Jun 252026
 


M.C. Escher Dream 1935


Iran Calls MoU Deal A ‘US Defeat’ (ZH)
Trump Threatened Netanyahu With ‘Divorce’, NYT Reporters Say In New Book (RT)
The Democrat Party Is Dead (Matt Margolis)
‘Occupy Wall Street’ Now Officially Controls the Democrat Party (CTH)
Mamdani-backed Candidates Sweep Democratic Primaries In NYC (Guardian)
Can Anyone Govern Britain — Or America? (Daniel McCcarthy)
Brent Falls To Pre-War Levels (ZH)
‘Customers Are Being Gouged’: Trump Tells DOJ To Look Into Gasoline Prices (ZH)
An AI Cyber Apocalypse Is ‘Months, Not Years’ Away, Five Eyes Warns (Moran)
US To Set Up Testing Ranges Mimicking Ukraine Battlefield (RT)
US Carmakers Could Produce Missiles – Trump (RT)
Journal Under Fire for Retracting Article Challenging Claims of Racism (Turley)
Investigation Launched Into Von der Leyen Over Secret Chat With Zelensky (TASS)
Sweltering Heat As Europe Heatwave Spreads (BBC)

 


 

https://twitter.com/GuntherEagleman/status/2069522132988543210?s=20 https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2069539332084375596?s=20

 


 


The more they give in, the stronger their claims.

Iran Calls MoU Deal A ‘US Defeat’ (ZH)

“The war is going very well. As you know, we’re winning by a lot. Iran is making very big concessions,” Trump told reporters at the Capitol. “We’ll see what happens — but it has been very, very, very powerful,” the US President added. Tehran has remained insistent it never agreed to allow nuclear inspector access, and that the Strait of Hormuz is opening on its terms. Meanwhile, the latest on the Lebanon tenuous ceasefire and crisis:


Tehran Provokes Trump: Deal to End War a ‘Declaration of US Defeat’. The post-war narrative battle between Washington and Tehran intensified Wednesday after Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf claimed the recently signed Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) – and confirmed in Switzerland – amounted to nothing less than a US capitulation. Speaking in Baku during a gathering of parliaments from member states of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), Ghalibaf argued that the agreement validated Iran’s long-held position that negotiations only succeed when foreign powers abandon coercion and recognize the Islamic Republic’s rights.

“The Islamabad memorandum of understanding became a declaration of the US defeat,” Ghalibaf said. The remarks underscore the widening disconnect between how Washington and Tehran are portraying the agreement. While the Trump administration has presented the MoU as evidence that its pressure campaign forced concessions from Iran, Iranian officials continue to frame the deal as proof that the United States ultimately backed away from attempts to dictate terms.

Ghalibaf further suggested that the agreement demonstrated dialogue can only produce results when the opposing side ceases efforts to impose its will and instead accepts Iran’s sovereign rights. Iran has lately stated that it asserted its red lines through ‘action’.

Energy Secretary: 72 Ships Have Exited Strait in Last Day
Several vessels have already navigated the Strait of Hormuz utilizing a fresh evacuation framework established by the United Nations’ shipping agency, an official confirmed on Wednesday. More via newswires:US Energy Secretary Wright says roughly 72 ships have exited Strait of Hormuz in last 24 hours. “Ships have already begun to pass under the plan,” stated a spokesperson for the UN’s International Maritime Organization (IMO), though they opted not to disclose specific details regarding the transiting vessels.

According to the latest LSEG ship-tracking data Wednesday, at least two dry bulk carriers and one cargo vessel successfully crossed the strait under the new program within a 12-hour window. An additional analysis of ship movements by Reuters, utilizing data from LSEG and MarineTraffic, indicated that at least 35 other commercial vessels – primarily dry bulk, cargo, and container ships – are gearing up to make the passage. Brent crude oil prices fell below $75 a barrel late yesterday, marking the first time the global benchmark has traded under that level since the outbreak of the Trump-initiated Iran conflict. The drop in crude prices could provide relief for consumers and businesses by easing pressure on fuel costs and inflation, a desired Washington outcome of the MoU signing – for which Trump has come under severe criticism from hawks at home. Speaking of escalating, we have another early morning Trump Truth Social statement, openly contradicting the consistent stated position of Tehran leaders.

Read more …

“The US president reportedly said “all the Jews” are tired of the Israeli prime minister..”

Trump Threatened Netanyahu With ‘Divorce’, NYT Reporters Say In New Book (RT)

US President Donald Trump claimed that “all the Jews” are tired of Benjamin Netanyahu and threatened the Israeli prime minister with “divorce” between the close allies during a phone call, according to a new book by New York Times journalists Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan. The account comes from ‘Regime Change: Inside the Imperial Presidency of Donald Trump’, excerpts of which were cited by media outlets on Tuesday. The heated exchange reportedly took place in September 2025, when Trump was pushing Israel to accept his peace plan for Gaza. He spoke with Netanyahu in the presence of US presidential envoy Steve Witkoff and his son-in-law, Jared Kushner.


“Everybody’s sick of you, Bibi. All the Jews are sick of you. Even the two Jews on this call are sick of you,” Trump reportedly told Netanyahu, according to the Times of Israel. “Everybody hates you, and I’ve stood by you,” Trump said, warning that Israel’s refusal to accept the deal would result in “a divorce” between the countries, according to The Independent. Trump and Netanyahu praised their close cooperation during the opening weeks of the US-Israeli war against Iran, which was launched on February 28. Trump became increasingly critical of Israel as efforts to subdue Iran faltered and peace talks stalled.

Trump condemned Israeli strikes in Lebanon after Iran threatened to pull out of negotiations, at one point arguing that Netanyahu has “no f**king judgment” and reportedly calling him “f**king crazy.” According to the Washington Post, US intelligence agencies recently warned Trump that Netanyahu is likely to attempt to undermine efforts to secure a lasting peace with Iran. Both leaders have faced criticism at home, with opponents arguing that the interim agreement signed by the US and Iran last week failed to achieve their stated war aims.

Read more …

The system makes the Dems live on as zombies. You need two parties, and it’s -practically, not theoretically- impossible to add a third one.

The Democrat Party Is Dead (Matt Margolis)

New York just gave America a preview of who’s actually running the Democrat Party, and it isn’t Hakeem Jeffries. On Tuesday, all three socialist candidates endorsed by socialist Mayor Zohran Mamdani swept their targeted congressional primaries. Three races, three wins, zero exceptions. Three Democrat incumbents in safe districts all lost. “Their positions are some of the most extreme & far left Dems have seen,” Fox News correspondent Bill Melugin said on X. Trust me, he’s not exaggerating.


Darializa Avila Chevalier took NY-13 on a platform built around abolishing prisons, abolishing ICE, abolishing borders, defunding the police, and opposing the deportation of every illegal immigrant, including violent criminals. Claire Valdez won NY-7, promising citizenship and voting rights for people who broke into this country illegally, taxpayer-funded transgender medical treatments, and the elimination of private health insurance for every American. These aren’t fringe positions anymore. They’re the new mainstream of the Democrat Party, and voters in these districts chose them enthusiastically.


And no Democrat is safe. Just look at NY-10, where Brad Lander demolished Rep. Dan Goldman, grabbing nearly 65% of the vote. Goldman was one of the loudest anti-Trump voices in Congress, and he led impeachment efforts against President Trump. None of that mattered. His support for Israel and his refusal to endorse Mamdani are the reasons he lost. Lander, meanwhile, ran on abolishing ICE, forgiving almost $2 trillion in student loans, and packing the Supreme Court.= That’s the candidate Democrat primary voters preferred over a guy who spent years trying to remove Trump from office.

