Jan 122025
 


René Magritte The victory 1939

 

Trump Starts Governing Early From His Palm Beach Shadow White House (Whedon)
Trump To Sign Around 100 Executive Orders Upon Taking Office (ZH)
Trump Admin Prepares Response to Starmer’s Election Interference (Ferguson)
Something Is Rotten In The State Of Starmer (Milbank)
Trump’s ‘Crazy’ Ideas Not So Crazy After All (Kadish)
Meloni: Soros Is Interfering In Democracies, Not Musk (RMX)
Musk Bought Twitter To “Destroy The Woke Mind Virus” (RT)
Trump To Place Investments In A Trust During Presidency (JTN)
Special Counsel Jack Smith Resigns (RT)
Merchan’s Frankenstein Monster (Turley)
House Judiciary Expected To Continue Hunter Biden Probe Despite Pardon (JTN)
CIA Can Read WhatsApp Messages – Zuckerberg (RT)
We Were Censored By Meta; We’re Taking Them to the Supreme Court (CHD)
US Playing ‘Fool’s Game’ By Ignoring Russia’s Red Lines – Peter Kuznick (RT)
AfD Delegates Reject Motion Condemning Putin (RT)
Why Was Pacific Palisades Reservoir EMPTY? It Gets Worse. (Victoria Taft)

 

 

 

 

No punishment

Maher

Watters

 

 

 

 

The ground running.

Trump Starts Governing Early From His Palm Beach Shadow White House (Whedon)

President-elect Donald Trump’s past few months have been unusually busy for an incoming president and have seen him notch key agenda wins before even returning to office. With President Joe Biden essentially absent from the public eye, Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate has taken on the role of a shadow White House, from which he has begun to operate a sort of pre-presidential administration. Foreign dignitaries, domestic politicians, and billionaire investors alike have flocked to the Palm Beach resort to meet with the incoming president, some of whom have brought with them economic and/or ideological offerings. His reach has extended well beyond the confines of his compound, reverberating across allied nations while he and his surrogates work to seemingly push out opposition figures leading key American partners. Here’s a look at his biggest moves while waiting to reclaim the Oval Office:

Outgoing Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau speedily traveled to Mar-a-Lago after Trump floated the possibility of imposing tariffs on the country. The meeting was widely panned in Canadian media and even led to comedic skits depicting Trudeau eating a Big Mac without the use of his hands at Trump’s behest. The president-elect’s subsequent retorts referring to Trudeau as the “governor” of Canada further belittled his status in the eyes of the Canuck electorate. Already struggling in the polls, Trump’s proposition of making Canada the 51st state seems to have helped fuel Trudeau’s already significant decline in public opinion and he subsequently announced his plans to resign once the Liberal Party selected his replacement.

Trump notched a major win on digital censorship when Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg announced the platform would end its partnerships with fact-checking organizations and instead switch to a user-driven correction system similar to X’s community notes. The move followed a late November meeting at Mar-a-Lago between Zuckerberg and Trump. Facebook was one of the major platforms that banned Trump in the wake of the Jan. 6, 2021, incident at the U.S. Capitol, though it later restored his accounts. In December, Facebook parent company Meta donated $1 million to Trump’s inauguration fund. Google and Boeing this week each donated $1 million to the same fund, helping the pot reach a record $170 million. Amazon Executive Chairman Jeff Bezos, moreover, congratulated Trump on his comeback and later met with him at Mar-a-Lago as well. The owner of the Washington Post prevented the left-wing outlet from issuing an endorsement in the 2024 election. He has further worked to tone down the outlet’s anti-Trump bias in the wake of the election.

Trump’s victory evidently signaled to some Democrats that the public favors some of key policies, namely on reducing the size of government and cracking down on illegal immigration. Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., made headlines this week with plans to visit Mar-a-Lago at Trump’s request. Fetterman has developed a reputation as a moderate willing to work with Republicans and co-sponsored the “Laken Riley Act” in the Senate, which would require the detention of illegal immigrants accused of a wide array of crimes. That bill passed the House this week and cleared a procedural hurdle in the upper chamber. It is expected to pass the Senate and reach the president’s desk in time for Trump’s inauguration. “I think it’s pretty reasonable that if the president would like to have a conversation — or invite someone to have a conversation — to have it. And no one is my gatekeeper.”

He also appears to have found an ally in Rep. Jared Moskowitz, D-Fla., who in December joined the DOGE Caucus, a group of lawmakers dedicated to working with Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). “The Caucus should look at the bureaucracy that the DHS has become and include recommendations to make Secret Service and FEMA [Federal Emergency Management Agency] independent federal agencies with a direct report to the White House,” Moskowitz said of the bloc. Trump notched two multi-billion dollar investment deals with foreign companies during his transition, including from SoftBank and DAMAC Properties, which pledged $100 billion and $20 billion investments in the U.S., respectively. DAMAC Chairman Hussain Sajwani and SoftBank Group CEO Masayoshi Son both visited Mar-a-Lago and announced their investments in joint press conferences with Trump.

The incoming president used the DAMAC conference to highlight his pledge to help clear administrative red tape for foreign investors as an incentive to do business in the U.S. “And I made it a point of telling people, if you invest a billion dollars or more, and we’ll do this for people with far less too, but we guarantee it, we’re going to move them quickly through the environmental process,” he said this week. Trump has also used the transition period to unveil an ambitious foreign policy agenda that includes the acquisition of foreign territory, including at the expense of treaty allies. He has vowed to use economic coercion to reclaim the Panama Canal and acquire Canada and Greenland. He further said he wouldn’t rule out military force to take Greenland or the Canal Zone. Denmark currently maintains official control over Greenland and is a member of NATO, as is Canada.

When pressed on whether he would rule out a military seizure, he told reporters that “I’m not going to commit to that now, it might, it might be that you’ll have to do something. Look, the Panama Canal is vital to our country.” Trump has insisted that Panama, which purchased the canal zone for $1 dollar under President Jimmy Carter, has repeatedly violated the terms of the agreement by overcharging American ships for passage and allowing the Chinese government to exert control over the critical waterway. The president-elect has insisted that the United States needs the Panama Canal and Greenland “for economic security.” “The Panama Canal was built for our military,” he added during a press conference in Palm Beach, Fla. Donald Trump Jr. visited Greenland this week along with Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk in a highly publicized trip that saw them tour the area and meet with locals.

Read more …

There will be surprises.

Trump To Sign Around 100 Executive Orders Upon Taking Office (ZH)

President-elect Donald Trump will sign around 100 executive orders as soon as he takes office, according to Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-OK). Mullin did not go into details, however Trump has previously said he would sign a variety of border and immigration-related EOs following his second inauguration, including a national emergency over illegal immigration – and rolling back ‘climate agenda’ regulations surrounding drilling for oil and natural gas. “I will sign Day One orders to end all Biden restrictions on energy production, terminate his insane electric vehicle mandate, cancel his natural gas export ban, reopen ANWR in Alaska—the biggest site, potentially anywhere in the world—and declare a national energy emergency,” Trump said in December.

According to Trump transition spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt, “The American people can bank on President Trump using his executive power on day one to deliver on the promises he made to them on the campaign trail.” Bloomberg reports that Trump will put a hiring freeze on the government, and mandate that federal employees return to the office for in-person work, a position pushed by billionaire Elon Musk as part of the newly formed Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). In recent weeks, the Trump team has been working behind-the-scenes to make sure its initial months are as productive as possible.

“While chief of staff Susie Wiles has said she views the first 100 days as an artificial metric, she and the entire Trump team see the first two years — before midterm elections could imperil Republican majorities in the House and Senate — as the best opportunity for the term-limited incoming president to achieve his sweeping goals”. -Bloomberg. That said, as Mullin noted further in an appearance on Fox & Friends, EOs can easily be undone by future administrations. “As he said, it’s not permanent,” said Mullin. “I would like reconciliation so we can start making this stuff into legislation, so we can move forward.” “The president was very clear, he wants results,” Mullin continued. “He said he can wait if we can do one big, beautiful bill. He’d like to have one big, beautiful, beautiful bill. But if the House were to get bogged down, maybe we have to divide it up in two.”

As the Epoch Times notes, the senator was making reference to comments made by Trump this week after he met with Republicans in Washington. “I think there’s a lot of talk about two [bills], and there’s a lot of talk about one (bill), but it doesn’t matter,” Trump told reporters. “The end result is the same,” he said, adding that his meeting with GOP lawmakers showed the party is ”unified.” Mullin added that Republicans need to “deliver for the American people on securing the border, on energy independence, on getting the regulations rolled back and making sure that we have taxes that are permanent, so we don’t have a $4 trillion tax increase on the American people right now.”

Read more …

X thread.

Trump Admin Prepares Response to Starmer’s Election Interference (Ferguson)

In an unprecedented twist in global politics, the Trump administration is rumored to be preparing a dramatic response to revelations of foreign interference in the 2024 U.S. presidential election. With undeniable proof surfacing that UK Labour leader Keir Starmer allegedly orchestrated a covert operation involving 100 staffers to support Donald Trump’s rival, Kamala Harris, the political landscape has been shaken to its core. As Donald Trump triumphantly prepares to return to the White House, insiders close to the administration suggest that his approach to this betrayal could mark a turning point in U.S.-UK relations. The weight of the evidence reportedly leaves no room for doubt: this was not just meddling—it was a calculated assault on American democracy. And now, Trump may be ready to wield the full force of the presidency to hold the Starmer government accountable.

Extreme Measures on the Table Behind closed doors, discussions are said to be taking place within the Trump inner circle. Options under consideration range from economic sanctions targeting Starmer’s allies to severe diplomatic actions that could isolate the UK on the world stage. One unnamed senior advisor was quoted as saying, “This isn’t just politics—it’s treason against the American people. The response will be swift and decisive.” Whispers of even more drastic measures have surfaced, with some speculating that the administration may seek an international tribunal to prosecute Starmer for violating U.S. election integrity. Others suggest that covert operations to destabilize the Labour-led UK government could be on the table, a stark reminder that the Trump presidency is unafraid to take bold action when American sovereignty is at stake.

The End of the ‘Special Relationship’?This scandal threatens to unravel the longstanding “special relationship” between the United States and the United Kingdom. Trump, a known advocate of strong nationalist policies, could view this betrayal as the ultimate affront to American independence and might use it to justify a dramatic recalibration of the alliance. Sources close to the administration say Trump has already warned of “serious consequences” during private conversations, leaving the Starmer government scrambling to contain the fallout. Starmer’s alleged interference, if confirmed, could not only undermine his credibility at home but also plunge the UK into political chaos. Already, opposition voices in Parliament are calling for investigations into Starmer’s actions, fearing repercussions that could devastate Britain’s economy and its standing on the world stage.

A Warning to All Foreign Leaders By making an example of Starmer, Trump could send a stark message to any foreign leader contemplating interference in U.S. elections: no one is beyond the reach of American justice. The world is watching as the Trump administration crafts its response, knowing that the actions taken in the coming weeks could set a precedent for how the U.S. deals with foreign adversaries.

A New Era of Retribution This unfolding drama signals a new era in international politics, where foreign meddling in American elections is met with fierce and uncompromising retaliation. As Trump prepares to step back into the Oval Office, one thing is clear: the rules of the game have changed, and the cost of betrayal has never been higher. The stage is set for an international showdown, and the Starmer government may soon find itself in the crosshairs of an administration determined to defend American democracy at all costs. As the world holds its breath, one question looms: how far is Donald Trump willing to go to settle the score?

Read more …

I think he himself is rotten. This kind of “it’s everyone’s fault” and “it ain’t so bad” is precisely what’s wrong.

Something Is Rotten In The State Of Starmer (Milbank)

Elon Musk, and a host of other critics, have been going after Keir Starmer for his and Jess Phillips’ decision to refuse a national inquiry into the grooming gangs in Oldham. Keir Starmer is furiously angry about the grooming scandal. Unfortunately, what he is mostly angry about seems to be those attacking his record, rather than the rape gangs. Before we get to what was wrong with his response, and there was a great deal, we should first understand where he and his supporters are coming from. Musk is ill-informed, unconcerned with the truth and making reckless assertions, and he is doing so from a massive social media platform, on the eve of his becoming an official in the US government. Musk and his allies have attacked Starmer and Jess Phillips, both of whom believe they have taken a substantive role in fighting against sexual abuse.

From inside No 10, the situation feels desperately unfair, and manipulated by an irresponsible right wing press and social media. Labour refused a national inquiry into abuse in Oldham, instead encouraging the council to hold its own, as many others had already done so with some success. In this judgement, they were backed by none other than Professor Alexis Jay, who led the previous national inquiry in 2015, and who argues that another inquiry will just delay justice and vitally needed reforms. The government says they are intent on implementing her recommendations, and point out that much of the inaction happened on the watch of the Conservative Party. Labour allies understandably wonder where this anger on the issue has been for the last ten years, when the Conservatives were at the helm, and in a position to do something about it.

From Labour’s perspective, the issue they are handling responsibly is being turned into a cynical political football by a Right that cares little about white working class girls, and quite a lot about using migration to rack up votes. Reform, led by Nigel Farage, has been unrelenting online and in the press condemning Keir Starmer personally. Robert Jenrick attacked the culture of British Pakistanis in a statement that so offended the political Left that the leader of the Lib Dems called on him to resign. Aside from divisive language, an amendment mandating a national inquiry was added by the Tories to the children’s wellbeing and schools bill, which Labour says could kill the legislation and endanger children.

You can see why Labour feels it needs to be combative and set the record straight. Unfortunately, this approach is a catastrophic error of political judgment, and reveals severe moral failings in Starmer’s approach to leadership. Put aside the wild exaggerations bandied about online, and forget about the sickening tussle in Westminster to lay the blame at a rival party’s door. What actually matters here? The truth, public safety, and justice for victims. In this situation Starmer isn’t the former head of the CPS, he isn’t even the leader of the Labour Party — he is the leader of this country, and the representative of the British crown. The grooming gang scandal touches every political party and level of government. Police, courts, social workers, local councils, and the national government all failed victims, and many colluded in their victimisation.

The seriousness of Musk’s claims, which millions of people saw, needed to be addressed, but ultimately Musk is a private individual living in America, making these allegations on social media. A simple statement setting the record straight from a spokesperson was all that it merited, and the Prime Minister personally responding was wildly disproportionate. For all that Musk is an adolescent throwing fuel on the fire of British politics, he is also a father and a human being encountering, probably for the first time, reports of the British police allowing thousands of children to be raped and, in at least one case, killed, out of a fear of appearing racist. His untruths and half truths are unforgivably irresponsible from the owner of a social media company, but his anger was entirely legitimate.

Read more …

Canada, Panama, Greenland, it all makes a lot of sense from an American point of View.

