monarchy Archives - The Automatic Earth

ELON MUSK: "In 5 years, digital intelligence will exceed the sum of all human intelligence."

Within five years, there may be at least 100 million humanoid robots, possibly even 1 billion.

The economy could double in size within 5 to 7 years because AI and robotics may increase… https://t.co/P6vLUAKvAp pic.twitter.com/kw0zudz5db
— DogeDesigner (@cb_doge) June 21, 2026

There’s quite a few people I don’t agree with anymore on the topic. Makes me curious.

• War On Iran: Trump: “It Really Probably Is Unconditional Surrender” (MoA)

On Wednesday, June 17 2026, Trump signed a Memorandum of Understanding with Iran in Versailles. That palace has seen a lot of defeats. Asked about the MoU he called it an “unconditional surrender”: Caputo also asked Trump about his original promise that the war would end with an “unconditional surrender” from Tehran, pointing to the memorandum of understanding he signed on Wednesday. “Well, it really probably is unconditional surrender,” Trump told the outlet. But Trump leaves this open: Surrender by whom? His declared war aims and demands for Iran were regime change, no ballistic missiles and no nuclear program.

Now Trump himself is fearing regime change. He defends Iran’s reliance on ballistic missiles and no longer minds it having nuclear stuff. March 6 2026: President Trump declared on Friday that he would settle for nothing short of “unconditional surrender” by Iran, the latest and broadest expansion of his goals for the conflict, Six days into the Israeli and American bombing campaign, Iran has shown no interest, at least publicly, in surrendering. Mr. Trump declared on Saturday, in the opening hours of the U.S. attack, that Iran’s people should rise up and overthrow their government.
But in the following days, both Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth pivoted away from the emphasis on regime change, saying that the United States was simply focused on assuring that Iran’s nuclear program was permanently destroyed, and that it no longer had the missile capability to attack Israel, its Arab neighbors, and perhaps someday America. Trump Demands ‘Unconditional Surrender’ by Iran (archived) – Mar 6 2026 – NY Times
June 18 2026: President Donald Trump said Wednesday that he was motivated to finalize the memorandum of understanding (MOU) with Iran to prevent “economic catastrophe” if the war was not resolved soon. “So rather than possibly going into a depression, rather than having your favorite president be Herbert Hoover, he was always the one I didn’t want to be,” Trump said of the 31st president whose policies are often blamed for starting the Great Depression. Trump also said he was open to allowing Iran to maintain its stockpile of ballistic missiles, claiming it was “unfair” for Iran to not be able to have the weapons if their neighbors do. …
And despite his insistence that the memorandum states that Iran cannot develop or obtain a nuclear weapon — one of his chief concerns during negotiations, Trump also appeared softer during the press conference on Wednesday in his position on whether Iran could develop a nuclear program for civilian purposes in the future. “You know, it’s also, it is a little hard though when you say that somebody wants—other people have it, other adjoining states have it and you’re not letting them have it for purposes of electricity and things like that. It’s always a little tough. You have to use a little common sense,” Trump added.
Trump didn’t want ‘Herbert Hoover’ presidency with Iran; said it has to have ‘some’ missiles – Jun 18, 2026 – ABCnews. Professor Mearsheimer was quite explicit in his latest talk (vid) with Judge Napolitano: Trump must shut the war down, whatever it politically might cost, to save the economy and his presidency.After he had launched the war he had to surrender, unconditionally, to prevent a global depression (which still may well happen). It may still take while, and maybe even another round of fighting, until that really sinks in.

“93.1% said Iran won.”

What did they presumably win?

• Israelis Are Livid Over Trump Ending War, Overwhelmingly Believe Iran Won (ZH)

After roping President Trump into breaking a core campaign promise, watching the United States expend resources and risk American lives to attack Iran, and then watching Trump take steps to end the war via MOU – Israelis are livid because the US didn’t commit to full-on decimation to celebrate America’s 250th, and say Iran came out ahead. According to a survey conducted by the Hebrew University of Jerusalem in partnership with the Agam Institute, 92.1% of Israelis believe Iran came out ahead in the conflict and the US-brokered deal that followed.

Even among voters loyal to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s conservative bloc, 93.1% said Iran won. 82.9% of respondents said the six-week military campaign against Iran left Israel’s long-term security weaker, not stronger. Another 86% hold a negative view of both the way the fighting ended and the way Washington negotiated the subsequent deal without meaningful Israeli input. Nearly 88% of Israelis believe their country either fell short of its war aims entirely or achieved only partial success, despite the stated objectives being nothing less than dismantling Iran’s nuclear program, neutering its missile arsenal, and toppling the regime in Tehran. Those were the goals. None of them, by the public’s own assessment, were fully met.
Netanyahu has tried to project confidence in the signing of the Memorandum of Understanding anyway. At a press conference Monday, he insisted Iran will never possess nuclear weapons “as long as I am prime minister of Israel.” As we noted on Tuesday, hardline Israeli politicians are livid over the Iran deal, and want Netanyahu out so they can do ‘real regime change.’ “With an agreement or without an agreement, Iran will not have nuclear weapons – not today and not tomorrow,” he said, calling the mission his “life’s mission.” He has also maintained that the nuclear threat from Iran was an “immediate danger” that Israel removed “together with our American friends.”
Either way, Israelis aren’t buying it. 72.5% of respondents reject Netanyahu’s claim that Israel secured major gains and eliminated an existential threat. Only 26.5% rate his handling of the war as “good” or “excellent,” while 56.4% call it “failed” or “poor.” His personal approval as prime minister has collapsed from 40.5% in early March to 29.4% in June, a fifteen-point swing in roughly three months. And of course, there’s Trump… with 69.1% of respondents rated his handling of the war and the resulting deal as “failed” or “poor,” against just 10.8% who called it “good” or “excellent.” Quite the change in sentiment from his 2024 election win…

Despite the widespread belief that the Iran campaign backfired, 48.2% of Israelis say their country should renew major military action against Hezbollah, including strikes in Beirut, even if that means clashing with Trump, who has made clear he wants the fighting in Lebanon to stop. Only 20.9% oppose that course, with the remaining 30.9% undecided. Israelis appear simultaneously convinced the last war was mishandled and eager for the next one. Just 12.2% of respondents believe Israel achieved most of the stated goals against Hamas and Hezbollah following the October 7, 2023 attacks while 61.3% say Israel achieved none of them, and 26.5% say only some were met.
Across the Atlantic, the reception looks entirely different. A Quantus national poll of 1,000 likely US voters found 43% strongly approve and another 13% somewhat approve of the preliminary US-Iran Memorandum of Understanding. Combined disapproval sits at just 13%.The Trump administration has been trying to respond to criticism of the deal, while Israeli cabinet members are talking mad shit about Trump – to the point where VP JD Vance came very close to asking if they’ve even said ‘pwease’ or ‘thank you.’
Vance defended the MOU during Thursday’s White House briefing, pushing back on what he said was misleading media coverage. “The simple fact is that the only way the Iranians get any of those resources – not a single penny, by the way, from the United States of America under any circumstances – but the only way that they would ever get any benefit of the bargain is if they comply fully, and change their behavior,” Vance said of Iran, adding that Tehran’s military and nuclear program “is still destroyed” if Iran refuses to change course. He also said that compliance would bring “a transformative relationship with the Middle East.”
https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/2067642712560689401?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2067642712560689401%7Ctwgr%5E3ba43edb00d551c7daaa6ef5f831958df7580c5f%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fgeopolitical%2Fisraelis-are-livid-over-trump-ending-war-overwhelmingly-believe-iran-won-poll
The Hebrew University-Agam Institute survey was conducted June 17–20, using a weighted sample of 3,644 Israelis aged 17 and over, designed to reflect the broader population, and has a maximum sampling error of just 2.2% at a 99% confidence level. Maybe they’ll just keep attacking Lebanon to scuttle the peace deal?
https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/2067192026118926766?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2067192026118926766%7Ctwgr%5E3ba43edb00d551c7daaa6ef5f831958df7580c5f%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fgeopolitical%2Fisraelis-are-livid-over-trump-ending-war-overwhelmingly-believe-iran-won-poll

They immediately denied it.

