapons (RT)

EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas has welcomed US President Donald Trump’s promise to send more weapons to Kiev, but said he can’t describe it as American aid if European NATO states are fully bankrolling the initiative. Trump announced on Monday that he will allow other NATO members to buy American-made Patriot missile defense systems and other weapons for Ukraine – but indicated that US taxpayers will no longer finance Kiev’s war effort. “The United States will not be having any payment made. We’re not buying it, but we will manufacture it, and they’re going to be paying for it,” the US leader said during a meeting with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte in the Oval Office, adding “this will be a business for us.”

Speaking to reporters on Tuesday, Kallas welcomed Trump’s announcement but noted that Brussels “would like to see the US share the burden.” “If we pay for these weapons – it’s our support, it’s European support,” Kallas explained when asked to clarify what she meant by sharing the burden. “We are doing as much as we can to help Ukraine, and therefore the call is that everybody would do the same. It’s, you know, if you promise to give the weapons but say that somebody else is going to pay – it’s not really given by you, is it?” Moscow has repeatedly denounced Western arms supplies to Ukraine, saying they only serve to prolong the bloodshed and escalate the conflict without altering its course.

Russia remains open to negotiations but has not received a response from Kiev on the timing of the next round. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov stated on Tuesday that EU and NATO leaders have put Trump under “improper pressure” to adopt a hardline stance. Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov stressed that “any attempts to make demands, let alone issue ultimatums, are unacceptable.” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov also criticized Trump’s threat to impose “severe” secondary tariffs of up to 100% in 50 days, noting that such ultimatums are “perceived by the Ukrainian side not as a signal toward peace, but as a signal to continue the war.”

Read more …

“..Slovakia, but also Hungary, Austria, and reportedly Italy..”

“The [European] Commission’s proposal is, excuse my language, imbecilic. Demagogically, it is the result of a limitless obsession with Russia..”

• Slovak PM Fico Denounces Brussels’ ‘Imbecilic’ Russia Plan (RT)

Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico has slammed the EU’s plan to phase out Russian energy imports as “imbecilic,” warning that the move would undermine his country’s energy security, as well as the rest of the bloc. The RePowerEU plan envisages cutting all Russian oil and gas imports into the EU by 2027. The scheme has met with opposition not only from Slovakia, but also Hungary, Austria, and reportedly Italy.In a video posted on Facebook on Monday, Fico said the “battle for Slovakia’s energy security is nearing its end,” acknowledging that Bratislava cannot veto Brussels’ plan. He accused the EU leadership of deliberately presenting the proposal as trade legislation to pre-empt opposition. Unlike sanctions, the plan only requires a qualified majority to pass.

“The [European] Commission’s proposal is, excuse my language, imbecilic. Demagogically, it is the result of a limitless obsession with Russia,” the prime minister said. He added that phasing out Russian energy will “damage the Slovak economy and undermine the competitiveness of the entire EU.” Responding to a letter from Czech Prime Minister Petr Fiala, who urged Fico to support the EU’s 18th sanctions package against Russia, the Slovak leader stated on Monday that he would not relent until “relevant stakeholders provide [Bratislava] with the necessary guarantees that after January 1, 2028, Slovakia will have sufficient gas supplies at reasonable prices.”

Slovakia blocked the sanctions package for the second time last Friday, demanding that its concerns over the separate RePowerEU plan be addressed first. While Russian gas has not been subject to a direct EU ban, most member states have voluntarily cut imports. However, several landlocked countries – including Slovakia, Hungary, Austria, and the Czech Republic – still rely on limited volumes through exemptions. Bratislava and Budapest also receive much of their oil from Russia. Russia has warned that targeting its energy exports will continue to cause energy prices to surge across the EU, weakening the bloc’s economy. Since 2022, growth across the EU has stagnated.

Read more …

Sundance is not buying.

“Who believes this nonsense? We are years beyond believing the FBI is structurally doing anything to return fire against the Obama administration; yet here is Fox News selling bulk hopium to their viewers. Ridiculous. All of it.”

• Tick Tock Co-Pilot John Solomon Says FBI Currently Investigating “Conspiracy” (CTH)

Sean Hannity and John Solomon have apparently ejected Sara Carter for “Tick Tock Term-2”, seemingly replacing her with James (‘sounds like Gopher from Winnie the Pooh‘) Comer. In the latest iteration of the tick-tock walls closing in, at least according to Solomon, the FBI is currently doing a “grand conspiracy” investigation of Barack Obama, James Comey, John Brennan and James Clapper. Solomon says below, “This is a criminal conspiracy. And by treating it as a conspiracy, you eliminate the five-year statutes on individual crimes. So if something happened in 2016, but it was part of an ongoing conspiracy that continued with Jack Smith raiding Donald Trump’s home at Mar-a-Lago, it can be charged in the larger conspiracy. Even though, if you tried to charge it as an individual case, you wouldn’t get it.”

According to Solomon, even Lee Zeldin is a potential candidate to lead a special prosecution team against the former conspirators, and the evidence is so overwhelming … “a special prosecutor would have a jumpstart. This could be wrapped up in a couple of years.”… I can’t even begin to wrap my head around how ridiculous this claim by Hannity, Solomon and Representative ‘Gopher‘ Comer actually is. Who believes this nonsense? We are years beyond believing the FBI is structurally doing anything to return fire against the Obama administration; yet here is Fox News selling bulk hopium to their viewers. Ridiculous. All of it.

Read more …

“English-speaking audiences relying on European media’s English editions get an incomplete picture, skewed toward liberal narratives and missing the conservative currents driving political shifts..”

• The European Surprise—Why We Misread the Continent’s Shifts (ET)

Europe’s political landscape continues to defy expectations, leaving analysts and policymakers scrambling to explain outcomes that, in hindsight, seem foreseeable. From the UK’s Brexit vote to Giorgia Meloni’s rise in Italy, the Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) surge in Germany, Dutch farmers’ revolts, and Marine Le Pen’s ascent in France, each development triggers a chorus of shocked “No one saw this coming.” Yet millions of Europeans did. The persistent surprise may stem from a flawed lens—dominated by English-language media filters, historical overcorrections, and shrinking on-the-ground reporting—that distorts our understanding. As these shifts ripple globally, misreading Europe poses strategic risks we can no longer afford to ignore.

The pattern is unmistakable. Europe has been portrayed as a stable, liberal bastion—centrist coalitions driving climate action and European Union unity, embodying a progressive ideal. Yet reality diverges: The UK exited the EU in 2016, Meloni became Italy’s prime minister in 2022, Germany’s AfD polled second nationally in 2025, Dutch farmers blocked roads over nitrogen policies, and France’s center collapsed in 2024, elevating Le Pen. Each time, English-language coverage reacts with shock, missing signals visible to local populations. This disconnect begins with a critical media filter. English-language European outlets, such as state-funded France 24, Deutsche Welle, Politico Europe, and center-left publications like Le Monde, cater to an urban, university-educated, globally minded audience. These sources are mostly credible and professional but reflect a narrow slice of society, underrepresenting conservative and rural perspectives.

A key disparity amplifies this bias: While mainstream liberal media regularly publish English editions, conservative and right-wing outlets across Europe—such as Germany’s Junge Freiheit or Italy’s Il Giornale—rarely do. This choice stems from several factors: a lack of perceived demand in English-speaking markets, suspicion of hostile Anglo-American coverage, and a strategic focus on local bases. As a result, English-speaking audiences relying on European media’s English editions get an incomplete picture, skewed toward liberal narratives and missing the conservative currents driving political shifts. Country-specific examples reveal the depth of this gap. In Italy, Meloni’s 2022 victory, often labeled “neo-fascist” because of her party’s post-fascist roots, was misread by English outlets.

Yet her platform—lower taxes, stronger borders, and national pride—reflected frustration with unelected technocrats and Brussels’ fiscal rules. She formed a coalition with Matteo Salvini’s League and Forza Italia, securing a parliamentary majority with 44 percent of the vote, appealing to millions disillusioned by years of instability, not extremism. Her government’s three-year record (2022 to 2025) has focused on economic recovery. In Germany, AfD’s rise to more than 20 percent in state elections and a mayoral win in 2025 reflect discontent with soaring energy prices post-nuclear shutdown and immigration strains. Yet it’s framed as a dangerous anomaly, ignoring its roots in rural and eastern voter bases.

In the Netherlands, the government’s 2019 nitrogen reduction plan, mandating farm buyouts, sparked tractor blockades by farmers facing existential threats to generational livelihoods. The Farmer-Citizen Movement, formed in response, became the largest party in the Dutch Senate by 2023, a democratic revolt misread as a sideshow. In France, President Emmanuel Macron’s 2024 dissolution of the National Assembly followed his party’s European election defeat, paving the way for Le Pen’s National Rally. Her movement, drawing working-class and youth voters from disaffected leftist unions, has softened its rhetoric—shifting from anti-immigrant hardline to economic populism—normalizing her appeal amid the center’s collapse.

This blind spot is structural, rooted in postwar Europe’s “firewall” logic. After World War II, institutions like Germany’s Basic Law and France’s laïcité were designed to prevent fascism and nationalism, embedding a cultural consensus against these ideologies. The EU, as a moral project to dissolve rivalries, reinforced this stance. Over time, this overcorrection stigmatized moderate conservatism—national flags or religious appeals were red flags, dissent from EU norms labeled “anti-democratic.” Repressing these voices buried resentment, fueling unexpected populism. The UK grooming gang scandals illustrate a similar pattern: institutional real fear of fomenting racism delayed action on abuse, worsening the crisis. In Europe, suppressing feedback has similarly driven political surprises.

The Anglosphere’s media compounds this. Decades ago, outlets like The New York Times or CBS maintained lively European bureaus, offering nuance and real understanding of reality on the ground. Budget cuts and shifting priorities have shuttered many, replacing correspondents with wire services and freelancers. Walter Duranty’s downplaying of Joseph Stalin’s Holodomor, despite his Moscow base, shows proximity isn’t a cure-all, but its absence distorts coverage, even by the mere addition of intermediaries. Today’s reports—relying on embassy briefings, nongovernmental organization releases, the European media’s English language editions, or echo-chamber articles—many times lack critical context. For example, there was the framing of Dutch tractor protests as climate backlash rather than a livelihood crisis. For policymakers and investors, this distance misjudges risks, from policy legitimacy to market stability.

The stakes are high. Misreading Europe leads to ill-fated policies, regulatory backlash, and eroding trust in journalism, fueling polarization. Each “shock result” signals analytical failure with global repercussions—markets shift, alliances waver, and migration patterns change. The postwar consensus, while essential, has ossified into dogma, blinding elites to new threats. To see Europe clearly, we ought to think and act like historians. We stop waiting for “The Truth” to arrive in a statement and start building our own mosaic. This means reading across ideological spectra, using artificial intelligence to translate non-English conservative sources like Junge Freiheit (even if one vehemently disagrees with its editorial line), tracking polling trends, and listening beyond capitals.

This is not about endorsing right-wing or conservative parties over liberal and progressive ideologies; rather, it underscores that navigating with a flawed map—lacking the full true picture—hurts everyone’s performance. Understanding Europe’s diverse political currents, progressive gains and conservative surges alike, reduces the risk of costly surprises.

Read more …

He himself is a leading candidate.

• Bessent Says “Formal Process” To Find Successor To Jerome Powell Has Begun (ZH)

U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent confirmed on Tuesday that a “formal process” is underway to find a potential successor to Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell. In an interview with Bloomberg Surveillance, Bessent remarked, “There are a lot of great candidates, and we’ll see how rapidly it progresses.” He also noted that it would be confusing for Powell to stay on at the Federal Reserve after his term as chair concludes. Since last month President Donald Trump has intensified his criticism of Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell, repeatedly accusing him of mismanaging monetary policy and calling for aggressive interest rate cuts. Trump has argued that Powell is acting too slowly to respond to economic conditions and said, “Maybe I should go to the Fed… Am I allowed to appoint myself at the Fed? I’d do a much better job than these people.”

He has labeled Powell with a series of insults, calling him “stupid,” “too late,” “a numbskull,” and demanding the Fed slash rates by a full percentage point to stimulate the economy. Trump’s attacks continued into July, growing even sharper. On July 8, he declared that Powell “should resign immediately.” A few days later, he criticized Powell over cost overruns tied to a $2.5 billion renovation project at the Federal Reserve, referring to him as a “knucklehead” and “stupid guy.” Last week, Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought also criticized Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell for a renovation project he called “too lavish,” referring to it as “Versailles on the National Mall.”

On CNBC, Vought cited “fundamental mismanagement” at the Fed. Meanwhile, National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett, a potential successor to Powell, added, “If there is cause to fire Powell, Trump has the authority to do so.” The criticism appeared coordinated, with other figures like Fed candidate Kevin Warsh and Vice President J.D. Vance joining in. Trump also reiterated his demand for rates to be cut to around 1%. Members of his team suggested they might review the renovation project as a possible justification to remove Powell “for cause.”

Read more …

It’s not just Harvard.

“..Stanford University and MIT are operating as “mainly political lobbying operations fighting American innovation.”

• Marc Andreessen: ‘Universities Declared War On 70% Of The Country’ (ZH)

Venture capitalist Marc Andreessen warned that universities engaging in discriminatory practices against students and faculty will face significant consequences, according to leaked screenshots obtained by the Washington Post. In the private group chat with AI scientists and Trump administration officials, Andreessen stated that universities “declared war on 70% of the country and now they’re going to pay the price.” He criticized DEI and immigration policies, describing them as “two forms of discrimination” that are “politically lethal.”

Andreessen further claimed that Stanford University and MIT are operating as “mainly political lobbying operations fighting American innovation.” The billionaire tech investor also addressed Stanford’s decision to remove his wife, Laura Arrillaga-Andreessen, as chair of its Center on Philanthropy and Civil Society, noting it was done “without a second thought, a decision that will cost them something like $5 billion in future donations.”

This isn’t the first time Andreessen has called out what he perceives as a broken university system. In a recent interview with billionaire venture capitalist and Palantir co-founder Joe Lonsdale, Andreessen raised concerns about access to elite education. “If you’re the parents of a smart kid where I grew up [rural Wisconsin] and you think you’re going to get them into a top university in this country, you’re fooling yourself,” Andreessen said. “What level of untapped talent exists in this country that a combination of DEI and immigration have basically cut out of the loop for the last 50 years?”

Andreessen argued that the intersection of DEI policies and high-skilled immigration has “warped” perceptions of who gets access to elite education. “Nobody wants to talk about, but I’ve started to talk about the intersection of DEI and immigration that has really warped our perceptions on high-skilled immigration over the last 50 years,” he said.

Andreessen also pointed to the sharp rise in foreign enrollment at top universities, noting, “You look at the foreign enrollment rates at the top universities, which went from 2 or 3 or 4 percent 50 years ago or whatever to 27% or 30% or 50%.” “There’s been this massive transformation of who gets admitted through affirmative action, as we now know it, DEI,” the tech billionaire continued. “This goes straight to the political divide in the country. If you’re parents of a kid where I grew up [rural Wisconsin] and you’ve got a smart kid and you think you’re going to get them into, you know, a top university in this country, like you’re fooling yourself.”

Andreessen drove the point home, adding, “There is this really fundamental question which is, what level of untapped talent exists in this country that a combination of DEI and immigration have basically cut out of the loop for the last 50 years? And how long can we have this story to everybody in the Midwest and in the South that says, sorry, because of historical oppression, your kids are shit out of luck.” Andreessen made headlines last year when he and his business partner, Ben Horowitz, endorsed President Donald Trump’s third campaign for the White House.

Read more …

“Trump suggested that nothing in the Epstein files “could have hurt the MAGA Movement.”

• Trump Says He Spoke to Bongino Amid Reports of Infighting (ET)

President Donald Trump said he spoke to FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino on July 13, indicating that the two remain close despite reported friction over the release of the Jeffrey Epstein documents. “I spoke to him today. Dan Bongino is a very good guy. I’ve known him a long time,” Trump told reporters outside Air Force 1. “He’s in good shape.” The comments come after Axios reported on July 11 that Bongino—previously a conservative commentator who had long pressed for answers about Epstein’s 2019 death and operation—skipped work on Friday due to disagreements with Attorney General Pam Bondi’s handling of the matter. Laura Loomer, a political commentator close to the president, also reported on Bongino’s absence from work last week, similarly referencing disagreements between Bongino and Bondi.

Trump on July 12 told his supporters not to continue looking into the circumstances surrounding the billionaire’s death. “What’s going on with my ‘boys’ and, in some cases, ‘gals?’” Trump said in a July 12 post on social media platform Truth Social. “They’re all going after Attorney General Pam Bondi, who is doing a FANTASTIC JOB! We’re on one Team, MAGA, and I don’t like what’s happening. “We have a PERFECT Administration, THE TALK OF THE WORLD, and ‘selfish people’ are trying to hurt it, all over a guy who never dies, Jeffrey Epstein.” He added, “One year ago our Country was DEAD, now it’s the ‘HOTTEST’ Country anywhere in the World. Let’s keep it that way, and not waste Time and Energy on Jeffrey Epstein, somebody that nobody cares about.”

Epstein’s case has been intensely scrutinized online for years following his 2019 death in federal custody while awaiting prosecution on charges of engaging in a multiyear conspiracy to sex traffic minors. The billionaire was reported to have hung himself in his cell, but given his connections with many high-ranking officials and celebrities, many have speculated whether Epstein was murdered. The nature of Epstein’s operation, involving sexual exploitation of over one thousand victims, many of whom were minors, has also been scrutinized. At a July 8 Cabinet meeting, a reporter asked Bondi to address a claim that Epstein had been some form of intelligence community asset. “I have no knowledge about that,” she said. “We can get back to you on that.”

During that Cabinet meeting, Bondi also said a missing minute from a jail surveillance tape on the night Epstein died was a normal circumstance due to a routine technical artifact in the camera system, as the video is reset every night at 12 a.m. Trump suggested that nothing in the Epstein files “could have hurt the MAGA Movement.” On July 7, the Department of Justice and FBI released a memo stating that Jeffrey Epstein committed suicide and had no “client list,” and that the agencies would not release any further material related to the Epstein case. “As part of our commitment to transparency, the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation have conducted an exhaustive review of investigative holdings relating to Jeffrey Epstein,” the agencies stated in the memo.

The review found that Epstein committed suicide in his cell as he was awaiting trial in August 2019. This concurs with an autopsy conducted at the time. “The conclusion that Epstein died by suicide is further supported by video footage from the common area of the Special Housing Unit (SHU) where Epstein was housed at the time of his death,” the memo reads. The review found that Epstein did not keep a list of clients as part of his sex trafficking activities. Additionally, there is no evidence that Epstein blackmailed individuals, according to the memo. Nonetheless, according to the review, Epstein “harmed over one thousand victims” as “each suffered unique trauma.”

Read more …

This screams Supreme Court. Expedited.

• Media Runs Interference as Biden Autopen Scandal Explodes (Margolis)

The legacy media never misses a beat when it comes to parroting Democratic talking points, screaming “threat to democracy” and “constitutional crisis” anytime Donald Trump sneezes in the wrong direction. But when the left tramples on constitutional norms? Crickets — or worse, full-blown excuses. Case in point: Joe Biden’s autopen scandal. The same press corps that waited until after he left office to admit what we all saw with our own eyes — that Biden was mentally unfit — is now running interference again. This time, they’re pretending the autopen scandal is much ado about nothing. This week, the New York Times published an exposé that revealed that, despite claims to the contrary, Joe Biden didn’t individually approve every pardon or act of clemency done in his name. It was a damning report that raises even major questions about what was signed via autopen without his knowledge.

So what did ABC News do? They tweeted out that Joe Biden personally made every clemency and pardon decision during the last weeks of his failed presidency, including the ones handled by autopen. To call that misleading is an understatement. The New York Times admits, and so do Biden’s own aides, that many of those pardons were processed in “large batches.” The decisions? Not made after careful review of individuals, but based on broad, pre-approved categories. Biden didn’t know the names. He didn’t scrutinize the cases. He rubber-stamped entire classes of people for a free pass, while the staffers and bureaucrats filled in the blanks. Despite pushing the Biden talking point on social media, the actual article ABC linked to directly refutes Biden’s own statement.

“Former President Joe Biden, in an interview with the New York Times published on Sunday, said that he personally made every clemency and pardon decision during the last few weeks of his presidency — including those made with an autopen. However, he and aides told the Times that some decisions for large batches of pardons were based on broad categories that various people fell into, not based on reviewing individuals on a case-by-case basis. Biden said he approved the categories and standards for choosing who to pardon. “I made every single one of those. And — including the categories, when we set this up to begin with,” Biden said of the clemency and pardon decisions.”

This is the same media that now pretends to have had a “come to Jesus” moment over the cover-up of Biden’s cognitive decline — while still actively covering it up. They’re pushing Biden’s denials as truth right in their headlines, hoping the public fixates on the spin instead of the facts. But those facts are damning: Biden and his own aides have admitted he didn’t personally make every decision. The media’s job used to be holding power accountable. Now, they’re still running PR for Joe Biden.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

lungs
https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1945255216078843920

https://twitter.com/ChildrensHD/status/1945226072057905629

Xishi

Monarch

Chico
https://twitter.com/Igottafigh64510/status/1945098230611513374

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle May 13 2025

May 132025
 
 May 13, 2025  Posted by at 9:52 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , ,  45 Responses »


Henri Matisse Bathers by a river 1909-16

 

• Trump Floats Joining Russia-Ukraine Peace Talks in Istanbul (ZH)
• Kremlin Issues Update On Proposed Ukraine Peace Talks (RT)
• ‘Stop The Clownery’ – Top Russian MP To Zelensky (RT)
• Zelensky Should ‘Grasp’ Opportunity Offered By Putin – George Galloway (RT)
• Trump Rallies GOP To Back ‘Big, Beautiful Bill’ (ZH)
• US, China Reach Agreement To Lower Tariffs In 90-Day Cool-Off Period (ZH)
• China’s Keynesian Model Is Crumbling. It Needs a Trade Deal, Fast. (Lacalle)
• Major Breakthroughs in US-China Trade Negotiations (Mehta)
• Gaddafi Warned Them. Now The EU Is Living Out His Grim Prophecy (RT)
• Kallas A ‘Tragedy’ For EU – MEP (RT)
• Ukraine’s EU Entry Would Drag Bloc Into War – Orban (RT)
• Multiculturalism Fail: Britain Makes a U-Turn on Immigration (Margolis)
• Le Pen Pines For Unified Nationalist Front In European Parliament (RMX)
• Trump Announces EO to Lower Prescription Drug Prices through MFN Policy (CTH)
• How Trump’s Drug Price Executive Order Will Affect Medicare (DS)
• Growing Strain in the Trump-Netanyahu Relationship Worsens (Devlin)
• MAHA Hugger Mugger (James Howard Kunstler)
• Trump’s Weaponization Czar Ed Martin: ‘It Worked Out Great’ (NYP)
• America is Under Siege – 233 Federal Cases Against Trump – Larry Klayman (USAW)

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/MyLordBebo/status/1921844841383625064

Classify

Starship

Rogan 2021

Merit

Temp
https://twitter.com/JamesMelville/status/1921711875953242455

 

 

 

 

What’s the idea? Force Putin to show up? You can achieve much by meeting Putin, but not with Zelensky around.

I seriously wonder what their advisors tell Trump and Vance (who’s obviously poorly informed).

• Trump Floats Joining Russia-Ukraine Peace Talks in Istanbul (ZH)

In yet another Ukraine peace talks related surprise, President Donald Trump on Monday floated the possibility of him traveling to Turkey to personally mediate negotiations between Russia and Ukraine, which are set for Thursday in Istanbul. “I was thinking about actually flying over there,” Trump said during a televised press conference on drug pricing. The words come after Ukraine’s President Zelensky said he’s ready to be there, and also challenged Putin to travel to the Turkish capital in person. “There’s a possibility of it, I guess, if I think things could happen,” Trump added, and the caveat: “I would fly there if I thought it would be helpful,””Thursday’s meeting with Russia and Ukraine is really important,” Trump said. “I was really insistent that that meeting take place. I think good things can come out of that meeting. Stop the bloodshed, it’s a bloodbath.”

The White House is backing a 30-day ceasefire plan, in hopes that it would lead to a final end to the bloodshed, with detailed negotiations in the interim. “I have a feeling they’re going to agree. I do. I have a feeling,” Trump also emphasized. The travel comments seemed more about displaying his personal optimism on new talks. He didn’t mention specifics or the challenge of logistics and setting up proper security, which can typically take days or weeks when it comes to presidential travel and coordination between the Secret Service and host nations. President Trump is about to embark on a trip to Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and UAE – so a potential Turkey visit would require a stop-over upon the return trip. Zelensky was quick to respond to Trump’s public brainstorming, stating on X that “all of us in Ukraine would appreciate it if President Trump could be there with us at this meeting in Türkiye.” He added: “I hope that the Russians will not evade the meeting.”

It seems clear that in poking the Kremlin, Zelensky is really just seeking to performatively demonstrate to Washington and European allies that he’s willing to engage in negotiations, after Trump has ramped up the pressure, and given Kiev desperately needs to continue securing Western weapons and support. It remains that Zelensky has offered no big (territorial) concessions to end the war, so likely Putin isn’t too interested in traveling to Turkey personally, for something which would likely in the end be a bust in terms of finalizing a peace settlement. The Kremlin likely understands perfectly well that this is mostly Zelensky playing to the cameras, and seeking to satisfy Trump and ‘reset’ the relationship with the US. It’s anything but clear whether Zelensky will actually be in Istanbul at this point.

Read more …

“.. any pause in fighting would allow Ukraine to regroup its battered forces and continue its mobilization campaign. Moscow has also demanded that all Western arms deliveries to Ukraine be halted during any ceasefire period.”

• Kremlin Issues Update On Proposed Ukraine Peace Talks (RT)

Russia is ready to resume direct peace talks with Ukraine, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has reiterated, stressing Moscow’s “serious” commitment to reaching a lasting settlement of the conflict. On Sunday, Russian President Vladimir Putin offered Ukraine the opportunity to restart direct negotiations without any preconditions in Istanbul, Türkiye, which Kiev unilaterally walked away from in 2022. However, Ukraine, backed by several European nations, has demanded that Russia agree to a ceasefire first as a precondition for talks. After US President Donald Trump urged Kiev to “immediately” agree to the proposal for direct unconditional talks, Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky said he would be waiting for Putin in Türkiye on Thursday “personally.”

Nevertheless, he maintained that Kiev awaits “a full and lasting ceasefire, starting from tomorrow [Monday], to provide the necessary basis for diplomacy.” Asked about the progress in the Ukraine peace process, Peskov told reporters on Monday that Moscow remains committed to “resuming direct talks in Istanbul without any preconditions.” Moscow’s approach is aimed at “finding a genuine diplomatic resolution to the Ukrainian crisis, addressing the root causes of the conflict, and achieving a lasting peace,” Peskov said. He added that Putin’s proposal had received support from “leaders of many countries,” including those in several former Soviet republics and BRICS members.

The spokesman also noted that Trump had “called on the Ukrainian side to urgently, and without any conditions, take part in the meeting we proposed,” while pointing to Türkiye’s readiness to facilitate the talks. “In general, we are focused on a serious effort to find a path toward a long-term peaceful resolution.” Moscow has said it is open to a ceasefire “in general,” but has flagged several crucial concerns. Russian officials argue that any pause in fighting would allow Ukraine to regroup its battered forces and continue its mobilization campaign. Moscow has also demanded that all Western arms deliveries to Ukraine be halted during any ceasefire period.

Read more …

“He should recall his first profession less often and stop the clownery..”

• ‘Stop The Clownery’ – Top Russian MP To Zelensky (RT)

A senior Russian MP has blasted Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky for continuing to block peace negotiations with Moscow, saying Kiev should “stop the clownery” and return to diplomacy. In an interview with RT on Monday, State Duma Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Leonid Slutsky noted that Zelensky “banned negotiations for himself.” He was referring to the Ukrainian leader’s 2022 order banning direct negotiations with Russia as long as President Vladimir Putin remains in office. “He should recall his first profession less often and stop the clownery,” Slutsky said, in an apparent jab at Zelensky’s past as a comedian. On Sunday, the Russian president proposed resuming direct negotiations with Ukraine without any preconditions on May 15 in Istanbul. The peace settlement process must start with talks, which could ultimately yield “some kind of new truce and a new ceasefire,” according to Putin.

Slutsky urged the Ukrainian leadership be “rational,” calling negotiations the “only sensible step.” “We are ready to choose our delegation and fly to Istanbul even this minute,” he said. “Of course, the talks won’t be easy, but I hope we can truly bring the military phase of this conflict to an end. It is in everyone’s interest.” The lawmaker claimed that worldwide support for Russia’s offer is growing as the global majority has formed around Putin’s ideas of a multipolar world. “We must face reality and start negotiations. I urge everyone to morally support this position,” Slutsky said. He added that the number of countries supporting the conflict is “approaching zero,” and that “the path toward peace has been laid out by the Russian president, endorsed by US President [Donald Trump] and all reasonable people.”

Read more …

“..Zelensky would be better off ignoring the “train wreck crew that retreated from Kiev in that now famous train journey at the weekend..”

“..to Russia, the fundamental question in any potential peace talks would be whether an “enduring agreement… can be reached” with the current “illegitimate” Ukrainian leader..”

• Zelensky Should ‘Grasp’ Opportunity Offered By Putin – George Galloway (RT)

Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky should seize the opportunity to restart direct negotiations offered by Russian President Vladimir Putin, as Kiev has “a losing hand” in all areas, the leader of the Workers Party of Britain, George Galloway, has said. In a televised address early on Sunday, Putin offered Kiev the chance to “resume the negotiations they interrupted in 2022… without any preconditions,” suggesting that talks could be held on Thursday in Istanbul. Speaking to RT on Monday, Galloway said “it’s a pity that his European friends haven’t told President Zelensky, as [US President] Donald Trump has told him, that this is an opportunity that simply must be grasped.” According to the former British MP, “the alternatives are really quite ghastly… for everyone concerned.”

Galloway added that Zelensky would be better off ignoring the “train wreck crew that retreated from Kiev in that now famous train journey at the weekend,” referring to the visit to the Ukrainian capital by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, French President Emmanuel Macron, and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz. “He should not listen to the likes of Starmer and Macron” as “they don’t represent anything practical,” Galloway insisted. He argued that none of the European NATO member states making up the so-called “coalition of the willing” have the military and economic might to be of any significance. Galloway added that to Russia, the fundamental question in any potential peace talks would be whether an “enduring agreement… can be reached” with the current “illegitimate” Ukrainian leader. Zelensky’s presidential term expired last May, although he has refused to hold elections, citing martial law.

Read more …

“..now, with the tremendous Drug and Pharmaceutical Cuts, plus massive incoming Tariff Money, our ‘GREAT, BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL’ just got much BIGGER and BETTER..”

• Trump Rallies GOP To Back ‘Big, Beautiful Bill’ (ZH)

President Donald Trump on Monday called on congressional Republicans to unify behind what he hailed as his “ONE, BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL,” a sweeping legislative package that merges tax cuts, immigration reforms, and a raft of domestic priorities into a single reconciliation measure. “This week the Republicans are meeting in the Tax, Energy, and Agriculture Committees on major pieces of ‘THE ONE, BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL,'” Mr. Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform, urging lawmakers to stand behind House committee chairs Jason Smith of Ways and Means, Brett Guthrie of Energy and Commerce, and Glenn “GT” Thompson of Agriculture. “We must WIN! But now, with the tremendous Drug and Pharmaceutical Cuts, plus massive incoming Tariff Money, our ‘GREAT, BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL’ just got much BIGGER and BETTER. The Golden Age of America will soon be upon us.”

The comments, made just before Mr. Trump’s planned trip to Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates, came as his administration unveiled an executive action to lower pharmaceutical drug prices by up to 90% under a new “Most Favored Nations” pricing policy. He also lashed out at Democrats, accusing them of trying to “DESTROY our Country” by offering amendments to the bill prior to his press conference. “When I return from the Middle East, where great things will happen for America, we will work together on any and all outstanding issues,” Mr. Trump added. “But there shouldn’t be many — The Bill is GREAT.”

Despite the urgency in his messaging, progress on Capitol Hill has been slow. Lawmakers have sent just five bills to Mr. Trump’s desk this Congress. Still, Speaker Mike Johnson is aiming to change that, setting a Memorial Day deadline to pass the reconciliation package through the House. GOP leadership hopes to finalize the bill by July 4 — a timeline that coincides with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent’s request for a debt-limit increase included in the package. On Monday, the house GOP released a draft of the bill (full text below)- which confirms several core policy pillars previously signaled by leadership. Among the most consequential is a 5% remittance tax on international money transfers, designed to fund border security, which includes a new refundable credit for verified U.S. senders and strict compliance rules.

In a significant rollback of Biden-era environmental policy, the bill would terminate or phase out numerous clean energy tax credits, including for residential solar, new energy-efficient homes, and hydrogen production, with sharp limits on components sourced from “prohibited foreign entities”—primarily targeting Chinese supply chains. The legislation also introduces a new federal income tax deduction for qualified tips and overtime compensation through 2028, aimed at working-class earners. However, these benefits explicitly exclude high earners, service-sector owners, and nontraditional tipping industries, and require both the employee and spouse to have Social Security numbers to qualify—adding a compliance hurdle that could reignite partisan fights over ID requirements.