Trump’s ‘Crazy’ Ideas Not So Crazy After All (Kadish)

Why is it that people are always calling for someone to think “outside the box,” then when someone does, say, “Aaaak! He thought outside the box!” In that view, President-elect Donald J. Trump has already committed (at least) three heresies: Buy Greenland, stop China from controlling the Panama Canal and deepen America’s affiliation with Canada. All three ideas are neither crazy nor even new. President Harry S. Truman looked at acquiring Greenland in 1946. Thomas Jefferson, after the Louisiana Purchase, proposed buying Cuba – just think how the Cubans would be prospering now, politically and economically, if that deal had gone through. Those acquisitions didn’t take place but in 1917, the US did acquire Denmark’s Virgin Islands for $25 million.

As historian Stephen Press writes, “As secretary of state, John Quincy Adams arranged debt relief for Spain in exchange for Florida. Secretary of State William Seward acquired Alaska. “What Mr. Trump proposes is consistent with this American tradition—and with our current borders. Sovereignty purchases are responsible for more than 40% of U.S. land… “History suggests the benefits of being open-minded about this. Inhabitants of Alaska wouldn’t be better off under Russian sovereignty. Bringing Greenlanders into closer affiliation with the U.S., and sweetening the deal with economic subsidies, could conceivably prove beneficial to all parties” As for the Panama Canal, President Jimmy Carter handed it to Panama for $1, but on the condition that it permanently remain a neutral zone – not one controlled at both ends by China.

“We gave the Panama Canal to Panama,” Trump has pointed out. “We didn’t give it to China. They’ve abused that gift.” The US built the Panama Canal in the first place to be able to avoid having commercial and military sea traffic avoid the long journey around South America’s southernmost sea route, the Strait of Magellan – where the Chinese Communist Party also located a base. If there were to be a conflict with Communist China, it would be easy enough for them to block the Canal to U.S. use. As China expert Gordon G. Chang has pointed out: “China’s port facilities are at both ends of the canal. And when Gen. Laura Richardson took a helicopter ride over the Canal Zone, this was the middle of 2022; she said she ‘looked down and saw all of these dual-use facilities.’ … at a time of war, they could make the canal totally useless…. They say that we have a two-ocean Navy. Well, we would have two separate navies. It’d be very difficult to get ships from the Atlantic to the Pacific, or vice versa.”

Closer ties with Canada, as Trump appears to see them, would make a united-in-some-way North America a formidable landmass to any would-be adversary. “You get rid of that artificially drawn line,” Trump stated, “and you take a look at what that looks like, and it would also be much better for national security. Don’t forget, we protect Canada.” Trump seems to have been merely responding to the opening provided him by Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, days before the latter announced that he would be resigning. According to Trump:

“I said what would happen if we didn’t do it. He said Canada would dissolve. Canada wouldn’t be able to function, if we didn’t take their 20% of our car market… So, I said to him, well, why are we doing it? He said, I don’t really know. He was unable to answer the question, but I can answer it. We’re doing it because of habit, and we’re doing it because we like our neighbors, and we’ve been good neighbors. But we can’t do it forever and it’s a tremendous amount of money. And why should we have a $200 billion deficit and add on to that many, many other things that we give them in terms of subsidy?” Trump has also announced a “Made in America,” tax break incentive for investment in the US, and a “Golden Age of America.” It seems to have begun already — and he is not even president yet.

Read more …

“I never talked about this with Musk. It’s not my habit to use my public role to do favors to friends,” Meloni said.

“Is the problem that Elon Musk is influential and rich or that he is not left-wing?”

Meloni: Soros Is Interfering In Democracies, Not Musk (RMX)

At a press conference in Rome earlier this year, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni said that Elon Musk’s political posts on X do not pose a threat to democracy; while oligarch George Soros, however, continuously interferes in the politics of other nations, according to Italy’s leader. “The problem is when wealthy people use their resources to finance parties, associations and political exponents all over the world to influence the political choices of nation states”, Meloni told reporters at an annual press conference. “That’s not what Musk is doing,” she added. “Elon Musk financed an election campaign in his country, by his candidate, in a system in which, by the way, I would point out that this is quite common,” Meloni said. “But I am not aware of Elon Musk financing parties, associations or political exponents around the world. This, for example, is what George Soros does.”

“And yes, I consider that to be dangerous interference in the affairs of nation states and in their sovereignty,” she noted. Meloni also pointed to other wealthy people actively funding parties and NGOs around the world to influence local policies. “This is not the first time that famous and wealthy people have expressed their opinions. I have seen many such cases, often against me, and no one was offended then…” Musk, she said, is a very rich man who expresses his opinion and does not pose a threat to democracy. “Is the problem that Elon Musk is influential and rich or that he is not left-wing?” asked Meloni. She also noted that she and many others on the right are not financially dependent on Musk, unlike many on the left who are funded by Soros, or have been funded by him over the years. Meloni denied ever taking any money from Musk, “unlike those who have taken it from Soros”.

She also denied various media reports that her government is on the verge of signing a massive deal with Musk’s company SpaceX. However, even if that were true, signing a business deal is far different than receiving financial aid for political activities, which is behavior that Soros often partakes in with his beneficiaries. In response to a journalist’s question, Meloni also spoke about Elon Musk’s open support for the right-wing Alternative for Germany (AfD). Meloni stressed that if anyone tried to influence the Italian elections, it was Germany, under the then Social Democratic-Liberal-Green government. “I would like to remind you of the German side’s interference in the Italian election campaign,” Meloni said, referring to previous German concerns about the right-wing position she represented.

Soros has long been a controversial figure due to his outsized role in the politics of nations around the world, however, few on the left-liberal spectrum ever criticized this interference. Soros has also long called for the removal of Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, with both figures antagonistic towards each other over the years.

Read more …

“In 2021, I set out to destroy the woke mind virus and now it has been deleted..”

Musk Bought Twitter To “Destroy The Woke Mind Virus” (RT)

X owner Elon Musk has said that he purchased the platform, then known as Twitter, in order to “destroy the woke mind virus.” Musk has blamed much of modern society’s ills on radical liberalism. “In 2021, I set out to destroy the woke mind virus and now it has been deleted,” Musk wrote on X on Saturday, after sharing a post he made in 2021 reading “traceroute woke_mind_virus.” A traceroute is a diagnostic command used to troubleshoot Internet Protocol networks. Asked by a follower if this was “the main reason you bought twitter?” Musk replied “Yes.”Musk has frequently lashed out against the “woke mind virus,” a catch-all term used by some conservatives to condemn radical liberal philosophies and policies including transgenderism, censorship, and the promotion of diversity in the workplace at the expense of merit.

In an interview with Canadian psychologist Dr. Jordan Peterson last July, Musk said that the “woke mind virus” killed his son, referring to his transgender child Xavier. Musk claimed that he was “tricked” by doctors into signing documents authorizing his son to undergo hormone treatment, which permanently sterilized him. “I lost my son, essentially. They call it deadnaming for a reason,” the billionaire said. “The reason it’s called deadnaming is because your son is dead. My son Xavier is dead, killed by the woke mind virus. I vowed to destroy the woke mind virus after that.” Musk purchased Twitter for $44 billion in 2022, rebranding the platform as X, firing most of its content moderation staff, and rolling back the majority of its censorship policies.

X was the first major social media platform to reinstate US President-elect Donald Trump’s account, which was suspended after his supporters rioted on Capitol Hill in January 2021. The platform’s overhaul initially made it an outlier, with most of its competitors maintaining their restrictive speech policies. However, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg recently announced that his platforms – which include Facebook and Instagram – will dial back their moderation policies to “restore free expression” and will no longer work with third-party “fact checkers” to label political content. Alongside these planned changes, Meta ended its diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) hiring programs this week, and according to the New York Times, removed tampons from men’s bathrooms in its offices, where they had been provided “for nonbinary and transgender employees.”

Read more …

Someone will find fault.

Trump To Place Investments In A Trust During Presidency (JTN)

The Trump Organization on Friday announced that President-elect Donald Trump will place his investments into a trust controlled by his children and will have limited access to the company during his presidency. The organization released a five-page ethics plan on Friday that included several of the adjustments the company will make while Trump works from the Oval Office. The organization has also hired a new ethics advisor to ensure the company meets and exceeds its ethical and legal obligations. The release comes 10 days before Trump is set to take office on January 20. The company said that Trump would not be consulted on most matters related to the business and would only receive “general business updates,” according to NBC News. The investments will also be managed independently by “outside financial institutions” that will not seek his input on specific holdings or transactions.

It also said the company “will not enter into any new material transactions or contracts with a foreign government, except for Ordinary Course Transactions,” but does not mention whether it would do business with any foreign private entities. The disclosure comes after the Trump Organization backed away from foreign business dealings following Trump’s first election in 2016. The company also said that it would donate all profits from foreign governments at its hotels and similar businesses to the U.S. Treasury Department, as it did in 2016, and offer discounted rates to members of the U.S. Secret Service and other government agencies that lodge at Trump hotels. The Trump Organization is largely operated by the Trump’s sons Eric and Donald Trump Jr., who are executive vice presidents.

Read more …

Time to go after him.

Special Counsel Jack Smith Resigns (RT)

US Special Counsel Jack Smith, who led two federal cases against President-elect Donald Trump, has resigned after handing in his final report on his findings, according to court documents lodged on Saturday. The prosecution filed a motion to urge District Judge Aileen Cannon not to extend her injunction temporarily blocking the release of a portion of the special counsel’s report pertaining to the classified documents case against Trump. News of Smith’s resignation from the US Justice Department came in a brief footnote in the court filing. “The Special Counsel completed his work and submitted his final confidential report on January 7, 2025, and separated from the Department on January 10,” the footnote said.

Judge Cannon presides over the mishandling of classified documents case against Trump. Her block on releasing Smith’s report on the case lasts until Monday. Attorney General Merrick Garland intends to publicly release the other part of Smith’s report – detailing his findings in the case of Trump’s alleged attempts to overturn the results of the 2020 US election, according to court documents released on Wednesday. Smith led two of the four criminal cases brought against Trump after his first presidency. Cannon dismissed the first case in July last year, while DC District Judge Tanya Chutkan dropped the second in November, citing legal immunity afforded a sitting US president.

Neither of the cases went to trial. Smith’s resignation comes just ten days before Trump takes office on January 20. The incoming president had said he would fire Smith “within two seconds” of assuming office. The president-elect has repeatedly stated that the charges against him are groundless and “lawless.” On Friday, Trump was sentenced in the ‘hush money’ case brought against him in New York. While the ruling means he will not face fines or jail time, Trump will be considered a felon under US law.

Read more …

The legal system is barely functioning anymore. The skin of Frankenstein’s teeth.

Merchan’s Frankenstein Monster (Turley)

This week, the sentencing of President-Elect Donald Trump saw one of the most impassioned defense arguments given at such a hearing in years . . . from the judge himself. Acting Justice Juan Merchan admitted that the case was “unique and remarkable” but insisted that “once the courtroom doors were closed, the trial itself was no more special, unique, and extraordinary than the other 32 cases in this courthouse.” If so, that is a chilling indictment of the entire New York court system. Merchan allowed a dead misdemeanor to be resuscitated by allowing Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg to effectively prosecute declined federal offenses. He allowed a jury to convict Trump without any agreement, let alone unanimity, on what actually occurred in the case. Merchan ruled that the jury did not have to agree on why Trump committed an alleged offense in describing settlement costs as legal costs.

Neither the defendant nor the public will ever know what the jury ultimately found in its verdict. I once described this case as a legal Frankenstein: “It is the ultimate gravedigger charge, where Bragg unearthed a case from 2016 and, through a series of novel steps, is seeking to bring it back to life…Bragg is combining parts from both state and federal codes.” Even liberal legal experts have denounced the case and Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) recently called it total “b—s–t.” Now, Merchan seemed to assure this Frankenstein case that he was just like any other creature of the court. It did not matter that he was stitched together from dead cases and zapped into life through lawfare. Merchan knows that there is a fair chance this monstrosity will finally die on appeal, and he was making the case for his own conduct. The verdict, however, is likely to last far longer than the Trump verdict.

It is a judgment against not just Merchan but the New York legal system, which allowed itself to be weaponized against political opponents. In the Mary Shelley novel, Frankenstein says “I am thy creature: I ought to be thy Adam, but I am rather the fallen angel.” Trump can now appeal the case as a whole. Prior appeals in the New York court system were unsuccessful, and hopes are low that the system will redeem itself. However, Trump can eventually escape the vortex of the New York court system in search of jurists willing to see beyond the rage and bring reason to this case.

Notably, prosecutor Joshua Steinglass cited Chief Justice John Roberts in his argument before Merchan, noting that Roberts recently chastised those who attack the courts. (Roberts just the night before joined liberal justices and Justice Amy Coney Barrett in refusing to stay the sentencing). Steinglass portrayed Trump as an existential threat to the rule of law. Roberts, however, is everything that Merchan is not. You can disagree with him, but he has repeatedly ruled against his own preferred outcomes in cases, including rulings against President Trump and his campaign and Administration. For his part, Trump declined to criticize the court and declared that “This is a long way from finished and I respect the court’s opinion.” Indeed it is. Merchan’s monster will now go on the road and work its way back to the Supreme Court. Outside of New York this freak attraction will likely be viewed as less thrilling than chilling.

The election had the feel of the townspeople coming to the castle in the movie. In this case, however, the townspeople were right about what they saw in the making of a creature that threatened their very existence. Lawfare is that monster. It threatens us all, even those who hate Trump and his supporters. Once released, it spreads panic among the public which can no longer rely on the guarantees of blind and fair justice. That includes businesses who view this case and the equally absurd civil case brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James as creating a dangerous and even lawless environment. Many are saying “but for the grace of God go I” in a system that allows for selective prosecution. In the sentencing proceeding, Merchan was downplaying his hand in creating this Frankenstein. However, the case is the fallen angel of the legal system. While heralded in court by Bragg’s office as the triumph of legal process, it is in fact the rawest and most grotesque form of lawfare. Many will be blamed as the creators of this monster but few will escape that blame, including Merchan himself.

Read more …

Hunter will have to talk. And under oath he can’t lie.

House Judiciary Expected To Continue Hunter Biden Probe Despite Pardon (JTN)

House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan on Thursday indicated that he would keep the investigation into first son Hunter Biden going in the 119th Congress, even though President Joe Biden already pardoned him for all crimes committed in the past decade. The wide-ranging pardon was announced last month, and blamed Republicans for the reason he broke a promise he had made to voters. The pardon even forgives any theoretical crimes Hunter Biden may have committed when serving on the board of Burisma. President-elect Donald Trump has also threatened to go after his political adversaries after they allegedly targeted him in a series of court cases during the Biden administration.