The Democrat establishment knows exactly what happened, and it’s terrified. “Tonight wasn’t just a bad night for so-called ‘Leader’ Hakeem Jeffries. It was the night the Democrat establishment officially surrendered to Zohran Mamdani and the socialist wing of their party,” NRCC spokesman Mike Marinella said in a statement. “Every House Democrat, in safe and competitive districts alike, will now answer to the radicals calling the shots. And Americans should be terrified by where the Democrat Party is headed.” Even CNN’s Van Jones couldn’t spin his way out of this one. “This is a battle between the establishment and this insurgency,” Jones said. “And the roof is collapsing on the Democratic party establishment tonight.”

Here’s the reality nobody on the left wants to say out loud: the Democrat Party as it existed even a few years ago is finished. The socialist wing didn’t build a new party from scratch. It crawled inside the old one and took it over from the inside, like the zombie fungus controlling a dead ant. The Democrat Party is the corpse. The Socialist Party is what’s controlling it now. This should terrify the establishment because it makes it impossible to keep hiding what the party has become. This is going to terrify independent voters, who are watching candidates run on abolishing borders and prisons while still calling themselves Democrats. They’ll have no choice but to vote Republican to stop the radicals from taking over.

The socialist takeover isn’t slowing down. It’s accelerating, and every safe-district Democrat in Congress now has to answer to it. And now Republicans have been handed an opening most political parties only dream of. “That’s what the left is putting out. It’s these radical leftists that are being elected. They’re being inspired by Mamdani, AOC, Bernie Sanders. They’re running all across the country, and the only good news is in a lot of these districts where it’s actually competitive districts. If they’re putting up these radicals, we’re getting a lot of favorable matchups,” RNC Chairman Joe Gruters said on Newsmax. “It’s the mainstream. This is what’s happened to their Party. They’ve gone so far to the left. This is normal. But the people are going to reject this at the polls.”

Gruters argues the math looks really good for the GOP. “There’s 18 toss-up seats,” he pointed out. “We’re at 212. I think we have a chance to defy history and win these midterms. It’s because the left has gone so far to the left. It’s really the choices are crazy versus normal, and what do people want?”

Read more …

”IDEOLOGY: Capitalism is bad. Law enforcement are pigs. Policy should support emotions. The collective should rule every decision.”

‘Occupy Wall Street’ Now Officially Controls the Democrat Party (CTH)

It did not happen last night folks. It took them another 15 years after they installed Obama to become the legitimate heirs to the political party formerly known as Democrats.mThe progressive movement is now branded as “Democrat Socialists of America” (DSA), but those who have followed the arc of this group well understand every single member within DSA is from the Occupy Wall Street / Anarchy movement that preceded it. Fingers are being pointed toward New York as the epicenter of the new Democrat Party Headquarters of DSA, which is a fitting location of focus given the OWS origin.


The front line of the DSA movement consists of 18 to 30-year-olds, mostly white, urban, upper-middle-income activists, carrying Macbooks with anarchist stickers and physical attire resembling a blend of hipster ‘grunge’ and skateboard beanie resistance. They don’t shower much and love to talk about AOC and Bernie on Social Media. Don’t belittle them, they are authentic. They don’t misunderstand things; they bought into the nonsense and genuinely believe the popular narrative sold to them since High School that capitalism is horrible and Communism or Socialism is the preferred system of government.

Individually, not one of them would shed a tear if their collective comrades broke into their parent’s houses tomorrow and murdered the elders. When joined in group assemblies, their emotions are controlled by the sensibility of the group. This is the Mao generation, repeating and rhyming. IDEOLOGY: Capitalism is bad. Law enforcement are pigs. Policy should support emotions. The collective should rule every decision. Democrat socialists believe all dissent must be squashed unless they actually lose a popular election – then, the system is oppressing them. Speech that argues against their belief system is ‘violence’. However, violence that supports their belief system is ‘speech’.

Democrat Socialists of America are factually Occupy Wall Street activists. The traditional mechanisms of self-controlling morality do not apply to this group of generational ideologues. The haves -vs- have nots is their religion. They never cede power and elections do not remove them. Go look at history, the only thing that has ever stopped Socialism is physical violence. You may have read the stories of multi-billionaires building bunkers. The predictable DSA is why. People who say, “violence is not the answer” are pretending they don’t know history.

POLITICO – […] Fresh off sweeping victories across New York City that showcased the growing power of the anti-establishment progressive left inside the Democratic Party, Democratic Socialists of America leaders, eager to capitalize on their momentum, are already plotting their next act: making sure one of their own is on the presidential primary debate stage, whether the party wants them or not. “What DSA represents is a real contrast to Democrats who have run the last couple of elections on fear,” DSA national co-chair Megan Romer said. “You can’t run on that. You have to offer an alternative. And it’s really important that we be involved in that conversation in 2028. It’s important that we have somebody saying sensible things.”

Their search process is already underway. This summer, DSA is dispatching surveys to all 250 of its chapters, asking members to weigh who they want to back and why, and return their findings to national leadership by Sept. 15, details the group first shared with POLITICO. DSA expects to receive a stack of 20-page to 40-page dossiers from chapters coast to coast weighing in on who should carry the democratic socialist banner into 2028.The organization plans to hold national discussions, including with leaders like New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who is 84 and not expected to run in 2028, with a formal vote expected at the group’s 2027 convention next year — though leaders say they could move faster if the primary timeline demands it.

“We’re going to be talking about millions of hours knocking doors for 2028 — so when we decide to really run somebody, people have to feel like they had a say,” Romer said. Mamdani-backed candidates swept three closely watched New York congressional primaries Tuesday, with Claire Valdez, Brad Lander and Darializa Avila Chevalier all defeating more establishment-aligned rivals — including two incumbents. It was a major show of force for Mamdani’s political operation, and fresh evidence of the left’s growing muscle heading into 2028. “They ask, ‘Who do you want to run in 2028?’ Then they ask, ‘When does the race for 2028 begin?’ It starts now. It starts on Tuesday,” Mamdani said at a Brooklyn rally last week.

The elephant in the room for the group, of course, is Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

Read more …

Jerry Nadler, George Conway et al, as in: The anti-Trump field.

“JFK’s grandson Jack Schlossberg fails to advance in election to replace Jerry Nadler in Manhattan district. “

Mamdani-backed Candidates Sweep Democratic Primaries In NYC (Guardian)

Zohran Mamdani’s growing influence over the Democratic party was on show in New York City on Tuesday as three congressional candidates endorsed by New York’s democratic socialist mayor won closely watched primaries, while voters in Maryland, Utah and South Carolina cast ballots in primaries and runoffs.Brad Lander, the former New York City comptroller who also ran for mayor last year before endorsing Mamdani, won his race comfortably, defeating the Democratic representative Dan Goldman.


Another Mamdani ally, Claire Valdez, a state lawmaker and former union organizer, defeated Antonio Reynoso, the preferred successor of retiring Democratic Representative Nydia Velázquez in New York’s seventh district, encompassing parts of Brooklyn and Queens. And in a stunning upset, the public defense investigator Darializa Avila Chevalier toppled Representative Adriano Espaillat, the powerful five-term incumbent who chairs the Congressional Hispanic caucus, in the state’s diverse 13th congressional district, which covers Upper Manhattan and parts of the Bronx.

“What a glorious time to be a New Yorker,” Lander declared at this election night party in Brooklyn, where he was joined by the mayor. Mamdani then appeared at a watch party for Valdez, where he told a jubilant crowd: “The old politics that got us into this crisis is not the politics that’s going to get us out of this crisis.” It was a clean sweep for Mamdani, who waded into the House primaries earlier this year, spending his political capital to boost three leftwing allies – a gamble that would test his popularity and his influence. With his slate of candidates all but certain to be elected to Congress in November, Mamdani has left his stamp on the state’s congressional delegation and expanded his ascendant progressive movement.