Beyond those provisions, the bill extends provisions from the 2017 Trump tax law, including the higher estate and gift tax exemptions and the limitation on the deduction of state and local taxes (SALT), with a modified $30,000 cap for individuals that phases down for high earners. This could fuel renewed conflict with blue-state Republicans still pushing for full repeal. The bill further includes a new cap on the tax benefit of itemized deductions, revives limitations on casualty loss and moving expense deductions, and eliminates miscellaneous itemized deductions altogether—provisions likely to draw sharp resistance from Democrats, particularly those representing high-cost-of-living states.

Read more …

In a brief check of CNN yesterday, I learned that Trump had lost his trade venture in a terrible way. Because he came down from 145%. Well, I think he won. 2 weeks ago, the Chinese refused to talk. Now, they’re in a binding agreement to negotiate.

• US, China Reach Agreement To Lower Tariffs In 90-Day Cool-Off Period (ZH)

During a Monday morning press conference, President Trump told reporters that trade negotiations have led to a “total reset” in U.S.-China relations. He added that he may speak with President Xi Jinping later this week. More headlines from Trump’s press conference (courtesy of Bloomberg):
TRUMP: Total Reset With China
TRUMP: No Decoupling With China
TRUMP: Doesn’t Include Cars, Steel, Aluminum
TRUMP: Will Speak to Xi Maybe at End of Week
TRUMP: China Deal ‘Not the Easiest Thing to Paper’

* * *
China and the U.S. moved to ease trade tensions early Monday, agreeing to a temporary 90-day reduction in reciprocal tariffs on each other’s goods, according to a joint statement released by both governments on X. The accord, viewed as a breakthrough in a multi-month trade war between the world’s two largest economies, helped spark a rally in global markets: S&P 500 futures rose 3%, while Nasdaq futures gained 4%. European markets also advanced, and the U.S. dollar strengthened. U.S. government bonds sold as investors rotated back into equities and other risk-sensitive assets. The joint statement said that the U.S. will reduce levies on most Chinese imports from 145% to 30% by Wednesday. Here’s a summary of the U.S. actions:

The United States will remove the additional tariffs it imposed on China on April 8 and April 9, 2025, but will retain all duties imposed on China prior to April 2, 2025, including Section 301 tariffs, Section 232 tariffs, tariffs imposed in response to the fentanyl national emergency invoked pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, and Most Favored Nation tariffs.
• The United States will suspend its 34% reciprocal tariff imposed on April 2, 2025 for 90 days, but retain a 10% tariff during the period of the pause.
• The 10% tariff continues to set a fair baseline that encourages domestic production, strengthens our supply chains and ensures that American trade policy supports American workers first, instead of undercutting them.
• By imposing reciprocal tariffs, President Trump is ensuring our trade policy works for the American economy, addresses our national emergency brought on by our growing and persistent trade deficit, and levels the playing field for American workers and producers.
• Unlike previous administrations, President Trump took a tough, uncompromising stance on China to protect American interests and stop unfair trade practices.

The breakthrough in the talks also led to China reducing its 125% tariff on U.S. goods to 10%. Here’s a summary of the Chinese actions: China will remove the retaliatory tariffs it announced since April 4, 2025, and will also suspend or remove the non-tariff countermeasures taken against the United States since April 2, 2025.
• China will also suspend its initial 34% tariff on the United States it announced on April 4, 2025 for 90 days, but will retain a 10% tariff during the period of the pause. The joint statement indicated that Monday’s agreement would pave the way for further negotiations between senior officials. On the U.S. side, talks are being led by Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Trade Representative Jamieson Greer, while Vice Premier He Lifeng will represent China…

After taking the aforementioned actions, the Parties will establish a mechanism to continue discussions about economic and trade relations. The representative from the Chinese side for these discussions will be He Lifeng, Vice Premier of the State Council, and the representatives from the U.S. side will be Scott Bessent, Secretary of the Treasury, and Jamieson Greer, United States Trade Representative. These discussions may be conducted alternately in China and the United States, or a third country upon agreement of the Parties. As required, the two sides may conduct working-level consultations on relevant economic and trade issues.

The White House wrote on X that these trade talks will address America’s trade imbalances: The U.S. goods trade deficit with China was $295.4 billion in 2024—the largest with any trading partner. Today’s agreement works toward addressing these imbalances to deliver real, lasting benefits to American workers, famers, and businesses. The talks also addressed the ongoing fentanyl crisis. The United States and China will take aggressive actions to stem the flow of fentanyl and other precursors from China to illicit drug producers in North America.

Shortly after the joint statement was released, Bessent, who led the American delegation at the talks, told reporters in Geneva that both sides have “substantially moved down the tariff levels” and “neither side wants a decoupling.” “We had a very robust and productive discussion on steps forward on fentanyl,” Bessent added, pointing out that those talks might lead to “purchasing agreements” by China. Commenting on markets, Benedicte Lowe, an equity and derivatives strategist at BNP Paribas Markets 360, told Bloomberg TV that “deescalation was much better than expected by the market” and “for the next couple of days I would expect a bullish environment in the global equity market.”

Read more …

“Everything that is weak in China comes from previous years of government policies aimed at boosting economic growth by building stuff and hoping it would sell at some point..”

• China’s Keynesian Model Is Crumbling. It Needs a Trade Deal, Fast. (Lacalle)

In the past decade, the Chinese economy has expanded its central-planned neo-Keynesian model that simply cannot survive without a trade deal. The Chinese manufacturing sector has followed a running-to-stand-still strategy that simply cannot subsist without the enormous trade surplus with the United States. The Chinese manufacturing sector overcapacity is not an anecdote. It is the norm. China produces 30% of the world’s manufacturing goods but consumes less than 18%, according to CKGSB. Additionally, China’s industrial capacity utilization rate fell to 74.1% in the first quarter of 2025. China’s Keynesian central planning model aims to maximise employment and maintain strong economic growth, despite financial constraints and excessive indebtedness. Thus, it needs to sell its excess production to avoid a massive problem of working capital.

Even the government has recognised the problem in a roundabout way, noting that “involution”-style competition (wasteful competition) is a major focus for the 2025 economic policy, and steps are being taken to reduce unnecessary investments and control growth in some industries. However, overcapacity in China is not a fatality; it was created by political design, with local and national authorities trying to boost GDP at any cost. The model is aimed at keeping full employment and economic growth even with economic returns below the cost of capital, and it almost works if the excess capacity can be sold globally, receiving reserve currency and maintaining low costs by passing the working capital cost to global consumers and maintaining low production expenditure with currency controls and exchange rate fixing.

However, the combination of rising debt, a constantly weakening currency, and the escalating bankruptcy and working capital issues could potentially bring this model to a collapse, even in the absence of an official recession. China has learnt that it cannot endure a trade war and cannot substitute the US consumer, the richest and largest market, with European or Latin American consumers. Therefore, it needs a trade deal quickly before the domino of bankruptcies that has plagued the Chinese economy since 2021 erupts into a full-blown financial crisis. China is officially in deflation for the third consecutive month in April. Business insolvencies are projected to increase by 7% in 2025 and by 10% in 2026, according to Allianz, even as the government implements additional fiscal stimulus.

Small and medium-sized enterprises, particularly exporters, are facing mounting bankruptcies due to declining cash flow and the elimination of US tariff exemptions. Job losses are rising in export-dependent regions, and the urban unemployment rate is expected to average 5.7% in 2025, above the official target, according to CNBC. The official NBS Manufacturing PMI fell sharply to 49.0 in April 2025, the steepest decline since December 2023, reflecting a drop in output, new orders, and employment, with foreign orders shrinking to their lowest in at least eleven months. The collapse of the real estate sector, which once accounted for up to 30% of GDP, has weakened banks, reduced household wealth, and led to a negative wealth effect, further depressing consumption and credit demand.

China’s economic strengths are well known, but the weaknesses are too important to ignore. The situation serves as a reminder that central planning never works. Everything that is weak in China comes from previous years of government policies aimed at boosting economic growth by building stuff and hoping it would sell at some point. Furthermore, rising bankruptcies, an imploding property market, and mounting local government debt strain the financial system just as non-performing loans from the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) soar. Several BRI countries have defaulted on their debts or required IMF bailouts, including Sri Lanka, Zambia, Ghana, and Pakistan, while the BRI generated $385 billion in off-the-books debt.

Read more …

X-thread. Who won? The comments say China.

• Major Breakthroughs in US-China Trade Negotiations (Mehta)

The US-China trade standoff just ended with a historic 90-day agreement.

Chinese officials made THREE major concessions the media isn’t reporting. After weeks of escalating tariffs that reached a staggering 125% on both sides, US and Chinese negotiators met in Geneva this weekend. The result? A breakthrough 90-day agreement. But there’s more to this story than what’s being reported. Let’s rewind to understand why this matters. On April 2nd, Trump imposed “reciprocal tariffs” under his America First policy. China was assigned a 34% rate. Unlike other countries, China chose to fight back. That’s when things escalated dramatically.

China didn’t just add tariffs. They imposed severe non-tariff measures that effectively created a trade embargo, according to US officials. The economic equivalent of a declaration of war. Both sides kept raising tariffs until they hit a crippling 125%, creating an unsustainable situation that threatened global trade. That’s when something unexpected happened.

Concession #1: China agreed to reduce tariffs by 115%, bringing them down to just 10%. This matches the exact reduction the US offered, creating parity for the first time in this trade battle. But that’s just the beginning.

Concession #2: China removed ALL counter-measures. Beyond tariffs, China had imposed severe non-tariff barriers. Officials said these effectively created a trade embargo against US goods. They’ve now agreed to remove ALL of these barriers.

Concession #3 is perhaps the most surprising. China sent their deputy minister for public safety to address the fentanyl crisis. US officials called this an “upside surprise” – completely unexpected at a trade meeting. This isn’t just about lower prices on Chinese goods. It’s about a fundamental shift in the US-China relationship. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent revealed they’re managing a trade queue with 75+ countries bringing “their best offers” after seeing China’s concessions. The bigger story? This isn’t a one-off deal. US officials established a “mechanism” for ongoing negotiations – something they claim was “neglected” before. Communication channels had “atrophied” until now. What happens in the next 90 days is critical.

Negotiations will focus on rebalancing trade and addressing the $1.2 trillion deficit in goods. That deficit grew 42% in recent years. Now it’s being tackled head-on. Behind the scenes, a strategic vision is unfolding. The US aims to rebuild key manufacturing in medicine, semiconductors, and steel. Yet both sides agreed: “neither side wants a decoupling.” They want rebalancing, not separation. Both countries need a reset. One official explained: “China is unbalanced in terms of overproduction in manufacturing.” The US lost precision manufacturing.Together, they could find a new equilibrium.

America’s goals are clear:
• Restore critical manufacturing
• Maintain healthy trade flows
• Command respect in negotiations
• Create a model for future deals

This agreement sets the blueprint. The ultimate test will come during these 90 days. Will China follow through? Will concrete purchase agreements materialize to reduce the trade deficit? Let me know what you think in the comments. The rules of global trade are being rewritten, and this is just the beginning.

Read more …

“Tomorrow Europe might no longer be European, and even black”. Gaddafi saw it coming from miles away. And Hillary cackled.

• Gaddafi Warned Them. Now The EU Is Living Out His Grim Prophecy (RT)

The migration crisis on Europe’s southern borders has been brewing for decades. Today, it has reached a breaking point. In a bid to halt the flow of refugees, the EU is increasingly shifting responsibility to third countries – primarily African states that often face instability themselves. Libya is the most striking example of what these policies have led to. Today, around 4 million African migrants live there without legal status – more than half of the country’s official population of 7.5 million. Left in chaos after Western intervention, Libya has become a springboard for millions seeking to reach the shores of Europe. And it’s not just Libya – in recent years, the European Union has been forging a web of agreements with African and Middle Eastern countries, aiming to keep migrants farther from its borders through a combination of financial incentives and political pressure.

The critical situation in Libya is a direct consequence of Europe’s longstanding attempts to contain migration. According to the European Commission, as of 2023, the EU’s total population was 448.8 million, with 27.3 million non-EU citizens and 42.4 million people born outside the bloc. Despite a recent decline in illegal border crossings, the problem remains acute. Frontex, the European Border and Coast Guard Agency, reported that in January–February 2025, the number of illegal crossings dropped by 25%, to around 25,000. The main routes now run through West Africa and the Central Mediterranean, with migrants predominantly hailing from Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Mali, and other countries. The threat of uncontrolled migration has loomed over Europe for years. It’s worth recalling the warnings of the late Libyan leader, Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, who cautioned during a meeting with Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi in 2010:

“Tomorrow Europe might no longer be European, and even black, as there are millions who want to come in.” In 2011, just months before his death, Gaddafi told Tony Blair that his removal would plunge Libya into chaos, empower terrorist groups, and trigger new waves of migration to Europe. These predictions came true: after the civil war and NATO’s intervention, Libya fell into anarchy and became one of the main transit hubs for refugees. According to Libya’s Ministry of Internal Affairs, over 4 million foreigners are currently in Libya, most of them undocumented. Many are held in detention centers, which, amid lawlessness, rampant drug trafficking and armed clashes, have become little more than prisons. International organizations have documented slave markets and abductions of migrants for forced labor or ransom.

Those who fail to reach Europe face two options: deportation or death in the Mediterranean. UNICEF reports that more than 2,200 people died or went missing in the Mediterranean in 2024, including about 1,700 along the central route. Children and teenagers accounted for roughly one-fifth of all casualties. At a March 17 meeting at the Ministry of Interior of the Government of National Unity (GNU) in Tripoli, Minister Emad Al-Trabelsi stated that Libya could not cope alone, given its internal security and economic problems. In the presence of EU diplomats, African Union officials and representatives from the International Organization for Migration (IOM) and the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), he called on Western countries to help strengthen Libya’s southern borders, supply modern equipment for controlling migration, and provide broader support to the country.

Italy, one of the first destinations for many migrants, is actively seeking to change the situation. Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni proposed the Mattei Plan – a multibillion-euro initiative to invest in energy, agriculture, water supply, healthcare and education in African countries. Named after Eni founder Enrico Mattei, the plan is based on a simple idea: fostering economic development in Africa to reduce incentives for migration. At the same time, Italy is not shying away from another tool – “offshoring” migrants, meaning relocating them to third countries. Australia pioneered this model, sending asylum seekers to the island of Nauru since 2012. European countries are now adopting similar methods. In Europe, Albania may become a processing hub for migrants, thanks in part to Italian efforts. Under Meloni’s ambitious plan, two migrant screening centers are to be opened in Albania, a non-EU member state, but operated under Rome’s authority. The goal is to keep asylum seekers out of both Italy and the EU.

Read more …

Brussels is full of such tragedies. Because no democracy.

“Euro-Nazism is being reborn before our eyes,” Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said in response to Kallas’ threats..”

• Kallas A ‘Tragedy’ For EU – MEP (RT)

Senior EU officials, such as foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas, represent a “tragedy” for the bloc, Slovak MEP Lubos Blaha has told RT. Blaha also accused top officials in Brussels of supporting fascism. The MEP’s remarks come after Brussels criticized Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico’s attendance at Russia’s May 9 Victory Day celebrations in Moscow last week. Kallas warned EU officials and candidate countries against taking part in the event, urging them to travel to Kiev instead. Other EU officials warned that candidate states such as Serbia would have their status renewed if their leaders attended the celebrations in Russia. According to Blaha, the criticism directed at Fico and other leaders, such as Serbia’s Aleksandar Vucic, wasn’t genuinely about the conflict in Ukraine. “The real truth is different. The real truth is that their anti-fascism is pretended,” he said.

Blaha used the example of this year’s ceremony in the European Parliament commemorating the defeat of Nazi Germany in World War II, describing it as somber. “It was like a funeral. Everyone was so sad, and in the end, Beethoven was playing,” Blaha said, noting that the same music was used by Germany broadcasts after the Battle of Stalingrad. “This is the same tradition.” “If the European Union is governed by people like Kaja Kallas, then it’s a tragedy,” he added. Kallas, who previously served as the prime minister of Estonia, has repeatedly spoken out harshly against Russia and has labeled Moscow as the EU’s primary adversary, while advocating for increased militarization of the European bloc. Her warnings to EU member states and candidate countries about attending the Moscow Victory Day celebrations were met with condemnation from Russian officials, who labeled her threats as “blackmail.”

“Euro-Nazism is being reborn before our eyes,” Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said in response to Kallas’ threats. “This is how the fascists 80 years ago forced those they considered ‘second-class people’ to renounce their homeland, ethnicity, and faith,” she wrote on Telegram. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has also criticized Kallas as a “rabid Russophobe,” and recently claimed that “manifestations of neo-Nazism in Europe” are “significant,” and called for extensive efforts to combat the trend. Echoing these sentiments, former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev recently claimed that neo-Nazism is on the rise in Europe. He called for a comprehensive “de-Nazification” effort not just in Ukraine, but across the entire continent.

Read more …

“..Lavrov has stated that the EU is “becoming militarized at a record pace,” adding that there is now “very little difference” between the EU and NATO.”

• Ukraine’s EU Entry Would Drag Bloc Into War – Orban (RT)

Admitting Ukraine into the EU would only prolong the hostilities between Moscow and Kiev and risk dragging the bloc into the conflict, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has warned. Ukraine, which has made EU membership a national priority, formally applied to join the bloc in February 2022, days after the escalation of the conflict with Russia. Hungary has repeatedly pushed back against the EU’s goal of admitting Ukraine by 2030 – a target recently reiterated by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. On Monday, Orban reiterated Budapest’s opposition to accession, calling it a decision that could shape the bloc’s future for the worse. “As a country neighboring Ukraine, we believe that if Ukraine is admitted to the European Union, it will mean war,” Orban told the conference of EU parliamentary speakers in Budapest. The EU has never accepted a country at war – and for “good reason,” he added.

The Hungarian leader also expressed regret over the commitment of some EU leaders to continued military aid for Kiev. “We have a different view. We think the longer the war lasts, the more lives will be lost and the worse the situation will become on the battlefield,” Orban said. Ukraine still faces major hurdles on its path to joining the bloc, with full membership requiring unanimous EU approval and sweeping reforms, including anti-corruption efforts, improved governance, and legal alignment with EU standards. Orban has long opposed Ukraine’s integration into Western institutions, including NATO, arguing that its accession could escalate tensions with Russia. He suggested that the country should instead remain a “buffer” between Russia and the West.

While Russia has consistently rejected the idea of Ukraine joining NATO, its position on EU accession has been more restrained. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said Ukraine has the “sovereign right” to join the bloc, provided that it remains a matter of economic integration and not military alignment. However, Russian officials have warned that the line between civilian and military in the EU is becoming blurred. Peskov has accused the bloc of actively working to prolong the Ukraine conflict by repeatedly expressing its intention to support Kiev in its desire to “continue the war.” He has also criticized Brussels for undermining peace efforts by portraying Russia as the bloc’s primary adversary. Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has stated that the EU is “becoming militarized at a record pace,” adding that there is now “very little difference” between the EU and NATO.

Read more …

Better make that a very sharp turn.

• Multiculturalism Fail: Britain Makes a U-Turn on Immigration (Margolis)

UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer is now openly calling for a significant reduction in immigration, which marks a complete reversal from Labour’s previous open-borders agenda. In his latest remarks, Starmer didn’t just echo familiar concerns about wages or public services. He framed the immigration issue as a threat to national cohesion and, in doing so, acknowledged what many British citizens have been warning about for years. “Nations depend on rules, fair rules,” Starmer said. “Sometimes they’re written down; often they’re not. But either way, they give shape to our values, guide us towards our rights, of course, but also our responsibilities, the obligations we owe to each other.” This newfound focus on national responsibility is a remarkable about-face for a party that spent years dismissing immigration concerns as xenophobic.

But the Prime Minister went further, saying that without clear rules, the UK risks becoming “an island of strangers, not a nation that walks forward together.” Starmer, once a staunch advocate for multiculturalism, now concedes that the immigration system has been exploited at the expense of national identity. “When you have an immigration system that seems almost designed to permit abuse, that encourages some businesses to bring in lower paid workers rather than invest in our young people,” he said, “or simply one that is sold by politicians to the British people on an entirely false premise, then you’re not championing growth, you’re not championing justice.” “You’re actually contributing to the forces that are slowly pulling our country apart,” Starmer admitted.

But it’s more than just exploitation of cheap labor. The broader concern — unspoken in Starmer’s remarks but unmistakably present — is that an influx of Islamic migrants, many of whom openly reject Western values, has plagued the UK. It’s caused a slew of problems that politicians and the media have typically downplayed. In many cities, integration has failed, creating cultural clashes and deepening social divisions. Urban neighborhoods with large immigrant populations are experiencing increased tension, with growing concerns over crime, strained public services, and economic burdens. In short, the consequences of unchecked migration have been devastating, not just to public safety but also to social cohesion.

“That’s why I told the Labour Party conference taking back control is a Labour argument,” Starmer continued. “And why, most importantly of all, inward migration is already falling with this government.” It’s the clearest indication yet that Labour knows — even if it won’t publicly admit — it can no longer ignore reality. The cultural fractures, the rise in antisemitism, the radicalization concerns, and the strain on law enforcement have all added up. The question now is whether voters will buy Labour’s rebrand or see it as too little, too late. Either way, the Prime Minister’s speech confirms what critics have said all along: mass migration, particularly from hostile Islamic cultures, was never about diversity. It was about dismantling the nation. And now, even Starmer is admitting the damage.

Read more …

Much closer to what the countries and people have in common: the respectful preservation of what makes them different from each other. Much better than EU.

• Le Pen Pines For Unified Nationalist Front In European Parliament (RMX)

Marine Le Pen used a visit to Rome on Saturday to denounce what she called a growing “democratic scandal” within the European Union, following her recent conviction that has barred her from running in France’s next presidential election. Speaking alongside Italian Deputy Prime Minister Matteo Salvini, the French nationalist leader warned that her case was part of a wider pattern of political suppression aimed at silencing sovereignist movements across Europe. “I have an African friend who told me that there are countries where there are no elections, and countries where candidates are prevented from running,” Le Pen said in an interview with Corriere Della Sera during the visit. “I believe that my conviction is really a democratic scandal: I was prevented from running for election, despite having appealed and am therefore still presumed innocent.”

Le Pen drew a direct comparison between her own legal troubles and what she described as systematic efforts by the European establishment to neutralize opposition voices. “I can’t help but think of what happened to Salvini, what happened in Romania with Calin Georgescu, and what the European Union wants to do with Orbán,” she said. “The EU does not like defeats, but it is ready to go against the people to crush those who bother it.” Her remarks came during a joint appearance with Salvini at the League’s School of Political Formation following a religious observance in honor of Pope Leo XIV. The two leaders, longtime allies in the European nationalist movement, presented a united front against what they view as Brussels’ overreach and ideological rigidity. “His political ideas are practically the same as mine,” Le Pen said of Salvini. “And I want to add that he is a brave, faithful man with great willpower. He really is a friend.”

Le Pen also used her Rome trip to criticize ongoing EU defense integration efforts, particularly the Readiness 2030 initiative, which she claimed is another vehicle for centralizing power in Brussels. “Whenever there is a crisis, the EU takes advantage to push integrated policies that override national sovereignty,” she said. “Today, it does so with Ukraine and tries to build a European army. It does so in an absolutely cynical way, to impose its ideological agenda on the European people.”With French President Emmanuel Macron and other EU leaders visiting Kyiv for meetings with his Ukrainian counterpart, Volodymyr Zelensky, and the so-called “Coalition of the Willing,” Le Pen questioned the coalition’s true aim. “Does it want to reach an agreement for peace, or will it end up fomenting war?” she asked.

“Macron has put himself in the shoes of the warrior. France should do the opposite: devote all its efforts to acting as a mediator in the direction of peace.” Though Patriots for Europe, the nationalist parliamentary group Le Pen co-founded, is now the third-largest bloc in the European Parliament, she acknowledged that uniting with Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) could elevate their influence further. “I do not lose hope that the sovereigntists can evolve into a single formation,” she said. “After all, we already vote together on many amendments. Certainly, there is more that unites us than separates us.”

On Meloni herself, Le Pen insisted she has “an important diplomatic role, and that’s no surprise. We have differences — especially her support for the election of Ursula von der Leyen — but she’s achieved results, both externally and for Italy’s economy.” Despite tensions between the French and Italian governments, Le Pen advocated for a revival of the bilateral relationship. “France and Italy are the two most similar countries in Europe,” she said. “I support a true Renaissance in relations between them.” In contrast, she dismissed the longstanding Franco-German axis. “That axis is a choice of the current French government,” she said. “Germany has always pursued its own policies. I believe Europe needs rules that apply equally to all.”

Read more …

“most favored nation” (MFN)

“..I will be signing one of the most consequential Executive Orders in our Country’s history..”

• Trump Announces EO to Lower Prescription Drug Prices through MFN Policy (CTH)

CTH suspected we were going to see this…. and it might just work. President Trump has announced via Truth Social that he will sign an executive order to structurally create a “most favored nation” (MFN) policy toward USA drug manufacturing prices. Americans must receive a matching price to the lowest cost sold. President Trump – “For many years the World has wondered why Prescription Drugs and Pharmaceuticals in the United States of America were SO MUCH HIGHER IN PRICE THAN THEY WERE IN ANY OTHER NATION, SOMETIMES BEING FIVE TO TEN TIMES MORE EXPENSIVE THAN THE SAME DRUG, MANUFACTURED IN THE EXACT SAME LABORATORY OR PLANT, BY THE SAME COMPANY??? It was always difficult to explain and very embarrassing because, in fact, there was no correct or rightful answer.

The Pharmaceutical/Drug Companies would say, for years, that it was Research and Development Costs, and that all of these costs were, and would be, for no reason whatsoever, borne by the “suckers” of America, ALONE. Campaign Contributions can do wonders, but not with me, and not with the Republican Party. We are going to do the right thing, something that the Democrats have fought for many years. Therefore, I am pleased to announce that Tomorrow morning, in the White House, at 9:00 A.M., I will be signing one of the most consequential Executive Orders in our Country’s history. Prescription Drug and Pharmaceutical prices will be REDUCED, almost immediately, by 30% to 80%. They will rise throughout the World in order to equalize and, for the first time in many years, bring FAIRNESS TO AMERICA!

I will be instituting a MOST FAVORED NATION’S POLICY whereby the United States will pay the same price as the Nation that pays the lowest price anywhere in the World. Our Country will finally be treated fairly, and our citizens Healthcare Costs will be reduced by numbers never even thought of before. Additionally, on top of everything else, the United States will save TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS. Thank you for your attention to this matter. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!” [source]

***
[..] President Trump is on the cusp of announcing a big change in tariffs against foreign pharmaceutical companies in an effort to get the manufacturing of medicines brought back to the USA. Details are soon to surface. In a proactive move, the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA), went to the European Commission (EC) in April to hold talks with Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, calling for radical change and holding the threat of an exodus to the U.S. over the EC president’s head.

PRESS RELEASE – “Today, CEOs of the research-based pharmaceutical industry issued a stark warning to President von der Leyen that unless Europe delivers rapid, radical policy change then pharmaceutical research, development and manufacturing is increasingly likely to be directed towards the US.

A survey of EFPIA member companies conducted last week – to which 18 international large and medium-sized innovative companies responded – identified as much as 85% of capital expenditure investments (approximately €50.6 billion) and as much as 50% of R&D expenditure (approximately €52.6 billion) potentially at risk. This is out of a current combined total of €164.8 billion in investments planned for the period 2025-2029 in the EU-27 territory. Over the next three months, companies that responded estimate that a total of €16.5 billion i.e. 10% of the total investment plans is at risk.The US now leads Europe on every investor metric from availability of capital, intellectual property, speed of approval to rewards for innovation. In addition to the uncertainty created by the threat of tariffs, there is little incentive to invest in the EU and significant drivers to relocate to the US. (read more)”

Read more …

“Gasoline, Energy, Groceries, and all other costs, DOWN. NO INFLATION!!! LOVE, DJT.”

• How Trump’s Drug Price Executive Order Will Affect Medicare (DS)

President Donald Trump will take action on Medicare if pharmaceutical companies don’t lower prices across markets in response to his Monday executive order to slash prescription drug costs. Trump signed an executive order Monday morning instituting a “most favored nation” policy under which Americans will pay “the same price as the Nation that pays the lowest price anywhere in the World.” “DRUG PRICES TO BE CUT BY 59%, PLUS!” Trump wrote on Truth Social Monday morning. “Gasoline, Energy, Groceries, and all other costs, DOWN. NO INFLATION!!! LOVE, DJT.” Trump signed a similar executive order in 2020 that called for linking drug prices under both Parts B and D to those paid by selected foreign governments.

Medicare Part B covers doctor-administered medications. Medicare Part D covers prescription medicines that senior beneficiaries typically pick up at neighborhood pharmacies. The government provides income-related subsidies to seniors, who shop for the private drug coverage that best meets their own needs. That 2020 order resulted in a rule that was limited to Medicare Part B, but the executive order signed this morning is broader, according to a White House Official. The Daily Signal asked the White House on a background call for reporters how the order would affect Medicare Part D. Medicare is where the United States government spends the most money directly on pharmaceuticals, a White House official said.

“We will be taking action in the Medicare program if the pharmaceutical companies do not come to the table and lower their prices across markets,” the White House official told The Daily Signal. “That’s obviously one of our biggest programs, and where Medicare Part B has been successful in incentivizing generic utilization, where, in many places, for 90% of prescriptions, we get very low prices.” While 90% of prescriptions are generic, meaning developed to be the same as a medicine that has already been authorized, the expenditure on the remaining 10% of prescriptions is “enormous” and one of the main places the U.S. is getting “ripped off,” according to the White House official. The official said future action on the Medicare program will be a key focus of the Trump administration.

Read more …

Trump has some kind of fall-out with Bibi. But that doesn’t mean he turns his back on AIPAC or the entire Israel lobby. Let’s wait and see. He’s in the Gulf this week. The deals made there will give some things away. $1 triilion for the US while Bibi finishes off Gaza? Don’t think so.

• Growing Strain in the Trump-Netanyahu Relationship Worsens (Devlin)

American negotiators sidelined Israel in securing the release of the last living American hostage held by Hamas in Gaza in yet another sign of tension between President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Over the weekend, President Donald Trump’s administration brokered a deal for the emancipation of Edan Alexander, a 21-year-old dual American-Israeli national, with the help of Qatari and Egyptian mediators. Israel, meanwhile, was sidelined and learned of the deal only Sunday night. Unlike previous hostage exchanges, Alexander’s release did not accompany or come under the framework of a broader ceasefire agreement. Rather, Netanyahu is gearing up to expand Israel’s operations in Gaza after receiving approval from Israel’s security cabinet last week. Trump took to Truth Social on Sunday evening to announce the deal that ultimately secured Alexander’s release.

“I am happy to announce that Edan Alexander, an American citizen who has been held hostage since October 2023, is coming home to his family,” the president wrote. “I am grateful to all those involved in making this monumental news happen. This was a step taken in good faith towards the United States and the efforts of the mediators—Qatar and Egypt—to put an end to this very brutal war and return ALL living hostages and remains to their loved ones. Hopefully this is the first of those final steps necessary to end this brutal conflict. I look very much forward to that day of celebration!” Netanyahu, meanwhile, credited Alexander’s release to not only Trump’s diplomacy but also to “the military pressure of [Israeli Defense Forces] soldiers in the Gaza Strip.”

An unnamed Hamas official told NPR that the United States made certain guarantees to secure Alexander’s release. NPR added that, while the Hamas official did not go into detail, the official hinted that the U.S. would help secure the release of some Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli captivity, facilitate the delivery of some aid into Gaza, and negotiate a broader end to the war. Following Alexander’s release, Hamas published a statement saying, “The Al-Qassam Brigades have just released the Israeli soldier holding American citizenship, Edan Alexander, following communications with the U.S. administration. This comes as part of the mediators’ efforts to reach a ceasefire, open the border crossings, and allow the entry of aid and relief for our people in the Gaza Strip.” “The ball is now in the American and Israeli court. We gave the Americans what they asked for. They need to get the other side to give things too,” the Hamas official told NPR.

Netanyahu contradicted the Hamas official, claiming Alexander was released “without anything in return.” An Israeli Defense Forces unit received Alexander from Hamas on Monday and took the 21-year-old to a facility in Re’im for a medical and psychological evaluation. Alexander, a soldier for the Israeli Army, was captured by Hamas at his military post on the morning of Oct. 7, 2023. The New Jersey native moved to Israel after high school to serve in the Israeli military. Trump has changed America’s approach to pursuing a Middle Eastern peace agreement, opting to negotiate directly with Hamas and other belligerents in the Israel-Gaza conflict without Israel present.

Last week, American negotiators brokered a deal with Houthi militants in Yemen. The U.S. will end missile strikes in Yemen as long as the Houthis end strikes on American vessels in the Red Sea. This deal apparently surprised Netanyahu and other Israeli officials, and Netanyahu posted a video statement on X that said, “Israel will defend itself by itself. If others would join us, our American friends, very well. If they don’t, we will defend ourselves.” Trump’s decision to cut Israel out of the negotiations with the Houthis represents a response to Israel’s actions following the breakdown of the ceasefire brokered by Trump’s special envoy to the Middle East, Steve Witkoff, just prior to Trump entering office.