Jordan said that one way the investigation can continue is by interviewing special counsel David Weiss, who ultimately recommended Hunter Biden be prosecuted on federal gun and tax evasion charges. Weiss was interviewed last year as part of the committee’s impeachment investigation into the president, per Politico. “We think we need to look at David Weiss, the special counsel,” Jordan said. “There will be some additional work we need to do, I think, there because when we deposed him, he wasn’t willing to — he didn’t answer any questions, really, because it was [an] ongoing investigation.”

The Judiciary committee also questioned Hunter Biden and Joe Biden’s brother, James Biden, in closed-door interviews last year regarding the impeachment inquiry. Jordan also declined to investigate the president’s pardon of his son, claiming that even though he did not support the decision, the president has proper authority to pardon whoever they like.

Read more …

“What they do is have access to your phone. So it doesn’t matter if anything’s encrypted, they could just see it in plain sight..”

CIA Can Read WhatsApp Messages – Zuckerberg (RT)

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg has acknowledged that US authorities, including the CIA, can access WhatsApp messages by remotely logging into users’ devices, effectively bypassing the platform’s end-to-end encryption. Speaking on the Joe Rogan Experience podcast on Friday, Zuckerberg explained that while WhatsApp’s encryption prevents Meta from viewing message content, it does not protect against physical access to a user’s phone. His comments came in the context of a question by Rogan about Tucker Carlson’s quest to set up an interview with Russian President Vladimir Putin. In February last year, while speaking about finally succeeding in talking to Putin after three years of failed attempts, Carlson blamed the US authorities, namely the NSA and the CIA, for stalling his efforts.

According to Carlson, the agencies spied on him by tapping his messages and emails, and leaked his intentions to the media, which “spooked” Moscow from talking to him. Rogan asked Zuckerberg to explain how this could have happened given encryption safeguards that are supposed to protect messages. “The thing that encryption does that’s really good is it makes it so that the company that’s running the service doesn’t see it. So if you’re using WhatsApp, there’s no point at which the Meta servers see the contents of that message,” Zuckerberg said, noting that even if someone were to hack into Meta’s databases, they could not access users’ private texts. The Signal messaging app, which Carlson used, uses the same encryption, according to Zuckerberg, so the same rules apply. However, he noted that encryption does not stop law enforcement from viewing messages stored on devices.

“What they do is have access to your phone. So it doesn’t matter if anything’s encrypted, they could just see it in plain sight,” he clarified. Zuckerberg mentioned tools such as Pegasus, a spyware developed by the Israeli company NSO Group, which can be covertly installed on mobile phones to access data. According to Zuckerberg, the fact that users’ private messages can be jeopardized by directly breaking into their devices is the reason Meta came up with disappearing messages, where one can have one’s message thread erased after a certain period of time. “If someone has compromised your phone and they can see everything that’s going on there, then obviously they can see stuff as it comes in… So having it be encrypted and disappearing, I think is a pretty good kind of standard of security and privacy,” he stated.

Zuckerberg’s remarks come amid ongoing debates about digital privacy and government surveillance. While end-to-end encryption is lauded for protecting user data, agencies like the CIA and FBI have argued it can impede efforts to combat crime and terrorism. A 2021 FBI training document indicated that US law enforcement can gain limited access to encrypted messages from services like iMessage, Line, and WhatsApp, but not from platforms such as Signal, Telegram, Threema, Viber, WeChat, or Wickr. Additionally, while encrypted messages cannot be intercepted during transmission, reports indicate that backups stored in cloud services may be accessible to law enforcement if an encryption key is attached.

Read more …

Children’s Health Defense. RFK Jr’s organization.

We Were Censored By Meta; We’re Taking Them to the Supreme Court (CHD)

The headline from Politico’s “Playbook” would have been unthinkable eight years ago: “Meta sends Trump a friend request.” After all, Meta’s founder, Mark Zuckerberg, is a political lightning rod in conservative political circles, especially after the $300 million worth of “Zuckerbucks” spent during the 2020 election to elect like-minded politicians. Yet lately, Zuckerberg has been singing a much different tune. He referred to President-elect Trump as “badass,” visited him at Mar-a-Lago, and donated one million dollars to his inaugural fund. This week, Meta made news by adding Dana White, a longtime Trump ally and head of the Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC), to its board of directors. Then came the real bombshell: Meta ended its so-called “independent fact-checking program,” ostensibly lifting restrictions on speech across Facebook, as well as their other platforms like Instagram and WhatsApp.

In doing so, Zuckerberg admitted the current content moderation practices – in place since criticism of his platform during the 2016 presidential election – have “gone too far” and stressed a commitment to “restoring free expression.” Make no mistake: Meta’s “independent fact-checkers” are neither independent nor fact-based. Their elimination is a positive step and should be encouraged. The announcement came less than 24 hours after the organization I lead – the nonprofit Children’s Health Defense – asked the U.S. Supreme Court to hear our censorship lawsuit against Meta. But if Meta is serious about supporting “free expression,” they have a lot of work to do – and it requires more than moving workers from California to Texas, as Zuckerberg also pledged to do.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, Meta not only censored our posts – many having to do with topics that the so-called medical “experts” like Dr. Anthony Fauci were dead wrong about – but outright kicked us off the platform without warning. Meta first took action against CHD in May 2019, from takedowns and restrictions to an outright ban in August 2022 that is still in effect. What were our offenses? Simply publishing data on the risks of COVID vaccines, Remdesivir, and ventilation, as well as having the temerity to raise the benefits of natural immunity and alternative treatment with ivermectin and other protocols. An unfettered discussion of all these issues would have saved lives. We knew that many of the government’s promises – on items like the pandemic’s origin and the best way to treat symptoms and prevent its spread – were not grounded in “science” as they claimed but political imperatives from the Biden administration.

In 2020, we took them to court, starting in the San Francisco federal court. We suffered some legal setbacks along the way, and this week ended up before the U.S. Supreme Court. Meta will not change its ways without a fight. They not only kicked us off the platform but censored our supporters and erased our past posts. Meta shut down the “free expression” they claim to be championing. Yes, Meta was coerced by the Biden administration, but there’s more to the story. Zuckerberg’s WhatsApp messages showed that he conspired with the government and chose to censor because he had “bigger fish to fry” than protecting free speech. He knew then that censorship violated the rights of free expression, and he knew then that it wouldn’t help the administration bring COVID under control, but he did it anyway.

The pandemic may be over, but speech about COVID is not. If the Supreme Court takes our case, it can guarantee accountability for Meta’s role in this man-made disaster – and prevent another in the future. Meta, like the other mega-platforms, must be held accountable when they knowingly conform their content-moderation process and decisions or cede active, meaningful control to the government’s preference to suppress constitutionally protected speech. This time it was CHD’s health and medical freedom issues. But who will be next?

Ultimately, this debate is not about any one group or individual but all of us. How many people suffered or lost their lives because they didn’t have access to information that could have helped them make better-informed decisions about their health? The American public is better served with more information rather than less, especially when it is grounded on data-based scientific information. People are smart enough to make up their own minds. Last November, voters sent an unmistakable message that they want a break from the status quo. Kudos to Mark Zuckerberg for recognizing the prevailing winds and saying the right things. But the free speech fight won’t be over until those who were kicked off his platforms are reinstated.

Read more …

“I don’t see Trump as a friend of Russia. I don’t see him being in Putin’s pocket the way a lot of people in the West do. But I see him as willing to make deals..”

US Playing ‘Fool’s Game’ By Ignoring Russia’s Red Lines – Peter Kuznick (RT)

The strategy pursued by the US in the Ukraine conflict risks provoking serious responses from Russia, Peter Kuznick, professor of history and director of the Nuclear Studies Institute at American University, has said. Kuznick earlier appeared on US journalist Tucker Carlson’s podcast show alongside director Oliver Stone. In an exclusive interview to RT on Saturday, he warned against assuming Russia’s red lines can be crossed without consequence. “Russia keeps drawing red lines, and the United States keeps crossing them” on the assumption that Russia is “bluffing” and that President Vladimir Putin “is not going to follow through on his threats,” Kuznick said.

He described this approach as a “fool’s game,” warning it could lead to severe repercussions. Kuznick criticized the belief that Russia will remain passive, calling it “insanity” and stressing that such assumptions gamble with global safety. In December, Putin accused the US of encouraging escalation by arming Kiev and pushing Russia to the “red line.” He claimed the West uses these provocations to instill fear in their populations. Reflecting on Donald Trump’s policies, Kuznick noted Trump “does not view Russia as an implacable enemy,” though his administration provided lethal aid to Ukraine in 2019 and increased sanctions on Russia. “I don’t see Trump as a friend of Russia. I don’t see him being in Putin’s pocket the way a lot of people in the West do. But I see him as willing to make deals,” he said.

“Trump doesn’t have any fixed values or strong beliefs,” which “means that he could either be worse, dramatically worse, or he could be dramatically better,” Kuznick added. He and director Oliver Stone appeared on Tucker Carlson’s show earlier this week in the hopes Trump “would be listening” and “encourage the side of Trump that looks for peaceful solutions.”Kuznick warned that crises in Ukraine, Gaza, Taiwan, or the South China Sea could rapidly escalate into broader conflicts, including nuclear war. Highlighting the growing danger, he said he “would have moved the Doomsday Clock to 60 seconds to midnight.”

In November, Putin approved changes to Russia’s nuclear doctrine that expanded the scenarios that could warrant a nuclear response to include aggression by a non-nuclear state backed by a nuclear power. The doctrine describes nuclear weapons as an “extreme and forced measure” aimed at conflict prevention.Kuznick urged the US to adapt to a multipolar world, emphasizing diplomacy over unilateral action. He also criticized the administration of current President Joe Biden for its aggressive foreign policy and unwavering support for Israel’s actions in Gaza, which he argued undermines Washington’s global standing. “You can’t have it both ways,” Kuznick asserted, highlighting the inconsistency in condemning Russia’s actions in Ukraine while supporting Israel’s in Gaza.

Kuznick

Read more …

Sounds more like the voice of reason instead of some extreme right wing party.

AfD Delegates Reject Motion Condemning Putin (RT)

The right-wing Alternative for Germany (AfD) party has overwhelmingly voted against including in its 2025 election manifesto a condemnation of Russian President Vladimir Putin over the Ukraine conflict. The delegates gathered for a conference in Riesa, Germany on Saturday to decide on the platform for the snap parliamentary elections which will be held next month. Albrecht Glaser, a member of the Bundestag, proposed accusing Russia of failing to protect civilians in Ukraine and stating that the “AfD condemns the behavior of President Putin and once again calls on all warring parties to propose an immediate ceasefire and hold peace talks.” According to news channel N-tv, 69% of the delegates voted to reject the motion.

The draft program approved by the party leadership only briefly mentions the conflict, saying, “the war in Ukraine has disturbed the European peaceful order,” Deutsche Presse-Agentur reported. The draft reportedly says the AfD “sees Ukraine’s future as a neutral state outside of NATO and the EU,” and calls for the restoration of “undisturbed trade” with Russia. Known for its anti-immigration stance, the AfD is the second-most popular party in Germany, according to polls. The party has often been accused of parroting Russian narratives about the conflict between Russia and Ukraine. The party has rejected the ‘pro-Russian’ label, insisting that continuing military support for Kiev and sanctions on Russian trade and energy exports are counter to German national interests.

During a recent conversation with tech billionaire Elon Musk, AfD co-leader Alice Weidel argued that the EU has abandoned diplomatic efforts in favor of dangerous confrontation with Russia. The conflict could “escalate big time towards a nuclear exchange,” she warned. Early elections were called after Germany’s ruling three-party coalition collapsed in late 2024 due to disagreements over the budget.

Ursula

Former European Commissioner Thierry Breton says the EU has mechanisms to nullify a potential election victory of the AfD:
”We did it in Romania and we will obviously do it in Germany if necessary”

 

 

Read more …

The mismanagement is mindblowing.

Why Was Pacific Palisades Reservoir EMPTY? It Gets Worse. (Victoria Taft)

An empty reservoir and dry fire hydrants are now the symbols of California and local officials’ response to the horrific Pacific Palisades wildfire—one of six Santa Ana windblown firestorms still burning in Los Angeles. Gov. Gavin Newsom has ordered an investigation to demonstrate that he’s doing something, but the damage is being done right now. The 117 million-gallon Santa Ynez Reservoir was empty and down for maintenance when the devastating fire was sparked, perhaps in the brush, between the homes and the Pacific Coast Highway. You can see a map of the area in my story Good Intentions Might Be the Cause of Devastating Palisades Fire. Friday, officials confirmed that the reservoir had been down for nearly a year —closing in February 2024—for maintenance to the cover of the reservoir.

The New York Times reports that a contractor was hired in November to fix a crack in the cover. It is unclear why the reservoir had to be shut down for that extended period of time. The ripple effect was beyond devastating. The fires broke out Tuesday, Jan. 7. By the next day, Janisse Quiñones, the head of the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, said their system tanks went dry three times. You’ll want to remember that because the story is about to get worse. We have three large water tanks, about a million gallons each. We ran out of water in the first tank at about 4:45 p.m. yesterday. We ran out of water in the second tank about 8:30 p.m. and the third tank about 3 a.m. this morning. She never mentioned the empty reservoir, though former DWP Commissioner and mayoral candidate Rick Caruso did say that “the reservoir” hadn’t been filled. He was right and righteously angry.

Firefighters complained that there was no water coming out of the hydrants. The fires burned uncontrollably. In addition to the “investigation” by Newsom, the New York Times reported that the Department of Water and Power, whose job it is to fill the reservoirs, is looking into whether the empty Santa Ynez reservoir in Pacific Palisades made a difference in their fire response. We are not kidding. [..] Water for the Pacific Palisades is fed by a 36-inch line that flows by gravity from the larger Stone Canyon Reservoir, said Marty Adams, a former general manager and chief engineer at the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power. That water line also fills the Santa Ynez Reservoir. Water from the two reservoirs then sustain the water system for the Pacific Palisades, and also pump systems that fill storage tanks that feed higher-elevation homes in the neighborhood.

It was unclear whether officials could have brought the reservoir back online before the fire, after forecasters began warning of dangerous wildfire conditions. Now, I’m no hydrologist or physicist, but wouldn’t water pressure be helped by having water in all the tanks and reservoirs? Am I missing something here? But, what ho! We get an answer. Mr. Adams said an operational reservoir would have been helpful initially to more fully feed the water system in the area. But he also said it appeared that that reservoir and the tanks would have eventually been drained in a fire that was consuming so many homes at once. Municipal water systems are generally designed to sustain water loads for much smaller fires than what consumed Pacific Palisades. [emphasis added]

Those are a lot of words to say that more water would have been helpful. Speaking of not being a hydrologist, I looked up the latest state hydrology report because the global warming crowd desperately hopes to blame “climate change/catastrophe” for the fires. Yeah, well, that dog won’t hunt. If you’re new here, from east to west Southern California, there’s desert, then mountains, then semi-arid land all the way to the ocean. While the media will tell you this is climate change, this is no change at all. This is the state of play in California all the time. However, California has received a surge in water in the last few years following a drought, but there have been no new reservoirs built to store water since the last one opened in 1979. According the latest hydrologist report, “Major flood control reservoirs are either near their respective top of conservation levels or below.”