Elsewhere in the city, Jack Schlossberg, the grandson of John F Kennedy, was unsuccessful in his bid to revive the political legacy of the US’s most vaunted political family. In a House race that attracted outsized national attention, Schlossberg, 33, had hoped to parlay his huge social media presence and charisma into a Congressional seat, but he came up short in a crowded field of Democrats hoping to succeed the long-serving representative Jerry Nadler. Micah Lasher, a longtime New York politician and self-described “nerd”, won the primary in New York’s 12th district, a deep-blue district whose voters tend to identify as liberal rather than left-wing.

The race also included the prominent anti-Trump critic George Conway and state assembly-member Alex Bores, whose candidacy became the fulcrum for what observers described as an “AI civil war”. Lasher will be the heavy favorite to win the safely Democratic district in the November midterm election. Late on Tuesday night, Queens-born Donald Trump celebrated the defeat of both Goldman and Conway in a pair of social media posts. “Weak and pathetic Congressman Dan Goldman just lost, BIG! I guess people didn’t like him illegally targeting President TRUMP,” the president said of the congressman, who served as the lead counsel to House Democrats during the Trump’s first impeachment. Of Conway, whose ex-wife was a top adviser to the president during his first term, Trump gleefully predicted that he would “end up at about 5% of the vote in a rather weak field of young and aggressive Communists”.

Read more …

UK: No

US: Trump is doing it.

Can Anyone Govern Britain — Or America? (Daniel McCcarthy)

As Britain gets ready for its seventh prime minister in just 10 years, it’s time to ask whether the parliamentary system itself is broken. That might explain not only why landslide election victories don’t translate into stable leadership in Britain but also why America’s Congress is so feckless. Is representative government an idea whose time has passed? In Europe as well as America, leftists prefer that judges and bureaucrats wield permanent power, as supposedly impartial experts who know best how to stop the weather from changing and how many genders there are.


Britain’s Labour party started out as a vehicle for the working class, in theory. It was closely connected to the country’s major industrial unions — but Britain in the 21st century has lost most of its hard industry, and Labour is now led by the same kind of socially left-wing, technocratic wonks that make up the “inner party” of the Democrats in this country. Brexit, passed by the British people in a referendum 10 years ago this week, proved Labour had lost the working class — the party elite favored remaining in the European Union, but working-class voters themselves cast their ballots for “leave.”

Unfortunately, the Conservative party’s elite also favored “remain” — Prime Minister David Cameron himself did, and losing the Brexit referendum compelled him to resign. Yet Cameron was followed by another Conservative PM, Theresa May, who had also been a remainer. It took a third Tory PM, Boris Johnson, to follow through on the voters’ mandate, but Johnson proved to be Britain’s Joe Biden where immigration was concerned, unleashing the “Boriswave” of mass migration, which flooded Britain with some 4 million newcomers from places like India, China, Pakistan and Nigeria.

Personal scandals forced Johnson from office before the scale of the damage his policies did came to light — but bond markets didn’t tolerate Johnson’s successor, Liz Truss, for long. That left Rishi Sunak to lead the Conservatives in 2024 to their first general election defeat in 14 years. In that time, Conservatives had given Britain same-sex marriage, bigger government, deeper debt, more green-energy regulation and record-high immigration. Labour more than doubled its number of seats in Parliament with Keir Starmer leading the party into the election, yet the landslide didn’t translate into any mandate for him.

His popularity soon slid and polls indicated the Reform party would win the next election, making Nigel Farage prime minister. Labour is now gambling its problems are personal, not political, and once Starmer has made way for a new PM — virtually certain to be Andy Burnham — its majority will be salvageable. Burnham is even more left-wing than Starmer: at least as far left on social issues and even more enthusiastic about nationalizing industry. Farage is wagering Starmer wasn’t the millstone around Labour’s neck — the party’s politics are.

But even as traditional parties of the left and right elsewhere in Europe have decayed in ways much like those of Britain’s Tories and Labour, new populist parties have struggled to win and maintain power. Farage has to contend not only with Labour and what’s left of the Conservatives, but also with a small but vociferous insurgency to his right, the Restore party. All this suggests Burnham or Farage can’t count on enjoying a tenure longer than Starmer’s or Sunak’s. Parliamentary elections haven’t produced a stable British government by anyone in the last 16 years. What are the odds the next election, which has to be held by August 2029, will do so? [..]

Read more …

“Trump is also asserting that Iran will allow IEAE inspectors in, something the Islamic Republic is also vehemently rejecting.”

Brent Falls To Pre-War Levels (ZH)

Brent crude oil prices fell below $75 a barrel late yesterday, marking the first time the global benchmark has traded under that level since the outbreak of the Trump-initiated Iran conflict. The drop in crude prices could provide relief for consumers and businesses by easing pressure on fuel costs and inflation, a desired Washington outcome of the MoU signing – for which Trump has come under severe criticism from hawks at home. Speaking of escalating, we have another early morning Trump Truth Social statement, openly contradicting the consistent stated position of Tehran leaders.


Since the Switzerland high level talks led by Vance, there’s been a series of issues where Tehran and Washington have issued clearly contradictory statements. Trump says in the fresh statement that Iran informed the United States that there would be “NO TOLLS, NO INSURANCE COSTS, & NO OTHER CHARGES OF ANY KIND” imposed on vessels traveling through the strategic waterway. Trump as is typical criticized media reports that had suggested Iran could seek payments from ships using the route, calling such coverage “Fake News.” He added that if the information provided by Iran proved inaccurate, ongoing negotiations between the two sides would end “immediately.”

The president also denied reports that the United States had provided funds directly to Iran or released Iranian assets without conditions. “No money has been given to Iran, or released from their money to them, by the U.S.,” he said. However, Trump stated that Washington plans to make some Iranian funds available for agricultural purchases. According to the president, the money would be used to buy US farm products, including “Corn, Wheat, Soybeans, and more.” But Iranian leadership has vehemently rejected this narrative too.

“Food is desperately needed in Iran,” Trump said, adding that the purchases would be made “exclusively from the United States. The Strait of Hormuz remains one of the world’s most important energy shipping routes, and any disruption or additional costs imposed on vessels passing through the channel could have significant implications for global trade and oil markets. It is officially ‘open’ in the wake of the MoU signing – but the next few days and weeks will be telling.Meanwhile, some new developments on the Hormuz opening front, and Qatar LNG:

Qatar’s prime minister said establishing a hotline between the US and Iran is essential to prevent rogue actors impeding the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, as he predicted that the Gulf state would resume normal liquefied natural gas production “within a few weeks”. –FT. Trump is also asserting that Iran will allow IEAE inspectors in, something the Islamic Republic is also vehemently rejecting.

Read more …

Exactly like the old Lou Reed tune:

They’re never early, they’re always late.

First thing you learn is that you always gotta wait.

‘Customers Are Being Gouged’: Trump Tells DOJ To Look Into Gasoline Prices (ZH)

President Trump said on Wednesday that he had instructed the Department of Justice (DOJ) to open an investigation into oil companies over high gasoline prices. In a Truth Social post, Trump said that oil companies have not lowered their prices at the pump despite a recent decline in crude prices following the U.S.–Iran preliminary agreement. “Those prices are dropping like a rock! In other words, customers are being ‘gouged,’” he said. “Gasoline prices better start going down a lot faster than what I’m seeing!” Brent crude futures fell below $75 per barrel on Wednesday (back near pre-war levels), while U.S. West Texas Intermediate futures dropped to $72.29, amid the resumption of shipping traffic in the Strait of Hormuz.


Bloomberg’s energy guru, Javier Blas, remarked after President Trump’s post: “US President Trump, all political theatre, has just discovered the refining (and marketing) margin.” The national average price for regular gasoline stood at $3.93 per gallon on June 23, according to the American Automobile Association (AAA), down from $4.04 the previous week. The gas price was $4.53 per gallon a month ago. Of course, given the supply/refinery chain, it takes time (two weeks) for crude prices to ripple through to pump prices… AAA said it observed that gas prices remain above the levels before the conflict with Iran erupted in February.