That ceasefire, which would have continued to facilitate the return of hostages on both sides, started to falter in March. Israel accused Hamas of returning the wrong hostage remains, and Hamas made grotesque public showings of the hostage returns. Hamas, meanwhile, accused Israel of delaying the release of Palestinian prisoners and blocking aid headed for Gaza. The ceasefire evaporated on March 18 after Israel launched a large-scale aerial attack, which Israel justified by claiming Hamas militants were preparing for another attack. After the U.S. negotiated Alexander’s release, Netanyahu met with Witkoff and U.S. Ambassador Mike Huckabee in Jerusalem to discuss a broader hostage deal and an end to hostilities.

The Israeli government said hostilities will not end during future negotiations: “The Prime Minister made clear that negotiations will take place only under fire.” Trump departs from Washington on Monday for the Middle East, the first major international trip of his second term. The president will visit Riyadh, Doha, and Abu Dhabi—crucial players in ongoing Middle Eastern diplomacy—but not Jerusalem. Is it a snub to Netanyahu, or simply because Netanyahu has already visited Trump at the White House twice already this year? Regardless, the apparent tensions between Trump and Netanyahu are unlikely to be alleviated anytime soon. Hamas still has 20 living and an estimated 40 dead hostages, which the terror group continues to hold as leverage for negotiating the end of the war, but Israel shows no signs of slowing down.

https://twitter.com/AdameMedia/status/1921675932491735245

Read more …

“Those who perpetrated the greatest ruse in American presidential history by staging the Biden presidency will never tell us what their ultimate agenda was” — Victor Davis Hanson

• MAHA Hugger Mugger (James Howard Kunstler)

[..] sooner or later, Bobby Kennedy, Jr., will have to take some kind of stand on the Covid vaccines, namely stopping the shots altogether. Whatever you think of the childhood vaccine schedule — a red-hot issue these days — it seems quite insane that the Covid mRNA vaccine is still included on it. It is still officially recommended by the CDC. Among the “much more” effects of the shots is damage to human fertility. You must ask: by giving these shots to kids as young as six-months, are we setting up a nation that won’t be able to have children? Pretty spooky.

So, the new nominee for Surgeon General is one Casey Means of the brother / sister team, Calley and Casey Means, known primarily as food safety advocate sidekicks to Bobby Kennedy. The Meanses were already under some suspicion for rising to rapidly into prominence from out of nowhere since the summer of 2024 when Mr. Kennedy began to swing over to the Trump campaign. They were suspected and criticized as the shills for some sort of sinister alliance between Silicon Valley, Big Pharma, and the US intel blob. The Meanses have adroitly avoided taking a position on the Covid vaccines. Hmmmm. . . . That’s the chatter, anyway — whether there’s any truth to it, we will have to stand-by to discover.

You’d have to ask yourself whether Mr. Kennedy would ally himself with people of supposedly sketchy character. Is he being used or played? Or maybe, it’s just not so. The nomination of Casey Means sent out shock-waves through MAGA and MAHA. Her credentials seemed a little sketchy like Janette Nesheiwat’s before her. Ms. Means dropped out of her five-year medical residency in Oregon a few months before completing it, apparently due to disillusionment with conventional medicine. She does not have an active medical license, supposedly required to serve as Surgeon General.

Instead, she transitioned into what is loosely called functional medicine, which rejects the oppressive “standards of practice” dictated by insurance companies and reliance on pharma products to alleviate symptoms rather than treat the causes of disease. Ms. Means also became a medical entrepreneur, starting Levels, a glucose-monitoring tech company, and is an Instagram “wellness influencer” with 750,000 followers. Given the gross racketeering aspects of conventional medicine and its failure to deal with the shocking rise in chronic disease, you might argue that Ms. Means made the right career moves, weird as they might seem superficially.

It’s pretty much a miracle that RFK, Jr., managed to land safely as Secretary of HHS and that he was able to enlist “medical freedom” advocates Jay Bhattacharya to run the National Institutes for Health and Marty Makary to run the Federal Drug Administration. This represents a stupendous turnaround in government policy. It’s also plausible that this new public health team has been preoccupied with personnel and administrative re-org in the first months of Trump 2.0. They’ve begun to nibble around the edges of the national health crisis, such as banning toxic food coloring.

They have yet to face the big, nasty legal questions such as revoking Pharma’s liability shield against lawsuits for its defective products, ending TV advertising of Pharma products — which is just an extortion racket for managing cable news content to protect Pharma — fully confronting the autism calamity and its connection to childhood vaccines, and, of course, pulling the Covid shots.

There is also chatter that RFK, Jr., is “managed” by hidden persons or forces. One not-so-hidden character in that psychodrama is Senator Bill Cassidy (R-LA). Sen. Cassidy, a medical doctor, chairs the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee that ran Mr. Kennedy over-the-coals in his confirmation hearing. Political pressure caused Sen. Cassidy to cave and vote “yes” for RFK,Jr., then. Louisiana has since changed its election rules so that Democrats can no longer vote in the GOP primary, and Cassidy is vulnerable. His base is restless. He voted to impeach Mr. Trump in January 2021 over the Capitol J-6 riot.

So, the chatter says that Mr. Kennedy made a deal with Sen. Cassidy to avoid taking certain actions — like, anything that might hurt Pharma and its profit-stream — or else Mr. Kennedy would be dragged back in front of the HELP Committee and raked over the coals again. If that were to happen, I suspect Mr. Kennedy would handle himself very capably in any public hearing. He has always been in command of the facts. As head of HHS, he has had access to a deep trove of information that he had no access to previously. He must know by now exactly what sort of mischief has been perpetrated in US public health over the decades and will not be shy about disclosing it publicly. You should also not be surprised if Mr. Kennedy begins issuing criminal referrals before much longer.

As for Casey Means. . . give her a chance to demonstrate that she is on the right side of MAHA and willing to fight in what has become a biomedical war on the American public.

Read more …

GOP killed his DC US Attorney nomination, and now he gets a better job.

“As an originator of serious weaponization policy development on the campaign, Ed has landed exactly where he belongs..”

• Trump’s Weaponization Czar Ed Martin: ‘It Worked Out Great’ (NYP)

Newly minted weaponization czar Ed Martin is gearing up to take on a myriad of bad actors who the Trump administration says weaponized government powers to punish conservatives and MAGA supporters over recent years. Martin’s list of potential targets is very wide, including propagators of Russiagate, prosecutors in Capitol riot cases, individuals who allegedly helped cover up COVID-19 origins and even international organizations that have censored Americans.“The truth is important, and we need it,” Martin told The Post. “Then, after the truth is known, we need to hold those accountable that did the wrongdoing, and we need to also help those who are victims. We have both of those obligations.”

For years, Martin, formerly the Missouri Republican Party chairman, has helped research government weaponization and crafted strategies to combat it. During the 2024 campaign, he helped craft language in the 2024 GOP platform calling on the party to “stop woke and weaponized government.” He’s also already started going after some key targets. While serving as interim US attorney for the District of Columbia, a position that is set to expire for him on May 20, he sent out investigatory letters to at least four key officials who were heavily involved with the Russia collusion investigation. Additionally, Martin demoted at least half a dozen prosecutors who were involved with pursuing the Capitol riot cases at the US Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia.

Now that he is set to help the Justice Department’s Weaponization Working Group, he intends to continue those investigations and expand further. He is also looking to probe foreign censorship of Americans and the “appearance of corruption in some of the USAID grants. “There may be no limit to the targets, since there was no limit to the weaponization,” Martin told The Post. To Martin, helping victims of government weaponization restore their reputations and get their lives back on track is a top priority as he heads into his new role as leader of the working group. “We want to stop the wrongdoing if government’s weaponized,” Martin explained. “We want to hold them accountable. But we also want to help people to get back on their feet and to be able to do things.”

The DOJ’s Weaponization Working Group was established in February by Attorney General Pam Bondi in response to an executive order from Trump to root out remnants of weaponization and hold key perpetrators accountable. Bondi called on the group to investigate actions by former special counsel Jack Smith’s team, federal assistance with “weaponization” done by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg and New York Attorney General Letitia James, tactics used against prosecution of Capitol rioters, the infamous FBI Catholic targeting memo, retaliation against whistleblowers and more. Martin was an early member of the group, and now, as its leader, he will report to Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche.

Trump named him to the weaponization czar role last week after his bid to get confirmed by the Senate to become a full-fledged US attorney for DC went up in flames when Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC) opposed him due to his positions on the Capitol riot. The president also named him as pardon attorney. “Many pardons are sort of mundane, right?” Martin reflected. “They’re not famous, they’re not Marc Rich and the political ones — they are people that have simply been wronged.” Martin says his team will follow the facts where they go and isn’t prejudging potential penalties he might pursue on certain cases. “Sometimes there’ll be crimes involved, in which case we’ll prosecute. Sometimes there’ll be just the need to make clear this is not how it’s supposed to go,” he said.

Despite the brutal setback he was dealt last week when he became a rare Trump pick to effectively get rejected by the Senate, Martin believes that the way events unfolded worked out for him. “I think it worked out great,” he said. “I’m gratified that’s happened, but I also just am willing to serve the president.” One of Martin’s allies, Michael Caputo — a self-styled “smashmouth” politico and Russiagate victim who has helped advise the new czar on weaponization — suggested the way events unfolded could prove to be a blessing in disguise. “As an originator of serious weaponization policy development on the campaign, Ed has landed exactly where he belongs,” Caputo said.

Martin is also hoping to be somewhat more outward-facing as the leader of the weaponization working group and promised to be very receptive to feedback.“Anybody who’s got a legitimate example or a complaint or whatever, we want to try to process that,” he said.

Read more …

“Can all of Biden’s last-minute pardons of criminals and J6 members who destroyed evidence be enforced or are they null and void as President Trump has declared? Klayman says, “They are null and void..”

• America is Under Siege – 233 Federal Cases Against Trump – Larry Klayman (USAW)

Renowned attorney Larry Klayman predicted on USAWatchdog.com that there would be full-blown, legal civil war happening in the court system. He also predicted that violence from the “rabid left” would not only increase but explode. Klayman, founder of Judicial Watch and now Freedom Watch USA, says there are now more than 233 federal court cases trying to stop or delay President Trump and his Administration. Klayman is here to update us on what is going on with the struggle America is having with the Deep State trying desperately to hold on to power.

Let’s start with Joe Biden’s appearance last week on ABC’s “The View,” where he looked confused and incompetent. Can all of Biden’s last-minute pardons of criminals and J6 members who destroyed evidence be enforced or are they null and void as President Trump has declared? Klayman says, “They are null and void and so is every other thing that was allegedly signed by him (Biden). He couldn’t even remember what he signed. . . . This is more than a scandal. It’s the worst scandal ever. Let me tell you something, Biden has not been abused as an elderly person. He abused the American people, and it’s much more than abuse. Biden committed treason.”

What about suspending “habeas corpus” as President Trump is thinking about doing to more quickly deport millions of illegal aliens? Klayman says, “He can do that in dire times, times of war. We are, in effect, in a war. We had drug traffickers, human traffickers, sex traffickers and terrorists running across our border in mass, over 10 million in the Biden Administration alone and many before that. So, yes, it’s a war-time situation, and he (President Trump) can suspend it. . . .Just get them the heck out of here. They are here illegally. They have no right to be here. The President should just ignore these edicts by these San Francisco judges and other judges . . . and do what he needs to do, and they can’t do anything. You know the judiciary has no ability to enforce any ruling. It’s only the Executive Branch, President Trump’s branch that he sit’s over, can enforce the rule of law.

This President has been sued thus far . . . in places like San Francisco, Chicago, Boston, Seattle, Portland and other places where they know they are going to get a Leftist judge. Federal judges are supposed to be assigned randomly. It’s like Wheel of Fortune, but that really does not happen. . . . They actually steer these cases. . . . We need to prosecute these judges and set up the Department of Judicial and Legal Accountability and work with President Trump. I hope he will appoint me to head that with others that will come on board because we need some strong leadership right now because he’s sinking. He (Trump) has been enjoined 70% to 80% of the time in every Executive Order that he has issued. This last one said Trump has no control over his departments anymore. There was a temporary restraining order that says you can’t cut workforce; you can’t do anything.”

Why all the attacks on President Trump? Klayman says, “They are attacking him because they hate him. . . . they are attacking him, and it’s all orchestrated. Washington is one giant, excuse the French, circle jerk. It’s a club.” Larry Klayman is representing conservative reporter Laura Loomer against Bill Maher and HBO. They are being sued by Loomer for falsely claiming she slept with President Trump. Klayman just deposed Maher and wants to release the video deposition. Maher’s lawyers have so far blocked that. Klayman says, “They are fighting tooth and nail to keep the video of Bill Maher secret so it can never be seen. Look at the hypocrisy. Laura Loomer gets defamed by Bill Maher, and the court has already denied a motion to dismiss . . .

She gets smeared all over the world, defamed that she had sex with the President behind the back of Melania. . . . Loomer’s reputation gets harmed, and this harms her financially . . . You can smear a woman and . . . . If President Clinton can have his deposition released, who is Bill Maher that he should be protected? Maher gave money to Kamela Harris as a political candidate. That’s why Maher went after Loomer, because she was a way to get to Trump.” In closing, Klayman has a warning, “Pro Hamas demonstrators are busting up campuses threatening Jews and Christians, we see that. We see Hakeem Jefferies the Minority Leader in the House, and Ilhan Omar, Rashita Tlaib, AOC and Bernie Sanders whipping up violence along with Jasmine Crockett, and they are calling for violence.” Are we headed for a civil war? Klayman says, “I believe we are.”

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Japan
https://twitter.com/Censored4sure/status/1921611973927842032

Civil war

Dore

Duck

Istanbul

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle May 2 2025

May 022025
 
 May 2, 2025  Posted by at 9:59 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , ,  41 Responses »


Piet Mondriaan New York City I 1942

 

• Trump Acts on Signalgate, Fires Mike Waltz (Margolis)
• China Assessing’ US Tariff Talks – Commerce Ministry (RT)
• Trump ‘Blundered’ On China Tariffs – Medvedev (RT)
• Trump Seeks Cooperation With Russia Instead of Confrontation (Sp.)
• US Ready To Spend Another 100 Days On Russia-Ukraine Peace – Vance (RT)
• US-Ukraine Deal ‘Important Step To End War’ – Rubio (RT)
• US Rejected Ukraine’s Security Guarantee Demands – NYT (RT)
• Kremlin On Minerals Deal: ‘Trump Has Broken The Zelensky Regime’ (ZH)
• Trump Has Forced Ukraine To Sell Itself For Aid – Medvedev (RT)
• Senate Republicans Block Rebuke Of Trump’s Tariffs (Pol.)
• Trump’s Opposition (Victor Davis Hanson)
• Europe Just Proved Trump Right About NATO (Green)
• Why a Strong Euro is an Economic Disaster for the EU (Sp.)
• Zelensky Sanctions Arestovich (RT)
• EU Will Never Recognize Crimea As Russian – Kallas (RT)
• Elon Musk Blasts Wall Street Journal’s CEO Search Report (ZH)
• Going to Kashmir…Just To Find Alice in Wonderland (Pepe Escobar)

 

 


Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev speaks at the “Knowledge.First” event in Moscow, Russia, April 29, 2025.

 

 

https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/1917740754081808589

Tulsi

90%

100

Dolls

Tulsi Fauci
https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1917957407323705752
https://twitter.com/GuntherEagleman/status/1917961395238309903

 

 

 

 

Waltz UN Ambassador, Secretary of State Rubio takes over National Security Advisor as well. Not perfect, but doable.

• Trump Acts on Signalgate, Fires Mike Waltz (Margolis)

The Trump White House just sent a clear message: accountability matters. National Security Advisor Mike Waltz and his deputy, Alex Wong, are out at the National Security Council, Fox News confirmed Thursday. Additional departures are expected, and President Trump is slated to speak on the matter himself. Waltz, a former Green Beret and Florida congressman, came under scrutiny after The Atlantic published a report detailing how Editor-in-Chief Jeffrey Goldberg was erroneously included in a Signal group chat with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and CIA Director John Ratcliffe, discussing counterterrorism strikes against the Houthi rebels in Yemen.

Though no classified information was divulged in the chat, Democrats pretended like the world had ended because of it and sought to use it to force the resignation or firing of anyone remotely connected to it. Their top target, of course, was Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. Waltz took responsibility for the inclusion of a journalist in the group chat, telling Fox News’ Laura Ingraham, “I take full responsibility. I built the group,” he said. “It’s embarrassing. We’re going to get to the bottom of it.” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told Fox News Digital earlier Monday when asked about reports claiming Waltz and others would be shown the door, “We are not going to respond to reporting from anonymous sources.”

Trump held a meeting with members of his cabinet on Wednesday following his 100th day back in office Tuesday, with Waltz attending the meeting. Following confirmation of Waltz’s ouster, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries told Fox News, “The National Security Advisor Waltz is out. He’s the first. He certainly won’t be the last.” Neither Hakeem Jeffries nor any other Democrat leader ever demanded accountability from Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin—or anyone else—for the catastrophic Afghanistan withdrawal in 2021. The deaths of 13 American service members apparently weren’t a big enough deal to merit accountability in the Biden administration. Nor was there accountability later, when Austin vanished for a week in a hospital without telling the White House. Silence. No outrage. No consequences. Just business as usual in Biden’s unaccountable administration.

Wong served as Waltz’s principal deputy national security advisor, who was detailed in the Signal chat leak as the staffer charged with “pulling together a tiger team” in Waltz’s initial message sent to the Signal group chat in March, the Atlantic reported at the time. […] Trump told the media April 3 that a handful of other National Security Council staffers had been let go following the Atlantic’s report on the Signal chat leak, which characterized the Trump administration as texting “war plans” regarding a planned strike on Houthi rebels in Yemen.

Whether you agree with this development or not, the Trump administration is willing to hold its people accountable. Compare that to Joe Biden’s disastrous handling of the Afghanistan withdrawal. In addition to the service members killed, billions in equipment were left for the Taliban, and our allies were blindsided. Yet not a single person in the Biden White House lost their job. No resignations. No demotions. No accountability. In fact, they patted themselves on the back and called it a success. That’s the difference. When President Trump sees a problem, he acts. He doesn’t protect insiders just because they’re part of the club. Accountability isn’t just a buzzword—it’s the standard. The swamp may not like it, and the media will no doubt spin it, but this is what leadership looks like.

Read more …

“..predict that formal talks will not be announced until after the US and China agree on the terms of a tariff deal privately.”

• China Assessing’ US Tariff Talks – Commerce Ministry (RT)

China is “assessing” US overtures to begin tariff negotiations, the Commerce Ministry said on Friday. According to the ministry, senior US officials recently reached out to Beijing through third parties with proposals to start talks. Tensions between the world’s two largest economies have risen since US President Donald Trump imposed 145% tariffs on Chinese imports last month as part of a wider effort targeting over 90 trade partners. Most of the new tariffs were paused for 90 days – excluding China – while a baseline 10% remains in place. Beijing responded with 125% tariffs on US goods and export restrictions. The ministry said China has taken note of recent US messages and is evaluating the possibility of negotiations, adding that while Washington has expressed interest in talks, trust would be undermined if unilateral tariffs remain.

“The US has recently sent messages to China through relevant parties, hoping to start talks with China. China is currently assessing this,” the ministry stated. Trump previously suggested that the tariffs could “come down substantially” and spoke about the potential for a “fair deal with China.” He also claimed that his administration was “actively” engaging with Beijing and that he had spoken to Chinese President Xi Jinping by phone. Secretary of State Marco Rubio claimed on Fox News last week that Beijing was “reaching out” to Washington. China has denied this and accused the US of misleading the public.

In its statement on Friday, the Commerce Ministry reiterated that the US must show “sincerity” by canceling the tariffs if it wants meaningful dialogue. It added that China remains open to talks, but will not be pressured: “If we fight, we will fight to the end; if we talk, the door is open.” It stressed that Beijing will only agree to negotiations in good faith. “Saying one thing and doing another, or even trying to coerce and blackmail under the guise of talks, will not work with China,” the statement read. Analysts expect negotiations will begin soon, citing recent market volatility and the IMF’s downward revision of global growth forecasts due to trade uncertainty. Some observers, however, predict that formal talks will not be announced until after the US and China agree on the terms of a tariff deal privately.

Read more …

“..possesses enormous resources and a vast domestic market –factors that will enable its economy to withstand any amount of pressure..”

I don’t think so.

• Trump ‘Blundered’ On China Tariffs – Medvedev (RT)

US President Donald Trump’s misplaced tariff policies are hurting America’s allies but will fail to tank the Chinese economy, former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said on Thursday. In early April, Trump announced sweeping tariffs on most of America’s trading partners, citing what he said was an unfair trade imbalance. After backlash overseas and a negative response from the stock market, he suspended most new duties for dozens of countries – except China – for 90 days pending negotiations.In a tongue-in-cheek post on Telegram on Labor Day, Medvedev, who serves as deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council, argued that Trump deserved an “exemplary labor” award for “starting the tariff battle.”

The US’s neighbors, as well as its allies in Europe, were “suffering” and “crying” from the duties imposed by Washington, he wrote. “They are all in a really bad position, facing the need to bow down in a ritual known as ‘kiss my ass,’” the ex-president quipped. “China, on the other hand, possesses enormous resources and a vast domestic market –factors that will enable its economy to withstand any amount of pressure. This is where Trump made a blunder,” he added. “Trump’s approval ratings have dipped, while the ‘deep state’ is vigorously resisting him,” Medvedev wrote.

Beijing responded to tariffs of up to 245% on its goods by imposing tit-for-tat duties on American imports. “Bowing to a bully is like drinking poison to quench thirst – it only deepens the crisis,” the Chinese Foreign Ministry said this week, warning that China “won’t kneel down.” Trump has defended his policies, doubling down on claims that Beijing was engaged in unfair trade practices. “They deserve it,” he said, responding to a reporter’s question about whether his tariffs were tantamount to an embargo.

Read more …

“President Trump has a very different view of Russia from his predecessors.”

• Trump Seeks Cooperation With Russia Instead of Confrontation (Sp.)

The first 100 days of US President Donald Trump’s second term in office have marked a profound shift toward searching areas of cooperation with Russia instead of confrontation, Rhode Island University Professor of Political Science Nicolai Petro told Sputnik. Trump officially took office as the 47th president of the United States on January 20. Upon entering the White House, the president and his team resumed direct contact with Moscow that has been cut off by their predecessors from ex-President Joe Biden’s team after the start of the conflict in Ukraine. “President Trump has a very different view of Russia from his predecessors. Rather than assuming that Russia’s interests must clash with American interests, he assumes that the two can find areas of cooperation, and that such cooperation has the potential to expand,” Petro said.

The expert described this as a “very profound shift” that is not shared by most of the American political elite and media, who continue to portray Russia as a threat to the United States. During the first 100 days of Trump’s second term, he had phone conversations with Russian President Vladimir Putin, while Russian and US officials held meetings in Saudi Arabia and Turkey. Part of the renewed diplomatic push also includes visits by US Special Envoy Steven Witkoff to Russia and by Russian Direct Investment Fund CEO Kirill Dmitriev to the United States. So far, the sides have been actively working on resuming the normal operation of their respective embassies while also discussing the issue of resumption of direct flights between the US and Russia.

Read more …

“We’ve got the peace proposal out there and issued, and we’re going to work very hard over the next 100 days to try to bring these guys together.”

• US Ready To Spend Another 100 Days On Russia-Ukraine Peace – Vance (RT)

The Trump administration is prepared to dedicate another 100 days to mediating a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine, US Vice President J.D. Vance told Fox News in an interview published on Wednesday. He said the US has made progress by getting both sides to present their ideas for resolving the conflict. “We’ve got this first step,” the vice president said, reflecting on the first 100 days of President Donald Trump’s second term. “We’ve got the peace proposal out there and issued, and we’re going to work very hard over the next 100 days to try to bring these guys together.” Vance noted that before the Trump administration got involved, Moscow and Kiev “weren’t even talking – not to each other, not to anybody. They were just fighting.”

He added: “Now, the work of diplomacy is to try to sort of bring these two sides closer together,” pointing to the “very big gulf between what the Russians want and what the Ukrainians want.” During last year’s election campaign, Trump vowed to end the conflict “within 24 hours” of entering the White House – which he later described as an “exaggeration.” Since taking office in January, he has pressed both sides to reach a ceasefire and has recently shown frustration over the lack of progress. Although Russia praised Trump and his team for better understanding its position than the administration of former President Joe Biden, Moscow insisted that any comprehensive ceasefire must include an end to Ukraine’s mobilization and a halt to foreign weapons deliveries.

Both sides accused each other of violating the month-long energy truce brokered by Trump in March, as well as last month’s 30-hour Easter truce. Moscow has demanded that Ukraine drop its claims to Crimea and four other regions, and abandon its NATO ambitions. On Thursday, Trump’s special envoy, Keith Kellogg, said Kiev had agreed to acknowledge Russia’s control over what it considers “occupied territories,” while stopping short of officially recognizing Russian sovereignty. However, Kiev has repeatedly stated that it will not cede any land to Russia.

Read more …

“According to Lavrov, “a [30-day] ceasefire in this situation is considered a precondition that will be used to further support the Kiev regime and strengthen its military capabilities.”

• US-Ukraine Deal ‘Important Step To End War’ – Rubio (RT)

The natural resource deal signed between Washington and Kiev is an “important step” toward ending the Ukraine conflict, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has claimed. The long-awaited agreement, which allows Washington to tap into Ukraine’s extensive mineral reserves in return for assistance with the country’s economic recovery, was signed on Wednesday. Notably, the document does not include any provisions for the US to offer security guarantees to Ukraine, despite this being “one of its initial goals,” as reported by Reuters. The New York Times indicated that the concept of security guarantees was dismissed by the US “early in the process.” In an X post on Thursday, Rubio thanked US President’s Donald Trump leadership, under which the deal was signed. Rubio called it “a milestone in our shared prosperity and an important step in ending this war.”

Negotiations for the agreement stretched on for several months, although both parties intended to finalize it during Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky’s visit to the White House in late February. The televised meeting led to a tense confrontation during which Trump accused the Ukrainian leader of ingratitude and “gambling with World War III.” This comes as Washington is in talks with Moscow over a possible peace deal that would end the Ukraine conflict. Multiple media sources indicate that the agreement put forward by Washington entails the US recognizing Russia’s sovereignty over Crimea. Additionally, the proposal reportedly includes a “freezing” of the conflict along the existing front line and an acknowledgment of Moscow’s control over significant portions of four former Ukrainian regions that voted to join Russia.

Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered a halt to all military operations against Ukrainian forces from midnight on May 7 until midnight on May 10, stating that this is being done for “humanitarian reasons.” Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov pointed out that Russia considers the ceasefire “the start of direct negotiations with Kiev without preconditions.” Zelensky branded Moscow’s three-day truce declaration a “manipulation attempt,” saying he wanted an immediate 30-day ceasefire instead. According to Lavrov, “a [30-day] ceasefire in this situation is considered a precondition that will be used to further support the Kiev regime and strengthen its military capabilities.”

Read more …

“When America is your friend and your partner, your nation is going to be better off. And there is a security component just in our presence..”

• US Rejected Ukraine’s Security Guarantee Demands – NYT (RT)

The US has rejected Ukraine’s request for security guarantees as part of a newly signed mineral resources agreement, the New York Times reported on Wednesday, citing sources familiar with the talks. The nine-page deal, signed the same day after months of negotiations and published on Thursday by the Ukrainian government, gives Washington preferential access to Ukraine’s mineral projects, including rare-earth metals. It also establishes a joint investment fund to support Ukraine’s post-conflict reconstruction. Despite its scope, the final agreement contains no formal pledge of future US military support, a key demand from Ukraine during negotiations. Instead, it vaguely mentions a “long-term strategic alignment” and promises US backing for Ukraine’s “security, prosperity, reconstruction, and integration into global economic frameworks.”

One source told the NYT that the US dismissed the idea of providing Kiev with explicit security guarantees early in the talks. State Department spokeswoman Tammy Bruce defended the agreement, suggesting that US involvement alone offers implicit protection. “When America is your friend and your partner, your nation is going to be better off. And there is a security component just in our presence,” she told Fox Business. Analysts told the NYT that the deal could help secure US President Donald Trump’s continued interest in Ukraine now that he is directly invested, and will potentially open the door to further discussions on military aid and a ceasefire with Russia. Still, critics argued that without binding guarantees, the deal’s impact may be limited if the conflict continues.

Ukraine’s parliament is expected to ratify the agreement within two weeks. The US has framed the deal as a way for Ukraine to repay past military aid – estimated at $350 billion by Trump, though Kiev claims the figure is closer to $100 billion and that the support was unconditional. The debt repayment clause, however, was dropped from the final text. After signing, Trump said the US could “in theory” recover “much more” than $350 billion through the deal. Commenting on the deal, deputy head of the Russian Security Council Dmitry Medvedev said the US has essentially “forced the Kiev regime to pay for American aid with minerals,” warning that all future military supplies will have to be paid “with the national wealth of a vanishing country.”

Read more …

“Now they will have to pay for military supplies with the national wealth of a disappearing country,”

• Kremlin On Minerals Deal: ‘Trump Has Broken The Zelensky Regime’ (ZH)

The Kremlin has said that what the newly signed minerals deal between Ukraine and Washington does is effectively force Kiev to pay for all future military aid. “Trump has broken the Kyiv regime to the point where they will have to pay for U.S. aid with mineral resources,” Medvedev, a former Russian president and current deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council, stated on Telegram. “Now they will have to pay for military supplies with the national wealth of a disappearing country,” he said of the Ukrainians. As of yet, the full contents of the newly inked deal, finalized and signed late in the day Wednesday, have not been revealed, but it gives the United States preferential access to new Ukrainian minerals deals and its natural resources like oil and gas, and will fund investment in Ukraine’s reconstruction.

But the Zelensky government was able to get something crucial dropped at the last minute. As CNN details, “Compared to earlier drafts, the final agreement is reportedly less lopsided in favor of the US and is not as far-reaching. It stipulates that future American military assistance to Ukraine will count as part of the US investment into the fund, rather than calling for reimbursement for past assistance.” President Trump’s initial reaction after the signing was seen in the following: Speaking Wednesday in a call with NewsNation, Trump said he made the deal to “protect” Washington’s contribution to the Ukrainian war effort. “We made a deal today where we get, you know, much more in theory, than the $350 billion but I wanted to be protected,” Trump said. “I didn’t want to be out there and look foolish,” he continued, voicing the administration’s longtime complaints that Zelensky only asks for “more and more” – and yet is still losing the war.

Meanwhile, the ceasefire process is still basically stalled, as neither side has backed off of their demands and conditions. President Zelensky has recently reiterated that he can’t even legally give up Crimea. However, Trump presidential special envoy for Ukraine and Russia Keith Kellogg has told Fox News that Ukraine is ready to make territorial concessions, but wouldn’t see any ceded territory as a permanent situion. “Not de jure forever, but de facto, because the Russians actually occupy that and they’ve agreed to that. They know that if they have a ceasefire in place, which means you sit on the ground that you currently hold, that’s what they’re willing to go to,” the envoy said. “You have your line set, and they’re willing to go there,” Kellogg emphasized. But it’s clear the Kremlin sees this as an issue of sovereignty and permanence, given President Putin has described the four annexed territories and Crimea as “ours forever”.

Read more …

“Trump has finally broken the Kiev regime into paying for American aid with minerals..”

• Trump Has Forced Ukraine To Sell Itself For Aid – Medvedev (RT)

US President Donald Trump has forced Kiev to sell off Ukraine’s mineral wealth for continued military aid, former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has said. Washington and Kiev signed a long-anticipated deal on the joint extraction of Ukrainian natural resources on Wednesday, after months of contentious negotiations. Trump has advertised the agreement as a way to get back the roughly $350 billion he claims Washington has spent on support for Kiev in the conflict with Russia. The agreement does not mention security guarantees, which Ukraine previously insisted on. Instead, it focuses on future US aid, rather than paying back assistance provided to Ukraine in the past.

“Trump has finally broken the Kiev regime into paying for American aid with minerals,” Medvedev, who currently serves as the deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council, said in a Telegram post on Thursday. “Now military supplies will have to be paid for with the national wealth of a disappearing country.” In February, Trump and Zelensky had a public spat in the Oval Office just as a deal was widely expected to be signed. After the meeting, the US president temporarily froze military aid and intelligence sharing with Kiev for around a month. The full text of the agreement signed on Wednesday has not been published, but available details suggest it is centered on a joint reconstruction investment fund. Ukraine is to contribute 50% of the revenue for new licenses for future resource extraction projects into the fund.

One potential difficulty with this deal is that as of now, Ukraine’s much-discussed rare-earths – highly sought-after metals used in high-tech production – are still largely untapped and need billions in investments to mine, the Washington Post wrote on Thursday, citing analysts. Additionally, a significant portion of the resources – according to old data from when Ukraine was a Soviet republic – is located in the Donbass region, a large part of which is now part of Russia, the WaPo said. In 2023, Forbes estimated Ukraine’s mineral wealth at roughly $15 trillion, with nearly half of this in Russia’s Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics.

Read more …

“Three Republicans joined Democrats in rejecting the tariffs”,

..and Trump still wins. Forget beating him in the Senate.

• Senate Republicans Block Rebuke Of Trump’s Tariffs (Pol.)

Two absences in the Senate left supporters of the resolution short of a majority. A Democratic effort to rebuff President Donald Trump’s sweeping global tariffs failed Wednesday, thanks to two absent senators. Senators voted 49-49 to reject the national emergency Trump used to impose tariffs of between 10 and 50 percent on many of the United States’ largest trading partners. It came on the same day the Commerce Department revealed that the economy shrank in the year’s first quarter, largely due to Trump’s trade policies. Three Republicans joined Democrats in rejecting the tariffs: Sens. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Susan Collins of Maine and Rand Paul of Kentucky. Paul was a cosponsor of the resolution with Sen. Ron Wyden, an Oregon Democrat.