Precipitation has been slow in the first couple of weeks of the year, but the “The statewide accumulated precipitation to end of November 2024 was 5.22 inches, which is 132% of average.” The snowpack, which is also where water is stored, and Gavin Newsom lets flow out to the Pacific Ocean to “save” a bait fish, is growing. “The statewide average snow water equivalent (SWE) was 5.1 inches for December 1, which is 168% percent of normal and 19% of April 1 average.” In other words, there’s been precipitation — remember all those atmospheric rivers? — and if there were more storage there would be more water available for drinking and fighting fires. I could go into the environmental rules that don’t allow much, if any, thinning in forests, road building, otherwise known as fire breaks, reservoir building, and preventative burning, which used to happen all the time to stop these conflagrations that the enviros like to blame on climate, but I do in my other stories.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Pope
https://twitter.com/i/status/1877908221987291462

Stone

Train
https://twitter.com/i/status/1877829927334236235

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Dec 162024
 


Pablo Picasso Female bust 1922

 

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

 

 

 

 

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

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

Lindsey

Hegseth

Logan

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

 

 

 

 

A Christmas Day truce is of course very appealing.

Trump Team Studying Orban’s Ceasefire Initiative (RT)

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

Helmer enters PCR territory.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

They will never admit they cornered themselves.

Germany ‘Cornered’ – Economy Minister (RT)

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

Syria: The Death of a Civilization (Karganovic)

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

Just don’t.

Trump Transition Team Considering Strikes on Iran (Antiwar)

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

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

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

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

Clawson

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

…But Continues Case Against New York..

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

She said about a year ago, people on the island started seeing giant offshore wind turbines covering their ocean views. Concerns were growing about impacts of the industry to the viewshed and marine wildlife, DiSibio said, but when a blade broke off one of the turbines in July and scattered shards of debris across New England shores, the tide of public opinion turned against the industry. “People are like, ‘Are you kidding?’ This is expected to happen on a regular basis. This is an environmental disaster. People are still picking up stuff on the beach. This is a small target in a big ocean. So imagine what’s still out there,” DiSibio said. While the impacts have hit the island hard, the election outcomes suggest Trump’s vows against offshore wind weren’t a selling point for the state or the island.

Massachusetts residents voted 61% in favor of Democratic candidate Kamala Harris, and in Nantucket nearly 67% of votes went for Harris. DiSibio said that as a 501(c)3, ACK for Whales is limited in what it can do, in terms of lobbying. She said that the organization will proceed now with what it’s been doing — educating the public and elected officials on the issue. She said they’ve got people in Congress who have been sympathetic to the issue, such as New Jersey Reps. Jeff Van Drew and Chris Smith, as well as Maryland Rep. Andy Harris in Maryland — all Republicans — who are listening.

“There are people in Congress who have concerns. They’ve got concerns around the environment, economic concerns to what this does to not just coastal communities, but how this will impact the whole state. Concerns around this means for rate payers, concerns around search and rescue, for the Coast Guard, national security. There are many, many questions that are out there,” DiSibio said. She’s hoping there will be more questions not only about the impacts, but also if they’re worth it. Environmental impact statements for offshore wind projects, which are required as part of the federal permitting process, note that the projects will have “no measurable influence on climate change.”

Read more …

“The government is slow, slow, slow — decades slow on adopting new ways of doing things, and there’s a lot of [other] carrier services that became legal in the ’70s that are doing things so much better..”

Trump Considers Privatizing US Postal Service (ZH)

Donald Trump is fired up about finally giving the money-losing US Postal Service its long-overdue shove into the private sector, according to three sources who talked to the Washington Post. Trump is said to have discussed the idea with Howard Lutnick, who’s co-chairing his transition team and who’s been tapped to serve as Commerce secretary in the new administration. He also held a meeting with various transition officials to exchange thoughts on privatization of the huge organization. Separately, the Department of Government Efficiency, led by Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, has held its own discussions about drastic action. Last month, USPS disclosed that it posted a net loss of $9.5 billion for the 2024 fiscal year — a loss that was 46% worse than the service’s $6.5 billion deficit in 2023.

The plunge came alongside a slight uptick in revenue enabled by the latest annual increase in postage rates, pursuant to the 2021 Delivering for America plan. That program was supposed to help the perennially-profitless behemoth “achieve financial sustainability and service excellence.” The service also has a crummy balance sheet, with nearly $80 billion in liabilities. After reviewing the numbers, Trump stated his opinion that the Postal Service shouldn’t be subsidized by the government, the Post’s sources said. Casey Mulligan, a University of Chicago economics professor who served on Trump’s Council of Economic Advisers, tells the Post it’s time for a major change: “The government is slow, slow, slow — decades slow on adopting new ways of doing things, and there’s a lot of [other] carrier services that became legal in the ’70s that are doing things so much better with increased volumes and reduced costs. We didn’t finish the job in the first term, but we should finish it now.”

The Postal Service is politically powerful — starting with its raw headcount: While you may not guess it given the long lines that typify a visit to a post office, USPS has a staggering 650,000 employees, who become very active whenever privatization gains momentum. It’s also popular among Americans — 72% view it favorably, compared just 21% who view it unfavorably, according to a 2024 Pew Research poll. Meanwhile, though a belief in small government is supposedly a GOP cornerstone, the postal service is particularly valued by people living in rural, Republican districts. Earlier this month, Missouri Republican Sen. Josh Hawley angrily confronted Postmaster General Louis DeJoy over a plan to save costs by slowing delivery for some mail, something that would affect rural areas more than urban ones. “I hate this plan and I’m going to do everything I can to kill it,” said Hawley in a Senate hearing.

In addition to having GOP control of the Senate and the House in the next legislature, Trump is positioned to fill three vacancies on the Postal Service’s 11-member board. (Biden has submitted nominees, but you can expect the Senate to ignore them through Jan 20.) Of the incumbents, three are Republicans, with two of them appointed by Trump in his first term. Even if privatization doesn’t happen, Trump’s mere threat of pursuing it could help drive changes to the organization. As the Lexington Institute’s Paul Steilder tells the Post…

“At the end of the day, the Postal Service is going to need money, it’s going to need assistance, or it’s going to have to come up with some radical, draconian measures to break even in the near term. That gives both the White House and Congress an awful lot of power and an awful lot of leeway here.” Sound good on paper…but, as evidenced by the “profit”-and-loss chart above, Congress has long shown a lack of urgency about seeing the USPS “break even in the near term.” Even with a president who’s fired about it — for now — we’re not convinced it will be any different this time.

Read more …

“The wording of the bill has many worried that this will be a centerpiece of a new era of anti-communist hysteria, similar to previous McCarthyist periods.”

Cold War Tactics With New Anti-Communism School Curriculum (Alan MacLeod)

Congress has just passed a new bill that will see the U.S. spend huge sums of money redesigning much of the public school system around the ideology of anti-communism. The “Crucial Communism Teaching Act” is now being read in the Senate, where it is all but certain to pass. The move comes amid growing public anger at the economic system and increased public support for socialism. The Crucial Communism Teaching Act, in its own words, is designed to teach children that “certain political ideologies, including communism and totalitarianism…conflict with the principles of freedom and democracy that are essential to the founding of the United States.” Although sponsored by Republicans, it enjoys widespread support from Democrats and is focused on China, Venezuela, Cuba and other targets of U.S. empire. The wording of the bill has many worried that this will be a centerpiece of a new era of anti-communist hysteria, similar to previous McCarthyist periods.

The curriculum will be designed by the controversial Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation and will ensure all American high school students “understand the dangers of communism and similar political ideologies” and “learn that communism has led to the deaths of over 100,000,000 victims worldwide.” It will also develop a series titled “Portraits in Patriotism,” that will expose students to individuals who are “victims of the political ideologies” in question. The 100 million figure originates with the notorious pseudoscience text, “The Black Book of Communism.” A collection of political essays, the book’s central claim is that 100 million people have perished as a result of the communist ideology. However, even many of its contributors and co-writers have distanced themselves from it, claiming that the lead author was “obsessed” with reaching the 100 million figure, to the point that he simply conjured millions of deaths from nowhere.

Its methodology was also universally panned, with many pointing out that the tens of millions of Soviet and Nazi losses during World War II were attributed to communist ideology. This means that both Adolf Hitler himself and many of his victims are counted towards the vastly overinflated figure. The book was condemned by Holocaust remembrance groups as whitewashing and even lionizing genocidal fascist groups as anti-communist heroes. The principal organization promoting the 100 million figure today is the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, which has shown a similar level of both anti-communist devotion and methodological rigor. The group, set up by the U.S. government in 1993, added all worldwide COVID-19 deaths to the victims of communism list, arguing that the coronavirus was a communist disease because it originated in China. It is these people who will be designing the new curriculum that will be taught in social studies, government, history, and economics classes across the country.

One of the central goals of the bill is also to “ensure that high school students in the United States understand that 1,500,000,000 people still suffer under communism.” This is a clear reference to China, a rapidly developing country that, in just two generations, has gone from one of the poorest on Earth to a global superpower, challenging and even surpassing the United States on many quality-of-life indicators. The bill goes on to detail how the school curriculum will “focus on ongoing human rights abuses by such regimes, such as the treatment of Uyghurs in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region” by the Chinese “regime” and its “aggression” towards “pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong,” and Taiwan, who it labels “a democratic friend of the United States.”

Read more …

 

 

 

 

 

 

Malhotra

 

 

Bone cancer

 

 

3d

 

 

Lynx

 

 

Fox

 

 

Bowhead

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Feb 222023
 
 February 22, 2023  Posted by at 10:22 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , ,  64 Responses »


Banksy Bataclan emergency door 2018 (stolen in 2019, recovered June 2020)

 

Russia Cannot Be Defeated On Battlefield – Putin (TASS)
‘Big Difference’ Between Arming Ukraine and Russia – Borrell (RT)
China-Russia Relations ‘Rock Solid’ – Beijing (RT)
China Names US As ‘Top Disruptor’ (RT)
Xi Jinping Planning Moscow Trip – WSJ (RT)
Putin Says West’s Goal Is To Tear Historical Regions Away From Russia (TASS)
Neo-Nazis in Ukraine, Failed Sanctions And Key Nuke Deal Suspension (RT)
Zelensky ‘Commanding’ US Military – Congresswoman (RT)
Italy Rules Out Jets For Ukraine (RT)
US Realizes No One Believes Its Nord Stream Story- Zakharova (TASS)
Evidence Of US Guilt For Nord Stream ‘More Than A Smoking Gun’ – Russia (RT)
Duma Supports Bill On Suspending Russia’s Participation In New START (TASS)
Russia Will Defend Itself With Any Weapon, Including Nuclear – Medvedev (TASS)
Anatomy of a Cover-up: The January 6 Tapes (Julie Kelly)

 

 

Inevitably after yesterday’s Putin speech, a lot of Russia today, and from Russian sources. Do note how China is coming to the foreground. Both countries insist on being treated as equals. NATO says no.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Celente
https://twitter.com/i/status/1627798699211358209

 

 

https://twitter.com/i/status/1628129409914834977

 

 

 

 

 

 

“..In this case the existence of our country is on the agenda..”

Russia Cannot Be Defeated On Battlefield – Putin (TASS)

Russia cannot be defeated on the battlefield, Russian President Vladimir Putin said in a message to the Federal Assembly on Tuesday. “They (the elites of the West – TASS) cannot but realize that it is impossible to defeat Russia on the battlefield,” the Russian leader said. As the president pointed out, the West was not trying to conceal its aim of inflicting a strategic defeat on Russia. “The elites of the West do not hide their aim to make Russia, as they say outright, suffer, a ‘strategic defeat.’ What does this mean? What is it for us? It means that they wish do away with us once and for all. In other words, to send a local conflict into the phase of a global confrontation,” Putin stressed. “This is precisely how we understand it all, and we will react accordingly. In this case the existence of our country is on the agenda,” he added.

Read more …

“..Sino-Russian relations are “rock solid and will withstand any test of the changing international situation..”

‘Big Difference’ Between Arming Ukraine and Russia – Borrell (RT)

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi asked the EU’s top diplomat, Josep Borrell, why he was so concerned with Beijing potentially giving weapons to Russia when Brussels is funnelling arms to Ukraine, Borrell told reporters. Wang and Borrell met at the Munich Security Conference last week, after which the latter warned on Monday that any Chinese assistance to the Russian military would be considered a “red line” by the EU. Speaking to reporters at a NATO meeting on Tuesday, Borrell said that he and Wang had a “frank conversation” in Munich. During this conversation, Wang made it clear that “China doesn’t provide arms to countries at war,” and had no plans of providing arms to Russia. This, Wang said, “is the principle of China’s foreign policy,” according to Borrell’s recollection.

However, Borrell said that Wang asked him: “Why do you show concern for me maybe providing arms for Russia when you are providing arms for Ukraine?” Borrell said that he responded by explaining the “big difference” between these scenarios, pointing out “what is at stake for us Europeans in the war in Ukraine.” However, he did not share his explanation with the press. Borrell is not the only senior Western diplomat to caution Beijing over its alleged support for Russia’s military. US Secretary of State Antony Blinken claimed last week that Washington was already aware of China’s non-lethal support for Moscow, and threatened “serious consequences” if that support escalated to lethal weapons. China’s foreign ministry responded to Blinken in a similar manner as Wang did to Borrell, urging the US to “seriously reflect” on its role in stoking the Ukraine conflict.

“It is the US, not China, that has been pouring weapons into the battlefield,” a ministry spokesman said on Monday. China has repeatedly called for a peaceful resolution to the conflict, and plans on releasing a peace proposal in the near future. Meanwhile, Beijing and Moscow have stepped up their bilateral trade since the beginning of Russia’s military operation in Ukraine last February, and both countries are currently taking part in trilateral naval drills with South Africa. Ahead of a potential visit to Moscow by Chinese President Xi Jinping this spring, Wang held a meeting in the Russian capital with Russian Security Council Secretary Nikolay Patrushev on Tuesday. Sino-Russian relations are “rock solid and will withstand any test of the changing international situation,” Wang said after the meeting.

Read more …

“..According to Wang, the two countries, as members of the United Nations Security Council, are responsible for “keeping the peace on the planet.”