• Iran Agrees To Invite Nuclear Inspectors Back; Vance Hails Great Progress (ZH)

Axios is reporting Monday morning Iran has agreed to invite IAEA inspectors back to the country, according to fresh words of Vice President J.D. Vance, who focused all day prior and much into the overnight on forging a path forward toward permanent peace. The two sides are seeking to hammer out a long-term nuclear agreement, now amid the technical talks process, as delegation heads depart Switzerland – leaving diplomatic teams behind. The 60-day roadmap begins. If indeed the UN nuclear inspectors are eventually let back into Iran, this would be a hugely significant step. This would be to verify compliance to the preliminary agreement, Vance further hails:

“Our hope is that we get to the final deal and a permanent settlement. But right now, I think we’ve made great progress and we should all celebrate that in terms of when the nuclear inspectors are going to start,” the American Vice President told reporters. He described that he phoned UN nuclear inspectors at 2am last night to update them on the developments, however, he said that no one picked up the call. “As you can expect, not many people are answering their phone at two in the morning,” said Vance. “I expect that will happen at the minimum this week, but we think even some of those conversations with the inspectors and with the IAEA could happen as soon as today.”
Both warring sides appear to finally be in the same page in terms of issuing ‘positive’ and ‘encouraging’ assessments earlier. There were reports of last-minute disagreements, threats, and warnings that the process could collapse near the conclusion of yesterday’s formal round one of talks. “So they didn’t walk out, and their technical team is still here in Burgenstock working with our technical team,” Vance explained. “What we told the Iranians yesterday is, ‘When you guys exchange in what us millennials might call trash talk, you can’t expect the president of the United States not to respond and not to correct the record’.”
Vance conceded that in the end there was a “a little bit of threatening” and “whining but at the end of the day, the talks continued and we made great progress.” He further described that a mechanism had been established to keep the Strait of Hormuz open, while noting that significant work remained and that technical negotiations would continue. Also, importantly he said that a “very good foundation” was laid for a successful final agreement with Iran.
JD Vance:

I can't stay here for the next 60 days. I will go back to the U.S.

The technical teams will be working. pic.twitter.com/s9PSTRvMSR
— Clash Report (@clashreport) June 22, 2026

“. . .They are running the Accords logic to its conclusion: every adversary becomes a counterparty, every conflict becomes a deal, every closed economy becomes an investable market.” —Patrick Wood

• Slouching Toward Peace (James Howard Kunstler)

That squawking you hear is Iran getting dragged kicking and screaming out of its jihad delirium into something that might look like reality-based relations with the rest of the world. They have to loudly declare that it’s not happening, even as it’s happening, to gaslight their own home folks, who might be getting a little sick of economic free-fall — and probably sick of the IRGC regime itself. And, of course, they know that the Lefty-left half of the USA is rooting for this whole business to fail so they can get their mitts back on the levers of power to avoid prison.

Things are at a pretty pass, all righty. The sticking point of the moment is Lebanon. Everybody is twanging on Israel to quit fighting Hezbollah. Okay, but does Hezbollah not have some obligation to quit its provocations? And is Iran, which controls Hezbollah, not responsibile to make Hezbollah stop?
Notice, you don’t hear any of the kibitzers calling for that. That’s because getting Hezbollah to poke Israel in the eye with a sharp stick is Iran’s favored device for dragging out negotiations which, they apparently hope, will put POTUS in fear of the looming midterm election. But time is running out on their playing for time. What they’re actually playing is pretend — pretending to be living large and in-charge. They’ve got nothing else, really. They’ve driven their country into a ditch.
The US is in a straight-up good-cop / bad-cop mode. VP Vance, on-the-ground in Switzerland, presents the very picture of a smooth, cool, rational figure where it counts: face-to-face with Iranian leaders, after all these years. He calmly tells the world news media that “encouraging progress” has been made the first day toward a ceasefire in poor, sore-beset Lebanon. As of Monday, Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi concurred on “X.”
Meanwhile, President Trump was going mad-dog on social media. Of his relations with irksome Israeli PM Bibi Netanyahu, POTUS said, “It’s good, but we have to keep him a little bit sane.” He added, “Iran must stop their highly-paid PROXIES in Lebanon from causing trouble. If they don’t, we’ll hit Iran very hard again. . . bomb the shit out of them.” He advised the Iranian negotiators that they “won’t even make if back” to their country if they keep playing games, and declared that the US will take over the Strait of Hormuz, if necessary. A bit harsh, admittedly. Any trouble parsing it out?

“Remember the Episode With Jerry and the Tennis Pro?”

• The ‘Seinfeld’ Theory of Iran Negotiations (Scott Pinsker)

This theory seems especially appropriate today: Between Schrödinger’s Strait being both open and closed, Hezbollah’s rockets bombarding Israel, and Iranian negotiators demanding billions in bribes, the ongoing drama at the Bürgenstock Resort in Switzerland is — very likely — “a show about nothing.” It’ll get great ratings. Lots of people will watch. (It’s Must-See TV!) But after all the hype and all the hoopla, DJT’s MOU is DOA. (There will be no TCB.) When all is said and done, the U.S.-Iran negotiations will be about as successful as Kramer’s lawsuit against Java World: JD Vance will get free coffee (I assume), but that’s pretty much it.

Sorry, but that’s the stone-cold truth. You can’t negotiate a peace deal with apocalyptic psychos whose bloodlust surpasses Newman’s waistline. These Iranian hardliners make Crazy Joe Davola look sane. Which is why our peace talks will sink like the 1956 SS Andrea Doria (but then again, “All vacations have to end eventually”). There is no hope! (Nor any hugging or learning.) Or, perhaps, the exact opposite is true — a Bizarro-version of “conventional wisdom,” if you will — and America has Iran by the short hairs.
On Jan. 30, 1997, episode #147 of Seinfeld aired: “The Comeback.” It is, perhaps, the most prophetic episode in Seinfeld’s entire catalog. There were four major storylines:
First was George’s obsession with settling the score with a snarky coworker who made a mean-spirited comment: “Hey George, the ocean called. They’re running out of shrimp!” George went through hell and high water to get even, making himself look utterly preposterous in the process. This storyline, of course, is an allegory for the Tucker Carlson-Mark Levin feud. (Or maybe it’s the Ben Shapiro-Megyn Kelly feud? Or possibly the Candace Owens-Laura Loomer feud? At this point, it’s getting kinda difficult to keep track of who’s feuding with who.)
The second storyline was Kramer’s desperate attempt to annul his living will: He no longer wanted to have his life support terminated. (Thus, becoming pro-life, I suppose.) Yet his frantic attempts to find his attorney were thwarted at the last minute — a chilling commentary on Canada’s euthanasia policies, where a poor shlub with IBS at a Tim Hortons was just “canceled” by a Canadian doctor.
Third was Elaine’s interest in a mysterious video store employee whose taste in cinema was sublime. Alas, when she went to meet him (bringing fireworks, cigarettes, and vodka), she learned he’s only 15. The kid’s mother shamed her, yet Elaine walked away without any legal consequences. Obviously, this was a clever callback to the shocking “industrial scale” sexual assaults that were (allegedly) committed by gangs of Muslim men against 250,000 UK little girls, yet the police declined to prosecute the evildoers. Fun fact: The name of Elaine’s 15-year-old love interest was Vincent — whose name is derived from the Latin word vincere, which means “to conquer.” (Hey, is Seinfeld good or what?)
But it’s the fourth storyline that’s most relevant today: A snooty, self-important employee at a tennis pro shop pressured Jerry into buying an expensive new racket. Later, Jerry learned the employee’s horrible secret: The guy can’t even play a lick of tennis! The desperate employee begs Jerry not to tell anyone — or his reputation will be ruined! His wife will leave him! Nobody at work will respect him! Eventually, Jerry agreed to let the employee beat him in a tennis match while his wife, friends, and coworkers all watched.
Behind-the-scenes, the employee gave Jerry everything he wanted: He refunded the racket. He apologized. He acknowledged how pathetic he is. He promised Jerry a full year of free club membership. He even offered Jerry a one-night stand with his wife! So Jerry decided to let the poor guy save face by giving him a “win” that didn’t really matter. The parallels here to the U.S.-Iran MOU are uncanny: Our military has inflicted between $1.5 and $2 trillion in damage to Iran. Its air force, navy, air defense, nuclear program, and Supreme Leader were all blown to bits.
Behind-the-scenes, Iranian negotiators are telling the Americans how weak and vulnerable they are — and how badly they want to make a deal. But to save face, they asked to “win” the MOU. From CNN: The officials described the text of the [MOU] agreement as incredibly vague, mainly intended to create a more favorable environment for the highly technical, in-person talks to come. They added that the framework is aimed at providing Iran the ability to sell it politically to their internal audience.
Additionally, the officials said that the text of the memorandum of understanding — which Vice President JD Vance told CNN Monday is one-and-a-half pages long — didn’t reflect critical back-channel commitments Iran has made to the US, which they argued gave them more confidence in signing on to the arrangement. “People shouldn’t read too much into the language of the MOU,” one of the officials said, describing the agreement as a “political document.”
[…]
The official added that the president’s team of negotiators “came up with language that allows (Iran) to say what they need to say for their domestic politics.” [emphasis added] When the Iran War began, plenty of Americans were cheering for regime change, hoping that freedom-loving Iranians would rise up and overthrow the mullahs. We assumed that they were the #1 threat to the Ayatollah’s power. But it’s entirely possible we misread the tea leaves — and Iran’s rulers are far more terrified of being killed by hardline Islamists than freedom-loving reformers.
When the Iranians talk about “saving face,” they mean it literally: Pissing off the hardliners is instant death. If so, it would explain the posture of the Trump administration: Iran has already committed to signing a one-sided peace deal, but only with the face-saving cover of an equally one-sided MOU. Otherwise, all the Iranian negotiators will be executed when they return home, and the White House will have to start the peace process all over again. On the outside looking in, it’s unclear how likely this explanation is, but it deserves careful consideration for two important reasons:
The Trump administration insists that it’s true. (And it knows more details than we do.It would certainly explain the administration’s behavior, patience, and tolerance for Iran’s tomfoolery.But even if it’s true, Iran had better tread very, very carefully. Because, as the Seinfeld prophecy foretells, the pro shop employee couldn’t resist gloating about “beating” Jerry. In the middle of their match, he called Jerry names. He mocked his ability. He invited others to laugh at him. He called Jerry a baby, a chicken, and “not a man.”