The national average price for regular gas was $2.98 on Feb. 28, the day when the United States and Israel launched military operations against Iran, triggering the war. “Getting prices back down to prewar levels will take longer because of the time it takes to resume shipping and production,” Marie Dodds, public affairs director for AAA Oregon/Idaho, said in a statement. As Aldgra Fredly reports for The Epoch Times, US and Iran signed a memorandum of understanding last week to end the war. Under the agreement, the Strait of Hormuz would be fully reopened, and Tehran would not procure or develop a nuclear weapon. The United States also agreed to waive sanctions on Iranian oil for 60 days.

U.S. Secretary of Energy Chris Wright told ABC News on June 21 that commercial shipping traffic through the Strait of Hormuz had returned to normal levels, and that Americans should expect further declines in oil, gasoline, and other energy prices as traffic resumed. “Flows of oil and natural gas through the straits have already returned to normal, and they will continue that way whatever happens with the negotiations with the Iranians,” he said.

Arsenio Dominguez, secretary-general of the International Maritime Organization, said on June 23 that more than 11,000 seafarers stranded in the region due to war would be evacuated under a coordinated effort with Iran, Oman, other coastal states in the region, the United States, and the maritime industry following the U.S.–Iran preliminary deal. “We have secured the necessary safety guarantees and have thoroughly verified the conditions for safe navigation to support these operations,” Dominguez said in a statement. Iran had previously blocked traffic in the Strait of Hormuz—a critical waterway through which a significant share of global oil and gas shipments passes—in response to the U.S. and Israeli attacks on its nuclear and military sites.

Read more …

“Frontier AI models are anticipated to exceed current industry expectations, fundamentally transforming both offensive and defensive cyber capabilities.”

An AI Cyber Apocalypse Is ‘Months, Not Years’ Away, Five Eyes Warns (Moran)

The Five Eyes intelligence group, comprising the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, is warning governments and corporations that AI models capable of launching devastating cyber attacks that could overwhelm their defenses are months, not years away. They are urging nations and companies to “act now” to improve cyber defenses.


This is a highly unusual warning from the normally circumspect intelligence group. The Five Eyes alliance typically operates with deep, classified sharing. They do not issue public joint statements lightly. When they align to release a unified message directly to the public and business leaders, it signals that the threat landscape has shifted in a way that regular, incremental IT adjustments cannot handle. In short, Five Eyes doesn’t do “hype.” When it releases a joint warning, it’s to alert governments and corporations to a real, imminent threat.

Usually, the group’s intelligence warnings paint a picture of cybersecurity risks across a multi-year window. This warning explicitly breaks from that convention, shifting the perspective from years to just “months.””While AI will help us improve cyber defense over time, it also accelerates the speed, scale, and sophistication of cyber threats,” the group notes. “Frontier AI models are anticipated to exceed current industry expectations, fundamentally transforming both offensive and defensive cyber capabilities. The timeline is not years; it is months.”

The writing has been on the wall for the last few months regarding an increase in urgency in the potency and capabilities of newer AI models. For instance, earlier this month, the U.S. government took the unusual step of ordering the AI startup Anthropic to suspend access to its powerful Mythos and Fable 5 models for foreign nationals. Policymakers expressed severe national security concerns that these specific models possess unprecedented capabilities to independently identify code vulnerabilities, potentially resulting in a “vulnerability tsunami” if misused by hostile actors.

From the Five Eyes Statement:

Cyber risk can no longer be treated as a purely technical issue. This is a core business risk and leadership responsibility. Boards and executives should ensure cyber resilience is in place and works under pressure. It is not enough to have controls. Leaders must be confident those controls will perform during a real incident. This requires reassessing long-standing trade-offs and using AI deliberately to strengthen defense – not just improve efficiency.

Core principles:
• Secure-by-design and secure-by-default must become standard practice not an aspiration.
• Resilience cannot depend on a single solution or technology.Defense in depth remains essential.
• As AI systems evolve, new and previously unknown vulnerabilities will emerge, including zero day vulnerabilities.
• Breaches will occur. Preparedness helps you contain them quickly and prevent escalation into major operational and financial crises.

Rather than targeting IT administrators with technical alerts, it directly holds boards and corporate executives accountable, framing AI-driven cyber risk as a fundamental threat to business continuity and trust. It demands that leaders move past treating cybersecurity as an IT standalone department and actively use AI defensively to outpace adversaries.”

“What it was saying is that in an age of AI, breaches will occur. It’s not a matter of if, but when, so it’s important to get prepared now,” Olivia Shen, director of the Strategic Technologies Program at the University of Sydney, told CNN. “Sophisticated businesses, usually your large corporations, they already invest in cybersecurity, and they’ll be better prepared,” Shen said. “The ones who are more exposed will be those small and medium-sized businesses who maybe have under invested so far, and they’ll basically be like sitting ducks.”

The speed with which these cyber threats are materializing is putting a damper on some efforts to place significant guardrails on AI. This month, several dozen cybersecurity researchers, AI entrepreneurs, and corporate executives signed an open letter urging the Trump administration to commit to “an open, scientific and transparent process of handling AI risk assessments” and said it was “essential” for security teams to “find and fix flaws in their own newly-written as well as decades of legacy code faster than our adversaries.”

“We know these technologies can be used for both defensive and offensive purposes, and we need a few more guardrails about how we can maximize the benefits for defensive cyber security, while gate keeping it away from potential cyber adversaries and scammers and cyber criminals,” Shen said. When the first major breaches happen, perhaps then we’ll get more serious about the speed with which AI development is outpacing our ability to adequately control it.

Read more …

Drones.. US lags behind.

US To Set Up Testing Ranges Mimicking Ukraine Battlefield (RT)

The US will set up at least two domestic testing ranges that mimic battlefield conditions in Ukraine, Army Secretary Dan Driscoll said on Tuesday. Driscoll said defense contractors will have access to the sites, where the Army and industry “can start to do much more aggressive testing,” according to DefenseScoop. The US has been struggling to keep pace with rapidly evolving drone technology used extensively by both Russia and Ukraine. “You can have a kind of electronic warfare and all of the contested environment created, and you can have drone manufacturers and counter-drone tool-builders engaging together,” Driscoll told reporters at an Army-hosted industry event.


“Then, we also want soldiers to be able to go there so that they can strengthen their skills and work hand-in-hand with developers,” he added. According to the Washington Post, the Pentagon is actively seeking companies capable of producing 300,000 low-cost kamikaze drones and is prepared to spend $54.6 billion next year on an expanded drone warfare program. The widespread use of surveillance and attack drones in the Ukraine conflict has created vast ‘kill zones’ along the front line, with both sides using UAVs to repel mechanized assaults and carry out strikes deep inside enemy territory. Russian Deputy Prime Minister Denis Manturov said earlier this month that domestic companies now have the capacity to produce more than 15,000 FPV drones per day, up from around 15,000 per month in 2023.

Moscow has warned that Western supplies of drone technology and other weapons to Kiev make NATO a de facto participant in the conflict and risk further escalation. Ukraine frequently uses drones to strike civilian targets. Last month, UAVs destroyed a college dormitory in Starobelsk, Russia, killing 21 students. On June 3, a Ukrainian drone struck a commuter bus in Enakievo, killing eight passengers. Two weeks later, a drone hit a bus carrying a youth football team from Belarus near the Russian village of Nelzhichi, killing a pregnant woman and injuring eight people, including six children.

Read more …

“Washington wants to expand weapons production after reportedly depleting key stockpiles in the Iran war and Ukraine”..