China-Russia Relations ‘Rock Solid’ – Beijing (RT)

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said on Tuesday that the bond between the two countries was strong and stable. During his visit to Moscow, the diplomat met with Russian Security Council Secretary Nikolay Patrushev to discuss “mutually beneficial cooperation in all fields.” “China-Russia relations are mature in character and rock solid, able to withstand the challenges of the volatile international situation,” Wang stressed. He added that the countries were ready to defend their national interests and dignity. Patrushev responded to Wang by saying the relations between Moscow and Beijing had “inherent value” and “were not swayed by outside trends.” He added that a strategic partnership with China was a priority for Russia as both countries were devoted to creating “a more just world order.”

According to Wang, the two countries, as members of the United Nations Security Council, are responsible for “keeping the peace on the planet.” Wang announced on Saturday during the Munich Security Conference that China had a peace proposal for the ongoing conflict in Ukraine and that “some forces might not want to see peace talks materialize.” He claimed he would present this plan at a later time. Chinese leader Xi Jinping is also planning a visit to Moscow in the coming months for a summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin, as reported by WSJ, citing sources familiar with the plan.

Last week, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken stated that Washington had information that China was mulling over providing “lethal support” to Russia in the military operation in Ukraine and that this would have “consequences.” Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin said during Monday’s press briefing Beijing would “not accept the US’s finger-pointing or even coercion targeting China-Russia relations.”

Read more …

“..US intervention in Ukraine also shows that Washington is “a source of trouble rather than ‘defender of peace’ for the world,” Wang said..”

China Names US As ‘Top Disruptor’ (RT)

China has labeled the United States the “top disruptor” on the world stage, saying Washington seeks “hegemony” over other nations after an American official slammed Beijing for “aggressive” policies. During a Tuesday press briefing, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin was asked to respond to recent remarks by US Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman, who accused the People’s Republic of attempting to “reshape the rules-based international order.”“Facts have fully proven that the US is the top disruptor of international rules and order. Hegemony is the hallmark of its approach to… international affairs,” Wang said, adding “It is the US, not China, that undermines and tramples on international rules.”

The spokesman went on to cite “abuses” by the US military in Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan, as well as the use of sanctions for “coercion,” “looting” and “exploitation,” saying American foreign policy has been “creating division and stoking confrontation all over the world.” US intervention in Ukraine also shows that Washington is “a source of trouble rather than ‘defender of peace’ for the world,” Wang said, noting that the US has flooded the Ukrainian battlefield with more weapons than any other country.“It makes people wonder… whether the US finds it conscionable to tell the world it wants peace and yet sit and watch its defense industry lining up their pockets,” he continued.

Sherman’s comments on China were made earlier this month at an event hosted by the Brookings Institution, a Washington, DC-based think tank, where the senior diplomat repeatedly spoke of the “challenges” posed by Beijing. “We’ve known that the PRC is the pacing geopolitical challenge of our era, one that will test American diplomacy like few issues in recent memory. We recognize that the PRC is the only competitor with the intent and the means to reshape the rules-based international order,” she said, accusing China of “aggressive” policies abroad. While Sherman also blamed the People’s Republic for “a clear violation of our national sovereignty and international law” after a Chinese high-altitude balloon drifted into US airspace in late January, Wang rejected any suggestion the craft was intended for espionage.

“Despite China’s repeated communication, the US turned a blind eye to the plain facts and weaved the ‘spy balloon’ narrative,” he said, adding that US President Joe Biden “gave the order and US fighter jets blatantly shot down the Chinese airship. This is yet another example of US hegemony.”US-China tensions have significantly escalated over the past year, with relations rapidly deteriorating after a visit to Taiwan by then-US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi last summer. In addition to a new round of sanctions imposed over the balloon incident, the Biden administration has also carried out near-monthly transits of the disputed Taiwan Strait with US warships, despite numerous warnings from Beijing, which considers Taiwan part of its sovereign territory.

Read more …

“..some forces might not want to see peace talks materialize..”

Xi Jinping Planning Moscow Trip – WSJ (RT)

Chinese President Xi Jinping will travel to Moscow for a meeting with Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin in the coming months, the Wall Street Journal claimed on Tuesday. Reports of the trip come as Beijing looks to take a leading role in resolving the conflict in Ukraine. The visit will take place sometime in April or early May, the American newspaper said, citing “people familiar with the plan.” The sources claimed that Xi will use the summit with Putin to push for multiparty peace talks aimed at ending the fighting in Ukraine. Successive rounds of peace talks failed last year, with Kiev abruptly withdrawing from negotiations in Istanbul in April.

Russian officials and others elsewhere have claimed that Western powers pressured Ukraine into abandoning the talks, despite an agreement being close at hand. Chinese Foreign MInister Wang Yi announced last week that Beijing will soon release a paper outlining its “position on the political settlement of the Ukraine crisis.” Wang said that the plan will respect the “territorial integrity and sovereignty” as well as the “legitimate security concerns” of both Russia and Ukraine. However, the minister suggested that China’s push for peace may meet the same end as last year’s negotiations did, as “some forces might not want to see peace talks materialize,” in what was seen as a thinly-veiled reference to the West’s alleged intervention in Istanbul.

Wang arrived in Moscow on Tuesday, and the Wall Street Journal said he will discuss Xi’s visit with Russian officials. Wang is scheduled to meet Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov on Wednesday, but it is still unclear whether he will speak with Putin. China has taken a relatively neutral stance on Ukraine, with its Foreign Ministry repeatedly calling for peace talks while labeling the US the “main instigator” of the conflict. Beijing has refused to join the Western-led sanctions regime against Russia, and has strengthened its trade ties with Moscow since the start of the military operation in Ukraine last February.

Read more …

“..in the 1930s, the West actually paved the way for the Nazis to come to power in Germany, and now they have started to turn Ukraine into an anti-Russia..”

Putin Says West’s Goal Is To Tear Historical Regions Away From Russia (TASS)

The West’s project to create an “anti-Russia,” which is now being implemented in Ukraine, aims to tear away from Russia the historical regions that are now called Ukraine, President Vladimir Putin said in his State of the Nation Address to the Federal Assembly on Tuesday. The project to create an “anti-Russia” that the West is now implementing in Ukraine is “not new,” Putin stressed. “Let me reiterate that in the 1930s, the West actually paved the way for the Nazis to come to power in Germany, and now they have started to turn Ukraine into an anti-Russia. The project, in fact, is not new. People who know even the least bit of history know perfectly well, this project goes back to the 19th century,” the Russian president noted.


“It was nurtured in the Austro-Hungarian Empire, [it was nurtured] by Poland and other countries with one goal: to tear away from our country these historical territories, which today are called Ukraine. This is what this goal is all about, there is nothing new here, no novelty, everyone repeats things,” the president stressed. According to Putin, the West expedited this project by “supporting the 2014 coup” in Ukraine. “After all, the coup was bloody, anti-state, anti-constitutional, but it was as if nothing had happened, as if this is the way,” the president pointed out. “They even reported how much money was spent on it.

Kisin

Read more …

“..the West recognizes that it cannot defeat Russia militarily, which is why it is launching increasingly aggressive information attacks against Russian culture, history, the Orthodox Church, and other traditional values.”

Neo-Nazis in Ukraine, Failed Sanctions And Key Nuke Deal Suspension (RT)

Russia not only intends to firmly protect its own interests, but also its belief that the modern world should not be divided into “civilized countries” and “all the rest,” Putin said. He stressed the need for close partnerships without exceptionalism and resorting to aggression. The president insisted that Moscow remains open to constructive dialogue with the West, and continues to call for a united and fair global security system. However, Putin claimed that instead of cooperating, the West has only issued a muddled response and hidden behind the umbrella of NATO, which continues to expand its borders towards Russia[..] Putin asserted that the Ukrainian people have become expendable hostages for Kiev and its Western backers, who have occupied Ukraine in a political, military, and economic sense, devastating the country for the past several decades.

Putin suggested that the West is treating Ukraine as a battering ram against Russia, and is using the battlefield as a test-firing range. However, he stressed that one thing “everyone should understand” is that the longer the range of Western weapons systems being delivered to Ukraine, the farther Russia will be forced to move the threat away from its borders. “It’s only natural,” said the president. Western elites no longer hide their true intentions and are openly calling for a “strategic defeat for Russia,” Putin added. He accused them of trying to transform a local conflict into a global confrontation, but argued that Russia will “react accordingly” to any threats. At the same time, Putin insisted that the West recognizes that it cannot defeat Russia militarily, which is why it is launching increasingly aggressive information attacks against Russian culture, history, the Orthodox Church, and other traditional values.

The West has not only opened a military and information frontline against Russia, but also an economic one, according to Putin. However, its efforts have backfired and ultimately failed, despite attempts to spark inflation, crash the ruble, and blatantly steal Russia’s foreign exchange reserves, he added. “Anti-Russian sanctions are only a tool,” Putin observed, claiming that the goal, as Western officials themselves have stated, is to “force suffering” upon Russian citizens. “But they miscalculated, and Russia’s economy proved much more robust than the West expected,” the president argued. Russia is not just adapting to new realities, but is bringing its economy to new frontiers and working with its partners on establishing a stable and secure system of international settlements, independent of the dollar or other Western reserve currencies, Putin explained.

Putin stated that Moscow is well aware of the West’s involvement in attempts by Ukrainian forces to strike Russia’s strategic aviation. This, coupled with “absurd” requests from NATO to be allowed to inspect Russia’s defense facilities within the framework of the New START nuclear treaty, leaves Moscow no choice but to temporarily withdraw from the agreement, the president announced.

Read more …

You sure it’s not the other way around?

Zelensky ‘Commanding’ US Military – Congresswoman (RT)

Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky is pushing the US military closer to a global conflict, Republican Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene said on Monday. Her statement followed US President Joe Biden’s unannounced trip to Kiev the same day. “Biden didn’t go to East Palestine, Ohio on President’s Day,” Greene, a congresswoman from Georgia, wrote on Twitter, referring to a small US town where a train carrying hazardous materials derailed earlier this month. “He went to Ukraine, a NON-NATO nation, whose leader is an actor and is apparently now commanding our United States military to world war.” The congresswoman argued that Washington’s support for Kiev has been “like a US proxy war with Russia” that is “now becoming more like a US-China war through the Ukraine-Russia war.” Greene insisted that Biden must be impeached “before it’s too late.”


A vocal critic of Biden’s foreign policy, Greene has been among US politicians calling for an audit of the country’s military and economic aid to Ukraine. Congress blocked a motion on the matter in December. Biden made an unannounced trip to Kiev on Monday, almost a year after Moscow launched its military operation in the neighboring state. He unveiled a new $460 million aid package, which includes ammunition for HIMARS multiple rocket launchers and Javelin shoulder-fired anti-tank weapons. According to the Pentagon, Washington provided Kiev with $30.4 billion in security assistance between February 24, 2022 and February 20, 2023. Russia has maintained that foreign weapons will not change the course of the conflict. The country’s foreign minister, Sergey Lavrov, has said that by helping Ukraine, NATO has been waging “a proxy war” against Moscow. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said this month that the US-led alliance’s military infrastructure was “working 24/7” to sustain Ukraine.

Read more …

“..Zelensky acknowledged that foreign leaders “have the right to have their own position..”

Meloni may change her stance, but that would torpedo her coalition with Berlusconi.

Italy Rules Out Jets For Ukraine (RT)

Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni has said her country will not supply fighter jets to Ukraine, rebutting local press reports claiming that Rome was preparing to send several aging planes to bolster Kiev’s forces. Speaking alongside Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky during a visit to Kiev on Tuesday, Meloni was asked to comment on a recent report in the La Repubblica newspaper, which said Italy was ready to donate five of its older AMX ground attack fighters. “At the moment, the supply of planes is not on the table,” the premier said, adding that such a decision would have to be made “in consultation with international partners.”

Instead, Meloni said Italy is working on a new arms package for Ukraine which will include a number of air defense systems, such as the SAMP/T surface-to-air missile launcher, which will be supplied in coordination with France. While the PM offered few details about the upcoming weapons shipment, Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani said on Tuesday that Italy would send new air defenses “within weeks.” The government has already passed a decree to continue military assistance through 2023, after Defense Minister Guido Crosetto vowed to keep up the flow of weapons indefinitely. While Kiev has repeatedly urged for fighter jets from its Western patrons, it has so far found no takers. Some NATO members, such as Poland and Slovakia, have proposed sending older Zelensky acknowledged that foreign leaders “have the right to have their own position,”Soviet-era MiG-29s from their own arsenals, but have yet to do so, with Warsaw calling on the United States to lead a “wider coalition” of countries to supply aircraft.

Though Poland has been among the most vocal in demanding fighter jets for its neighbor, President Andrzej Duda recently observed that his country has fewer than 50 war planes in its inventory, suggesting Warsaw does not have any to spare. During his joint press briefing with Meloni on Tuesday, Ukraine’s referring to Italy’s refusal to supply jets. The two leaders also signed a joint declaration reaffirming their “support for the principles of international law,” while Rome vowed to promote “strong and effective political and material support for Ukraine” among its NATO and European allies.

Read more …

“..I could tell you again about US Secretary of State Colin Powell’s vial hoax, but if you are tired of this story, I have plenty of others..”

US Realizes No One Believes Its Nord Stream Story- Zakharova (TASS)

The United States administration realizes that no one believes that it played no role in the blasts that damaged the Nord Stream and Nord Stream 2 pipelines, the Russian Foreign Ministry’s official spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said. “The Americans claim they “had nothing to do” with the explosions of the Nord Stream pipelines even though the findings by renowned investigative reporter Seymour Hersh are widely available,” she wrote on her Telegram channel late on Tuesday. “We know that they know that everyone knows that this is a lie.” “The problem is not that “the US” is the only logical answer to the oldest question in legal practice, Cui bono (who benefits?) that makes any sense; the problem is that the Americans are simply lying. I could tell you again about US Secretary of State Colin Powell’s vial hoax, but if you are tired of this story, I have plenty of others,” the spokeswoman continued.

As an example, the diplomat cited the situation in the Republic of Haiti, which has remained under the US occupation for decades. “And now a few words about the real assistance from the United States. In 2010, a terrible earthquake occurred on the island, killing hundreds of thousands of people; the total number of victims, including those killed and injured, exceeded half a million. The US allocated $380 million. Does this seem like a lot? But a US presidential election is 15 times more expensive. By the way, Joe Biden promised Zelensky much more than to their ‘allies and friends’ from Haiti during the most terrible period of their history,” she wrote. In this regard, she also recalled the 2021 assassination of Haitian President Jovenel Moise and the failed assassination attempt on Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro.