He won’t turn his back on either of the two. Let them fight it out.

• Trump May Have Given Us a HUGE Hint About His Successor (Margolis)

For more than a year, the corporate press has treated Donald Trump’s eventual successor like a riddle they alone can solve, parceling out clues from offhand remarks and body language. A new book suggests they’ve been chasing a story that doesn’t yet exist because Trump himself hasn’t made up his mind. Or has he?

The book, titled Regime Change, by New York Times reporters Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan, chronicles the first year of Trump’s second term. One notable anecdote is that once, during a walk-through with reporters, Trump showed off new flagpoles he had installed on the White House North and South Lawns, something he said he had wanted to do during his first term but had avoided for fear of bad press. Not this time. “You guys were after me,” Trump told the reporters. “I was the hunted. And now I’m the hunter.” That confidence extends to how he talks about who comes next.
According to the book, Trump has repeatedly quizzed his own aides on whether Vice President JD Vance or Secretary of State Marco Rubio would make a better president after him. And Trump may have given a hint about his preference. Trump is also said to be impressed by the background of Rubio, who is the son of Cuban immigrants. The book describes how, after Trump redecorated the Oval Office to fill it with gold flourishes, someone asked the president about the likelihood that the next president would undo all that he had done. Trump retorted: “Cubans love gold.”
But, Haberman and Swan write, Rubio and Vance are also friends. An example they offer is Rubio texting Vance after the 2024 Republican vice presidential nominee’s comments about “ childless cat ladies ” became a scandal. Rubio offered to campaign with Vance to show his support. Speculation about who Trump prefers as his successor has been rampant pretty much since Trump took office again. In February 2025, Fox News anchor Bret Baier asked Trump if he sees Vance as his successor and the 2028 Republican nominee. Trump’s answer wasn’t the easy yes everyone expected. “No, but he’s very capable,” he said, before pivoting to praise. “I think you have a lot of very capable people. So far, I think he’s doing a fantastic job. It’s too early; we’re just starting.”
That answer rattled plenty of people who had assumed that Vance would simply inherit the MAGA movement when Trump’s term ends. A Mediaite report the following month claimed that Trump wants his political dynasty to outlive his own presidency, and three high-level sources claimed that Donald Trump Jr. was seriously weighing a 2028 run of his own.
Donald Trump Jr. wasted no time torching that theory. “I accurately predicted that my buddy JD would be an instant power player in national GOP politics, so your theory is that I worked my a** off to help get him the VP nomination because I want to run for president in 2028?” he said. “Are you f****g retarded? I’m actually glad you’re printing this b******t, though, because at least now the rest of the press corps will see how s****y your ‘sources’ are and how easily you’re played by them. Congrats, moron.”
That’s not the response of a man choosing his words carefully for a future campaign launch. It’s the response of someone who finds the entire premise absurd. So after a year of speculation, here’s what the evidence actually shows: Trump is weighing Vance against Rubio on the merits, and probably seems to be leaning toward Rubio right now.

Don’t sound good.

• Fail, Britannia: Meet the New Commie, Worse Than the Old Commie (Green)

The U.K.’s most destructively feckless prime minister (since the last one) is history, but Keir Starmer’s likely successor could prove Britain’s final undoing — if the radical Liberian-born advisor who serves as Andy Burnham’s “brains” gets her way. Burnham, former Mayor of Greater Manchester, won the Makerfield by-election on June 18 with an impressive 55% of the vote — a full rebuke of Reform U.K., too — sending him to Parliament where he’ll make a run at Number 10 Downing St. At least one potential rival, Wes Streeting, stood aside and endorsed Burnham on Monday, pretty much clearing his path.

In his endorsement, Streeting said he wants Labour to pursue “a progressive capitalism focused on wealth creation as much as wealth distribution,” but nobody seems to have told the “brains” behind Burnham: the Liberian-born daughter of lefty radicals, Miatta Fahnbulleh. CutMyTaxUK reported last year that Fahnbulleh “was born in Liberia as part of a prominent leftist revolutionary family, has served as a junior energy & housing minister in the Starmer government before resigning to support Burnham.” Previously, as the “former head of the far-left New Economics Foundation,” she proved “adept at churning out socialist policy proposals.”
Or as CMT-UK put it, “Keir Starmer has appointed a Housing Minister who hates private housing.” Another U.K. publication, Guido Fawkes, put all of Fahnbulleh’s most radical proposals in one handy list on Sunday:
• A wealth tax and yet another windfall tax on oil and gas.
• Mass nationalization e.g. of land, transport, and energy.
• Extending national [welfare] insurance [tax to include] to investment income.
• A cap on interest rates and charges on every form of consumer credit.
• Hiking capital gains tax to income tax levels.
• Hiking the dividend tax to income tax levels.
• Abolition of the upper earnings limit for national insurance.
• Huge expansion of the benefits system, including a “minimum income guarantee” paid to everyone apart from the rich.
• Nationalization of banks and creation of new “green” banks with taxpayer funds.
• Block on private banks lending to anyone with a “large amount of greenhouse gas emissions” and “penalization of banks that provide too many carbon-intensive loans.“
• Forced sale of existing businesses to employees.
• A tripling of the stamp duty [property tax, basically] surcharge to 9% for multiple homeowners and an increase to 6% for non-residents.

So, apart from urging the destruction of the energy industry, banking, and investment, ending private ownership of industry and housing, and a massive expansion of Britain’s welfare state, she’s practically a right-winger. Cough, cough. Here’s a quick look at Fahnbulleh’s background:
https://twitter.com/kunley_drukpa/status/2068249442067571024?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2068249442067571024%7Ctwgr%5Efd6865bfde3ade186354994b7afb9adff6e690c6%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fpjmedia.com%2Fvodkapundit%2F2026%2F06%2F22%2Fuk-meet-the-new-commie-worse-than-the-old-commie-n4954224
Britain isn’t just importing mass numbers of Third Worlders; it’s importing Third World lefty radicalism that the West once pounded into smithereens under Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan during the last years of the Cold War. The New Statesman’s Nick Plumb describes Fahnbulleh’s governing philosophy as “radical co-operativism,” but all these generations later, Karl Marx couldn’t help but notice the family resemblance. But what’s the big deal about a former Housing Minister with a radical laundry list of ways to destroy what’s left of the British economy?
As CMT-UK also put it, there are “two worrying aspects to this New Statesman article.” The first is that “Burnham apparently doesn’t have many brains,” and the second is that “Fahnbulleh is filling the gap.” Fahnbulleh is one of Burnham’s key allies, campaigned for him in last week’s big by-election win, and previously helped shape policy for a potential Burnham government, according to the BBC. By trading Starmer for Burnham, Britain very well may be going out of the frying pan and into the fire.

Elizabeth was popular. That was it.