Sens. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) and Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) were missing from the vote, leaving supporters of the resolution short of a majority. Whitehouse was absent because he was returning from the Republic of Korea, where he represented the U.S. at a conference on protecting the ocean from threats like climate change, pollution and overfishing. McConnell, the former Republican leader, missed several votes Wednesday. “The Senator has been consistent in opposing tariffs and that a trade war is not in the best interest of American households and businesses,” said David Popp, a spokesperson for McConnell. “He believes that tariffs are a tax increase on everybody.” The vote was largely symbolic: The House has approved a rule to block a vote on the resolution and Trump has threatened to veto such a measure if it makes it to his desk.

And after the resolution failed, Republican leaders immediately forced a vote to table, or kill, it for good, and this time they brought in reinforcements: Vice President JD Vance arrived on Capitol Hill to break the tie. Still, the resolution’s failure hands Trump a victory as his administration tries to maintain support for the aggressive tariff platform among increasingly nervous Republicans. Paul said he felt the vote was more about the debate than the result, because he knew it wasn’t likely to clear Congress. “Most Republicans are just going along with it, but many of them are quietly still on the other side of this,” Paul said. “They just aren’t willing to say anything yet. But I think if we went through another quarter of negative growth and or another scare in the marketplace, I think there will be more visible voices against the tariffs.”

Yet even lawmakers who defended Trump’s tariffs acknowledged the uncertainty that has come with Trump’s attempts to upend the global trading order, an effort that has tanked consumer sentiment in the U.S. and spooked many businesses and investors. “I appreciate that many of us in this chamber have heard from constituents concerned about the economic impact of the tariffs,” said Sen. Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), who chairs the Senate Finance Committee that oversees trade policy. “All of us are watching this issue closely and working with the administration to find ways to minimize its impact on Americans. We should also be working with the administration to address a shared objective: more opportunities for Americans in foreign markets and an end to discriminatory actions in foreign markets.”

Read more …

“..the media has taken it upon themselves to use the only strategy that the Democratic Party can come up with. And that is to attack Donald Trump..”

• Trump’s Opposition (Victor Davis Hanson)

At the end of the 100 days of the Trump administration, let’s just review for a moment the opposition to it. And it’s actually, if you think about it, a tripartite, a threefold opposition: pollsters, the media, and the Democratic Party and the institutionalized Left. The pollsters have President Donald Trump down four or five points. But when you actually look at the Rasmussen poll or Mark Penn’s poll, a Democratic centrist, Trump is almost even. And then when you look with greater clarity at The New York Times poll that has him way down, you see that only 37% of the people polled voted for Donald Trump. But Donald Trump won by almost a point and a half. Don’t you think it should have been, I don’t know, 51%-49%? So, they were deliberately, in the case of The New York Times, under-polling Trump supporters.

The same was true with The Washington Post. They polled over 2,000 people, but only 840 were identified as Trump voters. Shouldn’t that have been half? So, what am I getting at? We’re getting right back to what happened in 2016 when the polls were completely wrong. The same thing happened in 2020 when they overestimated former President Joe Biden’s strength by four or five points. And then, even in 2024, the NPR poll had—on the last day of the election—they had then-Vice President Kamala Harris winning by four points. The Des Moines Register had Iowa lost to Trump by three points. He won it by 12. So, what the pollsters are doing—not that Trump hasn’t lost some to the controversy over the trade wars—but the pollsters are trying to create momentum, fundraising, and jazz up opposition.

Then we turn to the media. The media’s in a fight with the Democratic Left now because of the scandal of Joe Biden. The Democratic Left is saying, “Well, you were a journalist. If you thought he was demented or cognitively challenged, why didn’t you report it?” But the journalists are saying, “We couldn’t get close to him. He looked OK for us because you had him in such a guarded environment.” In truth, they’re both guilty. Do you remember those press conferences by then-White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre? Did anyone ever hear one question on those daily or three or four times a week press conferences? “Miss Jean-Pierre, is Joe Biden cognitively able to navigate himself to the podium? What is the nature of his cue cards? Have you had a Montreal Cognitive Assessment of him?” There was nothing. It was a combination of the Democratic Party, the Biden insiders, and the media.

And here’s another point, very quickly. The media has gained a lot of influence and power in the opposition because there is no opposition on the Democratic Party. So, in lieu of an alternate agenda, the media has taken it upon themselves to use the only strategy that the Democratic Party can come up with. And that is to attack Donald Trump. Now, what do I mean by that? If you look at the Democratic Party and the Left in general, they have boxed themselves in. On the one hand, they have no institutional power; no ability to pass legislation, losing the House and the Senate; no presidency, White House; no executive orders. Ultimately, all of the cherry-picked district and circuit judges will be overturned by a largely conservative Supreme Court.

In lieu of actual power, then you look at what is the alternative. Maybe the alternative is a 1994 Newt Gingrich Contract with America, an alternate agenda: Yes, we can do better on the border than you can. Yes, we have a better foreign policy with Iran. There’s nothing. There’s no shadow government. There’s not a young Bill Clinton ascendant. There’s no young Barack Obama. There’s nobody. There’s no leaders. There’s no agenda. Nothing. It’s nihilism. And so, let’s look at the third element. Do they have a good old days? Can they say, “Donald Trump ruined things”? “They were so good under Biden. The border was—we liked it open. Twelve million, we could have got 20 million illegal aliens. Let’s go back to that. We had a wonderful retreat from Afghanistan. Picture perfect. We can do it again. The Iran—the theater war in Ukraine and Iran, that wasn’t our fault. Maybe it was inevitable. We had a really good inflation—we had a little hyperinflation of 9%.”

So, there is no alternative good old days. They can’t say Donald Trump wrecked something because they had wrecked the country. So, what are we left with? We’re left with Donald Trump wore a blue suit at the Vatican funeral. Donald Trump is a fascist. No. According to Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker, he is a Nazi. No. According to former Vice President Al Gore, he is a Nazi. No. According to members of the Congress, is he deserving a polite conversation? You have to use the F-word. Or maybe it’s the S-word. It’s smutty mouth, potty mouth video. What is the one principle that ties them all together? We’re gonna talk about that in the next video. But it’s about fear that Donald Trump’s first 100 days are not as chaotic and bad as they tell us. But we might be on the cusp of something that will be very, very successful and will ensure Donald Trump has a successful presidency.

Read more …

“..Europe “would struggle to put 25,000 troops on the ground in Ukraine”…”

• Europe Just Proved Trump Right About NATO (Green)

In a shocking-not-shocking exclusive report in The (UK) Times, Europe “would struggle to put 25,000 troops on the ground in Ukraine” as part of a postwar peacekeeping force. Defense Editor Larisa Brown “was given a rare insight into conversations between Europe’s defence ministers and military chiefs as they thrashed out plans for a ‘coalition of the willing’ force,” and the results are as disappointing as they are sobering. And you know how much I hate sobering. British defense chief Admiral Sir Tony Radakin asked European defense ministers “if they could put together a 64,000-strong force to send to [Ukraine] in the event of a peace deal.” Britain offered up to 10,000 personnel, but even then, “defence ministers across Europe said there was ‘no chance’ they could reach that number and that even 25,000 would ‘be a push for a joint effort.'” This is not your father’s NATO.

During the Cold War, the British Army of the Rhine stood watch in West Germany for half a century with a force of 50,000 men — and the promise of swift reinforcements almost as quickly as the balloon went up. Today, all of European NATO couldn’t put a peacekeeping force in Ukraine of half that size without wheezing like an asthmatic with a sinus infection hiking up Kilimanjaro. NATO was always a little fractured and weaker than it should have been. Unlike the Warsaw Pact on the other side of the Iron Curtain, NATO members were independent nations, each with its own priorities and needs. Paris could complain about American “hyperpower” all it liked, but we didn’t send in the tanks — like Moscow would have — when France withdrew its forces from NATO command and ordered NATO troops out of France in 1966. We just made do.

And while Washington was correct to ask for more “burden-sharing” from our allies during the Cold War, it wasn’t as though they didn’t take the Soviet threat seriously. The West German Bundeswehr consisted of 10 battle-ready heavy Panzer and Panzergrenadier divisions, plus another division each of airborne and mountain forces — for a total of 38 combat brigades. That was just the Field Army. The Territorial forces consisted of reserve troops — older men called up to defend their cities, towns, and homes — amounting to another 450,000 soldiers. But here’s the rub. West Germany raised those forces from a population of 60 million with a GDP of $1.6 trillion in today’s dollars. Unified Germany has 80 million people, a GDP of $4.7 trillion, and a military of three divisions that are understaffed, under-trained, and unfit for combat.

The balloon went up more than three years ago in Ukraine, and yet the only substantial-sized NATO member seriously rearming is Poland. Milblogger CDR Salamander nailed it yesterday: “Europeans expect hundreds of thousands of Americans to immediately deploy to Europe to defend them against a nation with the GDP of Texas and a population 1/4th the size of European NATO.” This is from countries that admit they could barely muster 25,000 troops for Ukraine, even if their national survival depended on it. So when President Donald Trump complains that European NATO isn’t pulling its weight, he isn’t trying to destroy the alliance, as his critics claim. He’s warning of an existential threat to the alliance’s purpose and its members’ existence — and that America’s patience with perennial laggards is not unlimited. Nor should it be. And Europe’s defense ministers just admitted that, too.

Read more …

“..zero growth and recession for 3 years running..”

• Why a Strong Euro is an Economic Disaster for the EU (Sp.)

The euro has jumped in value almost 10% against the dollar since January. But before cheering at the thought of cheaper imports of Skippy peanut butter and Jim Beam whiskey, here’s what EU residents should know.
1. Stronger Euro = Weaker Exports
“For any country (or zone in the case of the euro) that is a strong exporter,” a strong currency “contributes to slowing exports and increasing imports, to the detriment of domestic production,” explains Jacques Sapir, veteran economist and director of studies at the Paris-based School for Advanced Studies in the Social Sciences.
2. Monetary Union Trap
Unlike ordinary nations, which can depreciate their currencies at will to restore exports’ appeal, eurozone members are trapped by the monetary union, which offers “quite limited” room to maneuver for big producers or tourism-based earners benefiting from depreciation vs everyone else.
3. Another Hit to Eurozone Economy in Rough Shape
The euro’s growing strength is bad news for a bloc already:
• facing zero growth and recession for 3 years running
• cut off from the source of its export competitiveness: cheap Russian energy
• facing brutal trade competition from the US and China.
4. Tariff-like Effects
“With the dollar depreciating by around 10% since mid-January, it is as if the US has imposed 10% customs duties on European products while subsidizing their exports to the eurozone by 10%,” Sapir says.
5. Tariff Wars Add to Uncertainty
“Major economic players abhor uncertainty…As long as these negotiations last, no one knows what the tariff levels will be and therefore how attractive the American market will be, whether for production or investment,” the economist says.

Read more …

If there are elections, he’ll run. If they let him.

• Zelensky Sanctions Arestovich (RT)

Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky has announced sanctions against his former top adviser. Alexey Arestovich has frequently criticized both Ukraine’s leadership and its military strategy in its conflict with Russia. Arestovich was among several Ukrainians mentioned in a decree released by Zelensky’s office on Thursday. Penalties imposed include asset freezes, restricted trade and financial transactions, travel, and the revocation of state awards. Arestovich served as an adviser to the Office of the President of Ukraine between 2020 and January 2023. He resigned in controversy after claiming that a Russian missile hit a residential building in the city of Dnepr only because it had been downed by Ukrainian air defenses. Following public outrage and accusations that he had discredited the Ukrainian army, Arestovich backtracked, apologized, and submitted his resignation.

He has since become a prominent commentator on the Russia-Ukraine conflict, often presenting views that diverge from the official Ukrainian narrative. Last month, he suggested that Kiev should agree to cede land to Russia as part of a potential US-brokered peace deal, warning that any attempts to reclaim lost territories would only backfire. “Why should we give up four regions? So that in six months or a year we don’t lose another six or eight,” he said, referring to four former Ukrainian territories that in 2022 voted in public referendums to join Russia. Kiev has consistently refused to acknowledge any territorial losses, however..

Arestovich has also accused the Ukrainian leadership of corruption. He has claimed that Zelensky is personally involved in numerous graft schemes and that Kiev’s Western backers are well aware of his activities. He has also signaled that he wants to run for president of Ukraine. Zelensky, whose term expired last year, has refused to call new elections, citing martial law, which has been extended more than a dozen times. Addressing the sanctions, the ex-adviser predicted that the Ukrainian authorities would now try to limit his media reach by cutting off access to his YouTube channel from the country’s territory.

Read more …

War princess.

• EU Will Never Recognize Crimea As Russian – Kallas (RT)

The EU has reaffirmed its refusal to recognize Russia’s sovereignty over Crimea, the bloc’s foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas has stated. Officials in Brussels are reportedly concerned that a possible peace deal negotiated by Washington and Moscow to end the Ukraine conflict would entail the US recognizing Crimea as part of Russia. The peninsula voted to secede from Ukraine and join the Russian Federation shortly after the 2014 Western-backed coup in Kiev. Speaking to the Financial Times on Thursday, Kallas, the EU high representative for foreign affairs and security policy, stated unequivocally, “Crimea is Ukraine,” underscoring that “no EU country would accept recognition of Crimea as Russia.”

Meanwhile, Trump’s suggestion that lifting sanctions imposed on Russia could be part of a peace deal has also alarmed EU officials, who fear it may prompt divisions within the bloc over maintaining its own sanctions regime, according to the FT. Kallas has warned EU states against following a US policy shift toward Moscow. She told the outlet that the EU is preparing a contingency plan to sustain economic pressure on Russia, should Hungary follow through on its threat to veto an extension of sanctions in July. She noted that this could include allowing national governments to adopt the sanctions individually or for Belgium to issue a decree to seize over $200 billion worth of Russian central bank assets frozen on Belgian soil.

Moscow has warned that seizing its assets would amount to “theft,” hinting at possible retaliatory measures against Western investments in Russia. The diplomat also emphasized that the EU could offer Ukraine financial support if the US withdraws, though military backing would be harder to replicate. “We are still working with the Americans and trying to convince them why the outcome of this war is also in their interest,” Kallas said. Last week, Moscow accused Brussels of obstructing US-Russian diplomatic efforts to end the Ukraine conflict, working instead to prolong the hostilities. “Europe wants war, not talks,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said.

Read more …

“WSJ’s Glazer and her co-authors chose to publish the story—despite receiving a denial from Tesla’s board before publication..”

• Elon Musk Blasts Wall Street Journal’s CEO Search Report (ZH)

Tesla Chairwoman Robyn Denholm denied a Wall Street Journal report claiming the board had begun searching for Elon Musk’s successor, calling the story “absolutely false.” Musk echoed the rebuke, slamming the story as an “EXTREMELY BAD BREACH OF ETHICS” by the legacy media outlet. “Earlier today, there was a media report erroneously claiming that the Tesla Board had contacted recruitment firms to initiate a CEO search at the company,” Denholm wrote in a statement published on X via Tesla.

She emphasized, “This is absolutely false (and this was communicated to the media before the report was published),” adding, “The CEO of Tesla is Elon Musk and the Board is highly confident in his ability to continue executing on the exciting growth plan ahead.” Musk chimed in, calling the WSJ story by Emily Glazer, Becky Peterson, and Dana Mattioli “an EXTREMELY BAD BREACH OF ETHICS that the WSJ would publish a DELIBERATELY FALSE ARTICLE and fail to include an unequivocal denial beforehand by the Tesla board of directors.”

WSJ’s Glazer and others cited anonymous sources to indicate that slumping vehicle sales and DOGE-related backlash had damaged the brand, prompting the board to search for a new CEO. Here’s an excerpt: “Board members reached out to several executive search firms to work on a formal process for finding Tesla’s next chief executive, according to people familiar with the discussions. [..] The board narrowed its focus to a major search firm, according to the people familiar with the discussions. The current status of the succession planning couldn’t be determined. It is also unclear if Musk, himself a Tesla board member, was aware of the effort, or if his pledge to spend more time at Tesla has affected succession planning. Musk didn’t respond to requests for comment.[..]

Why WSJ’s Glazer and her co-authors chose to publish the story—despite receiving a denial from Tesla’s board before publication—underscores how legacy media spreads misinformation and disinformation. This is the landscape Musk—and top officials in the Trump administration—are navigating: a hostile leftist corporate media environment that pushes endless streams of misinformation and disinformation.

Read more …

“It’s as if the Anglo-Zionist axis is using Kashmir as a volatile lab for a series of live tests – including pushing nuclear powers to the brink of confrontation..”

• Going to Kashmir…Just To Find Alice in Wonderland (Pepe Escobar)

Two overarching taboos reign on the – now shattered – collective West:
• Can’t define the Ukraine regime as Nazi.
• Can’t condemn the psychopathological Israeli genocide in Gaza.

The taboos happen to be inextricably linked to the Forever Wars deployed non-stop by the Empire of Chaos/Zionist axis. Lesser Hybrid Wars though – even carrying the horrifying prospect of turning nuclear – are allowed to come and go. Especially if they are part of the current war on BRICS, a sub-section of the war of factions of the West against the Global Majority. So let’s go to Kashmir – to the sound of Jimmy Page’s hypnotic riff. Both India and Pakistan are escalating the war of decibels. Turkey is offering weapons – to Pakistan. Iran offered a mediator role: no takers. The motive for the war is as dodgy as they come. An all-male tourist bus packing a bunch of merry tourists is roaming around Indian-held Kashmir. Passengers include a just married 26-year-old lieutenant of the Indian Navy – but without his wife (what kind of honeymoon is that?)

Another passenger is Nepalese. The bus is attacked by shady splinter goons loosely affiliated with the Salafi-jihadi Lashkar-e-Taiba outfit. The Empire has been all over the Indian front. The current US Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Tulsi Gabbard was previously fully funded by Prime Minister Modi’s circles. Eyeliner-loaded VP J.D. Vance recently visited India – complete with family Taj Mahal photo op. Then Modi went to visit Saudi Arabia – invited by MbS. After the Kashmir bus terror attack, Hindutva fanatics went on a cyber-attack spree. The crude tactics spell out classic Divide and Rule. Double whammy: revamped weaponization of India, and destabilization of a key Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) China front: the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). A thing of beauty: splitting BRICS from the inside.

None of that, of course, legitimizes the ghastly Pakistani military, which have thrown in jail, on spurious charges, the man who was trying to bring Pakistan to respectability: Imran Khan. It’s up, once again, to the adults in the room, any room – Russia – to de-escalate. This could be ideally performed inside the SCO – where both India and Pakistan are members, side by side with Iran. Moscow chose to take the initiative, by itself. Deputy Foreign Minister Andrey Rudenko met with both India’s Ambassador to Russia, Vinay Kumar, and Pakistan’s Ambassador to Russia, Muhammad Khalid Jamali. Russian terminology is essential: not only there was a call for both parties to “engage in constructive dialogue”. Moscow stressed, “we are ready to counter the global terrorist threat together.” The operative word is “global”. Delhi and Islamabad don’t seem to be getting the message – yet.

Kashmir as a volatile war lab An infernal machine is predictably on. It’s as if the Anglo-Zionist axis is using Kashmir as a volatile lab for a series of live tests – including pushing nuclear powers to the brink of confrontation. And all that dealt with casual insouciance – practically as a sideshow. Nothing coming from Sultan Erdogan and his intel apparatus could possibly be seen as trustworthy. In Syria, the MIT’s assets – the Headchopper Inc. congregated in Greater Idlibistan – ended up being installed in power in Damascus with their Zionist-friendly gang leader now posing as President. The comprador Yankee junta in Islamabad, for its part, may be facing the abyss – which in itself qualifies as auspicious news. In parallel, suspense accrues on whether Modi will show up for the Victory Day parade on May 9 in Moscow – and what he will tell his Russian hosts.

BRICS members Russia and Iran want the International North South Transportation Corridor (INSTC) running smoothly to India sooner rather than later. The game gets even more complex when we see that the Iranian investigation is finally starting to consider that the horrendous explosion at the Shahid Rajaee port may have been an act of sabotage or an FPV strike. Extra pressure on China is a real motivator for setting up this war lab. Now Beijing not only needs to start worrying about an explosively renewed India-Pakistan front but also extra CIA/MI6 mischief pushing the Pak connection to Uighur Salafi-jihadis. There’s no chance in hell Delhi will really understand Beijing’s geopolitical predicaments. A perfect scenario for the Hybrid War gang. Meanwhile, at the BRICS front, at least there are some signs of rationality – coming, once again, from Grandmaster Lavrov.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/newstart_2024/status/1917807982898725100

Turns
https://twitter.com/Rainmaker1973/status/1917896792856727785

https://twitter.com/catturd2/status/1917586303337562559

Ice cream

Moore

Owl
https://twitter.com/Rainmaker1973/status/1917882423162896621

Ants
https://twitter.com/Rainmaker1973/status/1917999523122622651

https://twitter.com/NiallHarbison/status/1917901686397632739

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle April 11 2025

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
https://twitter.com/LynneBP_294/status/1909921183992049991

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.

https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/1910320145299386695?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1910320145299386695%7Ctwgr%5E7132c1f6bd4f305f1e72f13841cb6c12b483ba72%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fpolitical%2Fjohnson-says-house-gop-have-votes-pass-budget-resolution

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.

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle March 27 2025

Mar 272025
 
 March 27, 2025  Posted by at 10:57 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  41 Responses »


Henri Matisse Woman with a hat 1905

 

• Trump Admin Hit by Record Number of Injunctions From Partisan Courts (McCarthy)
• When Judges Violate the Constitution (Joecks)
• President Trump Unleashes 25% Tariffs On Foreign-Made Auto Imports (ZH)
• Japanese Carmakers Face Catastrophic Profit Hit From Trump’s Auto Tariffs (ZH)
• Goldberg Accidentally Proved His ‘Signalgate’ Narrative Is a Hoax (Margolis)
• “Those Are Some Really Sh*tty War Plans”: Hegseth Ridicules ‘Bombshell’ (ZH)
• White House Selects Elon Musk To Investigate SignalGate Controversy (JTN)
• Distinguishing the Signal From the Noise (Victoria Taft)
• Might of the Living Feds: 1,500+ Cash-Sucking ‘Zombies’ (RCW)
• “Sometimes a Little Brain Damage Can Help.” (Pinsker)
• Trump Declassifies FBI Crossfire Hurricane Files (RT)
• US Government is a Big Money Laundering Operation – John Rubino (USAW)
• RFK Jr. is Pushing Big Pharma Ad Ban – And Corporate Media is Panicking (Becker)
• EU Officials Unhappy With Kallas – Politico (RT)
• Moscow Backs Ceasefire Despite Kiev’s Breaches – Kremlin (RT)
• Russia Winning In Ukraine, Continually Gaining Leverage: US Intel (ZH)
• Ukraine Never Had Nuclear Weapons – Grenell (RT)
• US Looking For ‘Proper Way’ To Reconnect Russia to SWIFT – Bessent (RT)
• Moody’s Issues Warning On US Finances (RT)

 

 

 

 

Elon why

XO

 

 

Russian steel

2016
https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1904948216447008882

 

 

 

 

 

 

“..69 District Court judges presiding over cases involving the Trump administration..”

• Trump Admin Hit by Record Number of Injunctions From Partisan Courts (McCarthy)

Since returning to the White House on Jan. 20, President Donald Trump has unleashed a storm of executive orders, a great many of which have been halted or blocked—not by the now-Republican-controlled Congress, but by federal District Courts. According to numbers compiled by the Harvard Law Review, U.S. District Courts have issued more sweeping injunctions against Trump in the past two months than they have against three former presidents over their entire terms. Since Jan. 20, lower courts have imposed 15 nationwide injunctions against the Trump administration, compared to what the Harvard Law Review recounts as six over the course of George W. Bush’s eight-year presidency, 12 over the course of Barack Obama’s eight years in the White House, and 14 during Joe Biden’s single four-year term.

During his first term, Trump was subjected to 64 nationwide injunctions. If inferior courts continue issuing nationwide injunctions against the Trump administration at the current rate (15 for every two months in office), then the second Trump administration will have accumulated 360 nationwide injunctions by the time the president leaves office—and a grand total of 424 over the course of both of Trump’s terms. However, there have been a total of over 45 rulings or more targeted injunctions leveled against the second Trump administration overall, according to The New York Times.

The Harvard Law Review’s tally (published in 2024) also noted the increased partisanship of the federal judiciary. Of the six injunctions imposed against Republican Bush, half came from judges appointed by Democrats and half from judges appointed by Republicans. Of the 12 injunctions imposed against Democrat Obama, seven (less than 60%) were issued by judges appointed by Republicans. Of the 64 injunctions Trump’s first Republican administration was slapped with, 92.2% were issued by judges appointed by Democrats. All—100%—of the 14 injunctions issued against Democrat Biden came from Republican-appointed judges.

Almost a year before Trump’s return to the White House, the Harvard Law Review also warned against the practice of “judge shopping,” essentially looking at the partisan leanings of various federal judges and bringing a complaint in a given district based on a judge’s presumed political leanings. During the first Trump administration, more injunctions were issued against the president by federal District Court judges in deep-blue California than by judges in any other state.

The second Trump term is seemingly witnessing a repeat of this effect. The Washington Stand conducted an analysis of all the lawsuits either already heard or pending a ruling or injunction at the District Court level against the second Trump administration, disregarding the handful of cases being overseen by federal magistrate judges. Of the 69 District Court judges presiding over cases involving the Trump administration, 21 were appointed by Republican presidents: two by Ronald Reagan, one by George H.W. Bush, eight by George W. Bush, and 10 by Trump himself. Already, several of those Republican-appointed judges have issued injunctions or rulings against Trump’s executive orders and actions. The other 48 District Court judges overseeing complaints against the Trump administration were appointed by Democrats: seven by Bill Clinton, 20 by Obama, and 21 by Biden.

In its analysis, The Harvard Law Review observed that “the extreme use of nationwide injunctions during the Trump Administration could reflect judicial responsiveness to the unprecedented degree to which President Trump tested the limits of presidential power.” However, the legal journal added that “in the Biden years, judges appear to be ordering vacatur in cases where plaintiffs requested an injunction.” An order of vacatur is binding only on the agency to which it is directed—as opposed to nationwide injunctions, which are, as the name suggests, binding nationwide and enforceable by holding violators in contempt—and simply vacates a rule, declaring that it shall have no legal effect.

The Harvard Law Review continued, “Whether the falling rate of injunctions from the Trump to the Biden Administration reflects a decrease in abuses of executive power, judicial responsiveness to growing criticism of the nationwide injunction, or the replacement of some injunctions with the ‘lesser remedy’ of vacatur, the decrease should not mislead: district court judges appear to be striking down executive policies of opposing administrations with unprecedented frequency.”

The growing use of nationwide injunctions by inferior courts, the prestigious legal journal warned, necessarily has a chilling effect on the development of law and precedent. When several inferior courts of different jurisdictions issue conflicting rulings, the matter often winds up at the U.S. Supreme Court, where a definitive standard is set for addressing similar issues going forward. However, nationwide injunctions halt the continued challenging of executive orders, executive actions, or laws, since, as the Harvard Law Review pointed out, various other inferior courts simply refuse to take up related cases, determining that there can be no demonstration of injury in fact while the nationwide injunctions are in place.

Read more …

“..Constitution. Article II gives “executive power” to the president, who is also commander in chief of the military. Yet, according to some federal judges, the judiciary is in charge of the executive branch’s military policy, hiring, spending decisions and deportation flights. The Trump administration can’t even take down a website.”

• When Judges Violate the Constitution (Joecks)

Leftist judges want to turn President Donald Trump into a president in name only. Look at all the ways that individual judges have hamstrung the Trump administration. A district court judge recently blocked Trump’s executive order removing transgender individuals from the military. Another judge ordered the Trump administration to send two men who are pretending to be women into a women’s prison. One federal judge ordered the administration to restore government webpages that promote the Left’s transgender narrative. A different district court judge stopped the Trump administration from disbanding the wasteful United States Agency for International Development. Secretary of State Marco Rubio appointed Jeremy Lewin to a high-level position in USAID. The judge later ruled that Lewin wasn’t allowed to serve in that role.

Last weekend, another federal judge blocked the Trump administration from deporting illegal immigrant gang members. He even unsuccessfully attempted to force them to turn around flights that were already in the air. These examples are only the tip of the judicial overreach iceberg. Now, all presidential administrations face lawsuits, but what’s happening here is well beyond historical norms. In his four years in office, former President Joe Biden’s administration received 14 federal injunctions. In less than two months, judges have already hit the Trump administration with more than that. These rulings are an affront to the Constitution. Article II gives “executive power” to the president, who is also commander in chief of the military. Yet, according to some federal judges, the judiciary is in charge of the executive branch’s military policy, hiring, spending decisions and deportation flights. The Trump administration can’t even take down a website.

Contrast that judicial activism with what Alexander Hamilton laid out in Federalist 78. “The judiciary is beyond comparison the weakest of the three departments of power,” he wrote. And “it can never attack with success either of the other two.” But, Hamilton warned, while “liberty can have nothing to fear from the judiciary alone,” it “would have everything to fear from its union with either of the other departments.” That’s what some district court judges are attempting to do. These unelected, unaccountable judges are attempting to upend the constitutional order. Most people take it for granted that the executive and legislative branches will abide by judicial decisions. And despite Trump’s social media bluster, his administration has been remarkably deferential to the judicial process in its actions.

That’s likely in part due to a belief that higher courts, including the Supreme Court, will largely overrule these individual judges. That’s already happened in one case involving Trump’s push to eliminate diversity, equity, and inclusion. Republicans in Congress are also working on potential solutions, such as requiring a three-judge panel to rule on injunctive relief. The judiciary is more vulnerable than many activist judges seem to realize. As Hamilton wrote, the judiciary “may truly be said to have neither force nor will, but merely judgment; and must ultimately depend upon the aid of the executive arm even for the efficacy of its judgments.” In other words, if Trump tells the court to enforce its own rulings, the court can’t. It can only hope there would be a political price to pay for openly defying a court order.

Public support for the judiciary, however, could collapse quickly. The Left has been attacking it for years. Biden openly disregarded a Supreme Court decision on student loan forgiveness. Some Democrats pushed to pack the Supreme Court, while others have wrongly smeared conservative justices as corrupt. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts needs to stop rogue district court judges from violating the Constitution–and quickly. If he doesn’t, support from the right could evaporate quickly. A diminished court isn’t ideal, but neither is one that flagrantly violates the Constitution.

Read more …

There are hardly any American cars in Europe. But the US is full of Mercs and Beamers. The issue is quite obvious.

• President Trump Unleashes 25% Tariffs On Foreign-Made Auto Imports (ZH)

Update (1600ET): President Trump has announced a 25% tariff on all cars not made in the US. “This will continue to spur growth,” Trump told reporters. Trump confirmed that these new tariffs are in addition to existing tariffs and are expected to result in $100 billion in revenues. To underscore his seriousness, Trump said, “This is permanent.” In addition to the tariffs, Trump discussed his plan to allow Americans to deduct interest payments on cars that are made in America. If the car is built in the US, there will be no tariffs. “We are going to charge countries for doing business in our country and taking our jobs, taking our wealth, taking a lot of things that they have been taking over the years.” GM and Ford shares are tumbling further on the news…

European and Canadian officials have already thrown their teddy-bears out of the stroller. Ontario Premier Doug Ford (who folded like broken deckchair on his last threat to hike electricity costs to Americans), warned that: “…he’ll “encourage Carney to target US automobiles… and will inflict as much trade pain as possible.” Canadian PM Mark Carney commented that US tariffs are a “direct attack” on Canadian auto workers, adding that the Trump tariffs “will hurt us.” “We will defend our workers, our companies, and our country.” European Commission Chief Ursula von der Leyen immediately posted her disappointment on X:

“I deeply regret the US decision to impose tariffs on European automotive exports. The automotive industry is a driver of innovation, competitiveness, and high quality jobs, through deeply integrated supply chains on both sides of the Atlantic. As I have said before, tariffs are taxes – bad for businesses, worse for consumers equally in the US and the European Union. We will now assess this announcement, together with other measures the US is envisaging in the next days. The EU will continue to seek negotiated solutions, while safeguarding its economic interests. As a major trading power and a strong community of 27 Member States, we will jointly protect our workers, businesses and consumers across our European Union.”

“Our automobile industry will flourish like it’s never flourished before,” Trump commented, seemingly unflapped by the possibility of retaliation.

Read more …

“..about 46% of all new cars sold in the US are imported.”

• Japanese Carmakers Face Catastrophic Profit Hit From Trump’s Auto Tariffs (ZH)

As the fallout from Trump’s tariff plans comes into relief, a harsh truth is emerging for the automotive industry: there are lots of losers and not many winners. But foreign automakers, those without US facilities, will be hit especially hard. As Bloomberg notes, from South Korea’s Hyundai to Germany’s Volkswagen, and to a lesser extent America’s own General Motors, many of the world’s most prominent carmakers will soon face higher costs from Trump’s new levies on auto imports and key components. That’s because about 46% of all new cars sold in the US are imported.