US Carmakers Could Produce Missiles – Trump (RT)

US automakers could begin producing missiles and other weapons as Washington moves to expand military output and replenish its arsenals, President Donald Trump has said. Speaking to reporters at the White House on Monday, Trump said car companies with spare factory capacity are discussing deals to manufacture weapons, including Patriot air-defense missiles and Tomahawk cruise missiles. ”They’re dealing with General Motors. They’re dealing with Ford,” Trump said. “I know General Motors is all excited about building weapons now.”


He added that some plants belonging to the two carmakers are expected to be converted to military production, describing the shift as part of a “big strong economic push” to produce arms. His remarks come after the Wall Street Journal reported in April that the Pentagon had approached General Motors, Ford, GE Aerospace, and Oshkosh about retooling civilian factories to produce munitions and other military equipment. The talks were reportedly part of an effort to put US industry on what Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has called a “wartime footing,” echoing the World War II-era conversion of Detroit factories to military production.

The push comes amid mounting concern over the state of US weapons stockpiles after years of arms deliveries to Ukraine under former President Joe Biden and heavy missile use during the recent US-Israeli war against Iran. US media and think-tanks have warned that Washington burned through large quantities of critical munitions during the Iran campaign, including Tomahawk cruise missiles, Patriot interceptors, THAAD missiles, and other advanced systems.

Reuters has also reported that depleted inventories could delay US arms deliveries to fellow NATO members. Trump has downplayed shortage concerns, saying the US has “quite a few” missiles but wants to keep larger reserves. His administration has requested a record military budget of around $1.5 trillion for the 2027 fiscal year, with much of the increase expected to go towards replenishing stockpiles and expanding production.

Read more …

“..psychology as a field is a tool of white power..”

Journal Under Fire for Retracting Article Challenging Claims of Racism (Turley)

We have previously discussed academic journals canceling publications that challenge the orthodox views of mainstream scholars. The latest such example can be found in the Journal of the New Zealand College of Clinical Psychologists, which pulled the 2025 article of Arna Mitchell who questioned claims that psychology as a field is a tool of white power. The editors reportedly declared that such conclusions are inconsistent with the publication’s values.


Dr. Kumari Valentine, a psychologist and former editor of the journal, wrote an article raising concerns over the retraction: The reason given for the removal was not research fraud, plagiarism, ethical misconduct, or factual error. Rather, the NZCCP Council determined that retaining the article was inconsistent with the values of the College and could perpetuate harm to Maori. The article, He Wero Ano: Don’t Just Tell Me, Show Me How Science and Psychology Are Racist in New Zealand, took issue with the broad, unsubstantiated claims of systemic racism in psychology across all levels of the discipline, including that science itself is a social construct of white Europeans and white power.

Mitchell, a Maori woman herself, also took issue with the view that tribal ways of knowing should be given equal weight to scientific ways of knowing in the training and practice of psychologists in New Zealand. One would think that such a viewpoint, particularly from a Maori woman, would, at a minimum, be welcomed as a provocative and interesting perspective. However, various readers were less interested in reading it or even responding to it. They campaigned to cancel it.

Some did respond, saying they felt the critique was based on a misunderstanding of Kaupapa Maori psychology. That should also be a welcome perspective in allowing a free exchange of viewpoints on the subject. Some faculty have cried foul, calling the cancellation raw censorship. This is reminiscent of the controversy at the Emory Law Journal and the firing of an editor at JAMA. These controversies are a reflection of the viewpoint intolerance that has taken hold of much of academia, supporting groups, and journals.

Read more …

Nice pair.

Investigation Launched Into Von der Leyen Over Secret Chat With Zelensky (TASS)

European Ombudsman Teresa Anjinho has launched an investigation into European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen over a secret chat involving German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, French President Emmanuel Macron, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, and Vladimir Zelensky, the Berliner Zeitung newspaper reported. Anjinho notified the European Commission of the investigation last week. She is examining whether the EC violated transparency rules by refusing to grant the Dutch organization Follow the Money (FTM) access to the correspondence.


The European Commission justified its refusal by stating that publishing the chat data could “complicate the international relations of the European Union (and its member states) with third countries.” “I have decided to launch a probe into the European Commission’s actions regarding the applicant’s request in accordance with EU regulations concerning public access to documents,” Anjinho wrote to the FTM organization. She expects to meet with EC representatives by mid-July.

Read more …

Places are hot that were not built for it. 40 people drowned in France alone in a few days.

Sweltering Heat As Europe Heatwave Spreads (BBC)

France is bracing for another day of exceptionally hot weather, with more than half the country remaining under a red heat alert on Wednesday. Tens of thousands of homes have been left without power in western Brittany, while a major wildfire was brought under control overnight in the Maine-et-Loire region. It comes after the country experienced its hottest June day since records began on Tuesday, with an average temperature of 29.8C (85.54F) recorded.


The heatwave is expected to spread to other parts of western Europe on Wednesday, with an orange alert for dangerous weather in place for parts of the Netherlands. Temperatures are expected to peak in the Netherlands and Belgium on Friday, while Germany is expected to see the mercury rise to 40C (104F) over the weekend. The heatwave is also expected to spread to eastern Europe over the next few days, with severe heat warnings issued for countries including Poland, Croatia and Hungary for later in the week.

So far, France, Spain and Italy have been hardest hit by the heatwave. Forty people have drowned in heatwave-related incidents in France since last Thursday, according to the prime minister.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/niccruzpatane/status/2069567930308624607?s=20

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 


M.C. Escher Dream 1935


Iran Calls MoU Deal A ‘US Defeat’ (ZH)
Trump Threatened Netanyahu With ‘Divorce’, NYT Reporters Say In New Book (RT)
The Democrat Party Is Dead (Matt Margolis)
‘Occupy Wall Street’ Now Officially Controls the Democrat Party (CTH)
Mamdani-backed Candidates Sweep Democratic Primaries In NYC (Guardian)
Can Anyone Govern Britain — Or America? (Daniel McCcarthy)
Brent Falls To Pre-War Levels (ZH)
‘Customers Are Being Gouged’: Trump Tells DOJ To Look Into Gasoline Prices (ZH)
An AI Cyber Apocalypse Is ‘Months, Not Years’ Away, Five Eyes Warns (Moran)
US To Set Up Testing Ranges Mimicking Ukraine Battlefield (RT)
US Carmakers Could Produce Missiles – Trump (RT)
Journal Under Fire for Retracting Article Challenging Claims of Racism (Turley)
Investigation Launched Into Von der Leyen Over Secret Chat With Zelensky (TASS)
Sweltering Heat As Europe Heatwave Spreads (BBC)

 


 

https://twitter.com/GuntherEagleman/status/2069522132988543210?s=20 https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2069539332084375596?s=20 https:/twitter.com/Adams_Tech_AI/status/2069412440140325371?s=20

 


 


The more they give in, the stronger their claims.

Iran Calls MoU Deal A ‘US Defeat’ (ZH)

“The war is going very well. As you know, we’re winning by a lot. Iran is making very big concessions,” Trump told reporters at the Capitol. “We’ll see what happens — but it has been very, very, very powerful,” the US President added. Tehran has remained insistent it never agreed to allow nuclear inspector access, and that the Strait of Hormuz is opening on its terms. Meanwhile, the latest on the Lebanon tenuous ceasefire and crisis:


Tehran Provokes Trump: Deal to End War a ‘Declaration of US Defeat’. The post-war narrative battle between Washington and Tehran intensified Wednesday after Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf claimed the recently signed Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) – and confirmed in Switzerland – amounted to nothing less than a US capitulation. Speaking in Baku during a gathering of parliaments from member states of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), Ghalibaf argued that the agreement validated Iran’s long-held position that negotiations only succeed when foreign powers abandon coercion and recognize the Islamic Republic’s rights.