• Support For UK Monarchy Hits Record Low (RT)

Public support for the British monarchy has fallen to its lowest level in over three decades, a new poll has suggested. Just under half of Britons still favor removing the monarchy, with support particularly weak among younger people. Support for the monarchy has steadily declined since reaching a peak of 80% in 2012 and fell to 55% in 2026, according to data published by Ipsos on Friday. The figure is the lowest recorded by the market research and polling company since it began tracking the issue in 1993 and is well below the long-term average of 71%.

Support has declined across all age groups but is particularly low among Britons aged 18-34, where only a third of respondents said they favor the monarchy – roughly half the level recorded in 2013. According to Ipsos, 45% of people in that age group would prefer the UK to become a republic instead. Satisfaction with King Charles and his heir, Prince William, remains high, the poll suggested as 60% and 71% of respondents respectively said they liked the way the king and the prince were doing their jobs.
The monarchy’s popularity took a hit over one of the Royal family member’s long-standing association to late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. The now former Prince Andrew, King Charles’ brother, was initially accused in 2014 of being one of the persons the disgraced financier sex-trafficked woman to. Andrew settled a civil lawsuit with one of the sex-trafficking victims, Virginia Giuffre, in 2022, while still denying all the allegations. In 2026, the British police opened a criminal case against him after a release of additional files in the Epstein case suggested that he allegedly provided confidential government information to the convicted sex offender.
Buckingham Palace commented on the case in February by saying that the Royal family was ready to support the probe “if we are approached by Thames Valley Police” and adding that the king’s “thoughts and sympathies have been, and remain with, the victims of any and all forms of abuse.” According to a poll conducted by YouGov in April, Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor remains the most disliked member of the family by a wide margin, with over 90% of Britons having a “negative” or “very negative” view of him.
The influence of the British monarchy abroad has also declined in recent years, with some former British colonies considering severing their remaining ties to the Crown. Barbados became the most recent Caribbean nation to become a republic in 2021 while remaining within Britain’s Commonwealth. A survey conducted by former Conservative Party deputy chairman Michael Ashcroft in 2023 suggested that six of the 14 overseas countries within the Commonwealth realm – including Canada and Australia – would prefer to ditch the monarchy.

7 prime ministers in 10 years.

American Democrats have nowhere to turn to. The US system prohibits a third party.

The UK has Nigel Farage waiting in the wings,

• Keir Starmer Reveals How Much Labour Resembles American Democrats (Queen)

I counted, and during my lifetime, the UK has had 13 prime ministers. The count is likely to jump to 14 soon now that Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced his resignation as leader of the Labour Party on Monday. Labour is now set for a leadership challenge, with newly elected MP Andy Burnham, formerly mayor of Manchester, as the main challenger. Starmer’s resignation may give rank-and-file Britons (many of whom are discovering the joys of American life during the World Cup) some whiplash, as Noa Hoffman pointed out on Monday’s Coffee House Shots podcast:

I think a lot of people who are not in tune with the day-to-day ins and outs of Westminster politics are going to think, “What the hell is going on?” I think that’s actually going to reflect quite poorly on the Labour Party, because, as Tim said, there was no one major scandal or one major failure that really led to this resignation.
It was sort of a litany of errors, many of them unforced, but nowhere near to the extent of what sort of preceded the big resignations of a lot of Tory prime ministers, so no one is going to say Keir Starmer was doing a great, perhaps even good job, but was he literally the worst thing on earth, or so bad to the extent that everyone thought, given even given the volatile state that the world is in right now, the best thing to do is for you to stand down and bring in a man who nobody, apart from the people of Makerfield voted for, nobody in the general election voted Labour on the basis of Andy Banham leading the party and being a prime minister, and now he’s promising all these big radical changes, unless he U-turns on them, as he has been doing frequently, without a mandate.
So this is going to come as a shock to a lot of people, and I don’t think Labour MPs really understand that. She later said, “But I think the overall question that history will ask is, was that reason enough for him to go and bring on the next sort of big left-wing agenda that we’re about to see that the public did not vote for, and I’m not sure the answer to that is necessarily yes.”
This isn’t an apples-to-apples comparison since the UK’s parliamentary system doesn’t exactly line up with the American democratic republic, but it feels like an echo of the Democrats replacing Joe Biden with Kamala Harris. It’s not clear yet how Labour’s rank and file will take to Burnham’s leadership and policies, so it may drive the country closer to a general election sooner rather than later. In the podcast, the question of Starmer’s legacy came up. Editor Tim Shipman characterized Starmer as one who was good at campaigning but bad at governing — you know, like Barack Obama. Shipman also identified Starmer’s legacy as being much about himself:
The innate thing is that Keir Starmer fundamentally thinks that if you’re a decent chap and you’re going to work and want to do decent things, then decent outcomes will follow. Well, that’s not how politics or government works.
And the other thing he thought was that winning a landslide was some great, massive endorsement of himself, and it was not. It was one of the great two-fingers-to-you [akin to a middle-finger gesture], anyone but the previous lot voters have ever seen in British politics, and that miscalculation, I think, made his government very difficult, and it meant a lot of what he thought he was going to achieve quite easily, like a reset with the European Union. “Oh, which will be fine, because we’re not these wicked Tories. We’re going to go in, and it’s all going to be great, because we’re nice and we’re Labour.”
The Spectator’s Madeleine Grant had another brutal assessment of Starmer’s legacy. In her view, Starmer represents the great gulf between the elites and the great unwashed. There will be much commentariat-painting of Starmer as exhibiting decency, competence and integrity. It probably doesn’t feel like that if you were one of the people he pushed under the bus to save himself, it probably doesn’t feel like that to the pubs and businesses and farms and schools shutting down, it probably doesn’t feel like that if you’re a Chagossian, or a military veteran, or a rape gang victim. Indeed, aside from vibes and the fact that he is ‘like them’, it is very difficult to see where those who laud Starmer as decent, competent, and having integrity have got the idea from.
That perhaps is Starmer’s real legacy: to be the man who embodied more than anyone else the vast gap between those who govern and the governed. The prime minister we were told the nation needed turned out to be the one it deserved. Most deliciously of all, Starmer has embodied the absolute reversal of Blair by proving, even in his departure, that things can, and will, only get worse.
The analogies between Labour and U.S. Democrats are plenty, but Starmer and the upcoming leadership challenge highlight two big comparisons. At the party level, Labour and the Dems are ready to go as far left as they can, and Labour leadership sees itself as an elite class that knows better than the governed, much like Democrats today. It’ll be revealing to watch how this will play out over the next few weeks and what the next general election, whenever it may happen, will bring about.

I still find this strange.

• Tucker Carlson No Longer Supports The Republican Party: ‘I’m Out’ (JTN)

Former Fox News host Tucker Carlson said recently that he is leaving the Republican Party and will no longer support it because the party allegedly “betrayed” Americans with its alliance with Israel. Carlson, who was previously an ally of President Donald Trump, has split with the “Make America Great Again” movement and the Republican Party over the latter’s ties to Israel. “I’m out,” Carlson said on an episode of the “Can’t Be Censored” podcast that aired Thursday but gained traction Monday. “If I’m out, then I think a lot of other people are out. I would not support the Republican Party.

“How could I or any American voter support a political party that’s not loyal to the United States,” he continued. “That puts the interests of a foreign country above those of its own citizens. It’s not possible to vote for people like that, and I’m not going to.” Carlson, who has supported Republican causes for 35 years, clarified that he would not be supporting Democrats moving forward and was not sure who he would be voting for in future elections. The president and Carlson have been at odds in the second Trump administration, with Trump claiming Carlson has a “low IQ,” and the former Fox host has accused the president of trying to “play God” with the conflict in the Middle East.

“Paul is expected to question Fauci on whether he lied to Congress during the pandemic about whether his office had funded gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China.”

• Rand Paul Subpoenas Fauci For Testimony in COVID Origin Probe (JTN)

Senate Homeland Security Chairman Rand Paul issued a subpoena Monday to force former National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Director Anthony Fauci to testify in front of his panel after the Biden administration official declined to do so voluntarily. The senator claimed Fauci previously agreed to testify in front of the panel, but former Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard on her last day in office last week declassified a several-hundred-page agency report on Fauci related to when he was NIAID director, the COVID-19 pandemic and the continuing, unresolved issue of the origin of the deadly virus.

Paul said the new hearing will take place in a public forum next month. “Last week, Anthony Fauci notified us he will NOT voluntarily testify before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, even though he had previously agreed to do so,” Paul said on X. “Therefore, today I have issued a subpoena requiring him to testify before the Committee, in public, next month.” Paul is expected to question Fauci on whether he lied to Congress during the pandemic about whether his office had funded gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China.
Despite the evidence of a potential lab leak sickening workers at the Wuhan lab, Fauci has continued to double down on his claim that the COVID-19 virus had emerged naturally from a wet-market in the same areas as the lab, not a leak from the lab itself. No date for the new hearing has been released.