“There are very few winners,” Sam Fiorani, vice president of global vehicle forecasting for AutoForecast Solutions, said in a phone interview. “Consumers will be losers because they will have reduced choice and higher prices.” One notable winner in the tariff chaos is Elon Musk. His Tesla, which has large factories in California and Texas, churns out all the electric vehicles it sells in the US, although as Elon noted late on Wednesday, the company will also not remain unscathed.

Ford could also face a less-severe impact than some rivals, with about 80% of the cars it sells in the US being built domestically. Others will be less lucky: starting April 2, the new 25% tariffs will apply to all imported passenger vehicles and light trucks, as well as key parts like engines, transmissions. Not surprisingly, the tariffs give automakers that heavily source parts in the US an edge, and Trump also allowed an exemption: the new levies will only apply to the non-US share of vehicles and parts imported under a free-trade agreement with Canada and Mexico. That may soften the blow for vehicles whose supply lines zig-zag across the continent. Tariffs on parts from Canada and Mexico that comply with the trade deal also won’t take effect until the US sets up a process to collect those levies. The US neighbors could use that window to try to stave off full implementation, even if it’s a long shot.

Read more …

There are whole lists of Goldberg’s anti-Trump articles.

• Goldberg Accidentally Proved His ‘Signalgate’ Narrative Is a Hoax (Margolis)

The Democrats’ latest effort to manufacture a Trump administration scandal blew up in their faces this week after Jeffrey Goldberg, editor-in-chief of The Atlantic, reported that he was somehow included in an encrypted Signal chat group with top administration officials discussing a planned attack on Houthi rebels in Yemen. According to Goldberg, officials discussed classified and/or top-secret war plans. No one disputes that Goldberg was erroneously included in the chat, but the real issue is whether classified or top-secret war plans were actually discussed. CIA Director John Ratcliffe and DNI Director Tulsi Gabbard testified that nothing classified or top secret was discussed in the chat. Others in the administration have said the same thing. Goldberg had been given the opening to release the chats in their entirety to prove them wrong. But he insisted that he wouldn’t.

During an interview on The Bulwark Podcast with Tim Miller, Goldberg repeatedly evaded calls to produce evidence, raising serious questions about the credibility of his claims. Miller directly challenged Goldberg, pointing out that top Trump administration officials had accused him of lying. “Now, the Secretary of Defense and the White House Press Secretary have said you’re lying, have said there are no war plans there, have said there’s no classified information,” Miller stated. “So the obvious question is, shouldn’t you now demonstrate it? Shouldn’t you publish the text?” Goldberg flatly refused. “No, because they’re wrong. They’re wrong,” he insisted, offering no proof to back up his claims.

Here’s the problem with that claim: In the encrypted chat, National Security Advisor Michael Waltz explicitly mentioned the participants’ “high side” inboxes, a reference to the classified system. This made it clear they knew certain topics couldn’t be discussed on the Signal platform. Miller pressed Goldberg further in the interview, asking whether he would at least provide the alleged messages to congressional intelligence committees. Instead of responding substantively, Goldberg deflected with sarcasm. “Wow. What? You wanna become my lawyer?” he quipped with an annoyed tone. He clearly wasn’t comfortable with the line of questioning, and I got the sense he was hiding something.

As the conversation continued, Goldberg struggled to justify his refusal to produce evidence, resorting to vague justifications. “Just because they’re irresponsible with material doesn’t mean that I’m gonna be irresponsible with this material,” he said. He further attempted to cast doubt on the administration’s credibility, suggesting officials were merely trying to “get out of a jam.” In a final attempt to defend his decision, Goldberg framed it as a matter of principle. “I have a pretty clear standard in my own behavior of what I consider… information that I consider to be in the public interest, even if it’s technically classified or not,” he said, adding that he was “sticking to my principles.”

Read more …

“No names. No targets. No locations. No units. No routes. No sources. No methods. And no classified information.” ..”some really shitty war plans.”

• “Those Are Some Really Sh*tty War Plans”: Hegseth Ridicules ‘Bombshell’ (ZH)

Update(1326ET): Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has responded to the growing calls among Dems for him to step down. This is hours after The Atlantic published the fuller chat logs, alleging that he’s discussing ‘war plans’ in an unsecure and unclassified setting – also with a journalist inadvertently added to the group chat. Hegseth emphasized on X that there were No names. No targets. No locations. No units. No routes. No sources. No methods. And no classified information.” And he said sarcastically these these make for “some really shitty war plans.”

Still, this is unlikely to appease the Trump White House’s enemies, who are also now claiming that national security officials ‘lied’ before the Senate yesterday.

* * *
The Atlantic has published the fuller chat thread from the Signal group that journalist Jeffrey Goldberg was ‘inadvertently’ included in. This comes after the top Trump officials involved denied that they shared secret “attack plans” in an unsecure, unclassified setting. The President has downplayed it, defending both national security adviser Mike Walz and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. Senator Mark Warner of Virginia, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, has called for both Hegseth Waltz to either resign or be fired from their top national security posts. “When the stakes are this high, incompetence is not an option,” Warner wrote on social media Tuesday. “Pete Hegseth should resign. Mike Waltz should resign.”And in a a letter to President Trump, House minority leader Hakeem Jeffries has urged Hegseth’s termination, calling him “unqualified” and a national security risk.

“The so-called secretary of defense recklessly and casually disclosed highly sensitive war plans — including the timing of a pending attack, possible strike targets and the weapons to be used — during an unclassified national security group chat that inexplicably included a reporter,” Jeffries wrote. “His behavior shocks the conscience, risked American lives and likely violated the law.” The newly published messages were sent on March 15 and purport to be from an account identified as Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth. Amid the ongoing controversy, Golberg and The Atlantic are seeking to present a ‘smoking gun’ of sorts. The messages include times of strikes and the types of aircraft being used in attacks on Yemen’s Houthis, who have for many months been sending drone and missiles against Red Sea shipping, including American warships and even at times a carrier.

Read more …

The “chat” group is invite only. It should be simple to see who invited, and then added, the journalist.

• White House Selects Elon Musk To Investigate SignalGate Controversy (JTN)

The White House on Wednesday asked Tesla CEO Elon Musk to lead a probe into the so-called SignalGate scandal, which refers to the accidental addition of a journalist to a national security chat on the encrypted messaging app Signal. Jeffrey Goldberg, The Atlantic’s editor-in-chief, reported on Monday that he was added to a chain last week containing messages from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, National Security Adviser Michael Waltz, Vice President JD Vance, and 15 other senior national security officials. The discussion regarded the Defense Department’s strike plans on the Houthis. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt confirmed to reporters that Musk had been asked to help lead the investigation, along with his team at the Department of Government Efficiency, per The Hill.

“Elon Musk has offered to put his technical experts on this to figure out how this number was inadvertently added to the chat, again to take responsibility and ensure this can never happen again,” she said. The White House Counsel’s office and the National Security Council are also helping with the investigation. President Donald Trump said a staffer on Waltz’s team was responsible for Goldberg’s inclusion, and Waltz has denied ever meeting or talking to Goldberg. The journalist’s invitation allegedly came from Waltz’s account. Waltz has accepted “full responsibility” for the scandal.

Read more …

“I won’t make excuses for the security breach, for that’s what you call it when Jeffrey Goldberg is on the text chain hiding under the name “Jeffrey Goldberg.”

• Distinguishing the Signal From the Noise (Victoria Taft)

After the hypersonic quickness and near-flawlessness of the first few weeks of the Trump 47 presidency, the mediacrats have seized upon a Signal chat between 17 high-level administration officials and Atlantic editor Jeffrey Goldberg. They’ve attempted to turn a discussion about attacking Houthis into the theft of the Manhattan Project. It won’t work, but it doesn’t mean that between applauding the Tesla showroom fire bombings and threatening the drivers of those cars, the left won’t keep trying to make this fetch happen. The Morning Joe gadflies, endless CNN panels, even Hillary Clinton and everyone at the Trump White House agree on one thing: Jeffrey Goldberg shouldn’t have been on that Signal text chain because no one can trust him.

Financier, Shark Tank’s Kevin O’Leary, often says, “To be effective you must be able to distinguish the signal from the noise.” The way this issue has been discussed by mediacrats, it’s been all noise. Endless noise. First, Goldberg hates Trump. His wife works for Hillary Clinton, for goodness’ sake. Goldberg is “The Atlantic’s” Bob Woodward: the guy that comes up with all kinds of uncorroborated stories that no one has ever heard of, much less seen evidence for. If it’s true, why is it only stated in front of Bob or Jeffrey and never reported or even alluded to by anyone before or since? Even actor Bill Murray worked out that puzzle. Goldberg put the words “suckers and losers” into Donald Trump’s mouth at the same time he allegedly petulantly refused to go to a World War II cemetery in Normandy. Yeah, that’s totally on brand for Trump. Not.

Of course, it had nothing to do with the weather making it impossible to fly over the French countryside and near the cliffs of Pointe du Hoc to get to the cemetery. I mean, there are never weather problems there. Take the Normandy invasion as an example, the reason why Trump was there. That whole Normandy invasion thing wasn’t beset by weather problems. Dwight Eisenhower had no problems with the weather. He parked those Higgins Boats without an issue, and everyone got to Omaha without a scratch — in Jeffrey Goldberg’s imagination, anyway. Also, do you think a president, especially one who owned his own aircraft, might take the word of a helo pilot when things are too dangerous? Naw. Never happen. The whole thing’s absurd. Matt’s got a nice round-up of the rest of the boneheaded things Goldberg has said about Trump over here.

This isn’t a bash Jeffrey Goldberg session; there are plenty of pieces around here doing that because he makes it so deliciously easy. I must mention, however, that “The Atlantic” editor reported that they discussed war plans on the Signal text chain. Or maybe that’s what he thought this discussion was. Let’s ask Jeffrey. Jeffrey, how did this compare to the last time you were privy to “military plans”? Did you get all the troop movements, LZs, and weapons packages the last time? Were you included in further communications when members of the national security team said on the Signal chat, “we need to move to the high side” to continue the discussion on a more secure apparatus? I won’t make excuses for the security breach, for that’s what you call it when Jeffrey Goldberg is on the text chain hiding under the name “Jeffrey Goldberg.” But who had Goldberg in their contacts, anyway? What the actual hell?

The noise continued with the hilarious and beside-the-point reactions by former Obama and Biden officials. They are pure irony. Honestly, who thought it was a good idea to get Hillary Clinton and Susan Rice’s reactions? That is comedy gold. What, no Tony Blinken to discuss his expertly executed Afghanistan pullout that included an agreement not to kill the terrorists killing innocents in front of American soldiers? Or was it the bug-out at Bagram, giving China a home base? The woman who destroyed documents, emails, phones under preservation orders, and also had her own server, which even Mike Morrell, one of the 51 spies who lied, said was certainly spied on by the ChiComs and Russians, and worse, weighed in. Goldberg’s wife’s boss, Hillary Clinton, said:

Read more …

1,500+ organizations that haven’t been (re-) authorized by Congress for 45 years, but should have been. And have kept functioning, and received funding, as if they have been.

• Might of the Living Feds: 1,500+ Cash-Sucking ‘Zombies’ (RCW)

In 1974, Congress created the Legal Services Corporation to connect lower-income Americans involved in civil disputes with free legal help. The law that established the agency stipulated that authorization for its funding would expire in 1980, when lawmakers were required to vote on whether to keep it alive. They never did. Still, Congress has funded LSC every year since. In fiscal 2025, its 51st year, LSC’s 135 employees will spend 95% of its now $560 million annual budget paying legal groups to represent Americans in cases such as eviction, domestic violence, and disputes over government benefits, according to Ron Flagg, the agency’s president since 2020. “LSC would welcome reauthorization,” Flagg said. “We haven’t hidden from it. Every budget cycle, we go through an exhaustive process before Congress appropriates funds — dozens of meetings with leaders of both parties. We demonstrate our return on investment, how we help 2 million Americans get life-saving legal help.”

The Legal Services Corp. now stands as America’s oldest “Zombie” program, but it’s far from unique. At a time when the Trump administration is moving aggressively to scale back government, including eliminating the entire Education Department, it’s sobering to note that 1,503 agencies or programs live on despite expired authorizations, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Another 155 will expire on Sept. 30. The Zombies, nearly half of which have been officially dead for more than a decade, persist in a budgetary netherworld. In a deep dive last year, CBO analysts were able to find dollar amounts for 491 of the programs, with total expenditures of $516 billion. They don’t know how much funding the other programs received.

The total federal budget in 2024 was $6.8 trillion, meaning expired Zombie programs take up at least 8% of the budget, and likely much more. “A lot of programs don’t get reauthorized because Congress is okay with how they’re operating,” said Josh Huder, former congressional staffer now at the Georgetown University Government Affairs Institute. “They continue to get annual appropriations because most members think they’re worthwhile.” Many Zombie programs now soak up far more funding than lawmakers originally envisioned. The Federal Election Commission, for example, was expected to spend $9.4 million per year before its authorization expired in 1981. Yet the agency continued to receive funding and spent $95 million in 2024, auditors at government watchdog Open The Books found. The Federal Communications Commission was originally allocated $339.6 million per year. Its funding authorization expired in 2020, yet it spent $28.4 billion last year.

Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency hasn’t addressed the Zombies that are prowling the federal spreadsheets. Given DOGE’s headlong push to first root out alleged waste, fraud, and abuse and ask questions later, experts say, Zombies may offer a ripe target. “One could imagine that if DOGE is clued into the notion of expired authorizations, they’ll think a program is defunct,” said Sarah Binder, senior fellow at Brookings and professor of political science at George Washington University. She said this would be a mistake. “If Congress is still appropriating money to the programs, they’re not Zombies. They’re living, breathing agencies.” Binder says the fault lies not with the agencies, some of which have become important enough to be household names, but Congress. Lawmakers have made it so difficult to accomplish their most fundamental tasks, such as funding the government for another year, that they hardly ever get around to doing other important things, such as reauthorizing existing programs.

The Foreign Relations Authorization Act, for example, expired in 2003. Yet in 2024, Congress spent $38.4 billion on 24 of the law’s programs, allowing legislators to influence the White House’s foreign policy and security assistance to other nations. The House Committee on Energy and Commerce, now led by Rep. Brett Guthrie (R-KY), supported the funding of 346 expired programs, more than any other committee, the CBO found. The Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, now chaired by Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-LA), spent more identifiable money than any other group: $153.5 billion. “Congress’ job doesn’t stop when they allocate the money,” said Casey Burgat, professor at George Washington University’s Graduate School of Political Management.

“They have to oversee it. And when they fail to do that they open themselves up to somebody else doing that. In this case, an aggressive executive branch in the form of DOGE.” Of the 1,503 agencies or programs, 22 remain alive that required a reauthorization vote as long ago as the 1980s, according to the CBO. In addition to the Legal Services Corp., whose authorization expired in 1980, and the FEC (a 1981 reauthorization deadline), the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, or FERC, which oversees the country’s power grids (1984) and the Energy Information Administration, or EIA, whose data informs U.S. policymaking (1984), are among the Zombies pushing middle age.

Read more …

Fetterman.

• “Sometimes a Little Brain Damage Can Help.” (Pinsker)

He might be dead, but George Carlin is having a career year on social media. Seems the 20-something liberal crowd has discovered his standup material, and short clips of him lambasting the establishment are still going viral. Of course, Carlin was also waaaay to the left: In one of his books, he wrote, “Property is theft. Nobody ‘owns’ anything. When you die, it all stays here.” Liberals love that. (Interestingly, clips of his 1990 “Doin’ It Again” HBO concert, where he condemns euphemistic language, censorship, PC gibberish, and even defends the use of the N-word, are seldom shared online. Can’t imagine why.) Whenever Carlin’s clips are uploaded, the youngsters all seem to have the same reaction: “Wow, this guy was REALLY ahead of his time!” And in some ways, he absolutely was. But perhaps he was most notably ahead of his time with his 1984 book, “Sometimes a Little Brain Damage Can Help.”

Because, 40 years later — which sounds almost biblical, an irony Carlin would probably appreciate — an enormously large, brain-damaged Pennsylvania senator named John Fetterman is having a career year, too. I mentioned his size because it’s striking: At six foot eight, he’s the only man left in D.C. who can look Barron Trump in the eye. With his shaved head and “gym bro” sweats, he’s one of a handful of Democrats who wouldn’t be out of place on the set of the “Joe Rogan Experience.” In fact, he’s already recorded one episode with Rogan and will probably be taping more. (Over two million views on YouTube and Spotify.) Meanwhile, the Democratic Party is just beginning to realize that it’s lost an entire generation of young male voters. As we discussed two days ago, “75-year-old white men supported Kamala Harris at a significantly higher rate than 20-year-old white men.”

As Newsweek described it: “This is the thing I am the most shocked by in the last four years—that young people have gone from being the most progressive generation since the Baby Boomers… to becoming potentially the most conservative generation that we’ve experienced maybe in 50 to 60 years,” Shor [the head of data science at the pro-Democratic polling firm Blue Rose Research] stated. It’s quickly becoming an existential problem for the Democratic Party. This is still a closely divided country; neither party can afford to lose key members of their constituencies. It’s all hands on deck! As professor David B. Cohen told Newsweek: Young voters compose a crucial part of the Democratic base, and if that is eroding, where do they make up for that? Going forward, Democrats will have to figure out how to bring young voters back to the fold — particularly young men — if they want to be competitive nationally.

Enter John Fetterman. He’s been candid about his mental health struggles — something which disproportionately afflicts young men, by the way. When pro-Hamas hoodlums protested outside of his home, he took to the roof and waved the Israeli flag. And he’s had it with the wackjobs in his own party: “I was really the first Democrat to refuse to shut our government down, and my party was so desperate to pander to shut the government down,” Fetterman said. “Absurd, absolutely absurd. Six months ago, we were lecturing the Republicans, ‘You can’t shut the government down.’ Now it’s, ‘Well, yeah, let’s do these things.’” He added, “It’s like that’s part of the problem, to pander, and they want to pander to the extreme parts of our party, to shut the government down. I said I will never burn the village down and claim that I’m saving it.”

Fetterman also pointed to Michigan as an example of political “pandering” that failed, claiming the Democratic Party tried to appeal to the left-wing Arab-American population only to lose the state to President Donald Trump anyway. He specifically called out Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., for refusing to support President Joe Biden and later Vice President Kamala Harris during the 2024 election because of their support for Israel. Fetterman claimed that she and other far-left Democrats ultimately helped to elect Trump. [Emphasis added] But his stance came at a cost: It put him in the crosshairs of the Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez/Bernie Sanders wing of the party. They hate him! But Big John isn’t backing down:

It’s a power struggle. And it’s one that Fetterman won’t win: He might be big, but his “wing” of the party is puny. The Democratic Party is essentially a coalition party, where the common denominator is that everyone agrees that they’ll work together. For most of the last 50 years, the coalition has been comprised of women, minorities, liberals, young voters, and “left-leaning libertarians” — folks like Bill Maher, who generally lean to the left but mostly want to be left alone. And you could probably include John Fetterman in that group, too.

Read more …

After JFK and MLK, people will be sleptical.

• Trump Declassifies FBI Crossfire Hurricane Files (RT)

US President Donald Trump has ordered the declassification of all FBI files related to the agency’s investigation into his first election campaign’s alleged contacts with Russia. The FBI launched the ‘Crossfire Hurricane’ investigation in July 2016 to examine whether Trump – then a presidential candidate – or members of his campaign were colluding or coordinating with Moscow to influence the election. In a memorandum released on Tuesday by the White House, Trump directed the Attorney General to make the materials available to the public “immediately.” Crossfire Hurricane was prompted by the ‘Steele Dossier’ – a compilation of unverified rumors about Trump and his alleged links to Russia. The dossier was compiled by former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele, and reportedly funded by the Hillary Clinton campaign.

Crossfire Hurricane preceded the appointment of Special Counsel Robert Mueller, whose subsequent ‘Russiagate’ investigation found no evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government. In 2023, the US Justice Department’s (DOJ) special counsel John Durham – appointed to review the origins of the Crossfire Hurricane probe – concluded that the FBI and DOJ had “failed to uphold their mission” by relying on biased information to surveil Trump. Durham criticized the FBI for showing a “serious lack of analytical rigor,” particularly when handling information from politically-affiliated sources. It was also revealed that the Steele Dossier had been used by the FBI to obtain court permission to spy on Trump’s campaign. In 2019, Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz reported that the FBI had made “basic, fundamental, and serious errors” in its warrant application.

Mike Davis
https://twitter.com/liz_churchill10/status/1904725820863578255

‘Crossfire Hurricane’ and Mueller’s Russiagate investigation cast a long shadow over Trump’s presidency, with allegations of “Russian collusion” persisting in the media even after Mueller’s report found no evidence to back them up. In a video posted on Tuesday on Truth Social, Trump said after signing the order: “This was total weaponization. It’s a disgrace…but now you’ll be able to see for yourselves.” Addressing journalists, he added: “You probably won’t bother because you’re not going to like what you see.” Trump had previously ordered a full declassification of Crossfire Hurricane during the final days of his first term, but the documents were never released. According to a 2023 CNN report, a binder containing highly classified information later went missing.

Read more …

“There is a decent chance of instead of having this gigantic collapse because the dollar is basically evaporating, that this government will be smart enough to do the monetary reset. Go back to a gold standard . . . go back to some sort of commodity base standard..”

• US Government is a Big Money Laundering Operation – John Rubino (USAW)

Analyst and financial writer John Rubino warned last October that “Chaos is Coming.” With exploding Tesla dealerships, mass deportations of violent gangs, DOGE uncovering massive fraud and waste, and an out-of-control Leftist judiciary trying to stop President Trump at every turn, you could say chaos is here. Rubino contends it’s not going away anytime soon as government grifters are going to try to keep the cash flowing. Now, AG Pam Bondi says her office is going after the fraudsters ripping off America. Rubino explains, “We are finding out that the federal government is a big money laundering operation. There are so many different ways and so many different avenues that take cash from taxpayers or newly created cash . . . and it basically funnels it to political operatives, political class and the ‘expert’ class all around the world. . . . We have created this class of people who are effectively grifters . . . because they don’t do anything worthwhile at all. Do you think that think-tanks produce anything of value, or lobbyists or Washington law firms or regulators? The regulator is basically on a long job interview for the company you are regulating. You prove you are a team player and then Pfizer hires you for 10 times your FDA salary. So, everywhere you look it’s a form of money laundering.”

So, now interest payments are spiraling to infinity with massive amounts of debt and currency creation. Rubino says, “We have hit the death spiral point for the dollar and the other big fiat currencies, which means the cost to maintain this debt starts to spiral out of control and people lose faith in the currency or the currency collapses or you have a currency reset. What is really interesting about the Trump Administration is it contains a lot of gold bugs. . . . There is a decent chance of instead of having this gigantic collapse because the dollar is basically evaporating, that this government will be smart enough to do the monetary reset. Go back to a gold standard . . . go back to some sort of commodity base standard where we peg the dollar to something that is real and cannot be created in infinite quantities on a printing press. It could be we do that without insane amounts of pain and stress, but it would still be painful. Anybody who has dollars will watch those dollars be devalued dramatically.”

In this scenario, the dollar sinks in value. What happens to gold? Rubino says, “Everybody who runs the numbers says gold has to be $10,000 per ounce at a minimum and maybe much higher. Gold has to go way up in price in a currency reset. . . . So, your gold becomes much more valuable, and your silver gets pulled along by gold and goes up by some multiple of gold’s percentage gains. If gold goes up three times, silver will go up five to ten times.” Rubino thinks Europe is headed for war with Russia or civil war. Either way, the Euro will not survive. Rubino says the domestic violence will continue here in America but thinks the Deep State won’t stop President Trump’s agenda. Rubino also says everybody should concentrate on owning real things such as farm land, gold, silver and a good vehicle. Rubino also says some emergency food and a garden are good ideas too.

Read more …

“Nearly 31% of ad minutes on major nightly news broadcasts in 2024 came from pharmaceutical brands.”

• RFK Jr. is Pushing Big Pharma Ad Ban – And Corporate Media is Panicking (Becker)

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Donald Trump’s Health and Human Services Secretary, is pushing a plan to ban pharmaceutical ads from television. He’s right to push for it—and not just because the U.S. is one of only two countries on earth that allows such advertising (the other being New Zealand). America’s health system isn’t just flawed; it’s harming public health, distorting journalism, and fueling Big Pharma’s malignant influence over our daily lives. Let’s start with the obvious: TV drug ads aren’t designed to inform—they’re designed to manipulate. The formula is always the same. Cue soft lighting and sappy piano music. A sad, listless person pops a pill and suddenly life is vibrant again. They’re running through fields, laughing with family, walking dogs across idyllic bridges. Then, in a breathless voiceover, the side effects come tumbling out like a legal disclaimer roulette wheel—stroke, heart failure, suicidal thoughts. The goal? Make viewers want a drug before they even talk to their doctor. It’s emotional coercion dressed up as health education.

This completely inverts how medicine is supposed to work. Health care decisions should be made inside the exam room, not in a 60-second marketing spot. Patients should go to their doctors with symptoms, and those doctors—armed with clinical training and knowledge of the patient’s full health profile—should decide whether a drug is even necessary. Many issues could be better addressed through lifestyle changes, diet, supplements, or preventative care. But instead, America has normalized a pill-for-everything culture, supercharged by the fact that doctors are often nudged by patients demanding whatever drug they saw advertised last night during a commercial break. This isn’t just bad medicine—it’s dangerous. And it’s no accident.

Big Pharma isn’t spending billions on advertising because it cares about your health. It’s doing it because the return on investment is enormous. Studies estimate the ROI on direct-to-consumer (DTC) drug ads ranges from 100% to 500%, depending on the drug. In 2025 alone, pharmaceutical companies are projected to spend over $5 billion on national linear TV ads, according to iSpot.tv. That number balloons even higher when you include digital and streaming. Just a handful of blockbuster drugs—like Skyrizi, Jardiance, and Ozempic—are burning through tens of millions in TV ads every month. This revenue isn’t just padding Big Pharma’s pockets—it’s quietly buying influence in the media. Nearly 31% of ad minutes on major nightly news broadcasts in 2024 came from pharmaceutical brands.

That means a huge portion of media budgets depend on the very companies they should be holding accountable. And surprise, surprise: when Big Pharma misleads the public, many news outlets are either silent or hesitant to report critically. The financial conflict of interest is baked in. We saw the worst-case version of this during the COVID-19 pandemic. The novel mRNA shots—rushed to market under emergency use—were sold to the public as miracle solutions. Government officials and media outlets claimed these vaccines would “stop infection,” “prevent death entirely,” and “end the pandemic.” Younger, healthy individuals were told they needed them for everyone’s safety, despite already low statistical risk. None of these claims held up. As the data evolved, we learned the vaccines offered some reduction in severe disease, but not sterilizing immunity. Yet the media rarely corrected course.

Why would they? Pharma ads were paying the bills. Meanwhile, federal workers were mandated—and many private sector employees coerced—into getting injections under false pretenses. Billions of dollars flowed to Big Pharma. The American public was misled. This pattern of deception is not new. Pfizer alone has paid billions in legal penalties over the years for unethical marketing, off-label promotion, and other violations. The most infamous: a $2.3 billion settlement in 2009—the largest health care fraud settlement in U.S. history at the time. Yet companies like Pfizer, AbbVie, and Johnson & Johnson still enjoy a polished image on TV, thanks in part to relentless ad spending and regulatory leniency.

Read more …

They hired her for her Russophobia. What did they think they would get?

• EU Officials Unhappy With Kallas – Politico (RT)

EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas has been criticized by nearly a dozen EU officials over her hawkish stance on Russia and leadership style, Politico has reported, citing unnamed sources. According to the outlet, Kallas’ challenges began on her first day in office in December, following her tweet stating, “The European Union wants Ukraine to win this war” against Russia. Several EU officials reportedly felt uneasy that the former Estonian prime minister, within a day of assuming her new role, “felt at liberty to go beyond” established language norms. ”If you listen to her, it seems we are at war with Russia, which is not the EU line,” Politico cited one EU official as complaining on Wednesday.

Kallas has been a vocal critic of Russia and an advocate for increased military support to Ukraine. Her initiative to increase EU military aid to Kiev to up to €40 billion ($43.1 million) this year faced opposition from member states like Italy and Spain, who do not perceive Moscow as an immediate threat to the EU. Kallas, however, still has her defenders among the EU’s northern and eastern states, noted Politico. Russia has openly criticized the top diplomat, labeling her statements “rabidly Russophobic,” and “undiplomatic,” and accusing her of pushing for militarization amid ongoing US-brokered peace talks on Ukraine. She’s also reportedly been criticized for continuing to act like a prime minister by failing to consult diplomats from member countries before making sensitive proposals.

Kallas’ relationship with the United States has been questioned by some officials. After the sudden cancellation of her February meeting in Washington with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, attributed to “scheduling issues,” Politico sources suggested that Kallas had not adequately prepared by providing a clear agenda to US counterparts. After a contentious February Oval Office exchange involving US President Donald Trump, Vice President J.D. Vance, and Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky, Kallas tweeted, “The free world needs a new leader.” The apparent jab at Trump reportedly unsettled nations eager to maintain strong ties with the US administration.

Read more …

” Moscow suspects that Kiev is attempting to derail Washington’s efforts to mediate a comprehensive truce by continuing its attacks on energy infrastructure.”

• Moscow Backs Ceasefire Despite Kiev’s Breaches – Kremlin (RT)

Ukraine’s ongoing attacks on energy infrastructure are in breach of a US-mediated ceasefire but will not dissuade Russia from maintaining its commitment to the pause, Dmitry Peskov stated on Wednesday. The agreement to refrain from attacking such sites was brokered by US President Donald Trump and his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin during a phone conversation last week. Ukraine launched three separate assaults over two days, aimed at a natural gas reservoir and two segments of the national power grid, the Russian military reported on Wednesday; the latter two resulted in supply disruptions. At a press briefing, Peskov acknowledged Kiev’s “inability to adhere to agreements,” citing the incidents as evidence. Nevertheless, the Russian military is adhering to the suspension of strikes.

Peskov expressed the Kremlin’s commitment to the moratorium, saying it signifies progress in the improvement of US-Russia bilateral relations. He reminded journalists that Moscow has specified the types of targets protected under the partial ceasefire, which were discussed during consultations in Saudi Arabia earlier this week. Moscow suspects that Kiev is attempting to derail Washington’s efforts to mediate a comprehensive truce by continuing its attacks on energy infrastructure. The Foreign Ministry had previously warned that Russia could withdraw from the agreement in response to Ukrainian “provocations.”

Discussions in Riyadh reportedly focused on reviving the Black Sea Grain Initiative, a defunct security framework under which Moscow guaranteed the safety of civilian transportation to and from Ukrainian ports. Russia turned down the renewal of the agreement in 2023, citing Kiev’s misuse of the arrangement for military goals and the West’s failure to ease sanctions in order to facilitate food and fertilizer exports. Peskov assured that if past commitments made to Russia are finally honored, the initiative would be “reactivated.”

Read more …

“..a gradual but steady erosion of Kyiv’s position on the battlefield, regardless of any U.S. or allied attempts to impose new and greater costs on Moscow..”

• Russia Winning In Ukraine, Continually Gaining Leverage: US Intel (ZH)

The US government in its 2025 Annual Threat Assessment of the U.S. Intelligence Community – which was just released by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence in conjunction with top officials’ testimony at a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing Tuesday – has admitted that Ukraine’s battlefield prospects are fading amid the onslaught of superior Russian forces. Currently, Moscow has “seized the upper hand” in the war over the past year, the fresh assessment warns, and “is on a path to accrue greater leverage” as peace talks with Washington are underway. “Even though Russian President [Vladimir] Putin will be unable to achieve the total victory he envisioned when initiating the large-scale invasion in February 2022, Russia retains momentum as a grinding war of attrition plays to Russia’s military advantages,” the report states.

“This grinding war of attrition will lead to a gradual but steady erosion of Kyiv’s position on the battlefield, regardless of any U.S. or allied attempts to impose new and greater costs on Moscow,” it continues. This should come as no surprise to any objective observer; however, what is surprising is the huge amount of Russian losses estimated by US intelligence. While there’s no way of verifying such information, the report claims that there are over 750,000 dead and wounded on the Russian side. Still, the intel community emphasizes the Russian military machine’s ability to quickly replenish personnel while growing its industrial capacity to continually support the war.

On the prospect for achieving a quick peace settlement, the report notes that both Russian and Ukrainian leadership “probably still see the risks of a longer war as less than those of an unsatisfying settlement.” “For Russia, positive battlefield trends allow for some strategic patience, and for Ukraine, conceding territory or neutrality to Russia without substantial security guarantees from the West could prompt domestic backlash and future insecurity.” “Regardless of how and when the war in Ukraine ends, Russia’s current geopolitical, economic, military, and domestic political trends underscore its resilience and enduring potential threat to U.S. power, presence, and global interests,” it adds.

https://twiter.com/yarotrof/status/1904857430925648010?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1904857430925648010%7Ctwgr%5E23ccd6fdd0351c2bcd235f92faf7645aa404b476%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fgeopolitical%2Frussia-winning-ukraine-continually-gaining-leverage-us-intel-community

* * *
A note from UBS … US Intelligence On Russia Nuclear Capacity, China And Taiwan . The US annual threat assessment from the Director of National Intelligence carries warnings about Russia and China. The 2025 edition warned that Russia is developing a satellite capable of carrying a nuclear weapon. It said that China was making aggressive efforts to assert its sovereignty in the south and east China seas, and seems likely to increase its economic pressure on Taiwan. Indeed the report warned that China represented the most comprehensive and robust military threat to US security. The report claimed that both Russia and China are eyeing up Greenland for natural resources.