“The Islamabad memorandum of understanding became a declaration of the US defeat,” Ghalibaf said. The remarks underscore the widening disconnect between how Washington and Tehran are portraying the agreement. While the Trump administration has presented the MoU as evidence that its pressure campaign forced concessions from Iran, Iranian officials continue to frame the deal as proof that the United States ultimately backed away from attempts to dictate terms.

Ghalibaf further suggested that the agreement demonstrated dialogue can only produce results when the opposing side ceases efforts to impose its will and instead accepts Iran’s sovereign rights. Iran has lately stated that it asserted its red lines through ‘action’.

Energy Secretary: 72 Ships Have Exited Strait in Last Day
Several vessels have already navigated the Strait of Hormuz utilizing a fresh evacuation framework established by the United Nations’ shipping agency, an official confirmed on Wednesday. More via newswires:US Energy Secretary Wright says roughly 72 ships have exited Strait of Hormuz in last 24 hours. “Ships have already begun to pass under the plan,” stated a spokesperson for the UN’s International Maritime Organization (IMO), though they opted not to disclose specific details regarding the transiting vessels.

According to the latest LSEG ship-tracking data Wednesday, at least two dry bulk carriers and one cargo vessel successfully crossed the strait under the new program within a 12-hour window. An additional analysis of ship movements by Reuters, utilizing data from LSEG and MarineTraffic, indicated that at least 35 other commercial vessels – primarily dry bulk, cargo, and container ships – are gearing up to make the passage. Brent crude oil prices fell below $75 a barrel late yesterday, marking the first time the global benchmark has traded under that level since the outbreak of the Trump-initiated Iran conflict. The drop in crude prices could provide relief for consumers and businesses by easing pressure on fuel costs and inflation, a desired Washington outcome of the MoU signing – for which Trump has come under severe criticism from hawks at home. Speaking of escalating, we have another early morning Trump Truth Social statement, openly contradicting the consistent stated position of Tehran leaders.

Read more …

“The US president reportedly said “all the Jews” are tired of the Israeli prime minister..”

Trump Threatened Netanyahu With ‘Divorce’, NYT Reporters Say In New Book (RT)

US President Donald Trump claimed that “all the Jews” are tired of Benjamin Netanyahu and threatened the Israeli prime minister with “divorce” between the close allies during a phone call, according to a new book by New York Times journalists Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan. The account comes from ‘Regime Change: Inside the Imperial Presidency of Donald Trump’, excerpts of which were cited by media outlets on Tuesday. The heated exchange reportedly took place in September 2025, when Trump was pushing Israel to accept his peace plan for Gaza. He spoke with Netanyahu in the presence of US presidential envoy Steve Witkoff and his son-in-law, Jared Kushner.


“Everybody’s sick of you, Bibi. All the Jews are sick of you. Even the two Jews on this call are sick of you,” Trump reportedly told Netanyahu, according to the Times of Israel. “Everybody hates you, and I’ve stood by you,” Trump said, warning that Israel’s refusal to accept the deal would result in “a divorce” between the countries, according to The Independent. Trump and Netanyahu praised their close cooperation during the opening weeks of the US-Israeli war against Iran, which was launched on February 28. Trump became increasingly critical of Israel as efforts to subdue Iran faltered and peace talks stalled.

Trump condemned Israeli strikes in Lebanon after Iran threatened to pull out of negotiations, at one point arguing that Netanyahu has “no f**king judgment” and reportedly calling him “f**king crazy.” According to the Washington Post, US intelligence agencies recently warned Trump that Netanyahu is likely to attempt to undermine efforts to secure a lasting peace with Iran. Both leaders have faced criticism at home, with opponents arguing that the interim agreement signed by the US and Iran last week failed to achieve their stated war aims.

Read more …

The system makes the Dems live on as zombies. You need two parties, and it’s -practically, not theoretically- impossible to add a third one.

The Democrat Party Is Dead (Matt Margolis)

New York just gave America a preview of who’s actually running the Democrat Party, and it isn’t Hakeem Jeffries. On Tuesday, all three socialist candidates endorsed by socialist Mayor Zohran Mamdani swept their targeted congressional primaries. Three races, three wins, zero exceptions. Three Democrat incumbents in safe districts all lost. “Their positions are some of the most extreme & far left Dems have seen,” Fox News correspondent Bill Melugin said on X. Trust me, he’s not exaggerating.


Darializa Avila Chevalier took NY-13 on a platform built around abolishing prisons, abolishing ICE, abolishing borders, defunding the police, and opposing the deportation of every illegal immigrant, including violent criminals. Claire Valdez won NY-7, promising citizenship and voting rights for people who broke into this country illegally, taxpayer-funded transgender medical treatments, and the elimination of private health insurance for every American. These aren’t fringe positions anymore. They’re the new mainstream of the Democrat Party, and voters in these districts chose them enthusiastically.


And no Democrat is safe. Just look at NY-10, where Brad Lander demolished Rep. Dan Goldman, grabbing nearly 65% of the vote. Goldman was one of the loudest anti-Trump voices in Congress, and he led impeachment efforts against President Trump. None of that mattered. His support for Israel and his refusal to endorse Mamdani are the reasons he lost. Lander, meanwhile, ran on abolishing ICE, forgiving almost $2 trillion in student loans, and packing the Supreme Court.= That’s the candidate Democrat primary voters preferred over a guy who spent years trying to remove Trump from office.

The Democrat establishment knows exactly what happened, and it’s terrified. “Tonight wasn’t just a bad night for so-called ‘Leader’ Hakeem Jeffries. It was the night the Democrat establishment officially surrendered to Zohran Mamdani and the socialist wing of their party,” NRCC spokesman Mike Marinella said in a statement. “Every House Democrat, in safe and competitive districts alike, will now answer to the radicals calling the shots. And Americans should be terrified by where the Democrat Party is headed.” Even CNN’s Van Jones couldn’t spin his way out of this one. “This is a battle between the establishment and this insurgency,” Jones said. “And the roof is collapsing on the Democratic party establishment tonight.”

Here’s the reality nobody on the left wants to say out loud: the Democrat Party as it existed even a few years ago is finished. The socialist wing didn’t build a new party from scratch. It crawled inside the old one and took it over from the inside, like the zombie fungus controlling a dead ant. The Democrat Party is the corpse. The Socialist Party is what’s controlling it now. This should terrify the establishment because it makes it impossible to keep hiding what the party has become. This is going to terrify independent voters, who are watching candidates run on abolishing borders and prisons while still calling themselves Democrats. They’ll have no choice but to vote Republican to stop the radicals from taking over.

The socialist takeover isn’t slowing down. It’s accelerating, and every safe-district Democrat in Congress now has to answer to it. And now Republicans have been handed an opening most political parties only dream of. “That’s what the left is putting out. It’s these radical leftists that are being elected. They’re being inspired by Mamdani, AOC, Bernie Sanders. They’re running all across the country, and the only good news is in a lot of these districts where it’s actually competitive districts. If they’re putting up these radicals, we’re getting a lot of favorable matchups,” RNC Chairman Joe Gruters said on Newsmax. “It’s the mainstream. This is what’s happened to their Party. They’ve gone so far to the left. This is normal. But the people are going to reject this at the polls.”

Gruters argues the math looks really good for the GOP. “There’s 18 toss-up seats,” he pointed out. “We’re at 212. I think we have a chance to defy history and win these midterms. It’s because the left has gone so far to the left. It’s really the choices are crazy versus normal, and what do people want?”

Read more …

”IDEOLOGY: Capitalism is bad. Law enforcement are pigs. Policy should support emotions. The collective should rule every decision.”