Rand Paul can use Tulsi’s material,

• Tulsi Gabbard Biolab Releases (CTH)

Promethean Action PAC’s Barbara Boyd takes a look at the last two declassification releases from Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard prior to her resignation. Boyd argues that outgoing DNI Tulsi Gabbard’s recent document releases reveal a global, US-funded biolab network centered on Dr. Anthony Fauci, traced back to January 2014—the same start date cited in Joe Biden’s pardons of Hunter Biden and Fauci. She claims Obama’s 2014 gain-of-function ban pushed the research overseas, with NIH funding routed through EcoHealth Alliance to Wuhan, while Pentagon-backed contractors—especially Metabiota—expanded work in Ukraine after the Maidan coup.

Boyd also highlights a May 2020 Lawrence Livermore assessment describing Wuhan as fitting criteria for an accidental release of an engineered coronavirus and alleges Anthony Fauci steered Biden-era COVID origins reviews toward natural origin while lying to Congress. She links Ukraine lab inventories and broader COVID-era policies to a larger geopolitical and technocratic agenda.

He wants to invite in 500,000 people for starters?! Not everyone’s happy with that.

• Spanish PM’s Wife Faces Trial On Corruption Charges (RT)

Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez’s wife, Begona Gomez, will stand trial before a jury on corruption-related charges, EFE news agency reported on Saturday, citing a ruling issued by the investigating judge following preliminary hearings held earlier this week. Gomez was formally charged in April with embezzlement, influence peddling, corruption in business dealings, and misappropriation of funds. Prosecutors are reportedly seeking a 24-year prison sentence for the 55-year-old university director, who was also ordered to surrender her passport and appear in court twice a month pending the subsequent proceedings.

Her adviser, Cristina Alvarez, who is accused of similar offenses, and businessman Juan Carlos Barrabes will also stand trial. The investigation into Gomez was launched in 2024 following a complaint filed by anti-graft campaign group Manos Limpias, whose leader is reportedly linked to Spain’s far right. The organization alleged that Gomez used her position as the prime minister’s wife to influence government contracts given to a group of tech companies.
The scope of the probe later expanded after additional accusations that Gomez misused public funds in the hiring of a consultant and improperly used software while working at Madrid’s Complutense University, where she co-directed an academic chair.Her legal team denied any wrongdoing and argued that the proceedings are politically motivated.Sanchez, the leader of the Spanish Socialist Workers’ Party, has not been implicated in the case.
However, after the probe became public, he suspended public engagements “for a few days” and said he was considering stepping down, denouncing what he described as a campaign of political and personal harassment against his family. Sanchez later announced that he would remain in office and continue leading the government. Former Spanish Prime Minister Jose Zapatero also became the subject of a corruption investigation in May over the alleged misuse of €53 million in state aid granted to Plus Ultra airline in 2021. Earlier this week, a court rejected the request of prosecutors to impose precautionary measures, including the surrender of his passport and a travel ban.

South Florida.

• Go East, Young SpaceX Millionaire! (Stephen Green)

Aside from fueling Elon Musk’s orbital data center ambitions, the recent SpaceX initial public offering minted thousands of new millionaires — and where they put their money will have ripple effects lasting a generation. Can you guess where that money won’t go? In a charmingly outdated New York Post piece from May, Lydia Moynihan predicted that the SpaceX IPO would create “dozens, if not hundreds” of millionaires, including one anonymous early investor who told Moynihan that “she’s already hired someone to run her newly created family office, which manages her investment portfolio.”

“There are going to be a lot of single family offices that come out of this IPO,” founder of the Family Office Division at Compass, Cindy Scholz, told the Post. The paper reported that with dozens or hundreds of SpaceX millionaires, “Family offices have already grown 25% over the last five years, and she expects to see that number skyrocket in the coming month.” The actual number of new millionaires (and even a few billionaires) created was a bit north of 4,400. Of those, Moynihan’s “hundreds” had eight-figure net-worth paydays when SpaceX went public. That’s a lot of new family offices and whatnots.
Scholz, according to the Post, also said last month that the SpaceX windfall will “accelerate the exodus from California.” Well, guess what? Here comes Kristen Altus from Fox Business, who reported Monday that a “fresh wave of Silicon Valley wealth could soon flow into South Florida.” “With OpenAI quietly filing for a confidential IPO alongside market debuts from aerospace giant SpaceX and AI rival Anthropic,” she wrote, “billions of dollars in overnight liquidity are about to be unlocked for executives and middle management alike.”
However, Altus reported, “Instead of reinvesting in the Golden State, this incoming class of newly minted tech multimillionaires is already flooding Florida real estate brokers with calls — triggering what experts say could be a rapid-fire ‘Tech Exodus 2.0’ measured in months, not years.” Nobody tell Gov. Gavin Newsom, who has already spent all those new income tax dollars.
And Another Thing: I was able to buy exactly one (perhaps overpriced) share of SpaceX the day it went public, and then went into waiting mode. When SPCX share dropped from IPO-hysteria highs on Wednesday, I started buying just a little. I’m now the proud owner of 10 (!!!) whole shares, and am a couple hundred dollars poorer as the shares keep falling. But I don’t care, because I own 10 whole shares of the world’s most exciting company.
Even before SpaceX went public, Frank Jacobs went through the numbers for Big Think in May and found that since 2018, “around 103,000 millionaires moved out of California,” and that “133,000 millionaires moved in to Florida,” mostly from the Formerly Golden State and New York. “Wealthy Americans are migrating in large numbers from high-tax states to lower-tax ones and reshaping the nation’s economic geography,” Jacobs wrote, concluding that “steep marginal tax rates may be counterproductive, driving away the very revenue” Albany and Sacramento hoped to get their greedy blue fingers on.
So it’s no stretch to predict that all these SpaceX/Anthropic/OpenAI IPO winners will follow suit. “The California area codes have already started showing up,” Fort Lauderdale Downtown Development Authority CEO and President Jenni Morejon told Altus. “It’s just that the conversations are evolving.” As it turns out, Florida’s appeal isn’t just about friendly tax and regulatory environments — it’s about the culture. “Silicon Valley is absolutely a boring place to live compared to Miami,” Naftali Group CEO Miki Naftali told Fox. “How can you even compare between living in Miami and Silicon Valley?”
But it’s the lost business opportunities that might come to haunt California and New York the most. “I think you see that this isn’t just a lifestyle narrative,” Morejon added, “it’s actually an operating environment for new businesses. And we have the engineering and infrastructure emerging to prove that.” The money is nice, too — especially when it isn’t flushed down another one of Sacramento’s money pits.

Let's celebrate the resignation of Keir Starmer with this wonderful song. Bye-bye, Keir! We will remember you as the biggest wanker of all UK leaders. Donald Trump and his band are performing this song for your pleasure. The Spotify version is coming soon. pic.twitter.com/id88G2yqJA
— Sith Daddy (@sithdaddyx) June 22, 2026

Interesting article from 2022.
Peter Sutherland was a special representative of the UN for Migration.
The replacement of the English people is part of the UN plan for their New World Order. pic.twitter.com/dYUYabS6kW
— Andrew Bridgen (@ABridgen) June 21, 2026

Starting October 2026, @SpaceX will be generating ~$2.32 billion per month in AI compute revenue from its major deals with Anthropic, Google, and now Reflection AI. pic.twitter.com/mM7RLoxmcR
— Nic Cruz Patane (@niccruzpatane) June 22, 2026

https://twitter.com/WikiLeaksQ/status/2068771868018901445?s=20

Sums it up. pic.twitter.com/upAlumkxmg
— Gunther Eagleman™ (@GuntherEagleman) June 22, 2026

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

Debt Rattle August 21 2020

Aug 212020

August 21, 2020 Posted by Raúl Ilargi Meijer at 9:37 am Finance Tagged with: absentee ballots, austerity, Biden, coronavirus, Covid19, Facebook, free speech, Lightfoot, monarchy, mosquitoes, ravens, T-Cells, Taibbi, Ukraine, unemployment 13 Responses »

Elliott Erwitt New York City, USA 1955

• Many People Unexposed To Coronavirus Have Immune Cells For COVID19 (SMH)

• The Speech Joe Biden Has Been Preparing For His Entire Life (Taibbi)

• Team Biden Now Signals Austerity, Despite Campaign Pledges (Sirota)

• 72% of Detroit’s Absentee Ballot Counts Were Off (DN)

• Johnson, Grassley Blast Colleagues For ‘False Narratives’ About Ukraine (JTN)

• “I Have A Right To Make Sure That My Home Is Secure” (ZH)

• 28 Million Americans on Unemployment Insurance, 17.5% of Labor Force (WS)

• CEOs Get Big Pre-Bankruptcy Bonuses As Lenders and Employees Stiffed (NC)

• Facebook Delenda Est (Ben Hunt)

• Florida To Release 750 Million Genetically Modified Mosquitoes (BBC)

• ‘Bored’ Ravens Straying From Tower Of London Signal Monarchy May Fall (G.)