Read more …

“..the weapons remained under Russian operational control and Kiev lacked the technical capability to launch them..”

• Ukraine Never Had Nuclear Weapons – Grenell (RT)

The nuclear weapons that Ukraine transferred to Russia under the terms of the Budapest Memorandum in the 1990s were never under Kiev’s control, US Presidential Envoy for Special Assignments Richard Grenell has said. Following the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, Ukraine inherited a significant portion of the USSR’s nuclear arsenal, temporarily making it the third-largest nuclear power at the time. However, the weapons remained under Russian operational control and Kiev lacked the technical capability to launch them. In 1994, Ukraine signed the Budapest Memorandum along with the US, Russia and the UK, under which Kiev agreed to transfer all of its nuclear weapons to Russia in exchange for security assurances.

In a post on X on Tuesday, Grenell wrote: “Let’s clarify the Budapest Memorandum situation: the nuclear weapons belonged to Russia and were leftovers. Ukraine returned the nuclear weapons back to Russia. They did not belong to Ukraine. That’s an inconvenient fact.” Grenell’s comments come amid renewed statements by Ukrainian officials criticizing the country’s disarmament in the 1990s. Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky recently told British journalist Piers Morgan that Ukraine was “forced” to give up its nuclear weapons and described the Budapest Memorandum as “stupid, illogical, and very irresponsible.” He argued that Kiev should now either be fast-tracked into NATO or given nuclear weapons and missile systems to counter Russia.

Retired US General Keith Kellogg, who serves as Trump’s envoy to Ukraine and Russia, dismissed the proposal. Speaking to Fox News Digital last month, Kellogg said, “The chance of them getting their nuclear weapons back is somewhere between slim and none. Let’s be honest about it, we both know that’s not going to happen.”

Russia has repeatedly stated that Ukraine never possessed any nuclear weapons of its own, as the assets belonged to Moscow as the sole legal successor of the Soviet Union. Russian officials also maintain that the Budapest Memorandum envisioned Ukraine’s neutral status, which has since been undermined by NATO’s eastward expansion and Kiev’s aspirations to join the bloc. Moscow has cited Ukraine’s ambition to join NATO and its threat to obtain nuclear weapons as root causes for the Ukraine conflict. In November, Russian President Vladimir Putin warned that if Ukraine were to obtain nuclear weapons, Moscow would use “all the means of destruction at Russia’s disposal.”

Read more …

Major step.

• US Looking For ‘Proper Way’ To Reconnect Russia to SWIFT – Bessent (RT)

US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has confirmed that all options remain on the table as Washington considers lifting certain sanctions against Moscow, including the possible reconnection of Russian banks to the Belgium-based SWIFT network. The US and EU cut off major Russian banks from the SWIFT messaging system as part of a decade-long sanctions campaign, which was significantly expanded following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022. As part of the Black Sea ceasefire initiative discussed in Saudi Arabia earlier this week, Moscow requested that its Agricultural Bank (Rosselkhozbank) and other institutions involved in food and fertilizer sales be reconnected to the international payment system. “There would be a long discussion about many things in terms of the proper way to bring Russia back into the international system,” Bessent told Fox News on Wednesday, emphasizing that it was “premature to discuss the terms of a deal before we have a deal.”

“I think everything is on the table,” he added, noting that “it will be determined by the Russian leadership’s next moves whether the sanctions go up or down, and President Trump, I think, would not hesitate to raise the sanctions if it gives him a negotiating advantage.” Reconnecting Rosselkhozbank to SWIFT was part of the original Black Sea Grain Initiative, brokered in July 2022 by the UN and Türkiye. A Western failure to deliver on that commitment, along with Kiev’s alleged misuse of the arrangement for military purposes, prompted Moscow to reject the renewal of the agreement in 2023. The US and Russia agreed to revive the defunct Black Sea deal following 12 hours of talks in Saudi Arabia on Monday. President Donald Trump confirmed on Tuesday that his administration is considering lifting some sanctions on Moscow. “There are about five or six conditions. We’re looking at all of them,” he said.

The Brussels-based SWIFT system is incorporated under Belgian law and must comply with EU regulations and restrictions. European Commission spokeswoman Anitta Hipper stated on Wednesday that the bloc will not amend or lift its sanctions until Russia “unconditionally” withdraws all forces from the “entire territory of Ukraine.” Russian President Vladimir Putin said last week that Western sanctions are not a temporary measure but a long-term tool used to apply strategic pressure on Moscow, and that Russia’s rivals will always seek out ways to weaken the country. According to Putin, a total of 28,595 sanctions have been imposed on Russian individuals and entities in recent years – more than the total number imposed on all other countries combined – which have only strengthened the national economy by encouraging self-reliance.

Read more …

“..without effective policy interventions, America’s debt-to-GDP ratio could rise from the current 124% to approximately 130% by 2035, with interest payments consuming about 30% of federal revenue.”

• Moody’s Issues Warning On US Finances (RT)

Ratings agency Moody’s has sounded the alarm on the United States fiscal health, warning of a continued decline due to widening budget deficits and increasing concerns over debt affordability. The warning comes as the national debt surpasses $36 trillion and annual deficits exceed $1.7 trillion, raising concerns about the government’s ability to manage its financial obligations. ”[US] fiscal strength is on course for a continued multiyear decline”, having already “deteriorated further” since Moody’s assigned a negative outlook to America’s top-notch AAA credit rating in November 2023, the agency said in a report on Tuesday, as cited by Financial Times.

US President Donald Trump has advocated measures aimed at stabilizing the nation’s finances, including implementing significant tariffs and proposing tax cuts intended to stimulate economic growth. However, Moody’s has cautioned that extending substantial tax cuts without implementing significant spending reductions could exacerbate the country’s fiscal challenges. ”We see diminished prospects that these strengths will continue to offset widening fiscal deficits and declining debt affordability,” it said, according to Reuters.

Republicans are pushing for a $4.5 trillion extension of tax cuts, which would in turn require significant spending reductions, something that may conflict with Trump’s commitment to protect social programs, the agency noted. The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), led by Elon Musk, tasked with reducing wasteful spending, claims to have achieved $115 billion in savings nationwide. However, according to Moody’s, such cuts are relatively minor compared to mandatory spending obligations. The agency projects that, without effective policy interventions, America’s debt-to-GDP ratio could rise from the current 124% to approximately 130% by 2035, with interest payments consuming about 30% of federal revenue.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Tucker cancer

 

 

Change

 

 

IVM

 

 

Water

 

 

Bike
https://twitter.com/buitengebieden/status/1904655016427741277

 

 

Best friend
https://twitter.com/Yoda4ever/status/1904589189267808471

 

 

PB

 

 

Family
https://twitter.com/buitengebieden/status/1904965543695663410

 

 

Herds

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle March 5 2025

Mar 052025
 
 March 5, 2025  Posted by at 10:45 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  64 Responses »


Gustave Courbet The desperate man (self portrait) 1852

 

• Common Sense Revolution: Trump Outlines Sweeping Vision For Next 4 Years (JTN)
• Trump’s Big Speech Proves To Be Optics Nightmare For Democrats (JTN)
• Half of Democrat Voters Are Tired Of Far-Left Politics (ZH)
• Did Palantir Give Trump & Vance the Real Ukraine Intel? (Sp.)
• Musk Offers Zelensky To Give Up Power, Leave Ukraine (TASS)
• Zelensky Reverses Hardline Position On Peace Talks (RT)
• Musk Wants ‘Actions, Not Words’ From Zelensky (RT)
• Musk Says All Government Agencies ‘Cooperating With DOGE’ (ET)
• NATO Could Collapse Like a Balloon With a Slow Leak (Sp.)
• Reality Confronts The Euro Ruling-Strata (Alastair Crooke)
• Kaja Kallas Is Ill-Equipped To Take Stock Of EU Foreign Policy (Proud)
• Eating Crow (Stephen Karganovic)
• The Apocalyptic Trump Choice Facing The EU (Lukyanov)
• EU’s von der Leyen Unveils $840bn Rearmament Plan (RT)
• EU Spent More Money On Russian Energy Than Ukraine Aid Last Year (ZH)
• Sanctions Have To Go, Kremlin Tells Trump (ZH)
• Putin Agrees To Mediate US/Iran Nuke Talks After Trump Request (ZH)
• Government Advisor Warns UK is Heading For Civil War (MN)

 

 

 

 

FBI

Vance


https://twitter.com/i/status/1896754941575983386

Kari Lake

Fentanyl

Sachs
https://twitter.com/i/status/1896608908430672272

Sachs

Ursula

 

 

 

 

Common sense indeed. That’s all that’s needed. But the Democrats have lost it, and now they barely exist anymore. Watching bits of Trump’s speech last night, that’s what I was thinking: they’re gone, they’re around only in name. They took the knee to support BLM as it burnt down US cities unpunished. They insisted males must have access to girls’ dressing rooms. But countless Americans are (grand-) parents of young girls, and they want no part of that. Yesterday, their perhaps main point appeared to be that the world’s richest man is stealing granny’s pension and Medicare. Stick a fork in them and turn them over; they’re done. But that leaves Trump with no resistance; not sure that’s a good thing. And since we stopped last year with one Dem candidate who was too demented, followed by one who was too unpopular, it’s not clear at all what future they have, if any.

• Common Sense Revolution: Trump Outlines Sweeping Vision For Next 4 Years (JTN)

President Donald Trump on Tuesday evening delivered an optimistic speech outlining his vision for the next years, alternating between a pugilistic and jovial tone as he showed to Democrats that he would not back off of his core campaign promises and invited them to participate in his efforts to reshape the nation. “I return to this chamber tonight to report that America’s momentum is back. Our spirit is back. Our pride is back. Our confidence is back, and the American Dream is surging bigger and better than ever before,” he began. “The American dream is unstoppable, and our country is on the verge of a comeback, the likes of which the world has never witnessed and perhaps will never witness, again, never been anything like it.”

Focusing on a “common sense revolution” that he framed part as a global movement, he highlighted his early efforts to rebuild the American economy and declared that “among my very highest priorities is to rescue our economy and get dramatic and immediate relief to working families.” To that end, he pointed to his administration’s plan to reduce egg prices, bolster American energy production, encourage auto-manufacturing in the U.S., and revitalize the shipbuilding industry through a dedicated White House office. Though not technically a State of the Union address, the speech served a similar function and Trump used the opportunity to deliver a number of partisan blows to his opponents while attempting to win them over on key points.

“This is my fifth such speech to Congress, and once again, I look at the Democrats in front of me, and I realize there is absolutely nothing I can say to make them happy or to make them stand or smile or applaud, nothing I can do,” he said. “I could find a cure to the most devastating disease, a disease that would wipe out entire nations or announce the answers to the greatest economy in history, or the stoppage of crime to the lowest levels ever recorded. And these people sitting right here will not clap, will not stand, and certainly will not cheer for these astronomical achievements,” he went on. “So Democrats sitting before me for just this one night, why not join us in celebrating so many incredible wins for America, for the good of our nation, let’s work together and let’s truly make America great again.”

Prior to the speech, reports had suggested that Democrats would take a more subdued approach to protesting Trump’s remarks. But such reports were disproven as raucous jeering from the conference prompted repeated admonishment from House Speaker Mike Johnson, who ultimately ordered the removal of Rep. Al Green, D-Texas, from the chamber. The opposition’s frequent refusal to stand or applaud throughout the speech, moreover, attracted considerable online attention, especially as Trump highlighted the death of Laken Riley and the presence of a 13-year-old child with cancer. Riley’s death served as the keynote of Trump’s discussion on illegal immigration as the first law he signed upon returning to office bore her name.

“Last year, I told Laken’s grieving parents that we would ensure would not have died in vain. That’s why the very first bill I signed into law as your 47th president mandates the detention of all dangerous criminal aliens who threaten public safety, very strong, powerful act,” he said. Much of the speech saw Trump urge Congress to pass his legislative priorities, including a call for a balanced budget, making interest payments on car loans tax deductible if the vehicle was made in America, and banning child sex changes. Trump used much of speech to Congress to highlight his efforts to fight inflation, bolster energy production, and strengthen the U.S. economy, outlining his overall plan and touting his early accomplishments.

“Among my very highest priorities is to rescue our economy and get dramatic and immediate relief to working families. As you know, we inherited from the last administration an economic catastrophe and an inflation nightmare,” he declared. “Their policies drove up energy prices, pushed up grocery costs and drove the necessities of life out of reach for millions and millions of Americans, if not never had anything like it.” “We suffered the worst inflation in 48 years, but perhaps even in the history of our country, they’re not sure. As President, I’m fighting every day to reverse this damage and make America affordable again,” he declared. “Joe Biden especially let the price of eggs get out of control. The egg prices out of control, and we’re working hard to get it back down. Secretary, do a good job on that. You inherited a total mess from the previous administration.” Trump further pointed to his efforts to construct a national gas pipeline, encourage foreign investment, and to cut government waste.

Read more …

It’s very sad, too.

• Trump’s Big Speech Proves To Be Optics Nightmare For Democrats (JTN)

President Donald Trump’s joint address to Congress on Tuesday night proved to be an optics nightmare for Democrats as one of their own was booted from the House chamber by the sergeant at arms and social media lit up over liberal lawmakers’ refusal to stand for a boy with cancer being made a member of the Secret Service. House Speaker Mike Johnson had Rep. Al Green, D-Texas, removed from the House chamber during Trump’s joint address for disrupting the speech. Johnson banged the speaker’s gavel as Democrats disrupted Trump’s speech, before instructing them to follow decorum and ordering Green’s removal.

“Members are directed to uphold and maintain decorum in the House and to cease any further disruptions,” Johnson said. “That’s your warning. Members are engaging in willful and continuing breach of decorum, and the chair is prepared to direct the sergeant at arms to restore order to the joint session. Mr. Green, take your seat. Take your seat, sir. Take your seat. Finding that members continue to engage in willful and concerted disruption of proper decorum, the chair now directs the sergeant at arms to restore order. Remove this gentleman from the chamber.” Shortly after Johnson’s order to remove Green from the chamber, Trump said, “This is my fifth such speech to Congress, and once again, I look at the Democrats in front of me, and I realize there is absolutely nothing I can say to make them happy or to make them stand or smile or applaud, nothing I can do.

“I could find a cure to the most devastating disease, a disease that would wipe out entire nations or announce the answers to the greatest economy in history, or the stoppage of crime to the lowest levels ever recorded. And these people sitting right here will not clap, will not stand, and certainly will not cheer for these astronomical achievements. They won’t do it, no matter what — five times I’ve been up here, it’s very sad, and it just shouldn’t be this way,” he continued. “So Democrats sitting before me for just this one night, why not join us in celebrating so many incredible wins for America, for the good of our nation, let’s work together and let’s truly make America great again.” Trump also pointed out a 13-year-old boy in the gallery who is battling cancer and has been made an honorary police officer. The president said that he was making the child an agent of the Secret Service.

“Joining us in the gallery tonight is a young man who truly loves our police. His name is DJ Daniel, he is 13 years old, and he has always dreamed of becoming a police officer,” Trump said. “But in 2018, DJ was diagnosed with brain cancer, the doctors gave him five months at most to live. That was more than six years ago. Since that time, DJ and his dad have been on a quest to make his dream come true, and DJ has been sworn in as an honorary law enforcement officer, actually a number of times. The police love him, the police departments love him. “And tonight, DJ, we’re going to do you the biggest honor of them all. I am asking our new Secret Service Director, Sean Curran, to officially make you an agent of the United States Secret Service. Thank you, DJ. DJ’s doctors believe his cancer likely came from a chemical he was exposed to when he was younger. Since 1975, rates of child cancer have increased by more than 40%.”

Wile Republicans gave DJ a standing ovation, only about a dozen Democrats joined them. The rest sat without recognizing the boy. Former Arizona Assistant Attorney General Jennifer Wright (R) reacted to the Democrats’ reaction in post on X on Tuesday, writing, “The congressional democrats are horrible human beings. They couldn’t even stand to applaud newly sworn in Secret Service Agent DJ, a child battling cancer!!” A brief clip that Wright reposted on X showed the majority of Democrats remaining seated while Republicans gave DJ a standing ovation. During Trump’s address, some Democrats in the chamber held up circular black signs with white lettering that had statements such as “Protect Veterans,” “False,” “Save Medicaid,” and “Musk Steals.” Near the start of the speech, Democrats started booing Trump, before being drowned out by Republicans chanting, “USA!”

As Trump entered the House chamber for his address, Rep. Melanie Stansbury, D-N.M., held up a sign next to the president that read, “This is NOT Normal.” White House Deputy Chief of Staff Taylor Budowich posted a thread on X on Tuesday of several occasions in Trump’s speech that Democrats didn’t clap for.

Read more …

“..if the polls are correct then nearly half of Democrats are burnt out on the wacky Manson Family behavior of their activist counterparts..”

• Half of Democrat Voters Are Tired Of Far-Left Politics (ZH)

Can Democrats learn to admit when they’re wrong? It might depend on the variety of Democrat. Woke activists have proven time after time that they will double down on every incorrect position because they don’t care at all about being right; they only care about winning and destroying anyone who stands in their way. But this is psychopathic behavior that should be common only among the fringes of ideological debate. Are all Democrats woke and crazy, or do a lot of them go along with the extremist mob because they’re too afraid to speak against their own side? Or, perhaps a lot of people that lean to the left of the political spectrum have a habit of blindly following the lemmings in front of them, even if it means going off a cliff in the end.

Whether it was psychopathy, cowardice or trend chasing, millions of US voters thought it was a good idea to jump on the woke bandwagon and support authoritarianism, collectivism and moral relativism for at least a solid four years. No moderation was allowed. No nuance was discussed. No centrist ideals entertained. During the Biden Administration and the Kamala Harris campaign ESG, CRT, DEI, LGBT and Net Zero were the message and the madness. It was everywhere and there was no escape. Not surprisingly, the zealotry of the political left created massive blowback that they just could not comprehend. Using billions in government funds from agencies like USAID to saturate the culture with race communism and trans cultism did not help them in the long run. In fact, most of the population became fed up and angry. The Democratic Party fully embraced the woke militants and ended up alienating half of their own voter base.

After the Democratic Party’s well-publicized setbacks during the November elections, a recent national poll indicates 45% of Democrats want their party to go moderate and move away from the terminally woke. That’s up 11 points from 2021. Only 31% of respondents in a Quinnipiac University survey conducted last month had a favorable opinion of the Democratic Party, with 57% seeing the party in an unfavorable light. Polls also show that Democrats in congress hit an all-time-low approval rating last month as the party is finding it increasingly difficult to counter Donald Trump’s government accountability message. To oppose government audits suggests they have something to hide. Democrat politicians have come out publicly in recent weeks to admit that overt “wokeism” is ruining the party. Senator Mark Warner, a Virginia Democrat, asserts:

“I think the Democrats’ brand is really bad, and I think this was an election based on culture. And the Democrats’ failure to connect on a cultural basis with a wide swath of Americans is hugely problematic…” “I think the majority of the party realizes that the ideological purity of some of the groups is a recipe for disaster and that, candidly, the attack on over-the-top wokeism was a valid attack.” In other words, Get Woke – Go Broke. It took several years and a severe beat down in the elections to draw out even a modicum of awareness from leftists and it’s unlikely that they will abandon identity politics in the near term. But, if the polls are correct then nearly half of Democrats are burnt out on the wacky Manson Family behavior of their activist counterparts. This means that without dramatic changes, the Dems will not be winning any elections anytime soon.

Read more …

“Palantir Turns Ukraine Into an AI War Lab.”

• Did Palantir Give Trump & Vance the Real Ukraine Intel? (Sp.)

While Volodymyr Zelensky brazenly questioned JD Vance’s knowledge of Ukraine in the White House slapdown, Donald Trump and his veep may have already exposed all his corrupt schemes. Time Magazine boasted that tech giant Palantir Technologies embedded its state-of-the-art analytics AI software into Ukraine’s government operations in June 2022. More than half a dozen Ukrainian agencies, including its Ministries of Defense, Digital Transformation, Economy, and Education, now rely on Palantir. The company has access to virtually all Ukraine’s data, from real-time satellite and drone footage to financial and economic records, according to the media. Beyond its military AI solutions, Palantir is also tasked with “rooting out corruption” in Ukraine – effectively making it the Zelensky regime’s invisible watchdog.

Founded in 2003, Palantir was backed by the CIA’s venture arm, In-Q-Tel, and worked on US-NATO operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. What’s more, billionaire Peter Thiel, Palantir’s co-founder, has been a loyal Trump ally since 2016. Thiel mentored JD Vance since 2011, backed his Narya Capital, and donated $10 million to his Senate campaign in 2021. With Palantir’s insider access, it likely holds intel on Ukraine’s corruption, misuse of US funds, forced conscriptions, and more – intel Thiel could have shared with Trump and Vance. Rumors suggest Palantir’s AI may have been used by Elon Musk’s DOGE team, hinting that Kiev’s schemes could already be exposed, much like USAID’s murky dealings.

Read more …

At least it makes sense. But I don’t have the feeling it’s his decision.

• Musk Offers Zelensky To Give Up Power, Leave Ukraine (TASS)

The leader of the Kiev regime, Vladimir Zelensky, should resign and leave Ukraine, US entrepreneur and Head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) Elon Musk said. “As distasteful as it is, Zelensky should be offered some kind of amnesty in a neutral country in exchange for a peaceful transition back to democracy in Ukraine,” Musk wrote on his X social media page. On February 28, Vladimir Zelensky visited the White House for a meeting with US President Donald Trump. Their televised exchange, with reporters present, devolved into a shouting match, with Trump reprimanding that Zelensky was ungrateful to the United States for the support provided to Kiev, and Vice President JD Vance pointing out that Zelensky showed a disrespectful attitude towards the US. The press conference following their meeting was canceled. Trump posted a statement on the Truth Social network asserting that Zelensky disrespected the US and displayed reluctance to seek a peaceful resolution to the Ukraine conflict.

Read more …

He’ll say anything he’s told to say.

• Zelensky Reverses Hardline Position On Peace Talks (RT)

Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky has said that Kiev is ready to engage in peace negotiations with Russia, to be brokered by US President Donald Trump. The statement comes after the White House reportedly stopped all military aid to Kiev following a disastrous meeting in the Oval Office between the two leaders, for which US officials have demanded Zelensky apologize. Zelensky made a concession-filled post on X on Tuesday, saying his public feud with Trump in the Oval Office was “regrettable.” “We are ready to work fast to end the war,” Zelensky wrote. He has frequently said in the past that Ukraine would fight as long as necessary and that peace talks could only happen on Ukraine’s terms. He proposed the release of prisoners and establishing “truces” on both the air and sea fronts, echoing suggestions by UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer and French President Emmanuel Macron in a meeting with him in London on Sunday.

The French-UK plan envisages a temporary, month-long “truce in the air, on the seas, and on energy infrastructure.” Moscow has repeatedly ruled out a temporary ceasefire with Kiev, insisting on a permanent, legally binding peace deal that addresses the root causes of the conflict. On Monday, Trump reportedly ordered a temporary halt to all US military aid to Ukraine, aiming to pressure Zelensky into negotiations to end the conflict with Russia. An unnamed senior administration official told Fox News that military assistance would stay suspended until the Ukrainian leadership demonstrates a genuine commitment to peace talks. “Ukraine is ready to come to the negotiating table as soon as possible to bring lasting peace closer,” Zelensky continued on X, offering his appreciation for Washington’s support. “My team and I stand ready to work under President Trump’s strong leadership to get a peace that lasts,” he added.

“’Ready’ is good, it is positive,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov reacted to the statement. During the Friday meeting, Trump accused Zelensky of ingratitude and “gambling with World War III” by refusing to work towards a halt to hostilities. On Sunday, Zelensky told reporters that “an agreement to end the war is still very, very far away, and no one has started all these steps yet.” Trump condemned his statement on social media, promising that “America will not put up with it for much longer.” Russian President Vladimir Putin has indicated Moscow’s readiness to resolve the Ukraine conflict through peaceful means. He emphasized Russia’s aim of establishing an international system that ensures a balanced and mutual consideration of interests, creating a long-term, indivisible European and global security framework.

Additionally, Zelensky highlighted his willingness to swiftly finalize a minerals deal with the US, viewing it as a step toward “toward greater security and solid security guarantees.” Trump has declined to provide specific promises on security, such as admitting Ukraine to NATO or contributing American troops to a future peacekeeping mission. He has also argued that Kiev’s ambition to join NATO was “probably the reason this whole thing started.” Moscow has welcomed Trump’s NATO comments, with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov saying the US president is “the first and only” major Western leader to publicly name NATO expansion and Ukraine’s desire to join the bloc as a key cause of the ongoing conflict.

Read more …

“The Kremlin also said that Kiev must renounce its claims to Crimea and four other regions that have voted to become part of Russia.”

• Musk Wants ‘Actions, Not Words’ From Zelensky (RT)

Words alone would not be enough to restore trust in Kiev, Elon Musk has said in a response to Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky’s announcement that he was ready to sign a deal with the US on rare-earth minerals and agree to a ceasefire with Moscow. “Actions, not words, are what matter. Let’s see what actions take place,” the billionaire and top adviser to US President Donald Trump wrote on X on Tuesday. Zelensky had earlier expressed his regret that last Friday’s meeting in Washington “did not go the way it was supposed to.” The US and Ukraine were supposed to sign a rare-earths deal during Zelensky’s visit to the White House. The signing was abruptly canceled following a heated argument in the Oval Office, during which Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance accused Zelensky of not being grateful for American aid to Kiev.

Trump later claimed that his guest was acting disrespectfully and did not want to achieve peace with Russia. On Tuesday, Zelensky said that Kiev was ready to sign the minerals agreement at “any time and in any convenient format.” He stated that Ukraine was also ready for a prisoner exchange and a truce, with a “ban on missiles, long-ranged drones, bombs on energy, and other civilian infrastructure.” He thanked Trump, the US Congress, and the American people but stopped short of formally apologizing for the Friday incident. Following a shouting match in the White House, Trump told reporters that Zelensky would need to be ready for peace with Russia if he wanted to be welcomed back.

Fox News cited a senior US official on Monday as saying that Zelensky should issue a public apology if he wants to sign the minerals deal. Later reports said, however, that Trump was planning to announce the agreement during his address to Congress on Tuesday evening. Moscow welcomed Zelensky’s overtures as a “positive” development. “It is good that he [Zelensky] is ready [to go back to the talks with the US],” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told journalist Pavel Zarubin from the TV channel Rossiya-1 on Tuesday. Moscow has insisted that peace should be made on its terms, including the transformation of Ukraine into a neutral country. The Kremlin also said that Kiev must renounce its claims to Crimea and four other regions that have voted to become part of Russia.

Read more …

“I think that email perhaps was misinterpreted as a performance review, but, actually, it was a pulse check review…”

• Musk Says All Government Agencies ‘Cooperating With DOGE’ (ET)

Adviser to President Donald Trump, Elon Musk, said Saturday that some federal agencies will respond on behalf of employees to an email asking what federal workers did in the past week and that all agencies are cooperating with the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which was created last month to cut waste, fraud, and excess spending. “All federal government departments are cooperating with DOGE,” he wrote. For the Departments of State, Defense Department, and “a few others, the supervisors are gathering the weekly accomplishments on behalf of individual contributors,” Musk wrote on his social media platform, X. Over the weekend, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) sent out a second round of emails to multiple agencies asking all federal employees to list five things they accomplished that week.

Earlier on Saturday, Musk said in a separate X post that responding to the email “is mandatory for the executive branch” and that “anyone working on classified or other sensitive matters is still required to respond if they receive the email, but can simply reply that their work is sensitive.” An email that was sent to Defense Department civilian employees, seen by The Epoch Times, provided guidance to the “what you did last week” email and said employees must respond to it within 48 hours. “A response to this email satisfies all OPM requirements for the past two weeks,” the email to Pentagon employees added. Musk, with Trump’s backing, has pressed for the emails as a means to hold workers accountable and as a “pulse check” to make sure all federal employees on the payroll actually exist.

The emails are part of broader efforts by Musk and DOGE to downsize the federal government and reduce spending. Musk and Trump have said that the organization is needed to find and eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse. Democratic lawmakers and labor unions have criticized DOGE, saying that widespread cuts could hamper crucial government functions and services. Musk and DOGE have been targeted by multiple lawsuits seeking to block them from accessing government systems and confidential data. The suits allege that Musk and DOGE are violating the Constitution by wielding the kind of vast power that only comes from agencies created through the Congress or appointments made with confirmation by the Senate. At the first Trump Cabinet meeting held last week, Musk explained the role that DOGE will play. He also addressed the mass emails that were sent to federal employees.

“I think that email perhaps was misinterpreted as a performance review, but, actually, it was a pulse check review,” Musk said, adding that “this is not a high bar.” “What we are trying to get to the bottom of is we think there are a number of people on the government payroll who are dead, which is probably why they can’t respond,” he said. Shortly before the first round of emails were sent out last month, Trump had called on Musk to “get more aggressive” with spending cuts and reform to the government. After they were sent out, Trump told reporters in the White House, alongside French President Emmanuel Macron, that those who do not answer the email are at risk of termination.

Musk is not a Cabinet-level official and has been listed as a presidential adviser to Trump with a special government employee status. The Trump administration has given conflicting statements on the exact role that Musk plays within DOGE or whether he actually heads it. In court papers last month, a senior White House official said that Musk is not in charge of DOGE, nor an employee of the department. Trump later said that Musk is effectively leading the organization.

Read more …

“NATO has been ‘unified’ for the past 40 years in letting the US foot the bill and supply the manpower for Europe’s defense..”

• NATO Could Collapse Like a Balloon With a Slow Leak (Sp.)

Former Supreme Allied Commander Admiral James Stavridis earlier warned that the end of NATO could be “days away.” Before entering office, then-President-elect Donald Trump vowed to consider withdrawing the US from NATO. However, the US won’t leave the alliance abruptly, Come Carpentier de Gourdon, a geopolitical analyst and the convener of the editorial board of World Affairs journal, told Sputnik.The US may “gradually starve NATO of funds and other resources by repatriating most of the US personnel from bases in Europe, for instance,” which would prod European states to maintain the alliance at their costs, Gourdon said.

Washington may also push NATO members to raise their defense budgets to 5% which “would probably put an unacceptable burden on those states,” he went on. “In that situation, NATO would become moribund and many of its countries would look for alternative arrangements,” the analyst concluded. It looks like US President Donald Trump has decided NATO’s “free ride is over,” Michael Shannon, political commentator and Newsmax columnist, said in an interview with Sputnik. “NATO has been ‘unified’ for the past 40 years in letting the US foot the bill and supply the manpower for Europe’s defense,” he noted.

The alliance “can pay its fair share in troops, money and equipment or it can watch the US leave them to their feckless fate. US taxpayers get nothing from this arrangement while EU taxpayers get everything,” Shannon stressed. It’s unclear if the US will formally withdraw from NATO, but one can see “a major cutback in NATO spending and a drawdown of US manpower in the EU,” according to the analyst. “When that happens and the other NATO members fail to shoulder their own burden, I can see NATO slowly collapsing like a balloon with a slow leak,” the commentator pointed out.

Read more …

‘Through the tear in the fantasy bubble, they see their own demise..’

• Reality Confronts The Euro Ruling-Strata (Alastair Crooke)

They (the Euro-élites) don’t have a chance: “If Trump imposes this tariff [25%], the U.S. will be in a serious trade conflict with the EU”, the Norwegian Prime Minister threatens. And what if Brussels does retaliate? “They can try, but they can’t”, Trump responded. Von der Leyen has, however, already promised that she will retaliate. Nonetheless, the combined suite of the Anglo administrative forces is still unlikely to compel Trump to put U.S. military troops on the ground in Ukraine to protect European interests (and investments!). The reality is that every European NATO member – to varying degrees of self-embarrassment – admits publicly now that none of them want to participate in securing Ukraine without having U.S. military troops provide ‘backstop’ to those European forces.

This is a palpably obvious scheme to inveigle Trump into continuing the Ukraine war – as is Macron and Starmer’s dangling of the mineral deal to try to trick Trump to recommit to the Ukraine war. Trump plainly sees through these ploys. The fly in the ointment, however, is that Zelensky seemingly fears a ceasefire, more than he fears losing further ground on the battlefield. He too, seems to need the war to continue (to preserve continuing in power, possibly). Trump calling time on the Ukraine war that has been lost has seemingly caused European elites to enter some form of cognitive dissonance. Of course, it has been clear for some time that Ukraine would not retake its 1991 borders, nor force Russia into a negotiating position weak enough for the West to be able to dictate its own cessation terms. As Adam Collingwood writes:

“Trump has torn a huge rip in the interface layer of the fantasy bubble … the governing élite [in the wake of Trump’s pivot] can see not just an electoral setback, but rather a literal catastrophe. A defeat in war, with [Europe] left largely defenceless; a de-industrialising economy; crumbling public services and infrastructure; large fiscal deficits; stagnating living standards; social and ethnic disharmony – and a powerful populist insurgency led by enemies just as grave as Trump and Putin in the Manichean struggle against vestiges of liberal times – and strategically sandwiched between two leaders that both despise and disdain them …”. “In other words, through the tear in the fantasy bubble, Europe’s elites see their own demise …”. “Anybody who could see reality knew that things would only get worse on the war front from autumn 2023, but from their fantasy bubble, our élites couldn’t see it. Vladimir Putin, like the ‘Deplorables’ and ‘Gammons’ at home, was an atavistic daemon who would inevitably be slain on the inexorable march to liberal progressive utopia”.