“In 2021, Haitian President Jovenel Moise was assassinated; his wife, Martine, was also shot in the attack. And what was found? Suspicions that the Americans were responsible again emerged in the Western information landscape immediately,” Zakharova continued. “Also that week, the US Department of Justice issued a short press release declaring that several Americans associated with American PMC CTU Security had been arrested. Official Caracas reported that CTU had earlier been involved in the failed assassination attempt on Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro.” “This is a very thought-provoking story for Zelensky, who so affectionately embraced Joe Biden in the centre of Kiev. How much must one hate their own people to consider a prospect similar to that of long-suffering Haiti for themselves?” she said. “So, to what extent is the US “not responsible” for sabotaging Nord Stream – as much as for the assassination of Haiti’s president? Or for the vial hoax of the invasion of Iraq?” the spokeswoman asked rhetorically.

Read more …

“Unless its perpetrators are found and brought to justice, the attack may well usher in an epoch when transnational undersea infrastructure becomes a legitimate target, which would cause “chaos and terrible damage to all of humanity..”

Evidence Of US Guilt For Nord Stream ‘More Than A Smoking Gun’ – Russia (RT)

The destruction of Nord Stream pipelines was an act of international terrorism and needs to be addressed to avoid “chaos” on the high seas, Moscow’s ambassador to the UN, Vassily Nebenzia, told the UN Security Council on Tuesday. Russia has accused Germany, Sweden and Denmark of a cover-up to shield the US, and said it would only trust a UN investigation. The two pipelines carrying Russian natural gas to Germany under the Baltic Sea were damaged by a series of blasts in September 2022. While Moscow has stopped short of openly accusing the US of carrying out the bombing, journalist Seymour Hersh did just that in an article published earlier this month.

Nebenzia referred to Hersh’s article and statements by multiple US officials threatening the pipeline – from president Joe Biden and Secretary of State Antony Blinken, to “godmother of the anti-constitutional coup in Ukraine,” Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Victoria Nuland. He also brought up the infamous tweet by former Polish foreign minister Radek Sikorski and an alleged text by Liz Truss, the UK prime minister at the time – all suggesting the US and its allies had the motive, as well as means and opportunity, to destroy Nord Stream. “We’re not going to do ‘highly likely’ here,” said Nebenzia, referring to the British accusations against Russia in the Security Council chamber in 2018. The publicly available evidence is “more than a smoking gun” that Hollywood is so fond of, but all Moscow wants is an independent international investigation into the claims in Hersh’s article, the Russian diplomat added.

The attack on Nord Stream involved explosives and qualifies as international terrorism under a convention signed in 1997, Nebenzia noted. Unless its perpetrators are found and brought to justice, the attack may well usher in an epoch when transnational undersea infrastructure becomes a legitimate target, which would cause “chaos and terrible damage to all of humanity,” he added. According to Nebenzia, Russia does not trust the investigations currently conducted by Sweden, Denmark and Germany, as they all refused to share their findings or outright ignored Moscow’s inquiries. “It is quite clear,” he said, that they are “covering up for their American big brother.” If Western countries block Russia’s request for a UN investigation, that will “only shore up our suspicion,” he added.

Before Nebenzia addressed the Security Council, former US diplomat Rosemary DiCarlo – currently the under-secretary-general for Political and Peacebuilding Affairs – argued the world body was “not in position to verify or confirm” anything, urging everyone to “show restraint and avoid accusations that could escalate the already heightened tensions in the region.” The Security Council also heard from professor Jeffrey Sachs and retired CIA analyst Ray McGovern, who both testified to Hersh’s bona fides. While the US government rejected Hersh’s narrative as false, it “did not offer any information contradicting Hersh’s account, and did not offer any alternative explanation,” said Sachs. He also called Nuland’s comments about Nord Stream “not at all appropriate in the face of international terrorism.”

Nebenzya

Read more …

The US refuses to let Russian investigators in.

Duma Supports Bill On Suspending Russia’s Participation In New START (TASS)

The Russian State Duma Committee on International Affairs on Wednesday recommended to the lower house the adoption of a bill suspending Russia’s participation in the Measures for the Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms (START, New START). Russian President Vladimir Putin submitted the document to the State Duma. According to the bill, the New START Treaty will be suspended, and the decision on the resumption of Russia’s participation in the treaty will be made by the President of Russia. The law will go into effect on the day of its official publication. The treaty is an agreement between Russia and the United States which provides for the reduction of the nuclear arsenals of both countries.

Putin announced his decision to suspend Russia’s participation in New START in his State of the Nation Address to the Federal Assembly on Tuesday. The president stressed that Russia was not withdrawing from the treaty, but before discussing the continuation of work under this document, Russia must understand for itself how New START would take into account the arsenals not only of the United States, but also of other NATO nuclear powers: the UK and France. For its part, the Russian Foreign Ministry noted in its statement that Russia’s decision to suspend its participation in New START was reversible and called on Washington “to show political will and make good-faith efforts for general de-escalation and the creation of conditions for the resumption of the full functioning of the treaty”.

The ministry also said that despite the decision to suspend New START, Russia would continue to comply with its quantitative limits for the duration of the treaty’s validity. In addition, the Russian side will continue to participate in the exchange of notifications with Washington on the launch of intercontinental ballistic missiles and submarine-launched ballistic missiles on the basis of the 1988 agreement between the USSR and the US. The Foreign Ministry also added that Russia intended to closely monitor further actions of the United States and its allies “both in the field of New START and in the field of international security and strategic stability in general, and to analyze them with regard to damage to Russian interests” and the need for additional countermeasures on Moscow’s part.

Read more …

“..France and the UK. Their strategic nuclear forces were not usually included in the list of nuclear warheads and carriers when preparing agreements between the United States and the USSR (Russia), but it is high time to do so..”

Russia Will Defend Itself With Any Weapon, Including Nuclear – Medvedev (TASS)

The world faces a global conflict if Washington’s goal is to defeat Moscow. Russia will defend itself by any means, including with nuclear weapons, Russian Security Council Deputy Chairman Dmitry Medvedev said. “It is obvious to all the powers that be that if the US wants to defeat Russia, we are heading for a conflict on a global scale. If the US wants to defeat Russia, we have the right to defend ourselves with any weapon, including of the nuclear kind,” he wrote on his Telegram channel on Wednesday. Medvedev recalled that the day before, President Vladimir Putin gave his State of the Nation Address to the Federal Assembly which announced, among other things, the suspension of Russia’s participation in the Measures for the Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms (START, New START).

“This decision was long overdue, I pointed to it last year,” the politician said. According to his assessment, the decision, which was due to the war declared on Russia by the US and other NATO countries, will have big reverberations for the world at large and for Washington in particular. “After all, the American establishment’s reasoning so far has been the following: we will interfere in your affairs, we will supply copious amounts of weapons to the Kiev regime, we will work to defeat Russia, we will limit and destroy you, but strategic security is a separate topic. It’s not related to the overall context of the US-Russia relationship. It is almost like a sacred cow,” Medvedev noted.

This conclusion, he continued, is “worse than a crime – it is the Americans’ grave mistake”. According to the politician, this is a mistake “born of their mania grandiosa,” that is, their sense of superiority and impunity. He quoted Putin as saying that it was impossible to defeat Russia on the battlefield and noted that “this is exactly why we have suspended New START (for now)”. “Let the US elites who have lost touch with reality think about what they have achieved. Let’s also watch the reaction of other NATO nuclear powers: France and the UK. Their strategic nuclear forces were not usually included in the list of nuclear warheads and carriers when preparing agreements between the United States and the USSR (Russia), but it is high time to do so,” Medvedev summed up.

Read more …

Any time now, Tucker.

Anatomy of a Cover-up: The January 6 Tapes (Julie Kelly)

Tucker Carlson now has the equivalent of nearly five years of surveillance footage captured by U.S. Capitol Police security cameras on January 6, 2021. House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) turned over the tapes to the Fox News host earlier this month, according to Axios. Carlson’s producers and researchers are already distilling the footage; the first round of clips is expected to air in a few weeks. While some grumble that McCarthy did not fulfill his promise to publicly release the footage—arguably a valid complaint—Carlson’s team undoubtedly will give the massive trove much-needed context and maximum impact. Carlson released a three-part documentary, “Patriot Purge,” in November 2021 that explained how the events of January 6 helped launch a second “war on terror” against American citizens out of step with the Biden regime.

Since early 2021, Carlson has used his nightly show to expose the cruel treatment of Trump supporters suffering pretrial detention orders; raised questions about the use of undercover assets including FBI informants and the mysterious role of Ray Epps; asked why the case of the January 5 “pipe bomber” remains unsolved; and demanded the release of the surveillance video as late as last month. Releasing the video never should have been a political fight; after all, the footage was recorded on a taxpayer-paid closed circuit television system installed on public property to monitor public employees. Contrary to arguments by Capitol Police and the Justice Department, the video belongs to the public, not federal agencies.

But both entities, with the help of D.C. District Court judges, have successfully kept the trove largely under wraps for more than two years. Even the FBI and D.C. Metropolitan Police departments signed agreements a few days after the Capitol protest to acknowledge that the tapes technically belonged to Capitol Police. In a sworn statement filed in March 2021, Thomas DiBiase, general counsel for the Capitol Police, insisted the footage constituted “security information” that required very limited access. “Our concern is that providing unfettered access to hours of extremely sensitive information to defendants who already have shown a desire to interfere with the democratic process will . . . [be] passed on to those who might wish to attack the Capitol again,” DiBiase warned.

The Justice Department subsequently designated the tapes as “highly sensitive” government material subject to protective orders in January 6 prosecutions. It’s been a major battle for defendants and their attorneys to properly access all of the video tied to their cases; defendants cannot watch any clips without the presence of a legal authority and none of the footage can be shared or downloaded.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

$50 trillion

 

 

 

 


Sculpture by Smaban Abbas, departure terminal of the Cairo International Airport

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Sep 282022
 
 September 28, 2022  Posted by at 8:52 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , ,  36 Responses »


Salvador Dali Bather 1924

 

Four Regions Vote To Join Russia: What’s Next? (RT)
Russia’s Main Gas Pipeline To EU Suffers Unprecedented Damage – Operator (RT)
Kremlin Comments On Possible Causes Of Nord Stream Damage (RT)
European Nat Gas Prices Soar After Gazprom Warns Ukraine Flows At Risk (ZH)
Putin Blasts West’s ‘Predatory’ Food ‘Swindle’ (RT)
Ukraine Can Use Western Weapons Against ‘Territories Seized By Russia’ – US (RT)
Americans Are Growing Tired Of Support For Ukraine Without Diplomacy (BI)
US Preparing $1.1 Billion Arms Package for Ukraine (Antiwar)
Questions Over The Value Of Military And Political Alliances (Bordachev)
White House Mulling Potential Yellen Departure After Midterms (Axios)
Nadler Feuded With Schiff, Pelosi Over Unconstitutional Trump Impeachment (Fox)
Liberal Former PM Renzi Dismisses ‘Fascism’ Brewing in Italy Claims (BB)
Meloni Contra Mundum (Gonzalez)
Human Sacrifices: are They Coming Back? (Ugo Bardi)
Pro-Vaccine Doctor Suspects Pfizer Booster Sent His Cancer Into Overdrive (CHD)
CDC Finds Lasting Post-vaccine Heart Problems In Young Adults (JTN)

 

 

I’ve assembled so much material on the pipeline sabotage, I’ll -largely- deal with that separately.

 

 

 

 

Hurricane vaccine

 

 

 

 

 

 

Rosa Koire
https://twitter.com/i/status/1574735606676013058

 

 

 

 

 

 

“Immediately the Russian Constitution will come into force in relation to these territories where everything is very clearly stated in this regard..”

Four Regions Vote To Join Russia: What’s Next? (RT)

The Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics (LPR and DPR) along with Kherson Region and part of Zaporozhye Region in southern Ukraine have voted to join Russia in referendums that were held between September 23 and 27. In Lugansk, more than 98% of voters have supported the idea to join Russia, official figures show with all the ballots counted. Donetsk has shown similar results with more than 99% of voters supporting the move. Both Zaporozhye and Kherson regions have process all the ballots by late Tuesday, with 93% and 87% of voters respectively backing the split from Ukraine and reunification with Russia. The process of integrating new regions into Russia may take some time as it requires the approval of the country’s parliament and the president.

But Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said on Friday that he was “convinced it will be fast enough.” Under the Russian constitution and the federal law on the accession of new constituent members, the procedure includes several steps. Once the regions willing to become part of the Russian Federation submit their proposals to Moscow, the president should inform parliament and the government on the matter, Senator Konstantin Kosachev explained in a Telegram post last week. If a political agreement on the accession is reached, “draft international treaties on the admission of foreign states or parts of them” to Russia should be developed, Kosachev, the vice speaker of the upper house of parliament, said.

These agreements regulate issues such as the name and status of new territories, citizenship, succession, the functioning of public authorities, the operation of legislation, and so forth. After these treaties are signed, the Russian Constitutional Court should verify if they comply with the country’s supreme law. If there are no violations, the next step will be the ratification of the documents by the lower house, the State Duma, and their approval by the upper house, the Federation Council. Simultaneously, a draft federal constitutional law on the admission of new constituent units to Russia should be submitted to the Duma. If approved, it then goes to the upper house for consideration. “This law enters into force no earlier than the entry into force of the international treaties themselves,” Kosachev noted.

Moscow warned earlier that if the Donbass republics and the two southern Ukrainian regions united with Russia, it would consider any attempts by Kiev to retake them as attacks on its own land. “Immediately the Russian Constitution will come into force in relation to these territories where everything is very clearly stated in this regard,” Peskov told journalists last week. Shortly after the regions decided to hold referendums, Russian President Vladimir Putin announced a partial mobilization that involved calling to arms some 300,000 reservists, according to the military. Media reports have suggested that Moscow allegedly plans to mobilize up to a million.

Read more …

“Experts say repairs on both pipelines could take up to several years.”

Russia’s Main Gas Pipeline To EU Suffers Unprecedented Damage – Operator (RT)

The simultaneous destruction of three gas pipelines in the Baltic Sea is unprecedented, Nord Stream AG, the operator of Nord Stream 1, said on Tuesday. It declined to provide a deadline for repairs. The pipeline had been supplying gas to the EU until late August, when Russia slashed deliveries, citing technical difficulties resulting from Western sanctions. “The destruction that occurred on the same day at once on three strings of the offshore gas pipelines of the Nord Stream system is unprecedented. It is not yet possible to estimate the timing of the restoration of the gas transmission infrastructure,” the company said.

On Monday, Danish authorities spotted a gas leak near the island of Bornholm in the Baltic Sea, and closed off an area of five nautical miles (9.26km) around the site. The discovery came shortly after the defunct Nord Stream 2 pipeline suffered a drastic loss of pressure overnight. German and Danish authorities are investigating the incidents. Nord Stream spokesman Ulrich Lissek said a “large bubble field near Bornholm” was spotted, adding that “the pipeline was never in use, just prepared for technical operation, and therefore filled with gas.” Meanwhile, on Tuesday, Sweden’s Maritime Authority also reported leaks on the Nord Stream 1 pipeline northeast of the Bornholm island in Swedish and Danish waters, Reuters reported, citing the country’s officials.