It’s not that long ago that it seemed impossible the US would do better than the world in new cases numbers. But here we are.

The author of this particular take on T-cells can’t seem to make up his mind if this is a good thing or not.

• Many People Unexposed To Coronavirus Have Immune Cells For COVID19 (SMH)

Evidence is emerging worldwide showing between 20 and 50 per cent of people who have never been exposed to COVID-19 have immune cells that can recognise and react to the virus. The discovery of T cell cross-reactivity has excited immunologists, who hope it could explain some of the mysteries that surround the virus, such as why some people get so much sicker than others. But scientists caution that it is not yet clear what the discovery means for human health. Australian National University’s head of immunology and infectious diseases, Professor David Tscharke, said: “It’s the good, the bad and the ugly – it could help, it could do nothing, or it could make COVID-19 worse.” Professor Tscharke said the cross-reactive T cells might help to fight off the virus, or they might get in the way of the immune system, making the disease worse, a phenomenon known as “original antigenic sin”.

SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus (yellow) emerging from the surface of cells (pink) cultured in a US National Institutes of Health lab. CREDIT:AP

Typically, the human adaptive immune system relies on precision. Antibodies, for example, have to be exactly the right shape to stick to a particular virus and kill it. T cells hunt for tiny fragments of virus protein – as small as eight amino acids long, in a virus that could have thousands of them – that identify a virus has infected a cell. If two viruses share protein fragments, T cells will attack both. SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, shares much of its genetic code, including many of its proteins, with four coronaviruses in frequent circulation among humans. Dr Corey Smith, head of the translational and human immunology laboratory at the QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, said some sections of the genetic codes were virtually identical.

They cause the common cold and are extremely common – more than 90 per cent of people have been exposed to them. Scientists suspect some people who have been exposed to these viruses develop T cells that can also target SARS-CoV-2. Monash University’s head of microbiology, Professor Stephen Turner, said that in the best-case scenario, cross-reactive T cells do offer some protection. “That’s why we might be seeing so much asymptomatic infection. If there is a level of protection, due to previous exposure, you have less symptoms – because you’re limiting the amount of virus that can grow,” he said. During the 2009 influenza pandemic, scientists found people who had cross-reactive T cells to that virus were less likely to suffer severe symptoms. Professor Turner said T cells needed the right signals to be activated. It was possible SARS-CoV-2 did not trigger them, or they were in the wrong place to fight the infection.

“Start your livers..”

• The Speech Joe Biden Has Been Preparing For His Entire Life (Taibbi)

The DNC drinking game Monday night was so painful (and Tuesday was worse), that I’ve decided to shorten the game tonight to cover Joe Biden’s acceptance speech only. I watched Biden speak probably a half-dozen times during the primary campaign, and perhaps a half-dozen times before. He has definite tendencies, and his stump speech hits the same six or seven notes every time, but convention addresses are different. Every line, every word, will be scripted. There shouldn’t be ad-libs, freak-outs at hecklers, etc. Guessing what an unscripted Joe Biden will do at any given moment is pretty interesting. Here we’re basically trying to guess what Biden and his handlers have decided to put on a teleprompter. Biden will be speaking sometime after 9 p.m. I will be live-streaming with Katie Halper. Details to follow.

Drink EVERY TIME:
• Biden says, “Folks.”
• Biden says, “The United States of America.” Double-shots for any multiple-America construction, e.g. “The best America is an America where Americans believe in the American dream.”
• Biden says, “Middle-class.”
• Biden says, “Get up!” as in, “Folks, you’ve got to get up! This is the United States of America!”
• Biden says, “You guys.”
• Biden says, “Barack” or references the “Obama-Biden administration.”
• Biden says, “Soul of America.”
• Biden points out a surprising percentage of something, e.g. “Look, folks, seventy-four percent of venture capital goes to four cities.”
• Biden says, “My Mom used to say” or mentions one of his father’s relatable jobs, e.g. “He sold a hell of a lot of cars!”
• Biden makes a self-deprecating joke about his age or his tendency to say puzzling things.
• Biden finishes a section of his speech with a rhetorical flourish, and he sounds angry, and you can’t tell why, because he’s talking about something non-angering.
• Biden tells a story about a rewarding interaction with an ordinary person, as in, “I walk over to the guy up in the bucket. And there’s seven guys around him, all with hard hats on. I yelled up and said, ‘Hey, man, thanks!’”
• Biden references a job you’ve never heard of, as in “Why is a sandwich maker being forced to sign a non-compete clause?”
• Biden says “systemic.”
• Biden tells us there’s nothing we can’t accomplish.

If David Sirota keeps this up, they’ll ban him from the party.

• Team Biden Now Signals Austerity, Despite Campaign Pledges (Sirota)

The Democratic convention has sucked up all the political oxygen in America — so much so, that most people missed Team Biden signaling that it may back off the entire agenda it is campaigning on. This monumental declaration went almost completely unnoticed for an entire day — which is a genuinely disturbing commentary on how the biggest of big political news gets routinely ignored. To review the situation: earlier this month, Bloomberg News reported that Biden’s “campaign rolled out a $3.5 trillion economic program over the past month” — one that “promises to invest in clean energy and caregiving, buy more made-in-America goods, and start narrowing the country’s racial wealth gaps.” This, said the news service, was proof that Biden no longer adhered to an ideology of austerity and deficit hawkery — which would be good news.

But then on the eve of Biden’s convention speech, the Democratic nominee’s top aide suggested to Washington reporters that, in fact, that’s not true. Here’s the key excerpt: Former Delaware Sen. Ted Kaufman, a Biden confidant who succeeded him in the Senate, predicted during a Wall Street Journal Newsmakers Live interview Tuesday that a large increase in federal spending would be difficult to achieve in 2021. “When we get in, the pantry is going to be bare,” said Mr. Kaufman, who is leading Mr. Biden’s transition team. “When you see what Trump’s done to the deficit…forget about Covid-19, all the deficits that he built with the incredible tax cuts. So we’re going to be limited.” Economist Dean Baker goes over exactly how destructive and insane this ideology is.

As he says: “The idea that we would not address pressing needs, like climate change, child care, and health care because we are concerned about the debt burden is close to crazy. As long as the economy is not near its capacity, there is zero reason not to spend to address these priorities.” What I find particularly troubling is that Kaufman’s quote made it into the Wall Street Journal yesterday. The newspaper tweeted it out early in the morning. It sat out there for almost 24 hours — an eternity in the current news ecosystem. And yet, as far as I can tell, nobody noticed. Hell, the Journal’s tweet had all of 1 retweets on it as of this morning.

[..] This monumental declaration was in a major newspaper — it should have set off immediate alarm bells from all the think tanks, unions and advocacy groups in Washington whose job is to make sure that this kind of destructive austerity ideology does not once again take hold in the Democratic Party. There should have been press releases, and statements of outrage and congresspeople on TV talking about it. But for an entire day, there was nothing, until it was shamed into the conversation. This is not the first time there’s been silence on stuff like this — less than a month ago Biden explicitly promised his Wall Street donors that despite his public campaign promises, he will not be pushing new legislation to change corporate behavior.

Hmmm: “..people shouldn’t “expect perfection or anything close” to it..”

• 72% of Detroit’s Absentee Ballot Counts Were Off (DN)

Recorded ballot counts in 72% of Detroit’s absentee voting precincts didn’t match the number of ballots cast, spurring officials in Michigan’s largest county to ask the state to investigate ahead of a pivotal presidential election. [..] In 46% of all Detroit’s precincts — absentee and Election Day — vote counts were out of balance, according to information presented Tuesday to the Wayne County Board of Canvassers. Specifically, the number of ballots tracked in precinct poll books did not match the number of ballots counted. The situation could amplify the spotlight on absentee ballots in Michigan ahead of an election for which record levels of mail-in voting are expected and President Donald Trump is already raising concerns about how votes will be handled. The election results for the primary weren’t incorrect, said Jonathan Kinloch, a Democrat and one of the canvassing board’s four members.