Many in the Euro ruling-strata clearly are furious. Yet what can Britain or Germany actually do? It has quickly become clear that European states do not have the military capacity to intervene in Ukraine in any concerted manner. But more than anything, as Conor Gallagher points out, it is the European economy, circling the drain – largely as a result of the war against Russia – that is dragging reality to the forefront. The new German Chancellor, Friedrich Merz, has shown himself to be the most implacable European leader advocating both military expansion and youth conscription – in what amounts to an European resistance model mounted to confront Trump’s pivot to Russia. Yet Merz’s winning CDU/CSU achieved only 28% of votes cast, whilst losing significant voter share. Hardly an outstanding mandate for confronting both Russia – and America – together!

“I am communicating closely with a lot of prime ministers, and heads of EU states and for me it is an absolute priority to strengthen Europe as quickly as possible, so that we achieve independence from the U.S., step by step”, Friedrich Merz said. Second place in the German election was taken by the Alternative for Germany (AfD) with 20% of the national vote. The party was the top vote getter in the 25-45 year-old demographic. It supports good relations with Russia, an end to the Ukraine war, and it wants to work with Team Trump, too. Yet AfD absurdly is outcast under the ‘firewall rules’. As a ‘populist’ party with a strong youth vote, it becomes automatically relegated to the ‘wrong side’ of the EU firewall. Merz has already refused to share power with them, leaving the CDU as pig-in-the-middle, squeezed between the failing SPD, which lost the most voter share, and the AfD and Der Linke, another firewall outcast, which, like AfD, gained voter share, especially among the under-45s.

The rub here – and it is a big one – is that the AfD and the Left Party, Der Linke (8.8%), which was the top vote getter in the 18-24 demographic, are both anti-war. Together these two have more than one third of the votes in parliament – a blocking minority for many important votes, especially for constitutional changes. This will be a big headache for Merz, as Wolfgang Münchau explains: “For one thing, the new Chancellor had wanted to travel to the NATO summit this June, with a strong commitment to higher defence spending. And even though the Left Party and the AfD hate each other in every other respect, they agree that they won’t give Merz the money to strengthen the Bundeswehr. More important, though, is the fact that they won’t support a reform to the constitutional fiscal rules (the debt brake) that Merz and the SPD are desperate for”.

Read more …

“No one voted for Kallas to occupy her office in Brussels. While Zelensky has only been unelected since May of 2024, Kallas will only ever be an unelected apparatchik.”

• Kaja Kallas Is Ill-Equipped To Take Stock Of EU Foreign Policy (Proud)

Now that Zelensky has been battered by Trump and abandoned by Starmer, he can fall back of Europe’s leading diplomat, Kaja Kallas. God help us all. The earth is still shaking from President Trump and Vice President Vance’s tag team annihilation of Volodymir Zelensky at the White House. The 27 February meeting between Trump and Keir Starmer was a more convivial affair, with the British Prime Minister quiet on Ukraine while promoting the idea of much prized trade talks with America. That was the first signal of the UK getting real about its foreign policy disaster in Ukraine and recognising that it needs trade with America far more than it needs the huge cost of propping up an unwinnable war. This leaves Zelensky’s fate in the hands of the European Union. And with Kaja Kallas, the current EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the omens aren’t promising.

Kallas’ problem is threefold. First, she is not diplomatic. If the biggest foreign policy challenge in Kallas’ in-tray right now is the war in Ukraine, then her ingrained hatred of Russia makes her a singularly bad choice as Europe’s lead diplomat. Her worldview is carved out of her experience growing up in the Soviet Union the child of a woman who was deported to Siberia in 1949. She looks at Russia through a shattered lens of Estonia’s suffering during the so-called communist terror after the end of World War II. How she sees events in Ukraine today is simply a continuum of the folklore of her life. Russia is the hated enemy, and, at some point, Russia will return to conquer Estonia once more. In her statements before war in Ukraine started, Kallas reaffirmed her view that Estonia could be the next country that Russia invades. As a NATO country, I have never seen any evidence that Russia has a plan to do this.

Kallas has called for NATO troops to be deployed to Ukraine, to ensure Russia’s total defeat. She has suggested that Russia be broken up into a series of smaller states. She once implied that Ukraine should inflict more civilian casualties on Russian citizens, to balance the number of casualties in Ukraine. Even as President Trump has said that NATO membership for Ukraine is unrealistic, she has continued to push for this to be kept on the table, despite it having been a redline for Russia for nineteen years. Almost everything that she says is rooted in her unshakeable belief that defeating Russia is vital for the world to become a safer place. The world is full of extremists, of course. However, she claims to be the leading diplomat of Europe. She seems singularly ill-suited to that role. But will nonetheless still support Zelensky, I’m sure.

Which ushers in her second problem, the absence of a democratic mandate. Countries that are sceptical about the European project often express concerns about the lack of democratic accountability of EU institutions. No one voted for Kallas to occupy her office in Brussels. While Zelensky has only been unelected since May of 2024, Kallas will only ever be an unelected apparatchik.

Read more …

“You should have never started it. You could have made a deal.”

• Eating Crow (Stephen Karganovic)

For those unfamiliar with this colourful American idiom, “eating crow” means “to undergo the humiliation of having to retract a statement or admit an error.” It is a rough equivalent of the Biblical practice of putting on a sackcloth and covering oneself with ashes. Something of the sort has indeed happened with two major collective West narratives, the war in Ukraine and the “genocide” Xinjiang. The Ukraine narrative maintained that the conflict that started in February 2022 was an unprovoked act of “Russian aggression.” The equally bogus Xinjiang narrative rested on the groundless premise that the Chinese government was conducting an extermination campaign targeting the Uyghurs, a Turkic Muslim ethnicity, in its Northwestern province of Xinjiang.

Both assertions have now been debunked as completely false. That was accomplished in part by those who were aggressively promoting those narratives. The one misrepresenting the conflict in Ukraine imploded with a huge bang, whilst the Xinjiang genocide fabrication did so with a whimper. But it hardly matters; they are both effectively dead now. The key ground of the Russian aggression claim was debunked recently by its most prominent promoters. In pursuing dialogue with Russia as a means of settling the conflict in Ukraine, the new Trump administration, in the face of fierce vested interest and deep state resistance and however grudgingly, has finally made an important admission. It is that the operational premise of the hostility to Russia which at several junctures had brought the world to the brink of war was in fact false.

That is the plain meaning of President Donald Trump’s remark, addressed to the Ukrainian leadership with reference to responsibility for the war: “You should have never started it. You could have made a deal.” As if on cue, administration officials are also changing their tune. The President’s adviser and special envoy Steve Witkoff articulated Washington’s new position in no uncertain terms: “The war didn’t need to happen. It was provoked.” But who provoked it? The key takeaway from Witkoff’s remarks concerns the genesis of the conflict, although what he said may strike informed people as merely conceding the obvious: “It doesn’t necessarily mean it was provoked by the Russians. There were all kinds of conversations back then about Ukraine joining NATO. The president has spoken about this — that didn’t need to happen. It basically became a threat to the Russians, and so we have to deal with that fact.”

There is an immense difference between “unprovoked full scale aggression,” which was the party line until a few days ago, and the new position consisting of the explicit recognition that Russia’s military operation was provoked, because it occurred in response to a threat. The acid test of Trump administration’s commitment to the revised view of the conflict was the way it would vote in the UN on the resolution proposed by Ukraine, regurgitating the three-year “Russian unprovoked aggression” propaganda claims. Refreshingly, this time round the U.S. joined Russia to vote against it.

The lie concerning the Chinese “genocide” in Xinxiang has now also been laid bare and once more the truth has been affirmed by the most authoritative source, the original slanderers themselves.It should be recalled that Great Britain not only spearheaded the charge that China was committing genocide in Xinxiang but had also made its facilities available in 2021 to an NGO specifically set up for the purpose of conducting a kangaroo court trial in order to give the charge a veneer of legitimacy. The veneer was rather short lived, as it turned out, because Dr. Alena Douhan, the UN Human Rights Rapporteur, evidently intrigued by the Xinxiang genocide frenzy, actually took the trouble to go there and check for herself. In her findings she reported that no evidence of genocide was detected and asked that sanctions based on the unfounded allegation be removed.

Easier said than done because the Xinxiang controversy has nothing to do with verifiable human rights abuses, much less the crime of genocide, and everything to do with the Chinese province’s pivotal position on the Great Chessboard. Quite simply, as we had stated before, “Xinjiang happens to be the most convenient land route corridor which China’s Belt and Road Initiative must inevitably take if it is to be viable. Accordingly, make Xinjiang a sufficiently hazardous place and for all practical purposes B&R trade goes up in smoke. Chinese products cannot reach their foreign destinations, and neither can the products of foreign partners be reliably delivered to the Chinese market.”

Read more …

“They have pushed Washington to find a resolution to the Ukraine conflict that aligns with European interests. But the now-public rupture between Zelensky and Trump has stripped them of that opportunity..”

• The Apocalyptic Trump Choice Facing The EU (Lukyanov)

Friday night’s dramatic events at the White House, featuring Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky, have placed Western Europe in an extremely difficult position. Many of the region’s leaders, who range from moderate to intense skeptics of US President Donald Trump, have nonetheless attempted to preserve the traditional transatlantic alliance. They have pushed Washington to find a resolution to the Ukraine conflict that aligns with European interests. But the now-public rupture between Zelensky and Trump has stripped them of that opportunity. Whether by design or by accident, Zelensky has forced the United States to clarify its stance: Washington is a mediator, not a combatant, and its priority is ending escalation, not taking sides.

This marks a stark departure from the previous position, in which the US led a Western coalition against Russia in defense of Ukraine. The message is clear – American support for Kiev is not a matter of principle but merely a tool in a broader geopolitical game. The EU has loudly declared that it will never abandon Ukraine. But in reality, it lacks the resources to replace the United States as Kiev’s primary backer. At the same time, reversing course is not so simple. The price of trying to defeat Russia is too high, and the economic toll too severe, but a sudden shift in policy would force Western European leaders to answer for their past decisions. In an EU already grappling with internal unrest, such a reversal would hand ammunition to the political opponents of the bloc’s leaders.

Another key reason Western Europe remains on this path is its post-Cold War reliance on moral arguments as a political tool – both internally and in its dealings with external partners. Unlike traditional powers, the EU is not a state. Where sovereign nations can pivot and adjust policies with relative ease, a bloc of more than two dozen countries inevitably gets bogged down in bureaucracy. Decisions are slow, coordination is imperfect, and mechanisms often fail to function as intended. For years, Brussels attempted to turn this structural weakness into an ideological strength. The EU, despite its complexity, was supposed to represent a new form of cooperative politics – a model for the world to follow. But it is now clear that this model has failed.

At best, it may survive within Western Europe’s culturally homogeneous core, though even that is uncertain. The world has moved on, and the inefficiencies remain. This makes the dream of an independent, self-sufficient “Europe” – one capable of acting without American oversight – an impossibility. Western Europe may attempt to endure the turbulence of another Trump presidency, just as it did during his first term. But this is not just about Trump. The shift in US policy is part of a deeper political realignment, one that ensures there will be no return to the golden age of the 1990s and early 2000s.

More importantly, Ukraine has become the catalyst for these changes. The EU does not have the luxury of waiting things out. Its leaders must decide – quickly – how to respond. Most likely, they will attempt to maintain the appearance of unity with Washington while adapting to new US policies. This will be painful, especially in economic terms. Unlike in the past, modern America acts solely in its own interests, with little regard for the needs of its European allies. One indicator of Western Europe’s shifting posture may be the upcoming visit of German Chancellor Friedrich Merz to Washington. At present, Merz presents himself as a hardliner. But if history is any guide, he may soon shift positions, aligning more closely with Washington’s new direction.

Read more …

Maybe if they had a reserve currency…

• EU’s von der Leyen Unveils $840bn Rearmament Plan (RT)

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has proposed that member states spend about $840 billion on defense to strengthen their military self-sufficiency – an amount more than double total EU defense expenditure in 2024. In a statement on Tuesday, the EU chief cited the “most dangerous of times” and the “grave” threats facing the bloc as reasons to assume greater responsibility for its own security. “We are in an era of rearmament,” von der Leyen declared, adding that she had sent a letter outlining her ‘ReArm Europe Plan’ to member state leaders ahead of the European Council meeting later this week. “ReArm Europe could mobilize close to €800 billion ($840 billion) for a safe and resilient Europe,” she said. “This is a moment for Europe. And we are ready to step up.”

Official data shows the bloc’s total defense spending reached an estimated $344 billion last year, marking an increase of more than 30% since 2021. The new plan includes $158 billion in loans available to member states to invest in what von der Leyen described as “pan-European capability domains,” including air and missile defense, artillery systems, missiles and ammunition, drones, and anti-drone technology. It will also address other needs, from cybersecurity to military mobility. The proposed five-part strategy is also designed to address the “short-term urgency” of supporting Ukraine, the EU chief said. Von der Leyen did not specify a detailed timeline, but emphasized that defense spending must increase “urgently now but also over a longer period over this decade.” Her announcement came just hours after news agencies reported on Monday that US President Donald Trump had ordered a pause on military aid to Ukraine.

Trump has repeatedly accused Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky of refusing to negotiate peace with Russia and exploiting US support for his own gain. Following Zelensky’s public clash with Trump and US Vice President J.D. Vance on Friday, the US president said America would no longer tolerate the Ukrainian leader’s attitude. The EU has historically depended significantly on the US for its security, primarily through the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). However, the Trump administration has recently signaled a major policy shift, urging European nations to take the lead in their own defense, as well as Kiev’s. Last month, Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth said that Washington intended to refocus its military priorities on countering China, warning the EU not to assume that American forces would remain in the region indefinitely.

Trump has previously warned that under his leadership the US would not defend NATO countries that fail to meet their financial commitments. He has floated the idea of raising mandatory defense spending by members to 5% of GDP, though none – including the US – currently meet that threshold. His push for increased defense spending has drawn mixed reactions, with some EU officials questioning its economic feasibility. European officials have occasionally raised concerns that Trump could pull the US out of the organization. Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Aleksandr Grushko recently warned that NATO appears to be preparing for war with Moscow, arguing that its current course poses a threat both to Russia and to overall security architecture.

Read more …

Trump talked about this report.

• EU Spent More Money On Russian Energy Than Ukraine Aid Last Year (ZH)

A new report reveals that the anti-Russia, pro-Ukraine EU – spent more money on Russian oil and gas in 2024 than they did on military aid to Ukraine. According to the report by the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA), the EU spent approximately $23 billion on Russian fossil fuels vs. $19.6 billion on military and financial aid to Ukraine. Meanwhile, China purchased at least $82 billion of Russian energy, India spent $51 billion, and Turkey spent $36 billion. In total, Russia raked in $254 billion on energy exports. “Since the beginning of the war in Ukraine, Europe has made significant progress in terms of energy independence. Imports of Russian oil and gas have decreased substantially, with gas imports dropping from 45% in 2021 to 18% in 2024,” said EU MP Thomas Pellerin-Carlin in response to the report.

“However, a quarter of Russia’s fossil fuel export revenues still come from Europe,” he continued. And despite EU efforts to reduce Russian dependence, member nations spent 7 billion euros ($7.3 billion) on Russian natural gas in the third year of the Ukraine war – an increase of 9% vs. 2023. According to CREA, increased sanctions on Russia could reduce the Kremlin’s fossil fuel revenues by $51 billion euros ($53.3 billion). “Due to insufficient sanctions and loopholes, Russia has earned over 825 billion euros ($862.9 billion) from fossil fuel exports since the start of their invasion of Ukraine,” according to Isaac Levi, CREA’s Europe-Russia Energy policy analyst. As American Greatness’ Eric Lendrum notes further, Overall, Russia’s oil exports have decreased by just 8% since the start of the war in 2022, despite overwhelming condemnation and sanctions from most Western nations.

Since the war began in February of 2022, Russia has made nearly $1 trillion in oil exports alone. One major reason for Russian exports remaining strong is that, even after numerous sanctions, the average price of Russian oil is still cheaper than other sources such as the Middle East. Another reason why Europe has remained dependent on Russian energy is the anti-energy policies of the previous Biden Administration. After the start of the war, many European countries prepared to abandon Russian energy in favor of American exports. However, Biden’s White House soon banned liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports in the name of combatting so-called “global warming,” thus forcing Europe back to the Russian energy market. President Donald Trump rescinded the LNG export bans with an executive order on his first day back in office.

Read more …

“If the United States has really decided to suspend military aid to Ukraine, it may coerce the Kiev regime to engage in a peace process..”

• Sanctions Have To Go, Kremlin Tells Trump (ZH)

Russia has informed the Trump administration on Tuesday that any normalization of relations with the United States must be accompanied by the lifting of sanctions against Moscow. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov responded to Monday reports saying Trump has ordered options be drawn up to potentially give Russia sanctions relief amid ongoing direct talks to prepare for peace negotiations to end the Ukraine war. “It is probably too early to say anything. We have not heard any official statements, but in any case, our attitude towards sanctions is well known, we consider them illegal,” Peskov said. “And, of course, if we talk about normalizing bilateral relations, they need to be freed from this negative burden of so-called sanctions.”

Several waves of sanctions have been slapped on Russia both by the prior Biden administration and the European Union, targeting especially banking, energy, and defense sectors – as well as many measures against Putin and his top officials, as well as Russian oligarchs. Given the dramatic and rapid moves coming out of the White House, this moment could be the best opportunity for Russia to get its wish of sanctions relief, though this is less likely to come from the European side. Monday saw the White House announce a pause in all US defense aid to Ukraine, amid ongoing pressure to ensure Zelensky signs Trump’s controversial minerals deal. Putin’s office has of course responded favorable to this unexpected development, with Russian media reporting the following new words, per TASS:

“If the United States has really decided to suspend military aid to Ukraine, it may coerce the Kiev regime to engage in a peace process, Kremlin Spokesman Dmitry Peskov said. …The order came into effect in the early hours of Tuesday. A Pentagon official told TASS that the US Armed Forces had suspended supplies of military aid to Ukraine. According to him, the move concerns all US military equipment that has not yet reached Ukraine, including weapons transported by aircraft and vessels or waiting to be shipped from transit zones in Poland. “Undoubtedly, we have yet to figure out the details but if it’s true, then this is a decision that really can push the Kiev regime towards a peace process,” the Russian presidential spokesman noted. ”

That decision came the same day Reuters reported “The White House has asked the State and Treasury departments to draft a list of sanctions that could be eased for US officials to discuss with Russian representatives in the coming days as part of the administration’s broad talks with Moscow on improving diplomatic and economic relations, the sources said.” These developments will likely accelerate the US-Russia talks and process of bettering ties, which could lead to actual economic cooperation down the line. Washington has also likely perceived by now that its anti-Russian sanctions have by and large not worked, or backfired. In many ways they have only strengthened Moscow’s relations and trade with leading BRICS nations like China and India, as well as Iran. Meanwhile, the below archived clip is subject of a lot of commentary this week, given where things now stand…

Read more …

Trump is fast.

• Putin Agrees To Mediate US/Iran Nuke Talks After Trump Request (ZH)

A very unexpected and unlikely development and plan is being widely reported Tuesday: Russian President Vladimir Putin has agreed to help the Trump White House broker talks with Iran on curtailing the country’s nuclear program. Trump reportedly relayed the request for Putin to play a direct role in new negotiations with Iran during their February phone call. The topic was further broached and more details were discussed during the US-Russia Riyadh talks which followed, reports Bloomberg on Tuesday. Neither the Iranian nor US governments have publicly commented on the Bloomberg report specifically, which was based on anonymous sourcing. But Russian state media did quickly acknowledge that Moscow stands ready to help the US and Iran resolve their issues through talks.

A TASS headline issued almost simultaneous to the Bloomberg report says as follows: “Moscow believes that Washington and Tehran should settle all their differences through talks and is ready to contribute to this, Kremlin Spokesman Dmitry Peskov told Bloomberg. “Russia believes that the United States and Iran should resolve all problems through negotiations,” he said, adding that Moscow “is ready to do everything in its power to achieve this.” This response from Peskov appears to support the Bloomberg report. This response marks something unexpectedly positive given that both Russia and Iran are heavily sanctioned by the United States – measures put in place under the Biden administration. Biden officials had castigated the Iranians as part of the axis attacking Ukraine, given that Iranian-supplied suicide drones have been heavily relied upon by Russian forces throughout the more than three-year long conflict.

Iran has only offered very vague comments, with a foreign ministry spokesman saying Monday it is “natural” for countries to offer to help negotiations along in the cause of diplomacy. “It’s possible that many parties will show good will and readiness to help with various problems,” the spokesman stated. “From this perspective, it’s natural that countries will present an offer of help if it’s needed.” Previously Tehran leaders, including the Ayatollah himself, expressed that at this point it’s somewhat futile to engage in direct talks with Washington – given Iran in good faith entered into the 2015 JCPOA nuclear deal with Obama, but then Trump unilaterally pulled out in 2018. The Ayatollah said in recent comments this means there’s no way to know if a future US administration will honor prior commitments and deals.

There’s also the greater complication of the standoff with Israel. Iran’s missile sites are at the ‘ready’ amid constant fears of an Israeli preemptive attack on the Islamic Republic’s nuclear facilities. Trump has been seen as giving Israel free reign to attack if it sees itself as under threat by Iran or its proxies in the region.

Read more …

It’s not just Britain.

• Government Advisor Warns UK is Heading For Civil War (MN)

A top academic and government advisor warns that the UK will experience a civil war within the next five years caused by the “destruction of legitimacy” brought about by the government’s failure to secure the border. Professor David Betz made the comments during a podcast appearance with journalist and author Louise Perry. Betz teaches at Kings College London and has advised or worked with the UK MOD and GCHQ as well as being a Senior Fellow of the Foreign Policy Research Institute. The professor, who describes himself as a “classic member of the establishment,” told Perry that British society is now “explosively configured” to suffer mass unrest. He said the fallout began with the fracture of the social contract after the political establishment in the UK tried to subvert the Brexit vote.

Subsequent years have brought about a “destruction of legitimacy” as a result of successive governments’ open border policy and their inability to protect children from grooming gangs, in addition to a two-tier justice system presided over by a highly-politicised judiciary. “If you want to create domestic turmoil in a society, then what the British government has been doing is almost textbook exactly what you would do,” said the professor. Betz said that the situation is now “too far gone” and that a national eruption which will outstrip last summer’s riots is likely to happen within half a decade. Writing on his Substack, Paul Embery outlined some of the other arguments Betz made during the podcast that led the professor to make his fateful prediction.

“Betz contends that we now live in a deeply fractured nation and one that has much less connection to those aspects of its history which previously made it content and well governed. The nefarious activities of certain individuals and groups serve to exacerbate and magnify our divisions. So, can a society in which such realities are playing out be said to be destined for civil war? Well, here comes the interesting bit. Betz explains that highly-heterogenous societies (those comprised of many different social, cultural and ethnic groups) in which there is no single dominant cohort are not especially prone to civil war. That is because no group has enough power or status to co-ordinate a widespread revolt. Similarly, highly-homogenous, or ‘unfactionated’, societies are not particularly vulnerable on account of the fact that it is generally easy to arrive at consensus positions.

The danger area, Betz asserts, is in the middle – societies that are becoming more heterogenous and in which a previously dominant social majority fears that it is losing its place. In such societies, a nativist sentiment manifests in a narrative of what Betz calls ‘downgrading’ and ‘displacement’ – the most powerful causes of civil conflict. Throw in long-term structural economic decline and the apparent inability of the government to offer ‘bread and circuses’, and the sense of dispossession deepens. He also addressed the phenomenon of ‘asymmetric multiculturalism’ in which ‘in-group preference, ethnic pride, and group solidarity – notably in voting – are acceptable for all groups except whites, for whom such things are considered to represent supremacist attitudes that are anathematic to social order’. This ‘provides an argument for revolt on the part of the white majority (or large minority) that is rooted in stirring language of justice’.”

On the surface, the United Kingdom would seem like the least likely country to be susceptible to mass civil disorder, but thanks to years of societal malaise and mass immigration, it unfortunately feels like we’re on the brink of experiencing just that.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/i/status/1896823198953726216

 

 

Measles
https://twitter.com/i/status/1896720120871002449

 

 

Scofield

 

 

Snoot rubs
https://twitter.com/i/status/1896681968177132008

 

 

Mama horse
https://twitter.com/i/status/1896971400591880684

 

 

Concrete wood

 

 

Lion

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle February 25 2025

Feb 252025
 
 February 25, 2025  Posted by at 10:46 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , ,  38 Responses »


Tintoretto The crucifixion of Christ 1568

 

• No Way Out (James Howard Kunstler)
• Liberals Panic Over ‘Politicized’ FBI After Bongino Appointment (ZH)
• Musk Warns Fed Workers – Return To Office Or Be Placed On Leave (ZH)
• Trump Officials Push Back Against Musk Initiative (RT)
• Judge Blocks Education Department, OPM From Sharing Data With DOGE (ET)
• US Adopting ‘Russian Narrative’ – EU’s Kallas (RT)
• EU’s Chief Diplomat Backs Zelensky’s Refusal To Hold Elections (RT)
• Germany Must Become ‘Independent’ From US – Bundestag Election Winner (RT)
• Income Tax vs Tariffs (Paul Craig Roberts)
• Zelensky Has ‘No Chance’ Of Winning A Fair Election – Putin (RT)
• Russia Ready To Work With US On ‘Rare Earths’ – Putin (RT)
• Putin Weighs In On Europe’s Participation In Ukraine Peace Talks (RT)
• The Ukraine War Will Only End On Russia’s Terms, Lavrov Says (ZH)
• EU Spending On Russian LNG Imports Quadruples (RT)
• Xi Backs Russia On Ukraine Peace Efforts – Kremlin (RT)
• West Knew NATO Push For Ukraine Was Risky – Wikileaks (RT)
• UK In Secret Plot To Extract Personal Data From 2 Billion iPhone Users (VF)
• Displaced Disinformation Experts Are Seeking New Opportunities (Turley)

 

 

 

 

Witkoff
https://twitter.com/i/status/1893733497568706786

Transgender

MSNBC: it costs them nothing

Bongino

ID

 

 

 

 

“Mr. Bongino has documented the worst blob crimes of recent years in a series of books that comprehensively presents the entire tapestry of lawlessness in microscopic detail. He knows the whole sordid, epic story, all the names, and all the money trails in every obscure corner of the worst aggregate matrix of scandals in US history. Believe me when I tell you, this is like a death sentence for the blob.”

“The Democratic Party was the political enabling partner in all this sedition and treason and it is hard to see how it comes out of this alive.”

• No Way Out (James Howard Kunstler)

CBS’s 60-Minutes show was at it again Sunday night in the most prime primetime weekend news slot on the old broadcast spectrum — Sunday at 7:00, the power-hour of national mind-fuckery — with blob PR-agent Scott Pelley singing the blues over the systematic disassembly of the rogue bureaucracy. Trouble is, fewer and fewer minds are susceptible to the argument that the blob exists to “save our democracy.” You’re supposed to go boo-hoo because the Department of Justice is under new management. Now get this: since 2015 the Department of Justice and its step-child, the FBI, have devoted their vast and savage powers to manifold acts of sedition, treason, malicious political prosecution, obstruction of justice, suborning perjuries, and countless other abuses of law in an ever-widening gyre of ass-covering operations as year-by-year their crimes multiplied.

RussiaGate was initially a cover-up op for the Clintons’ many acts of mischief and moneygrubbing when Hillary ran for President, just as the Mueller Special Counsel Investigation was a cover-up for the crimes committed by the DOJ and FBI after Hillary lost to Mr. Trump, just as Impeachment #1 was a cover-up for the Ukraine money laundry and its role in RussiaGate, and Impeachment #2 was a coverup for the 2020 election ballot hijinks that got rid of Mr. Trump, and just as the Mar-a-Lago raid was a cover-up to retrieve evidence of all-the-above that Mr. Trump had archived, and just as the flurry of Trump prosecutions in 2024 was the final (and amazingly inept) effort to put the Golden Golem of Greatness out-of-business forever.

But somehow, perhaps an act of Providence, he prevailed over all that adversity, like some paladin out of the ancient myths, and is suddenly back in charge — to the abject horror of all those lawyers and spooks behind the aforesaid ops, now nervously awaiting subpoenas in their Beltway McMansions. You will learn shortly that there is a difference between “justice” based on fraud and fakery and justice served by way of fact-patterns and evidence. And so late Sunday evening after the 60-Minutes pity party, came the pretty astounding news that former Secret Service agent and now podcaster Dan Bongino is appointed Deputy Director of the FBI. Astounding because Mr. Bongino has documented the worst blob crimes of recent years in a series of books that comprehensively presents the entire tapestry of lawlessness in microscopic detail.

He knows the whole sordid, epic story, all the names, and all the money trails in every obscure corner of the worst aggregate matrix of scandals in US history. Believe me when I tell you, this is like a death sentence for the blob. For instance, Mr. Bongino is acutely aware of what went down on J-6, 2021, when a supposed pipe-bomb was “found” at the DNC headquarters, the part it was supposed to play in the larger J-6 op to rid Washington of Mr. Trump, and the lying confabulations of former FBI Director Christopher Wray afterward. Now he is in a position to compel current and former FBI officials to answer questions about that, and much more, from the Crossfire Hurricane scam to the shenanigans in Judge Juan Merchan’s court last summer.

Those investigations will require a whole dedicated division of new FBI agents while Kash Patel attends to the latest grifts uncovered by the DOGE, the threats against public order and safety posed by countless military-aged illegal aliens ushered into the country by “Joe Biden” and Alejandro Mayorkas, the turpitudes of former AG Merrick Garland, and the crimes committed by officials in the CDC, FDA, and other public health agencies around Covid-19, and lingering monstrosities such as the Jeffrey Epstein capers, the huge fortunes mysteriously amassed by US senators and congressmen, the 1960s assassinations of the Kennedys and MLK, the censorship operations conducted by the combined FBI / CIA, State Department, and dark offices of the Pentagon, the theft of US largess given over to Ukraine, and the infiltration of American institutions by China.

The Trump admin knows that it will have to strike hard and fast in all these matters and more. Cases will have to be prepared briskly and removed to federal courts outside the blob-controlled DC district. A great many political figures will have to be taken out of circulation. It will be helpful to finally understand the bizarre capture of the old legacy news media so, for instance, it becomes clear why an outfit such as CBS’s 60-Minutes ended up on the dark side, committed to burying the truth and distorting reality at every opportunity.

The Democratic Party was the political enabling partner in all this sedition and treason and it is hard to see how it comes out of this alive. Expect to see a lemming stampede of resignations out of Congress and the Senate. And some of them, like Sen. Adam Schiff, and Rep. Eric Swalwell could end up in prison. You saw the fear in their public antics the past two weeks as the cabinet confirmations mounted. They know what’s coming. They are desperate, but the power they once wielded is now in other hands. There’s no way out. On a bright note, it was heartwarming to see that Joy Reid got “axed” from her primetime perch at MSNBC over the weekend. (Nobody axed me, but I approve!) She’ll be doing a must-watch farewell show this coming week. Don’t miss it!

Read more …

“..you know who should be panicking right now? Adam Schiff…”

• Liberals Panic Over ‘Politicized’ FBI After Bongino Appointment (ZH)

Sunday night’s panic within the FBI has quickly morphed into “utter despair” among liberals, “who had already grown fearful of a highly politicized FBI,” according to (formerly USAID-funded) Politico, which is rich considering that the FBI under Biden spent four years as a “highly politicized” weapon to go after conservatives.

Rolling Stone (of pedo coverup fame), framed Bongino’s appointment with the “bad cops” tag, which is followed by an unhinged screed.

The once-great activist rag writes: “The FBI will officially be headed by two men with no experience in the bureau, and a lot of blind loyalty towards President Donald Trump.” During the first weeks of Trump’s second administration, Bongino has hyped up the president’s power grab and revenge tour against his political opponents. Earlier this month, the radio host urged Trump to ignore a court order blocking the administration’s attempt to place a widespread freeze on federal funding. -Rolling Stone. Terminally TDS’d Stephen King deleted all of his interactions with Bongino:

And you know who should be panicking right now? Adam Schiff…

Read more …

It appears that Musk was just weeding out the dead. And see what else pops up. Bit of a coarse way to do it.

• Musk Warns Fed Workers – Return To Office Or Be Placed On Leave (ZH)

The Department of Government Efficiency’s Elon Musk wrote on X early Monday that starting this week, federal workers who fail to return to the office will be placed on administrative leave. “Those who ignored President Trump’s executive order to return to work have now received over a month’s warning,” Musk wrote, adding, “Starting this week, those who still fail to return to office will be placed on administrative leave.” Musk is referring to the “Return To In-Person Work” executive order Trump signed on day one of his second term, which states: “Heads of all departments and agencies in the executive branch of Government shall, as soon as practicable, take all necessary steps to terminate remote work arrangements and require employees to return to work in-person at their respective duty stations on a full-time basis, provided that the department and agency heads shall make exemptions they deem necessary.”