‘Occupy Wall Street’ Now Officially Controls the Democrat Party (CTH)

It did not happen last night folks. It took them another 15 years after they installed Obama to become the legitimate heirs to the political party formerly known as Democrats.mThe progressive movement is now branded as “Democrat Socialists of America” (DSA), but those who have followed the arc of this group well understand every single member within DSA is from the Occupy Wall Street / Anarchy movement that preceded it. Fingers are being pointed toward New York as the epicenter of the new Democrat Party Headquarters of DSA, which is a fitting location of focus given the OWS origin.


The front line of the DSA movement consists of 18 to 30-year-olds, mostly white, urban, upper-middle-income activists, carrying Macbooks with anarchist stickers and physical attire resembling a blend of hipster ‘grunge’ and skateboard beanie resistance. They don’t shower much and love to talk about AOC and Bernie on Social Media. Don’t belittle them, they are authentic. They don’t misunderstand things; they bought into the nonsense and genuinely believe the popular narrative sold to them since High School that capitalism is horrible and Communism or Socialism is the preferred system of government.

Individually, not one of them would shed a tear if their collective comrades broke into their parent’s houses tomorrow and murdered the elders. When joined in group assemblies, their emotions are controlled by the sensibility of the group. This is the Mao generation, repeating and rhyming. IDEOLOGY: Capitalism is bad. Law enforcement are pigs. Policy should support emotions. The collective should rule every decision. Democrat socialists believe all dissent must be squashed unless they actually lose a popular election – then, the system is oppressing them. Speech that argues against their belief system is ‘violence’. However, violence that supports their belief system is ‘speech’.

Democrat Socialists of America are factually Occupy Wall Street activists. The traditional mechanisms of self-controlling morality do not apply to this group of generational ideologues. The haves -vs- have nots is their religion. They never cede power and elections do not remove them. Go look at history, the only thing that has ever stopped Socialism is physical violence. You may have read the stories of multi-billionaires building bunkers. The predictable DSA is why. People who say, “violence is not the answer” are pretending they don’t know history.

POLITICO – […] Fresh off sweeping victories across New York City that showcased the growing power of the anti-establishment progressive left inside the Democratic Party, Democratic Socialists of America leaders, eager to capitalize on their momentum, are already plotting their next act: making sure one of their own is on the presidential primary debate stage, whether the party wants them or not. “What DSA represents is a real contrast to Democrats who have run the last couple of elections on fear,” DSA national co-chair Megan Romer said. “You can’t run on that. You have to offer an alternative. And it’s really important that we be involved in that conversation in 2028. It’s important that we have somebody saying sensible things.”

Their search process is already underway. This summer, DSA is dispatching surveys to all 250 of its chapters, asking members to weigh who they want to back and why, and return their findings to national leadership by Sept. 15, details the group first shared with POLITICO. DSA expects to receive a stack of 20-page to 40-page dossiers from chapters coast to coast weighing in on who should carry the democratic socialist banner into 2028.The organization plans to hold national discussions, including with leaders like New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who is 84 and not expected to run in 2028, with a formal vote expected at the group’s 2027 convention next year — though leaders say they could move faster if the primary timeline demands it.

“We’re going to be talking about millions of hours knocking doors for 2028 — so when we decide to really run somebody, people have to feel like they had a say,” Romer said. Mamdani-backed candidates swept three closely watched New York congressional primaries Tuesday, with Claire Valdez, Brad Lander and Darializa Avila Chevalier all defeating more establishment-aligned rivals — including two incumbents. It was a major show of force for Mamdani’s political operation, and fresh evidence of the left’s growing muscle heading into 2028. “They ask, ‘Who do you want to run in 2028?’ Then they ask, ‘When does the race for 2028 begin?’ It starts now. It starts on Tuesday,” Mamdani said at a Brooklyn rally last week.

The elephant in the room for the group, of course, is Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

Read more …

Jerry Nadler, George Conway et al, as in: The anti-Trump field.

“JFK’s grandson Jack Schlossberg fails to advance in election to replace Jerry Nadler in Manhattan district. “

Mamdani-backed Candidates Sweep Democratic Primaries In NYC (Guardian)

Zohran Mamdani’s growing influence over the Democratic party was on show in New York City on Tuesday as three congressional candidates endorsed by New York’s democratic socialist mayor won closely watched primaries, while voters in Maryland, Utah and South Carolina cast ballots in primaries and runoffs.Brad Lander, the former New York City comptroller who also ran for mayor last year before endorsing Mamdani, won his race comfortably, defeating the Democratic representative Dan Goldman.


Another Mamdani ally, Claire Valdez, a state lawmaker and former union organizer, defeated Antonio Reynoso, the preferred successor of retiring Democratic Representative Nydia Velázquez in New York’s seventh district, encompassing parts of Brooklyn and Queens. And in a stunning upset, the public defense investigator Darializa Avila Chevalier toppled Representative Adriano Espaillat, the powerful five-term incumbent who chairs the Congressional Hispanic caucus, in the state’s diverse 13th congressional district, which covers Upper Manhattan and parts of the Bronx.

“What a glorious time to be a New Yorker,” Lander declared at this election night party in Brooklyn, where he was joined by the mayor. Mamdani then appeared at a watch party for Valdez, where he told a jubilant crowd: “The old politics that got us into this crisis is not the politics that’s going to get us out of this crisis.” It was a clean sweep for Mamdani, who waded into the House primaries earlier this year, spending his political capital to boost three leftwing allies – a gamble that would test his popularity and his influence. With his slate of candidates all but certain to be elected to Congress in November, Mamdani has left his stamp on the state’s congressional delegation and expanded his ascendant progressive movement.

Elsewhere in the city, Jack Schlossberg, the grandson of John F Kennedy, was unsuccessful in his bid to revive the political legacy of the US’s most vaunted political family. In a House race that attracted outsized national attention, Schlossberg, 33, had hoped to parlay his huge social media presence and charisma into a Congressional seat, but he came up short in a crowded field of Democrats hoping to succeed the long-serving representative Jerry Nadler. Micah Lasher, a longtime New York politician and self-described “nerd”, won the primary in New York’s 12th district, a deep-blue district whose voters tend to identify as liberal rather than left-wing.

The race also included the prominent anti-Trump critic George Conway and state assembly-member Alex Bores, whose candidacy became the fulcrum for what observers described as an “AI civil war”. Lasher will be the heavy favorite to win the safely Democratic district in the November midterm election. Late on Tuesday night, Queens-born Donald Trump celebrated the defeat of both Goldman and Conway in a pair of social media posts. “Weak and pathetic Congressman Dan Goldman just lost, BIG! I guess people didn’t like him illegally targeting President TRUMP,” the president said of the congressman, who served as the lead counsel to House Democrats during the Trump’s first impeachment. Of Conway, whose ex-wife was a top adviser to the president during his first term, Trump gleefully predicted that he would “end up at about 5% of the vote in a rather weak field of young and aggressive Communists”.

Read more …

UK: No

US: Trump is doing it.

Can Anyone Govern Britain — Or America? (Daniel McCcarthy)

As Britain gets ready for its seventh prime minister in just 10 years, it’s time to ask whether the parliamentary system itself is broken. That might explain not only why landslide election victories don’t translate into stable leadership in Britain but also why America’s Congress is so feckless. Is representative government an idea whose time has passed? In Europe as well as America, leftists prefer that judges and bureaucrats wield permanent power, as supposedly impartial experts who know best how to stop the weather from changing and how many genders there are.


Britain’s Labour party started out as a vehicle for the working class, in theory. It was closely connected to the country’s major industrial unions — but Britain in the 21st century has lost most of its hard industry, and Labour is now led by the same kind of socially left-wing, technocratic wonks that make up the “inner party” of the Democrats in this country. Brexit, passed by the British people in a referendum 10 years ago this week, proved Labour had lost the working class — the party elite favored remaining in the European Union, but working-class voters themselves cast their ballots for “leave.”