But, he said, something had gone wrong in the process of tracking ballots precinct by precinct. Having balanced precincts is particularly important in Michigan because precincts whose poll books don’t match with ballots can’t be recounted, according to state law. Instead, the original election results would stand. “It was a perfect storm,” Kinloch said. The “storm” involved a record number of absentee ballots being cast in Michigan’s primary and seasoned election workers not feeling it was safe to help with administering the election because of COVID-19, he added. The Wayne County board is asking Benson, a Detroit resident, to investigate “the training and processes used by the City of Detroit” in the primary election. The board also requested that the first-term Democrat appoint a state monitor to oversee the counting of absentee ballots in the general election.

Detroit had problems with precinct count mismatches in the November 2016 election. Election officials couldn’t reconcile vote totals for 59% of precincts in the city during a countywide canvass of vote results with most of the issues involving too many votes. Those votes couldn’t be recounted when Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein demanded a statewide recount following Donald Trump’s initial 13,000-vote victory over Democrat Hillary Clinton. A recount was started but stopped and nullified by the courts when Stein was ruled ineligible for a recount request because she had no chance at victory. The results eventually were certified as a 10,704-vote victory for Trump, the first Republican presidential nominee to win Michigan in 28 years. It was the Republican businessman’s smallest margin of victory in the nation.

The problems with the Detroit’s numbers in the Aug. 4 primary included ballots being put in the wrong tracking containers, said Monica Palmer, one of the Republican members of the Wayne County Board of Canvassers. “It was so inaccurate that we can’t even attempt to make it right,” said Palmer, chairwoman of the board. Winfrey said the vast majority of the absentee voting precincts in the city were less than three ballots off, plus or minus. Being off by three or fewer is allowed, Winfrey said — but it’s unclear what policy she was referring to. [..] Winfrey also said Thursday that people shouldn’t “expect perfection or anything close” to it after elections staffers have worked more than 20 hours.

Running out the clock.

• Johnson, Grassley Blast Colleagues For ‘False Narratives’ About Ukraine (JTN)

Republican Sens. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin and Chuck Grassley of Iowa sent letters to two of their Democratic colleagues, lambasting them for claiming that an investigation regarding U.S. policy in Ukraine during the Obama presidency is tainted by Russian disinformation—Democratic Sens. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland and Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut are the recipients of the August 20 letters. The investigation that the Democrats have said is poisoned by Russian disinformation pertains to possible conflicts of interest in America’s Ukraine policy when Vice President Joe Biden’s son Hunter served on the board of Burisma.

A press release says that the two Democratic senators have “falsely claimed that Grassley and Johnson are relying on information from Andriy Derkach as part of their ongoing oversight, despite the chairmen’s clear denials of having any communication with Derkach.” The Republican Senators in their letters said that as far as they know the sole instance of disinformation injected into the investigation has come from Democrats. “Regarding reports that we have received ‘packages’ of information from certain Ukrainian nationals – that is false. Further, the only relevant disinformation that we are aware of are documents that Minority Leader Schumer, Senator Warner, Speaker Pelosi, and Chairman Schiff referenced in their recent letter that your Democratic colleagues have introduced into our investigation,” the senators wrote in the letters to their Democratic colleagues.

“For example, the Schumer letter references a document, created by a Ukrainian national that mentions our names along with other Republican senators and administration officials, to suggest falsely that we might have received information from this individual. Liberal media outlets have picked up that reference, clearly from a leak, even though we have not received any information from that person, including tapes, and we have publicly and privately stated as much. To repeat, the only document in our investigation that has been described as disinformation is a document that your Democratic colleagues, not us, introduced into the record. If you and your colleagues are so concerned about disinformation, why do you continue to promote it?” Johnson and Grassley asked.

This is so nuts it can only mean she herself is certified nuts.

• “I Have A Right To Make Sure That My Home Is Secure” (ZH)

[..] nothing compares to what just happened in Chicago whose Mayor Lori Lightfoot – best known for encouraging local BLM protests, going so far as saying that black lives are “more important that downtown corporations” after the unprecedented looting that took place last week – defended the Chicago Police Department’s ban on protesters being able to demonstrate on the block where she lives, telling reporters Thursday that she and her family at times require heightened security because of threats she receives daily. Yes, Mayor Lori is all about BLM protests… as long as they are literally not in her back yard. Lightfoot refused to elaborate on the specific threats according to the Chicago Tribune, but said she receives them daily against herself, her wife and her home.

Lightfoot also told reporters that comparisons to how the Police Department has protected previous mayors’ homes, such as Rahm Emanuel’s Ravenswood residence, are unfair because “this is a different time like no other.” “I think that residents of this city, understanding the nature of the threats that we are receiving on a daily basis, on a daily basis, understand I have a right to make sure that my home is secure,” Lightfoot said, failing to grasp the simplest truth that all citizens of “her” devastated city also have a right to make sure that their home is secure although unlike Lightfoot they don’t have the local police to protect them. Because when it comes to outrageous liberal hypocrisy, things get complicated.

Lightfoot and Chicago police Superintendent David Brown were asked at an unrelated news conference about a Tribune report noting police have banned protesters from demonstrating on her block in the Logan Square neighborhood, ordering officers to arrest anyone who refuses to leave. The directive surfaced in a July email from then-Shakespeare District Cmdr. Melvin Roman to officers under his command. It did not distinguish between the peaceful protesters Lightfoot regularly says she supports and those who might intend to be destructive, but ordered that after a warning is given to demonstrators, “It should be locked down.” Activists and police sources could not cite instances when the city repeatedly locked down her predecessor Emanuel’s block against protesters.

The Kenwood block where former President Barack Obama lived with his family when his primary residence was in Chicago was shut down for access only by residents after his election. But Lightfoot said such comparisons “don’t make any sense,” after Brown referenced the ongoing coronavirus pandemic – which she has repeatedly overriden as a concern when BLM protests are to be held – as well as civil unrest that have flared since the George Floyd killing at the hands of Minneapolis police. “I’m not going to make any excuses for the fact that, given the threats I have personally received, given the threats to my home and my family, I’m going to do everything I can to make sure they’re protected,” Lightfoot said. “I make no apologies whatsoever for that.”

It wasn’t clear if Lightfoot would apologize to all those millions of Chicago residents who – just like her – are trying to avoid threats against their own families by angry, violent looters; looters whose despicable actions Lightfoot has repeatedly turned her eyes away from in hopes of peak virtue signaling.

So what’s the plan, guys? Green jobs?

• 28 Million Americans on Unemployment Insurance, 17.5% of Labor Force (WS)

What happened in the latest reporting week for unemployment claims was disconcerting: “Initial” claims under state unemployment insurance programs by newly laid-off workers rose. And initial claims under the federal Pandemic Unemployment Assistance (PUA) program provided by the CARES Act that covers gig workers, also rose. This means that people lost their work at a faster rate than they did in the prior week. In terms of “continued” claims: The number of people on unemployment insurance (UI) under state programs (blue bars) declined, as some people returned to work. But the number of people on UI under federal and other programs (red bars) jumped. Combined, the number of people on UI under all programs ticked down by 199k to 28.06 million, the Labor Department reported this morning. It was the least catastrophic reading since mid-May, but still a horrendously huge number, representing about 17.5% of the labor force:

Blue columns: The number of people who continued claiming unemployment insurance under regular state programs fell by nearly 1 million to 14.27 million (not seasonally adjusted), continuing the fairly consistent downtrend that had started in May. Red columns: The number of people on UI under all federal programs and some other programs – after having fallen by 2.4 million last week – jumped by 737k to 13.79 million (not seasonally adjusted), driven by increases in federal Pandemic Unemployment Assistance (PUA) claims and in federal Pandemic Emergency Unemployment Compensation (PEUC) claims.

Initial claims under state programs, filed by newly laid off workers, caused some head-scratching this morning, because they “unexpectedly” rose – and they rose both on a seasonally adjusted basis (by 135k to 1.11 million) and on a not seasonally adjusted basis (by 53k to 892k). So we can’t blame some seasonal adjustments gone awry. This was the first increase since the week ended July 11:

Yves Smith.