Musk quoted a post by Ralph Norman, US Representative for South Carolina’s 5th Congressional District, who posted a video of his latest interview on Fox News, describing the direct insubordination of some federal workers still refusing to return to the office. On Saturday, Musk wrote on X that federal workers received an email “requesting to understand what they got done last week,” adding, “Failure to respond will be taken as a resignation.” The deadline is Monday. By late Sunday, there was pushback on the ‘accomplishments’ email from several federal agencies, including the Pentagon, FBI, State Department, and various parts of the Intelligence Community… An insider at the Social Security Administration’s headquarters in Woodlawn, Maryland, said Monday will be chaotic as employees rush into the office, given the limited availability of parking spaces. The Department of Government Efficiency’s latest move appears to create harsh working conditions that will make federal workers more inclined to quit voluntarily. As the old saying goes: “Welcome to Serbia.”

Read more …

Everyone can feel protected by their department heads. That’s not a bad thing…

• Trump Officials Push Back Against Musk Initiative (RT)

An instruction by Elon Musk, US President Donald Trump’s government efficiency czar, for federal workers to summarize their weekly activities or risk termination has reportedly prompted resistance among senior officials. On Saturday, Musk announced on X that all government employees must outline what work they had done over the week, warning that failure to comply might be interpreted as resignation. Emails sent to the 2.3 million federal workers reportedly requested that five bullet points detailing their activities be submitted by the end of Monday. The Wall Street Journal reported that Musk’s team at the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) devised the request after Trump urged him to “get more aggressive” in targeting perceived waste.

The emails were distributed via the Office of Personnel Management, the federal government’s HR arm. However, some department officials responded by instructing employees to ignore the emails, with directives coming directly from Trump appointees, the New York Times reported on Sunday. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard ordered her staff not to respond, citing the “inherently sensitive and classified nature of our work.” FBI Director Kash Patel informed employees that the agency “is in charge of all our review processes,” directing them to “pause any responses.” The Pentagon took a similar stance, the newspaper reported, citing an email from Darin S. Selnick, the acting head of personnel. Employees at the Department of Health and Human Services received conflicting guidance regarding Musk’s request.

Musk was appointed as a special official in the Trump administration tasked with cutting waste and fraud from government spending. Critics argue he aims to dismantle significant parts of the federal government, paving the way for a corporate takeover of corresponding functions. Trump has expressed support for Musk’s efforts amid the backlash surrounding the weekly report requirement. Musk downplayed the controversy, calling the email a “very basic pulse check” and sharing a meme that compared his job security threats to vaccination mandates during the Covid-19 pandemic.

Read more …

Judges pretending that DOGE is not part of the government.

• Judge Blocks Education Department, OPM From Sharing Data With DOGE (ET)

A federal judge on Feb. 24 blocked two agencies from sharing sensitive information with Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) staff. “The U.S. Department of Education; Denise L. Carter, the Acting Secretary of Education; and their officers, agents, servants, employees, and attorneys are ENJOINED from disclosing the personally identifiable information of the plaintiffs and the members of the plaintiff organizations to any DOGE affiliates,” U.S. District Judge Deborah L. Boardman wrote in a 33-page order. The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) and its employees are also forbidden from disclosing the same information to DOGE workers, the judge said. The temporary restraining order is in effect until March 10 as the case proceeds. It could be extended, converted into a preliminary injunction, or allowed to expire.

The American Federation of Teachers and other groups recently asked the court to block officials with the OPM, U.S. Department of Education (DOE), and U.S. Department of Treasury from conveying sensitive records to DOGE employees. Allowing DOGE access to the records endangers the privacy rights of veterans and other people represented by the groups, the organizations said in their request to the federal court in Maryland. Government lawyers argued that the judge should reject the motion for a restraining order because government officials have not violated the plaintiffs’ privacy.“At the heart of Plaintiffs’ theory is the baseless allegation that ‘DOGE representatives’ at the Defendant agencies are somehow outside the category of federal employees, or outside the category of federal employees in their respective agencies,” the lawyers wrote in a filing.

“Neither criticism withstands scrutiny. The Privacy Act therefore expressly allows disclosure of information protected under that statute in the circumstances of this case.” Boardman said that even if officials have been sharing information only with other government employees, it still violates the plaintiffs’ right to have their sensitive personal information kept private if the employees are not authorized to access the data. “Education and OPM possess a significant amount of detailed information about the plaintiffs’ lives,” the judge wrote. “To say that the plaintiffs suffer no cognizable injury when their personal information is improperly disclosed to government employees would nullify their interest in preventing unlawful government intrusion into their private affairs. The unauthorized disclosure of the plaintiffs’ sensitive personal information is an injury in fact.”

Although plaintiffs cannot receive relief under the Privacy Act, the judge said later, they can under the Administrative Procedure Act, which bars the government from taking steps that are not in accordance with the law. “The plaintiffs have shown that Education and OPM likely violated the Privacy Act by disclosing their personal information to DOGE affiliates without their consent,” Boardman said. The act prohibits agencies from disclosing “any record which is contained in a system of records by any means of communication to any person, or to another agency, except pursuant to a written request by, or with the prior written consent of, the individual to whom the record pertains.”

In addition to the American Federation of Teachers, a union that represents some 1.8 million people, the plaintiffs in the case are the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers, the National Active and Retired Federal Employees Association, and the National Federation of Federal Employees.The order expressly names Adam Ramada, a DOGE employee who said in a declaration filed in the case that he and five other DOGE employees have been working with the DOE to audit contracts, grants, and programs “for waste, fraud, and abuse.” “In addition, we help senior Department leadership obtain access to accurate data and data analytics to inform their policy decisions at the Department,” Ramada said in the filing.

Read more …

When she succeeded Borrell, I already said she’d been picked solely for her Russophobia and Putin hatred. Terrible selection criteria.

• US Adopting ‘Russian Narrative’ – EU’s Kallas (RT)

Washington has fallen for “Russia’s narrative,” EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas said on Monday. The accusation comes amid recent efforts by Washington and Moscow to begin resolving the conflict. “If [we] look at the messages that come from the US, then it is clear that the Russian narrative is there, very strongly represented,” Kallas told journalists in Brussels, stressing that the bloc is planning to “support Ukraine right now more than ever.” Kallas took office in Brussels as the EU’s high representative for foreign affairs and security policy, replacing Spain’s Josep Borrell in December last year. A pronounced foreign policy hawk who, while she was Estonian prime minister demanded in 2023 that “all business with Russia must stop,” Kallas faced resignation calls over revelations her husband held a 25% stake in a logistics company that provides services in the sanction-hit nation.

Since the Ukraine conflict escalated in February 2022, both the EU and the US have implemented multiple rounds of sanctions in an effort to isolate Russia. The penalties included disconnecting the country from the Western financial system, suspending nearly all trade and energy ties, and freezing Moscow’s foreign reserves—a measure condemned as “theft” by the Kremlin. On Monday, the EU adopted its 16th package of Ukraine-related restrictions, marking the anniversary of the launch of the Russian military operation against Kiev’s forces in February 2022. However, shortly after assuming office in January US President Donald Trump pivoted Washington’s stance on Ukraine. Trump recently claimed that Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky is responsible for the conflict’s escalation, and said that his presence at Washington’s meetings with Russia is unnecessary.

Meanwhile, media reports emerged that US envoys to the G7 and the UN have pushed for more cautious language in official statements, suggesting the use of “Ukraine conflict” instead of “Russia’s war of aggression.” The first meeting of Russian and US officials in three years occurred last week in the Saudi capital of Riyadh. The talks have ignited a backlash within the EU with member states accusing the White House of reopening dialogue with Kremlin without prior consultation and sidelining Brussels from the negotiations.

Read more …

No diplomacy.

• EU’s Chief Diplomat Backs Zelensky’s Refusal To Hold Elections (RT)

The EU’s top diplomat Kaja Kallas has announced that she supports Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky’s refusal to hold a presidential election. Although Zelensky’s five-year presidential term expired in May 2024, no new elections have been held, with Zelensky claiming that it is “not the right time,” and citing martial law. Russian President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly said that he no longer considers Zelensky a legitimate head of state. Speaking on Monday ahead of a meeting of EU foreign ministers in Brussels, Kallas said that “there is no need to hold elections” during wartime. She noted the public feud last week when the US president claimed that Zelensky is “a dictator without elections” and accused him of funneling US aid into a “war that couldn’t be won.”

Trump also claimed last week that Zelensky’s approval rating was at 4% and suggested that an election should be called. “He refuses to have elections. He’s low in the real Ukrainian polls. How can you be high with every city being demolished?” Trump said, adding that in the meantime, the US is “successfully negotiating an end to the war with Russia.” Zelensky responded by claiming that Trump is “living in a disinformation space” created by Moscow. In tune with Zelensky, Kallas declared that “it’s clear that the Russian narrative is very strongly represented” in Trump’s statement. She stressed that for any peace deal to be effective, it would need to involve the Europeans and the Ukrainians.

She was referring to recent high-level US-Russian talks in Saudi Arabia, which frustrated the EU. Member states criticized Washington for sidelining Brussels and Kiev during the negotiations. “You can discuss whatever you want with Putin, but if it comes to Ukraine and Europe, then Ukraine and Europe also have to agree to this deal,” Kallas told journalists. Last week, reports suggested that the EU is preparing a military aid package worth at least $6.2 billion for Ukraine. The package is expected to include 1.5 million artillery shells and air defense systems – one of the bloc’s largest military aid commitments since the escalation of the conflict in 2022. Russia considers Zelensky “illegitimate” and recognizes only the Ukrainian parliament and its speaker. Russian officials have warned that any treaties he signs could be challenged and questioned his ability to conclude lasting agreements.

Read more …

Germany got stuck in small change. Not enough.

• Germany Must Become ‘Independent’ From US – Bundestag Election Winner (RT)

Germany must gain real independence from the US, Friedrich Merz, the projected winner of Sunday’s parliamentary elections, has said. According to German media, Merz’s Christian Democratic Union (CDU) and its sister party, the Christian Social Union (CSU), are projected to receive 28.5% of the vote, which means that he will likely become the next chancellor.Speaking to reporters on Sunday night, Merz criticized US President Donald Trump’s handling of the Ukraine conflict. “The interventions from Washington were no less dramatic, drastic, and ultimately outrageous than the intervention we saw from Moscow,” Merz told reporters on Sunday night, according to the news agency Deutsche Presse-Agentur.

“The Americans, at least those in the current government, are largely indifferent to the fate of Europe,” he said. The conservative politician went on to argue that Germany must boost its defense and “gradually achieve independence from the US.” “I would have never thought that I would have to say something like that on a TV show,” he said. Trump has demanded that America’s allies in Europe pay “a fair share” in defense spending and contribute more to NATO. He also sidelined Ukraine and the EU when he reversed the Biden administration’s policy of “isolating” Russia and reopened direct talks with Moscow.

One of Trump’s most noteworthy allies, billionaire Elon Musk, has endorsed the anti-immigration Alternative for Germany (AfD) party, which is projected to become the second-largest party in the Bundestag. Trump, nevertheless, has congratulated the CDU on the victory. “Much like the USA, the people of Germany got tired of the no-common-sense agenda, especially on energy and immigration, that has prevailed for so many years,” he wrote on his Truth Social platform.

Read more …

Former Assistant Treasury Secretary: “President Trump’s idea of replacing the income tax with tariffs is sound and a great advancement in the restoration of freedom..”

• Income Tax vs Tariffs (Paul Craig Roberts)

Prior to 1913 the US government was financed by tariffs. It was under tariffs, not free trade, that the United States industrialized and became a manufacturing nation. Indeed, the Union invaded and destroyed the Confederacy in order to impose the Morrill Tariff on the South that enabled the North to industrialize. The North could not compete with British industry and required the protection of a tariff. It is extraordinary to me that it has gone unremarked for 112 years that the income tax, which required a constitutional amendment, resurrected slavery. In actuality, white people voted to impose slavery on themselves. Americans did not realize what was happening. The income threshold for being subject to the tax was so high that few qualified to be taxed.

Moreover, the first tax rate was 1% and the progression halted at 7%. To be taxed at 7% you had to have a phenomenal amount of income for those days of more than $500,000, the equivalent of multi-millions today. In the US in the 1900s a person who made $70,000 a year was considered extremely wealthy. When Henry Ford’s innovation of the moving assembly line was introduced in 1913, he raised his workers’ pay from $2.34 per day to $5, producing an annual income of $1,300. Only 3% of the US population was subject to the income tax. Many years ago I wrote an account of how the income tax amendment passed. In Georgia the state legislative leader said Georgia had no objection to the amendment as no one in the state of Georgia had an income high enough to be subject to the tax.

Everyone overlooked that once an income tax was in place, the thresholds could be lowered and the rates raised. By 1918, that is, within 5 years, the top tax rate had jumped to 77%, dropping to 25% in 1925. When the 16th Amendment to the Constitution was passed, slavery was resurrected. Historically, the definition of a free person is a person who owns his own labor. Serfs and slaves did not own their own labor. Serfs were not owned by feudal lords, the the lords had use rights to as much as 30% of a serf’s labor. The labor of an enslaved person belonged to the slave’s owner. An income tax establishes government ownership over part of your labor. How much depends on your income and the tax rate at the time.

If you fail to deliver the government’s share of your income, you are severely punished and can spend many years in prison. Every American income taxpayer is partly enslaved and partly free.A tariff is a tax on consumption, the preferable means of taxation according to the classical economists. It establishes no government ownership rights in your income. An income tax not only gives government a part ownership of your working time, it is also a tax on factors of production — labor and capital. Taxing factors of production reduces economic growth and Gross Domestic Product. It is a counter-productive tax that suppresses output. The substitution of a tariff for an income tax is a pro-growth policy that will produce higher incomes and raise living standards. Free labor is always more productive because you are working for yourself and your family.

Out-of-date neoliberal economists argue wrongly that tariffs violate free trade and reduce economic growth. In the Lionel Robbins Lecture in 2000, published by the MIT Press, Ralph E. Gomory and William J. Baumol proved that the case for free trade was false and that at best the notion that free trade was mutually beneficial was an occasional special case. Paul Samuelson found their proof convincing, but overall the economists have preferred their free trade indoctrination to the effort it takes to master a new understanding.The information from DOGE of the enormous fraud, abuse, and self-dealing that the US budget contains as a slush fund for insiders and for bribing foreign politicians and overthrowing foreign governments indicates that sufficient reductions are possible to establish a tariff at a reasonable rate. To rescue Americans from the slavery of an income tax would be one the greatest achievements in history. Let’s achieve it.

Read more …

“They are equal to zero. Unless, of course, something is grossly rigged, but this is also bad for him – it will be very noticeable..”

• Zelensky Has ‘No Chance’ Of Winning A Fair Election – Putin (RT)

Russian President Vladimir Putin has stated that Vladimir Zelensky has “absolutely no chance” of winning a fair election due to his low approval ratings and the internal political situation in Ukraine. Zelensky’s five-year presidential term expired in May 2024, but he has refused to hold new elections, citing martial law. The question of his popularity was raised last week by US President Donald Trump, who branded Zelensky a “dictator without elections” who is “down at a 4% approval rating.” Speaking on Monday, Putin noted that Zelensky’s popularity is significantly lower than that of potential rival General Valery Zaluzhny, the former commander of Ukraine’s armed forces. In an interview with journalist Pavel Zarubin, Putin suggested that if other political figures backed Zaluzhny, Zelensky’s chances of reelection would be “absolutely zero.”

“They are equal to zero. Unless, of course, something is grossly rigged, but this is also bad for him – it will be very noticeable,” Putin stated. “The fact is that the current head of the Kiev regime is becoming a toxic figure for the Ukrainian armed forces because he gives absurd orders dictated not by military considerations, but by political ones, and it is unclear what they are based on,” Putin said. He added that Zelensky’s leadership had resulted in “unjustifiably large or catastrophic losses,” making him “toxic for society as a whole.” “Therefore, [Zelensky] is a factor in the disintegration of the army, society, and the state. President Trump certainly understands this and is pushing him toward elections,” Putin said, adding that Trump apparently “wants to improve the political situation in Ukraine, consolidate society, and create conditions for the survival of the Ukrainian state.”

Putin has repeatedly said that he no longer considers Zelensky the legitimate head of state. Trump has also recently questioned the former comedian’s leadership, accusing him of mismanaging the conflict with Russia and misusing American financial aid. Zelensky accused Trump of falling for “Russian disinformation,” citing a January poll that allegedly indicated 57% of Ukrainians trusted him. However, data cited by The Economist last week suggested that Zelensky would lose to Zaluzhny by a wide margin if elections were held today, as many Ukrainians are “clearly frustrated with their war leader.” According to Putin, Zelensky – who has banned himself from talks with Moscow – is actively sabotaging any peace process, as it would require lifting martial law, which allows him to remain in power. Without martial law, the country would be compelled to hold elections, a scenario Putin believes Zelensky is determined to avoid.

Read more …

Just no American troops…

• Russia Ready To Work With US On ‘Rare Earths’ – Putin (RT)

Moscow is ready to work with Washington in developing rare earth mineral deposits, including in the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics, and Kherson and Zaporozhye regions, Russian President Vladimir Putin has said. The ‘rare earths’ deal US President Donald Trump’s administration is pushing for with Ukraine “doesn’t concern” Moscow, Putin said in an interview with Russia 1 TV journalist Pavel Zarubin on Monday. The actual value of Ukraine’s rare earth mineral deposits remains to be seen, the Russian leader noted. Moscow will be concentrating on its own development of rare earth minerals, given their importance in multiple sectors of the economy, he said. “We would be ready to offer this to our American partners… if they showed interest in working together,” Putin said, stressing that he meant both private and government companies.

As one of the global leaders in terms of its rare earth mineral wealth, Russia is willing to work with international investors in developing its deposits, he said. “This includes the new territories,” Putin added. “Our new historical territories, which were returned to the Russian Federation, also hold significant reserves.” The Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics, and Kherson and Zaporozhye regions joined the Russian Federation following referendums in 2022. While Forbes estimated the total value of mineral deposits of Ukraine at nearly $15 trillion in 2023, nearly half of the total mineral wealth lies in the Russia’s Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics.

Read more …

“Europe’s participation in the negotiation process on Ukraine is essential, Russian President Vladimir Putin has said. However, European representatives cannot demand anything from Russia..”

• Putin Weighs In On Europe’s Participation In Ukraine Peace Talks (RT)

Europe’s participation in the negotiation process on Ukraine is essential, Russian President Vladimir Putin has said. However, European representatives cannot demand anything from Russia, he added in an interview published on Monday. Putin commented on last week’s talks in Saudi Arabia, which were focused on restoring trust between Moscow and Washington, and excluded Ukrainian and EU leaders. Putin explained that “to resolve complex and even acute issues”, including the Ukrainian crisis, Russia and the US had to “take the first step”, which is “building trust”. “That is precisely what we were doing in Riyadh. That will also be the focus of our future contacts. Without this, it’s impossible to resolve any issue, especially one as complex and urgent as the Ukrainian crisis. But what do the Europeans have to do with this? This is a matter of bilateral Russia-US relations,” the president said.

Putin also claimed that the Ukrainian crisis itself “was not substantively discussed”, and Moscow and Washington agreed “that we would approach this matter in due time”. In this regard, Russia doesn’t oppose the participation of European representatives, Putin stressed. ”But I want to emphasize that we respect the position of our friends, particularly those within BRICS, who have established a group of peace advocates”, the President said, adding that he has just spoken with his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping, discussing the matter. “He informed me that this [BRICS] group will convene soon in New York to discuss the issue”, Putin said. He emphasized that Moscow is grateful to all its partners “who strive to achieve peace”. “Not only Europeans but other countries as well have the right to participate, and we respect that,” Putin concluded.

The US State Department praised the high-level discussions, calling it a significant step toward resolving the Ukraine conflict. This was the first such meeting since the conflict began in 2022. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, who was part of the delegation, noted that the meeting in Riyadh was initiated by the Russian and US presidents, who also agreed to begin preparations for a summit. Putin has previously said he would be glad to meet with his US counterpart Donald Trump, though he called it too early to name a specific date for a summit. He added that a simple “coffee hour” would not be enough to remedy relations between the two nations, and both sides need to thoroughly prepare. Moscow and Washington nevertheless “do not need any mediators” to sort out their differences, he added.

Read more …

“The Europeans continue on the path of a sanctions nosedive, on the path of conviction in the need to continue the war..”

• The Ukraine War Will Only End On Russia’s Terms, Lavrov Says (ZH)

It’s been three full years since the full-on Russian invasion of Ukraine kicked off on February 24, 2022. At this point, it’s become clear to all that Russian forces control the battlefield, amid steady ongoing gains in the Donbass region. Even as talks with the US progress, Moscow has made clear on Monday that it will only accept a peace settlement which “suits” its interests. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov issued the words while on an official visit to Turkey, and warned that European countries are trying to sabotage Trump efforts at peace. He emphasized that Moscow stands ready and willing to negotiate with Ukraine, Europe or “any representatives who in good faith would like to help achieve peace.” “But we will stop hostilities only when these negotiations produce a firm and sustainable result that suits the Russian Federation,” he said alongside his Turkish counterpart Hakan Fidan.

Among the proposals that might stymie progress on negotiations is the possibility of a European army of some 30,000 to patrol a buffer zone inside Ukraine. Moscow has consistently rejected that NATO troops would be present along the war-torn border. Trump himself has shown interest in such a peacekeeping force, especially as US troops would not be part of it. Put Putin will likely fear this is just recipe for another potential future showdown. In separate statements Monday, Putin spokesman Dmitry Peskov on Monday charged Europe with obstructing good faith peace efforts. “The Europeans continue on the path of a sanctions nosedive, on the path of conviction in the need to continue the war,” Peskov said in reaction to the EU imposing a new round of sanctions on Moscow. “This conviction of the Europeans completely contrasts with the mindset of finding a settlement on Ukraine, which we are now doing with the Americans,” he added.

Reuters reviews of the new punitive action: The European Union’s latest sanctions against Moscow include a ban on third-country airlines flying to the 27-nation bloc if they carry out domestic flights in Russia, the European Commission said, opens new tab on Monday. The EU’s 16th sanctions package against Russia includes a ban on primary aluminum imports and the sale of gaming consoles, while also listing a cryptocurrency exchange and dozens of vessels of the so-called shadow fleet used to evade sanctions. At this point both the US and Russian sides plan to continue conducting the talks which began last week in Riyadh. Presumably neither Ukrainian nor European representatives will be at the table for the next rounds. Each side appeared satisfied with how the first engagement went, with the Kremlin hailing the ‘successful’ betterment of relations, which has involved more staff returning to each respective embassy.

Read more …

“..in the fourth quarter of 2024, the volume of LNG imported from Russia was 18% higher than in the first quarter of 2021..” “..the value of these imports surged by 274%..”

• EU Spending On Russian LNG Imports Quadruples (RT)

The cost of Russian liquefied natural gas (LNG) purchases for the EU has nearly quadrupled in three years due to soaring prices and increased import volumes, according to Eurostat. Data released on Monday in a report titled ‘EU trade with Russia’, shows that in the fourth quarter of 2024, the volume of LNG imported from Russia was 18% higher than in the first quarter of 2021. Over the same period, the value of these imports surged by 274% due to the energy crisis. European gas prices rose dramatically following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022, alongside the EU’s commitment to phase out Russian energy dependence. While pipeline gas imports from Russia have mostly ceased due to sanctions and the sabotage of the Nord Stream pipelines, EU nations have continued purchasing record volumes of LNG from the country.

According to Eurostat, Russia’s share of the EU’s LNG imports grew from 11% in Q4 2022 to 22% in the last quarter of 2024. The US remained the bloc’s top supplier, accounting for 36% of its overall LNG imports. In June, Brussels targeted Russian LNG for the first time, banning re-loading operations, ship-to-ship transfers, and ship-to-shore transfers with the purpose of re-exporting to third countries via the EU. The sanctions came with a nine-month transition period. The EU’s 16th package of sanctions, introduced on Monday, further tightened restrictions on Russian energy. However, the bloc stopped short of imposing a full ban on the country’s LNG. According to data by analytics firm Kpler, imports of Russian LNG by EU member states are now at an all-time high.

The bloc has boosted imports of super-chilled fuel from the country following Kiev’s suspension of pipeline gas transit through Ukraine. Ukraine refused to extend a five-year transit contract with Russia’s energy giant Gazprom at the end of 2024, cutting off some EU countries from Russian pipeline gas. Currently, the only remaining Russian pipeline gas reaching the EU flows through the TurkStream pipeline, which runs via Türkiye and Greece. The Eurostat report highlights that EU pipeline gas imports from Russia have continued to decline, dropping by over 60% in volume in Q4 2024 compared to Q1 2021. However, due to soaring prices, the overall value of these imports decreased by only 9% over the three-year period, according to data.

Read more …

“The leaders have stressed that the Russian-Chinese foreign policy tandem serves as a factor of stabilization in world affairs..”

• Xi Backs Russia On Ukraine Peace Efforts – Kremlin (RT)

Russian President Vladimir Putin has told his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping, about Moscow’s latest contacts with Washington, the Kremlin reported on Monday. Beijing has expressed support for the renewed dialogue and new potential for resolving the Ukraine crisis, the statement said. Putin and Xi spoke on the phone to “share opinions on issues of immediate interest” for bilateral cooperation and the global agenda, describing the exchange as “warm and friendly.” “The leaders have stressed that the Russian-Chinese foreign policy tandem serves as a factor of stabilization in world affairs. Its strategic nature is not affected by external influence and does not pose a threat to any third party,” the statement said.

The Chinese description of the phone call said it was requested by Moscow, adding that during the talk, Xi expressed approval of the fact that “Russia and relevant parties have made positive efforts to resolve the crisis.” US President Donald Trump has reversed attempts to “isolate” Russia which were pursued by the previous administration. Now Moscow and Washington are working to restore normal diplomatic relations. Senior officials from both countries have said that this could lead to a resolution of the Ukraine conflict.

Members of the new US government had previously criticized President Joe Biden’s approach, arguing that it pushed Moscow into a position of a “junior partner” with Beijing, harming US interests. Conversely, Russia and China have described their relationship as a “no-limits partnership” based on mutual respect and shared views on how the world should be governed. Moscow and Beijing have criticized the US for allegedly fueling chaos around the world in an attempt to undermine competition.

Read more …

Wikileaks issued a large series of cables. Problem is, they’re all pre-2010.

• West Knew NATO Push For Ukraine Was Risky – Wikileaks (RT)

US and European officials were long aware of the high risk of conflict stemming from Kiev’s NATO ambition, Wikileaks revealed on Monday. Citing a trove of documents it obtained, the publisher detailed how Washington looked for ways to overcome some countries’ opposition to the idea despite warnings from Western envoys.Moscow repeatedly warned the diplomats that Ukraine’s accession to the US-led bloc could trigger a civil war or destabilize the whole region, forcing Russia to make a decision it “does not want to have to face,” according to a 24-minute-long video published by Wikileaks on X. The organization also cited a February 2008 cable from then US ambassador to Moscow William Burns, who warned that Russia saw NATO expansion as a security threat.

“Not only does Russia perceive encirclement, and efforts to undermine Russia’s influence in the region, but it also fears unpredictable and uncontrolled consequences which would seriously affect Russian security interests,” he wrote.That sentiment was shared by some NATO allies in Europe at the time, another document suggests. A 2005 cable documenting a meeting between the then US assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian affairs, Daniel Fried, and several high-ranking French officials said that Paris was concerned about Ukraine’s NATO trajectory sparking an armed conflict on the continent. “If there remained one potential cause for war in Europe, it was Ukraine,” the document said, citing French presidential diplomatic adviser Maurice Gourdault-Montagne. He cautioned that the US and its allies were intruding upon Russia’s “core zone of interest,” which could provoke a strong response.

Fried acknowledged at the time that Ukraine lacked a national consensus on NATO membership, but dismissed concerns over a violent internal split or Moscow’s reaction. Despite the repeated warnings, Washington still pushed for Ukraine’s entry, and intended to “pursue western integration and NATO enlargement deliberately, but quietly,” while “firmly” disagreeing with Russia, according to a September 2009 cable by the then US ambassador to Moscow, John Beyrle. Russia has consistently cited Ukraine’s aspiration to join NATO and the prospect of the bloc’s military infrastructure appearing in the neighboring state as one of the main reasons for the conflict. Moscow has also repeatedly described it as a “proxy war” against Russia, being waged by the West via Ukraine.

Read more …

X thread by Vigilant Fox.

• UK In Secret Plot To Extract Personal Data From 2 Billion iPhone Users (VF)

They were this close to your “encrypted” data. This story begins when the UK govt hit Apple with a secret gag order, forcing them to either backdoor encrypted data for billions of users or face criminal charges if they refused to comply. Apple couldn’t even talk about it. The order demanded Apple create a vulnerability in its iCloud encryption, which would have given the UK government a back door to financial information, health records, and private conversations—not just of UK citizens but of two billion iPhone users worldwide. Remember, the UK government has already tried to threaten and extradite individuals outside the UK for violating British censorship laws—including US citizens over their online posts. So what happens when governments push to punish you not just for what you say publicly but for what you say privately?

Rather than handing over the data of 2 billion iPhone users to the UK government, Apple chose to pull its Advanced Data Protection (ADP) in the UK—removing the option for UK users to enable encryption. Existing UK users must now disable encryption, and new users won’t have the option at all. US citizens and people in other countries remain unaffected by the UK government’s dystopian push to surveil and censor speech—for now. The UK government was this close to surveilling you, too—but luckily, Sayer Ji, Elon Musk, and The Wall Street Journal exposed this privacy nightmare. In another disturbing development, Imran Ahmed of the CCDH—one of the leading architects of the UK’s war on speech—is being awarded for his Orwellian efforts with a $300,000 prize this May.

@sayerjigmi has put together a petition to oppose this absurd aggrandizement of someone who has worked tirelessly to annihilate personal freedoms and silence dissenting voices. You can sign that petition here: https://change.org/p/urge-elevate-prize-foundation-to-reexamine-award-for-imran-ahmed

Read more …

Entire platoons of Nina Jankowicz’s are spreading across the globe…

• Displaced Disinformation Experts Are Seeking New Opportunities (Turley)

President Trump’s election has brought about mass layoffs among federal employees and contractors, including some who have sued and others who have protested. But one group — that of America’s would-be censors — is taking its cause worldwide. During the Biden administration, a massive industry took root, seeping up billions in taxpayer funds to research, target and combat those accused of misinformation, disinformation and “malinformation.” Although the exact number is uncertain, many trained censors are now facing unemployment. These self-described “disinformation experts” have become the modern equivalent of ronin, the Japanese samurai who found themselves without a master and wandered the land looking for a new use of their skill set. They are finding precisely that calling in academia, not-for-profit groups and, most importantly, Europe.

A speech-regulation industry that was booming under Biden has gone bust under Trump. Over the last four years, massive amounts of money were poured into universities, non-governmental organizations and other groups in an unprecedented alliance of government, academia and corporations. The media lionized many in the industry as “saving democracy” by controlling, targeting and suppressing others’ political speech. Not only did federal agencies fund these efforts, but they also coordinated censorship of groups and individuals with opposing views, even objecting to jokes on the internet. Universities cashed in on this largesse as well. It was popular with most liberal administrators and lucrative for academics. The sudden shutoff of the federal spigot comes as a blow, but it does not mean the speech warriors will simply convert their censor-shields into plowshares.

Many will follow in the footsteps of Nina Jankowicz, briefly the head of a now-defunct disinformation governance board. After the outcry over the board, Jankowicz quickly found her skills were in demand in Europe. Free speech has been in free-fall in Europe for decades. Germany has long enforced a robust system of speech criminalization that began with Nazi symbolism but steadily expanded to include inciteful speech, insults and merely “disinformative” statements. The United Kingdom and France showed the same insatiable appetite for the inexorable expansion of censorship and prosecutions. The European Union has also been ground zero for the anti-free speech movement’s aggressive use of the Digital Services Act, which bars speech that is viewed as “disinformation” or “incitement.”

When it passed over the objections of free speech advocates, European Commission Executive Vice President Margrethe Vestager was perfectly ecstatic, declaring it is “not a slogan anymore, that what is illegal offline should also be seen and dealt with as illegal online. Now, it is a real thing. Democracy’s back.” That is why Vice President J.D. Vance’s recent speech in Munich was so historic. For the free speech community, Vance went into the belly of the beast and denounced the anti-free-speech movement in the heart of Europe. The response to the Vance speech has been nothing short of panic in the anti-free-speech community. Many are assembling in conferences in Europe, including the upcoming World Forum in Berlin. Bill and Hillary Clinton will be in attendance. (I will also be speaking at the conference.)

It was Hillary Clinton who, after Elon Musk purchased Twitter with the pledge to dismantle the censorship system, called upon the EU to force him and others to censor her fellow U.S. citizens. She embraced the infamous Digital Services Act, which seeks to impose a global system of speech control. She has also suggested the arrest of those spreading disinformation. Immediately after the speech, familiar European and American voices denounced Vance and doubled down on the need for Europe to hold the line against dangerous free speech. For the free speech community, there could not be a better place for this debate to unfold. Germany has demonstrated the false claims of the anti-free-speech community over the years. Indeed, you might call their arguments “disinformation.” Vance and others who have challenged the European censorship systems have been attacked as Nazi enablers or sympathizers. Many of those who have fostered this attack are part of the regulator ronin. Others simply repeated the narrative without thought or support.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Democrat
https://twitter.com/i/status/1893692576659566765

 

 

Gender-affirming

 

 

Ride
https://twitter.com/i/status/1894016982191648775

 

 

Dogs and horses
https://twitter.com/i/status/1893565572555645271

 

 

Tommy

 

 

Ice
https://twitter.com/i/status/1893702373542916265

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 Older Entries