“There are two leaks on Nord Stream 1 – one in the Swedish economic zone and one in the Danish economic zone. They are very near each other,” a Swedish Maritime Administration spokesperson said. As the German Tagesspiegel newspaper reported on Tuesday, Nord Stream pipelines may have been damaged as a result of attacks. “A pressure loss in the two gas pipelines that occurred in rapid succession” could have happened due to a “targeted action,” it said. Experts say repairs on both pipelines could take up to several years. Lissek warned that it would be complicated to determine the reasons for the drop in pressure due “the sanctions regime and the lack of personnel on the ground.”

Read more …

“..a deliberate attack on the pipeline could only have been carried out using special forces, navy divers or a submarine”

Kremlin Comments On Possible Causes Of Nord Stream Damage (RT)

The Nord Stream pipelines may have been damaged in an act of sabotage, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov suggested when asked about the possible reasons for sudden pressure loss in three of the Baltic Sea gas network’s lines. Speaking to journalists on Tuesday, Peskov commented on a statement made by Nord Stream AG, the operator of the network, which said three offshore lines of the Nord Stream pipeline system sustained “unprecedented”damage in just one day. “No option can be ruled out right now,” Peskov said when asked if the damage may have been the result of sabotage. He added that Moscow is very concerned about the situation, and called for an immediate and thorough investigation into the incident, which has implications for energy security on the “entire continent.”

Pressure in line A of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, which was pumped with gas but had yet to go into operation, suddenly dropped overnight between Sunday and Monday. Shortly after that, on Monday afternoon, both of Nord Stream 1’s pipelines also suffered a sharp loss of pressure. Sweden and Denmark’s coastguards have since reported gas leaks off the coast of Bornholm island in the Baltic Sea – one in the Swedish economic zone and one in the Danish zone – and closed off the area to maritime traffic. According to a report from the Tagesspiegel newspaper on Tuesday, Berlin believes the sudden pressure drop in three gas pipelines at the same time could not be a coincidence and is likely a “targeted attack” from either Ukraine or Russia.

The outlet explained that a deliberate attack on the pipeline could only have been carried out using special forces, navy divers or a submarine. Berlin reportedly believes the sabotage was carried out by either “Ukraine-affiliated forces” or by Russia itself as a “false flag” operation to make Ukraine look bad and drive energy prices in the EU even higher. Nord Stream 1 was completed in 2011. Construction work on Nord Stream 2 (NS2) began in 2018, and suffered delays due to political pressure and sanctions from the US. NS2 was finished and pressurized in September 2021. However, two days prior to Russia’s military operation in Ukraine, the German government put its certification on indefinite hold, and has categorically rejected any suggestion from Moscow – or domestically – to unblock the pipeline.

Read more …

With Nordstream gone, they have to pay transfer fees again, to Ukraine and Poland. In dollars and euros.

European Nat Gas Prices Soar After Gazprom Warns Ukraine Flows At Risk (ZH)

In a day of constant news surrounding European gas flows, including the potential sabotage of the Nord Stream pipeline, moments ago, Russia state-owned gas giant Gazprom PJSC warned that another major source of gas flows to Europe was at risk, just hours after three massive gas pipelines were hit by suspected sabotage. As Bloomberg reports, in a dramatic escalation of the energy standoff between Russia and Europe in little over 24 hours, the Nord Stream pipeline was knocked out by what German officials said looked like sabotage. Gazprom then said that one of two remaining routes bringing gas to Europe – via Ukraine – was at risk because of a legal spat. Specifically, as Reuters notes, Gazprom rejected all claims from Ukraine’s energy firm Naftogaz in arbitration proceedings over Russian gas transit, and had notified the arbitration court.

It also said that Russia may introduce sanctions against Naftogaz in case it further pursues the arbitration case, meaning Gazprom would be prohibited by the sanctions from paying Ukraine the transit fees. Naftogaz had initiated a new arbitration proceeding against Gazprom earlier this month, saying the Russian company did not pay for the rendered service of gas transportation through Ukraine. The company had said “funds were not paid by Gazprom, neither on time nor in full” for the gas transit. Gazprom said on Tuesday that Naftogaz had no “appropriate reasons” to reject its obligations on transit via the Sokhranovka point, a key route for Russian gas exports to Europe. In May, Ukraine suspended the flow of gas through Sokhranovka, which it said delivers almost a third of the fuel piped from Russia to Europe through Ukraine, blaming Moscow for the move and saying it would move the flows elsewhere.

Following the report that Russia may soon halt natgas transit via Ukraine, gas prices quickly jumped almost 20% as traders factored in the prospect that Europe will have to live without Russian gas this winter – and beyond. Gazprom said that a legal dispute risks prompting Moscow to sanction Ukraine’s Naftogaz. If that happened, then Gazprom would be unable to pay transit fees, the company said on Telegram, putting at risk flows. “In practice, this will mean a ban on Gazprom from fulfilling obligations to sanctioned bodies under completed transactions, including financial transactions,” the company said. If, or rather when, supplies through Ukraine are shut down, it would leave Gazprom sending gas only via the TurkStream pipeline to Turkey and a handful of European countries that haven’t severed business ties with Russia.

Winter is coming

Read more …

“Russia is set to harvest a record amount of grain this year [..] But Russian food products have a difficult time finding their way to the global market due to Western economic sanctions, as do Russian fertilizers..”

Putin Blasts West’s ‘Predatory’ Food ‘Swindle’ (RT)

“Predatory” monetary and trade policies pursued by the US and its allies are the primary cause of the global food crisis, Russian President Vladimir Putin has said. Western nations are using their wealth and ability to print money to vacuum up food products from the global market, the Russian leader said during a government meeting on Tuesday. The unfolding crisis has been in the making for several years, he claimed. “Some leading nations have financial and food policies that led to the result we are observing now,” Putin said, adding that the behavior could be described as “predatory, without any exaggeration.” He noted that the US was a net exporter of food products last year, but now it is a net importer.

The Russian leader also reiterated his criticism of the Ukraine grain deal, which allowed Kiev to export food via the Black Sea. The arrangement was mediated by the UN and Türkiye, but Russia believes it is not working as intended, arguing that the shipments do little to alleviate food shortages in needy nations. Putin cited last week’s maritime traffic statistics in relation to the scheme, pointing out that most of the ships carrying Ukrainian grain that didn’t report Türkiye as their destination went to one of the EU nations. “Are they the poorest nations or what? The situation remains the same. Embarrassing as it sounds, but this is plain swindle, and nothing else,” he said.

Russia is set to harvest a record amount of grain this year, which is predicted to reach 150 million tons, including some 100 million tons of wheat, Putin said. But Russian food products have a difficult time finding their way to the global market due to Western economic sanctions, as do Russian fertilizers, he added. The West “is causing the global food crisis,” he claimed. The US and its allies deny that the restrictions they have imposed on Russian trade over the country’s military campaign in Ukraine are targeting its food and fertilizer exports. Officials in Moscow say that, while those products are technically not banned, restrictions on things like insurance and port services for Russian merchant ships effectively curb the country’s ability to export food and fertilizers.

Read more …

“Blinken also accused Russia of a “diabolical scheme” to deport or “disappear” the local Ukrainian population and “bus in” Russians..”

Ukraine Can Use Western Weapons Against ‘Territories Seized By Russia’ – US (RT)

Washington has no objections to Kiev using Western-supplied weapons to target territories that may decide to join Russia, as the US considers the vote to do so illegitimate, Secretary of State Antony Blinken said on Tuesday. The US and its allies have supplied Ukraine with a variety of weapons, including tube and rocket artillery. At a joint press conference with his Indian counterpart Dr. Subrahmanyam Jaishankar in Washington, Blinken was asked if the US had any objections to Ukraine using those weapons to attack targets in Donetsk, Lugansk, Zaporozhye and Kherson, which just wrapped up a vote on joining Russia. “We will never recognize the annexation of Ukrainian territory by Russia,” Blinken told reporters.

“Ukraine has the absolute right to defend itself throughout its territory, including to take back the territory that has been illegally seized, one way or another, by Russia. And the equipment, the weapons that we and many other countries are providing, have been used very effectively to do just that.” Russia’s “annexation” of the Donbass republics and the two regions will make zero difference to either Ukraine or the US, Blinken insisted. “The Ukrainians will continue to do what they need to do to get back the land that has been taken from them. We will continue to support them in that effort.” In June, when the US first sent long-range HIMARS rocket artillery to Ukraine, Blinken said he had received “assurances” from Kiev that they will not be used on Russian territory, and that he believed them due to a “strong trust bond.”

Kiev’s forces have since used the US-supplied weapons to target civilians in Donbass, Kherson and Zaporozhye, which are under Russian control. Ukraine has also bombed Crimea and border towns in the Russian regions of Kursk and Belgorod. Crimea rejoined Russia in March 2014, after the US-backed coup in Kiev, while Donetsk and Lugansk declared independence. Blinken also accused Russia of a “diabolical scheme” to deport or “disappear” the local Ukrainian population and “bus in” Russians who would then vote in a manipulated referendum to get annexed by Moscow.

Read more …

Given that there is no real information available in the US, this is quite the poll.

Americans Are Growing Tired Of Support For Ukraine Without Diplomacy (BI)

A new poll suggests that many Americans are growing weary as the US government continues its support of Ukraine in its war with Russia and want to see diplomatic efforts to end the war if aid is to continue. According to a poll conducted by the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft and Data for Progress, 57% of likely voters strongly or somewhat support the US pursuing diplomatic negotiations as soon as possible to end the war in Ukraine, even if it requires Ukraine making compromises with Russia. Just 32% of respondents were strongly or somewhat opposed to this. And nearly half of the respondents (47%) said they only support the continuation of US military aid to Ukraine if the US is involved in ongoing diplomacy to end the war, while 41% said they support the continuation of US military aid to Ukraine whether the US is involved in ongoing diplomacy or not.

The Biden administration and Congress need to do more diplomatically to help end the war, according to 49% of likely voters, while 37% said they have done enough in this regard, the poll showed. “Americans recognize what many in Washington don’t: Russia’s war in Ukraine is more likely to end at the negotiating table than on the battlefield. And there is a brewing skepticism of Washington’s approach to this war, which has been heavy on tough talk and military aid, but light on diplomatic strategy and engagement,” said Trita Parsi, executive vice president at the Quincy Institute. “‘As long as it takes’ isn’t a strategy, it’s a recipe for years of disastrous and destructive war — conflict that will likely bring us no closer to the goal of securing a prosperous, independent Ukraine.

US leaders need to show their work: explain to the American people how you plan to use your considerable diplomatic leverage to bring this war to an end,” Parsi added. The poll found close to half of likely US voters (48%) somewhat or strongly oppose the US providing aid to Ukraine at current levels if long-term global economic hardship, including in the US, occurs. Meanwhile, the poll showed that only four-in-10 Americans somewhat or strongly support the US providing aid to Ukraine at current levels if this occurs.

Read more …

“..will bring total US spending on the war since Russia invaded to $65.9 billion, which is the same number as Russia’s entire military budget for 2021.”

US Preparing $1.1 Billion Arms Package for Ukraine (Antiwar)

The US is preparing a new $1.1 billion arms package for Ukraine that will be announced soon, Reuters reported Tuesday, citing unnamed US officials. The weapons package will likely include HIMARS rocket systems, HIMARS ammunition, counter-drone systems, radar systems, training, and technical support. The arms package is expected to be provided to Kyiv using the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative (USAI) as opposed to sending the arms directly from US military stockpiles. The USAI allows the Biden administration to purchase military equipment for Ukraine from the US arms industry.


The new package will bring the total amount of US arms pledged for Ukraine since Russia invaded on February 24 to over $16 billion. Funds for Ukraine are still being pulled from the $40 billion aid package President Biden signed into law back in May, but Congress is preparing to authorize more spending to support the war. Congress unveiled on Tuesday a new $12.3 billion aid package for Ukraine that will be included in a stopgap funding bill that needs to be passed this week to avoid a government shutdown. The $12.3 billion includes military and economic support for Ukraine and will bring total US spending on the war since Russia invaded to $65.9 billion, which is the same number as Russia’s entire military budget for 2021.

Read more …

Valdai Club Programme Director Timofey Bordachev.

Questions Over The Value Of Military And Political Alliances (Bordachev)

The continuing military and diplomatic clash between Russia and the West, led by the United States, raises questions to which, until recently, the answers seemed obvious. These include the phenomena of permanent alliances and allied relations. It is no secret that the behaviour of Moscow’s formal allies in the CSTO (Collective Security Treaty Organization) and the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) in today’s environment raises questions for the Kremlin, while Russia’s opponents are raising hopes that the existence of these blocs is no longer an advantage, but a problem, for Russia’s foreign and defence policy. We see examples of individual member countries of the CSTO or the EAEU meeting US demands in matters related to economic warfare against Russia. This makes one wonder how important and necessary are Russia’s allies when it cannot, like the US, exercise authoritarian control over its foreign and defence policies?

The phenomenon of permanent alliance relations is a relatively recent invention in international politics – it emerged after the Second World War and it is entirely unknown whether the next round of global upheavals of a similar scale will see it survive. Even if we are not all blown to bits by a general nuclear catastrophe in the coming years, what is happening makes the prospects for all the phenomena that have shaped the fabric of international life in recent decades, without exception, highly uncertain. Today, the benchmark example of a permanent alliance of sovereign states is European integration. Another similar example is the NATO bloc, in which participation is cemented by the unconditional authority of a power far superior to its allies and not shy in making that clear.

It is no coincidence that the conflict around Ukraine, the first major war of the new era in international politics, is linked to the development of these two alliances. A strong group of states inevitably creates conflicts around itself. Indeed, this becomes a consequence of the fact that it protects the interests of its members. [..] the whole idea of an alliance in the usual sense of the word has lost all meaning. First and foremost, for its leading participant. The small member states obviously have neither alternative options nor the military, political or demographic resources for fully independent survival. This helps us to solve the problem of the formal preservation of such associations, even if they lose much of their necessary functions and content. However, it should be understood that, in the future, Russia, like its neighbors, will either have to give up the idea of institutionalizing its relations or resort to rather more authoritarian methods of governance.

Read more …

A decade of financial disaster.

White House Mulling Potential Yellen Departure After Midterms (Axios)

White House officials are quietly preparing for the potential departure of Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen after the midterms, the first and most consequential exit in what could be a broad reorganization of President Biden’s economic team, according to people familiar with the matter. While her potential departure would give Biden an opportunity to respond to public concern over his handling of the economy, it would also create an immediate political headache: finding a successor who can be confirmed by the Senate. The process is in the early stages and a decision on Yellen, or any Cabinet replacement, has not been made. Multiple sources stressed the outcome of November’s election, including who controls the Senate, will factor into whether she stays.