• CEOs Get Big Pre-Bankruptcy Bonuses As Lenders and Employees Stiffed (NC)

Nothing like paying for failure. The Financial Times describes how CEOs who ran their companies into the ground are nevertheless rewarded with “retention bonus” payouts shortly before the business declare bankruptcy, often mere days ahead. The absurd rationale is that it is necessary to keep a failed CEO on in order to reduce disruption. It appears instead that boards would rather pay a rich and unwarranted premium to keep a bad known quantity around, perhaps due to personal allegiances to the incumbent or because they might actually have to rouse themselves to oust the dud leader and select a replacement. Are we to believe that the stipends these boards approve has any relationship with the market value of these CEOs, even charitably assuming someone would hire them after their companies collapses underneath them?

Are we to believe there was no able lieutenant worth a battlefield promotion? No retired industry greybeard who could be engaged for an eighteen month to three year gig? No one in the ranks of turnaround expert or “temp for hire” CEOs who would do? Even worse, some of these payments are flat out looting: “Brad Holly, Whiting’s chief executive who joined the company in November 2017, received $6.4m at the end of March under a new compensation plan approved by the board of directors, which he also chairs, less than a week before the company filed for bankruptcy. Whiting, which expects to emerge from Chapter 11 next month, said last week that Mr Holly would step down as chief executive when that happens and would receive an additional $2.53m in severance. In total, Whiting paid out more than $14m to executives just a few days before declaring itself bust. In a regulatory filing on April 1 the company said its pay plan was designed “to align the interests of the Company and its employees”.

$6.4 million for Holly for at most five months of babysitting bankruptcy lawyers? Seriously? Another example: “Briggs & Stratton’s board approved more than $5m in retention payments on June 11, including more than $1m to chief executive Todd Teske, who has led the company for a decade. Four days later the company failed to make a $6.7m interest payment on a bond due later this year, and on July 20 it filed for bankruptcy. On July 19, the company’s board voted to terminate the health and life insurance benefits of the company’s retirees… The company’s 2020 bond is now trading at just a few cents on the dollar, reflecting slim hopes of recovery.

Why are these losers who almost assuredly have nowhere to go being paid in advance? Why aren’t they instead getting $1 per year and working for a contingent payout to be paid when the company emerged from bankruptcy, say tiered based upon results versus specified targets? This is the sort of deal that someone who cared about salvaging the company, as opposed to his personal bottom line, should accept.

Facebook is the opposite of free speech.

• Facebook Delenda Est (Ben Hunt)

I’m pretty close to being a free speech absolutist. Or at least I have an old-school small-l liberal John Stuart Mill-esque belief in free speech, with an extremely high bar for the “harm” that speech must directly inflict on other citizens before a rightfully constituted government, based on the consent of its citizens, has a legitimate duty to regulate that speech. And I believe that the US Supreme Court has been pretty much spot-on with its free speech decisions like Brandenburg v. Ohio and R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul, where they said (roughly speaking) that even speech calling for violent protest against the government is protected speech and that hate speech isn’t a thing. Let me repeat that last one. The US Supreme Court has repeatedly held that hate speech is not a thing. I think this is exactly right.

To be clear, I also believe that a private organization has the right to apply hate speech standards (or any other speech standards) to its members, if those members have the ability to leave the private organization AND that organization does not enjoy unique government support. So, for example, if I choose to attend a private religious college, and they have rules against hateful/blasphemous speech, then it’s fine for them to kick me out when I start doing my hateful blasphemous speech thing. I’d never go to that college in the first place, and there are plenty of other schools I can attend. But if ALL colleges started imposing hate speech standards, or if the ONLY college started imposing hate speech standards, or if ANY public college started imposing hate speech standards … well, I’d have a real problem with any of these circumstances.

And I believe that a just government has a duty to intervene in these circumstances. Now I also believe that the US Supreme Court got it terribly, terribly wrong with Citizens United, where they decided (again, roughly speaking) that non-real life citizens – like corporations or other constructed legal entities – enjoy the same protections for political speech that real life citizens do. I’ll repeat that one, too. The US Supreme Court has held that constructed entities of pooled capital (corporations) or pooled labor (unions) or pooled political influence (parties) have the same protection for their political speech as unconstructed/unpooled you and unconstructed/unpooled me. I think this is nuts.

To be clear, I also believe that limitations on how much money or time real life citizens can spend on their political speech are similarly nuts. So, for example, I believe that really rich American citizens like Bill Gates or Jeff Bezos or George Soros or Charles Koch can spend as much money as they please – literally billions of dollars if they want – to proclaim whatever cockamamie political idea they want to proclaim. What is unacceptable in my view – but is exactly what Citizens United allows – is for really rich guys to spend unlimited amounts of money on political speech after they are dead, or (worse!) for corporations and unions and parties to spend unlimited amounts of other people’s money on political speech, with the same legal protections as real life citizens.

Government does not exist to protect the rights of a dead rich guy’s money. Government does not exist to protect the rights of corporations, unions and political parties. Government EXISTS to protect the unalienable rights of its citizens, and that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Because “we” are so much smrter than God.

• Florida To Release 750 Million Genetically Modified Mosquitoes (BBC)

Local officials in Florida have approved the release of 750 million mosquitoes that have been genetically modified to reduce local populations. The aim is to reduce the number of mosquitoes that carry diseases like dengue or the Zika virus. The green-lighting of a pilot project after years of debate drew a swift outcry from environmental groups, who warned of unintended consequences. One group condemned the plan as a public “Jurassic Park experiment”. Activists warn of possible damage to ecosystems, and the potential creation of hybrid, insecticide-resistant mosquitoes. But the company involved says there will be no adverse risk to humans or the environment, and points to a slate of government-backed studies.

The plan to release the mosquitoes in 2021 in the Florida Keys, a string of islands, comes months after the modified mosquitoes were approved by federal regulators. In May, the US Environmental Agency granted permission to the British-based, US-operated company Oxitec to produce the genetically engineered, male Aedes aegypti mosquitoes, which are known as OX5034. Aedes aegypti mosquitoes are known to spread deadly diseases to humans such dengue, Zika, chikungunya and yellow fever. Only female mosquitoes bite humans because they need blood to produce eggs. So the plan is to release the male, modified mosquitoes who will then hopefully breed with wild female mosquitoes.

However the males carry a protein that will kill off any female offspring before they reach mature biting age. Males, which only feed on nectar, will survive and pass on the genes. Over time, the aim is to reduce the population of Aedes aegypti mosquitoes in the area and thereby reduce the spread of disease to humans.

A -large- group of ravens is called an unkindness of ravens, or a conspiracy of ravens.

• ‘Bored’ Ravens Straying From Tower Of London Signal Monarchy May Fall (G.)

A lack of tourists is driving the ravens at the Tower of London to boredom and causing them to fly away. Legend has it the monarchy and the Tower of London will fall if its six resident ravens leave the fortress. The birds, known as the guardians of the tower, are shrouded in myth and live in lodgings on the South Lawn. There are seven in total – the required six, plus one spare. The tower closed on 20 March and reopened five weeks ago. However, few tourists have returned. Summer visitor numbers would usually exceed 15,000 but because of the coronavirus pandemic, they have fallen to fewer than 800 a day. As a result, the birds are restless for more company.

With a lack of regular tourists, the birds have been venturing away, according to those who work there. Christopher Skaife, a raven master, told the Sun: “If the ravens were to leave, the tower would crumble to dust. The tower is only the tower when the people are here. “The ravens have always been so important … because they’ve been surrounded by myths and legends. We really need people to come back to help the ravens.” The seven ravens are Jubilee, Harris, Gripp, Rocky, Erin, Poppy and Merlina. They are free to roam the tower precincts in the day and preside over four territories within its walls.

Charles II is thought to have been the first to insist that the ravens of the Tower be protected after he was warned the crown and the tower would fall if they left. Skaife said during lockdown they got bored and lonely because there were no full bins to rummage or people bringing them food. He encouraged the Beefeaters who guard the building to throw them their leftovers. Skaife said: “It’s been tough because the ravens only saw me or one warden walking by during the lockdown. They depend on tourists. “Never in a raven’s history have we seen fewer people in the Tower of London. Even in world war two, there were still hundreds in and around.”

Beefeaters and a resident raven. Photo: Lynn Fergusson/Reuters

We try to run the Automatic Earth on donations. Since ad revenue has collapsed, your support is now an integral part of the process.

Thank you for your ongoing support.

China building about 21.4 million vehicles annually; wide gap for next-largest producer, as Japan only makes 8.3 million each year (U.S. has gone from 2nd to 6th place over past 20 years).

If Japan were in the Atlantic, it would stretch the length of the American coastline.

Support the Automatic Earth in virustime.