Yellen will also have some say in her fate, and with the world’s economy teetering, there could be a convincing case for her to stay. In addition to Yellen, officials are also considering the possibility that Brian Deese, the director of the National Economic Council, will leave early next year. Deese’s departure would present an opportunity for Gene Sperling, who is currently coordinating the implementation of the $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan, to serve an unprecedented third term as NEC director after holding that post in the Clinton and Obama administrations. Cecilia Rouse, the chair of the Council of Economic Advisers, is also expected to return to her academic post in the spring of 2023, opening up another Cabinet-level economic position.

Yellen, an economist by trade and at heart, has been reluctant to make overly political arguments when they violate her core academic beliefs. The former Fed and CEA chair has disagreed with the White House on several high-profile issues, including the White House faulting corporations for increasing inflation and — most recently — Biden’s decision to forgive some student debt. She has also made several statements that White House officials have privately viewed as blunders. Yellen publicly admitted this summer she was wrong on inflation, and last year said it would be a “plus” if the Fed raised interest rates.

Read more …

“..that Trump would not be able to face his accusers before being impeached did not sit right with Nadler, who warned Pelosi and Schiff of the ramifications it would have in the long run.”

You made your bed, Jerry. Lie in it.

Nadler Feuded With Schiff, Pelosi Over Unconstitutional Trump Impeachment (Fox)

A new book reveals that House Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., was at odds with how House Select Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s handling of impeachment proceedings against former President Trump, insisting that the methods used by the prominent Democrats were “unconstitutional” and could be used to attack the party. The revelation comes in a book set to be released on October 18 titled, “Unchecked: The Untold Story Behind Congress’s Botched Impeachments of Donald Trump,” written by Politico Playbook co-author Rachael Bade and Washington Post reporter Karoun Demirjian. The book chronicles the methods Democrats used to target Trump.

In October 2019, amid the Democrats’ plan to hold a full House vote on a resolution outlining the structure of impeachment proceedings against Trump, Nadler, according to the book, took issue with how Schiff, who was tapped by Pelosi to lead impeachment efforts, was prepared to proceed with the impeachment without due process for Trump. Worried about the situation and the likelihood that his Judiciary Committee would not be able to cross-examine witnesses as the committee had done traditionally, Nadler confronted Schiff about the planned process, and, according to the book, said: “It’s unfair, and it’s unprecedented, and it’s unconstitutional.” “I don’t appreciate your tone,” Schiff allegedly responded. “I worry you’re putting us in a box for our investigation.”

Sidelined by Pelosi to handle impeachment proceedings in the House, the book claims Nadler made an “effort to get back into Pelosi’s good graces” and that his “aides sucked up to her staff relentlessly” in an attempt to show that his panel was prepared to step in and assist. Striving to earn approval from Pelosi, Nadler hired attorneys and had his team pour through records and books from the impeachments of former Presidents Nixon and Johnson. Those efforts worked and led Pelosi and Schiff to reconsider the Judiciary Committee’s involvement in the process, although they had “their own ideas about how he should run his committee process,” according to the book.

“She didn’t want the Judiciary panel to interview witnesses at all,” the book’s authors wrote. “Pelosi simply didn’t trust the panel — which was stacked with liberal crusaders and hotheaded conservatives — to handle the rollout of the complex Ukraine narrative with the careful, compelling treatment it required. She couldn’t afford another Nadler screwup. The Judiciary chairman could focus on the legal business of crafting the articles of impeachment and have academics testify, she allowed. But that was it.” Nadler’s frustration with the pair of Democrats grew. Research conducted by his team proved that presidents facing impeachment from Congress had been allowed to defend themselves before the House Judiciary Committee, with attorneys for the president having the opportunity to attend hearings, as well as cross-examine testifying witnesses or call their own.

That did not matter to Schiff, and the fact that Trump would not be able to face his accusers before being impeached did not sit right with Nadler, who warned Pelosi and Schiff of the ramifications it would have in the long run. “If we’re going to impeach, we need to show the country that we gave the president ample opportunity to defend himself,” Nadler told them, according to the book.

Read more …

“She is my rival and we will continue to fight each other, but the idea that now there is a risk of fascism in Italy is absolutely fake news.” – Renzi

Liberal Former PM Renzi Dismisses ‘Fascism’ Brewing in Italy Claims (BB)

Former liberal Prime Minister of Italy Matteo Renzi has dismissed alarmist claims in the global media that incoming Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni is a “danger to democracy”, telling CNN “the idea that now there is a risk of fascism in Italy is absolutely fake news.” “Personally, I was against Giorgia Meloni. I’m not her best friend. We grew up together in politics, but we are, and will be, rivals, always,” said Renzi, who served as Prime Minister of Italy for nearly three years until December 2016, and is the leader of the liberal “Italia Viva” party. “At the same time, I think [Meloni] is not a danger [to] Italian democracy,” Renzi continued. “She is my rival, and we will continue to fight each other, but the idea that now there is a risk of fascism in Italy is absolutely fake news.”


The former Prime Minister went on to say that Meloni won Sunday night’s election, “particularly because populism, a lot of times, [wins] in Italy.” “She has a majority coalition, and probably she will be — I think next month — the next Prime Minister,” Renzi said, before doubling down on his claim that “democracy” is not at risk. “That is very important, because I fought against her, but at the same time, I think there is not a danger for fascism in Italy,” Renzi affirmed. Elsewhere in the interview, Renzi mentioned that he is “exactly the opposite of Giorgia Meloni, because she is a sovereigntist and I’m for Europe” [the European Union]. The international media has been quick to compare her to wartime fascist leader Mussolini, a serious allegation. Yet as Renzi’s comments demonstrate, not even Meloni’s own opposition inside Italy believes this to be true.

Read more …

“Me, I believe Mussolini was a good politician,” Meloni said in an interview. “By which I mean that everything he did, he did for Italy.”

Meloni Contra Mundum (Gonzalez)

[..] liberal democracies across the West unified this weekend in denouncing the democratic will of the Italian people, who have just propelled Giorgia Meloni and her right-wing Italian nationalist party to electoral victory. Man is a symbolic animal, and Meloni’s victory is seen as a symbolic rejection of Western liberalism. Whether she lives up to that potential is yet to be seen. But the electricity of the moment is palpable: the Italians have voted against the times. It’s difficult to dislike this atypical politician. Meloni’s father abandoned his family when she was just 11 years old, leaving her mother to raise her alone. She has working-classes bona fides, working as a nanny, waitress, and bartender to support herself. She has been politically engaged since she was a teenager and has never been shy about her views.

“Me, I believe Mussolini was a good politician,” Meloni said in an interview. “By which I mean that everything he did, he did for Italy.” Though she may not have read Legutko, Meloni has also noticed the similarities between communism and liberal democracy. “We did not fight against and defeat communism in order to replace it with a new internationalist regime,” she said during the National Conservatism conference in Rome, “but to permit independent nation-states once again to defend the freedom, identity, and sovereignty of their peoples.” Meloni has denounced the mass immigration of non-European people to European lands and called for naval blockades in the Mediterranean to thwart migrant smugglers. She also went against the grain on COVID-19 vaccines and lockdowns. Meloni was the only party leader to oppose the so-called Green Pass—a vaccine passport that would have been required to work, travel, and shop.

Under different circumstances, the West might be celebrating the ascent of this underdog. But her politics are, for the most part, outside the West’s liberal democratic consensus, which is why Italians love her. Most of all, Meloni breaks the consensus on social and cultural issues at the center of liberalism’s moral universe. She emphatically opposes abortion and same-sex marriage, rejects gender ideology and the promotion of alternative sexual lifestyles. At a rally before an audience that stood to its feet and applauded ceaselessly at her words, Meloni thundered: “Yes to natural families, no to the LGBT lobby, yes to sexual identity, no to gender ideology, yes to the culture of life, no to the abyss of death, no to the violence of Islam, yes to safer borders, no to mass immigration, yes to work for our people.”

Read more …

“You may not like ms. Meloni’s political orientation but she is a human being and, as such, she deserves respect, especially considering that she has taken upon herself a tremendously difficult task.”

Human Sacrifices: are They Coming Back? (Ugo Bardi)

If there ever was a society under stress, it is ours. We passed all the limits of survival: destroyed the oldr-growth forests, killed off large number of species, poisoned the atmosphere, depleted our mineral resources, eroded the fertile soil, polluted water and the atmosphere, set the planet on a path to an irreversible warming and a few more little things, including having deployed a sufficient number of nuclear warhead to wreck the ecosystem and, most likely, kill everybody. And we haven’t renounced to our beloved habit of making war against each other. Would you be surprised if we were to indulge in large scale human sacrifices? We are not yet there, but the path seems to be traced. Have you noted how popular are the “Zombie” movies?

Take a look at them in light of what I have been saying here: do you see them as a blueprint for the mass extermination of suburbanites? First starve them, easy: just stop the delivery to the local supermarkets and service stations. Once they run out of food and fuel, they are doomed. Then, while they are still able to stumble along, finish them off with a bullet to the head. Truly, the fascination with this idea casts much light on what our society has in mind for the near future. We are not yet to the point of seeing the elites booking zombie-killing safaris in the suburbs of our cities. But other possible large scale sacrifices are possible. I already mentioned how the German government had hired the country’s doctors to cull the undesirables. They had complied, happily. That could be easily done in our times, too.

The concept of human sacrifice, though, is not about numbers, but about the visible high-status of the victim. Now, after the electoral victory of Giorgia Meloni in Italy, many people commented by publishing on their social accounts the images of Mussolini’s dead body and of his lover Claretta Petacci. A clear message to Ms. Meloni, just as the many published images showing her upside-down, just like Mussolini and Petacci were. Will she undergo the same treatment as Mussolini? For sure, Italy is going toward a difficult period and whoever will lead the country risks being deemed responsible for whatever disaster will befell Italy in the near future. And it is also true that people can be extremely nasty when they are in a dire situation. You may not like ms. Meloni’s political orientation but she is a human being and, as such, she deserves respect, especially considering that she has taken upon herself a tremendously difficult task. We can and we should wish her success. Good luck, Giorgia, you’ll need a lot of it.

Read more …

They don’t want to believe themselves.

Pro-Vaccine Doctor Suspects Pfizer Booster Sent His Cancer Into Overdrive (CHD)

Michel Goldman, M.D., Ph.D., professor of immunology and pharmacotherapy at the Université libre de Bruxelles in Belgium, suspects his third dose of Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine may have sent his cancer into overdrive. Goldman, 67, is one of Europe’s best-known champions of medical research and a lifelong promoter of vaccines. But he told The Atlantic he wants discussion of the COVID-19 vaccine to be transparent — so he went public about his suspicion that the Pfizer booster shot he received on Sept. 22, 2021, may have induced rapid progression of his angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma (AITL), a type of lymphoma he’d been diagnosed with before he got the booster shot. After his diagnosis, Goldman said he rushed to get the booster shot, believing he would need it more than most people because once he started chemotherapy, his immune system would be compromised.

But after receiving the shot, Goldman’s follow-up CT scan showed something unexpected: Within only a few days, his cancer had grown so fast that cancerous points were lighting up all over his scan. “It looked like someone had set off fireworks inside Michel’s body,” The Atlantic reported. Goldman and his brother, Serge Goldman, a fellow scientist and head of nuclear medicine at the teaching hospital of the Université libre de Bruxelles, suspected Goldman’s COVID-19 booster shot may have triggered the rapid proliferation of cancerous growth in his body. The initial CT scan had been “a bit disturbing,” Serge Goldman told The Atlantic, because it showed an asymmetrical cluster of cancerous nodes around Goldman’s left armpit, where Michel’s first two doses of vaccine had been delivered.

The CT scan done after Michel’s third dose showed the cancer’s asymmetry had flipped and was clustered by his right armpit, where he received the third shot. The brothers knew it could be a mere coincidence, but they thought it was important to investigate the possibility that the vaccine might be behind the clustering — because it could mean other people with certain forms of cancer might be at risk of a COVID-19 vaccine causing their cancer to progress more rapidly. So on Nov. 25, 2021, the brothers — who had written prior papers together — and other colleagues published a case report in which they described Michel Goldman’s experience and urged the scientific community to study the phenomenon to see if it occurred in patients diagnosed with AITL.

Read more …

The CDC is politics disguised as science.

CDC Finds Lasting Post-vaccine Heart Problems In Young Adults (JTN)

The CDC continues to erase distinctions by COVID-19 vaccination status in public health guidance as ongoing global research — including its own — documents the mediocre performance of COVID vaccines and their unexpectedly high rates of lasting harm in some groups. Vaccination status is no longer used “to inform source control, screening testing, or post-exposure recommendations” for healthcare personnel, the Friday update to their CDC guidance says. The agency “[c]larified” that healthcare facilities, including nursing homes, have discretion on whether to screen-test asymptomatic personnel. It also now says asymptomatic patients “in general” do not require “empiric use of Transmission-Based Precautions” after exposure to an infected person.

A CDC study of 12-29 year-olds with heart inflammation following mRNA vaccination, published last week in The Lancet Child & Adolescent Health, found that 1 in 6 still had not “fully recovered” at least 90 days after myocarditis onset, including 1 in 100 who hadn’t improved at all. Myocarditis has increased so markedly among youth since vaccines were authorized for them that an Ivy League-affiliated hospital started running TV ads this month for its treatment in children. New York-Presbyterian marked the ad’s Sept. 6 YouTube video private less than two weeks later, following criticism that it was trying to “normalize” a vaccine-induced condition. The CDC’s COVID-19 Response Team found more than 800 myocarditis reports to the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System from Jan. 12 to Nov. 5, 2021 that matched the parameters for age and time since onset.

Excluding those without phone numbers or who couldn’t be reached, they studied 393 individuals whose healthcare providers, mostly cardiologists, completed a survey. The median age was 17 and overwhelmingly male. The team deemed four in five patients “fully or probably fully” recovered (320). But two-thirds of those initially required non-intensive care hospitalization, and 27% required intensive care. At their last provider followup, 28% of the fully recovered were still on doctor-ordered physical activity restrictions. The figures for the 65 patients who were not fully recovered: 62% non-intensive hospitalization and 18% intensive, and 48% still on physical activity restrictions. Less than a third had been cleared for physical activity, half the figure for the fully recovered, who had a median clearance of 10 fewer days (104).

Read more …

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Beach front
https://twitter.com/i/status/1574535405051019264

 

 

 

 

 

 


Staircase

 

 

 

 

Bird
https://twitter.com/i/status/1574778092131860483

 

 

 

 

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