Unfortunately, the Conservative party’s elite also favored “remain” — Prime Minister David Cameron himself did, and losing the Brexit referendum compelled him to resign. Yet Cameron was followed by another Conservative PM, Theresa May, who had also been a remainer. It took a third Tory PM, Boris Johnson, to follow through on the voters’ mandate, but Johnson proved to be Britain’s Joe Biden where immigration was concerned, unleashing the “Boriswave” of mass migration, which flooded Britain with some 4 million newcomers from places like India, China, Pakistan and Nigeria.

Personal scandals forced Johnson from office before the scale of the damage his policies did came to light — but bond markets didn’t tolerate Johnson’s successor, Liz Truss, for long. That left Rishi Sunak to lead the Conservatives in 2024 to their first general election defeat in 14 years. In that time, Conservatives had given Britain same-sex marriage, bigger government, deeper debt, more green-energy regulation and record-high immigration. Labour more than doubled its number of seats in Parliament with Keir Starmer leading the party into the election, yet the landslide didn’t translate into any mandate for him.

His popularity soon slid and polls indicated the Reform party would win the next election, making Nigel Farage prime minister. Labour is now gambling its problems are personal, not political, and once Starmer has made way for a new PM — virtually certain to be Andy Burnham — its majority will be salvageable. Burnham is even more left-wing than Starmer: at least as far left on social issues and even more enthusiastic about nationalizing industry. Farage is wagering Starmer wasn’t the millstone around Labour’s neck — the party’s politics are.

But even as traditional parties of the left and right elsewhere in Europe have decayed in ways much like those of Britain’s Tories and Labour, new populist parties have struggled to win and maintain power. Farage has to contend not only with Labour and what’s left of the Conservatives, but also with a small but vociferous insurgency to his right, the Restore party. All this suggests Burnham or Farage can’t count on enjoying a tenure longer than Starmer’s or Sunak’s. Parliamentary elections haven’t produced a stable British government by anyone in the last 16 years. What are the odds the next election, which has to be held by August 2029, will do so? [..]

Read more …

“Trump is also asserting that Iran will allow IEAE inspectors in, something the Islamic Republic is also vehemently rejecting.”

Brent Falls To Pre-War Levels (ZH)

Brent crude oil prices fell below $75 a barrel late yesterday, marking the first time the global benchmark has traded under that level since the outbreak of the Trump-initiated Iran conflict. The drop in crude prices could provide relief for consumers and businesses by easing pressure on fuel costs and inflation, a desired Washington outcome of the MoU signing – for which Trump has come under severe criticism from hawks at home. Speaking of escalating, we have another early morning Trump Truth Social statement, openly contradicting the consistent stated position of Tehran leaders.


Since the Switzerland high level talks led by Vance, there’s been a series of issues where Tehran and Washington have issued clearly contradictory statements. Trump says in the fresh statement that Iran informed the United States that there would be “NO TOLLS, NO INSURANCE COSTS, & NO OTHER CHARGES OF ANY KIND” imposed on vessels traveling through the strategic waterway. Trump as is typical criticized media reports that had suggested Iran could seek payments from ships using the route, calling such coverage “Fake News.” He added that if the information provided by Iran proved inaccurate, ongoing negotiations between the two sides would end “immediately.”

The president also denied reports that the United States had provided funds directly to Iran or released Iranian assets without conditions. “No money has been given to Iran, or released from their money to them, by the U.S.,” he said. However, Trump stated that Washington plans to make some Iranian funds available for agricultural purchases. According to the president, the money would be used to buy US farm products, including “Corn, Wheat, Soybeans, and more.” But Iranian leadership has vehemently rejected this narrative too.

“Food is desperately needed in Iran,” Trump said, adding that the purchases would be made “exclusively from the United States. The Strait of Hormuz remains one of the world’s most important energy shipping routes, and any disruption or additional costs imposed on vessels passing through the channel could have significant implications for global trade and oil markets. It is officially ‘open’ in the wake of the MoU signing – but the next few days and weeks will be telling.Meanwhile, some new developments on the Hormuz opening front, and Qatar LNG:

Qatar’s prime minister said establishing a hotline between the US and Iran is essential to prevent rogue actors impeding the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, as he predicted that the Gulf state would resume normal liquefied natural gas production “within a few weeks”. –FT. Trump is also asserting that Iran will allow IEAE inspectors in, something the Islamic Republic is also vehemently rejecting.

Read more …

Exactly like the old Lou Reed tune:

They’re never early, they’re always late.

First thing you learn is that you always gotta wait.

‘Customers Are Being Gouged’: Trump Tells DOJ To Look Into Gasoline Prices (ZH)

President Trump said on Wednesday that he had instructed the Department of Justice (DOJ) to open an investigation into oil companies over high gasoline prices. In a Truth Social post, Trump said that oil companies have not lowered their prices at the pump despite a recent decline in crude prices following the U.S.–Iran preliminary agreement. “Those prices are dropping like a rock! In other words, customers are being ‘gouged,’” he said. “Gasoline prices better start going down a lot faster than what I’m seeing!” Brent crude futures fell below $75 per barrel on Wednesday (back near pre-war levels), while U.S. West Texas Intermediate futures dropped to $72.29, amid the resumption of shipping traffic in the Strait of Hormuz.


Bloomberg’s energy guru, Javier Blas, remarked after President Trump’s post: “US President Trump, all political theatre, has just discovered the refining (and marketing) margin.” The national average price for regular gasoline stood at $3.93 per gallon on June 23, according to the American Automobile Association (AAA), down from $4.04 the previous week. The gas price was $4.53 per gallon a month ago. Of course, given the supply/refinery chain, it takes time (two weeks) for crude prices to ripple through to pump prices… AAA said it observed that gas prices remain above the levels before the conflict with Iran erupted in February.

The national average price for regular gas was $2.98 on Feb. 28, the day when the United States and Israel launched military operations against Iran, triggering the war. “Getting prices back down to prewar levels will take longer because of the time it takes to resume shipping and production,” Marie Dodds, public affairs director for AAA Oregon/Idaho, said in a statement. As Aldgra Fredly reports for The Epoch Times, US and Iran signed a memorandum of understanding last week to end the war. Under the agreement, the Strait of Hormuz would be fully reopened, and Tehran would not procure or develop a nuclear weapon. The United States also agreed to waive sanctions on Iranian oil for 60 days.

U.S. Secretary of Energy Chris Wright told ABC News on June 21 that commercial shipping traffic through the Strait of Hormuz had returned to normal levels, and that Americans should expect further declines in oil, gasoline, and other energy prices as traffic resumed. “Flows of oil and natural gas through the straits have already returned to normal, and they will continue that way whatever happens with the negotiations with the Iranians,” he said.

Arsenio Dominguez, secretary-general of the International Maritime Organization, said on June 23 that more than 11,000 seafarers stranded in the region due to war would be evacuated under a coordinated effort with Iran, Oman, other coastal states in the region, the United States, and the maritime industry following the U.S.–Iran preliminary deal. “We have secured the necessary safety guarantees and have thoroughly verified the conditions for safe navigation to support these operations,” Dominguez said in a statement. Iran had previously blocked traffic in the Strait of Hormuz—a critical waterway through which a significant share of global oil and gas shipments passes—in response to the U.S. and Israeli attacks on its nuclear and military sites.

Read more …

“Frontier AI models are anticipated to exceed current industry expectations, fundamentally transforming both offensive and defensive cyber capabilities.”

An AI Cyber Apocalypse Is ‘Months, Not Years’ Away, Five Eyes Warns (Moran)

The Five Eyes intelligence group, comprising the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, is warning governments and corporations that AI models capable of launching devastating cyber attacks that could overwhelm their defenses are months, not years away. They are urging nations and companies to “act now” to improve cyber defenses.


This is a highly unusual warning from the normally circumspect intelligence group. The Five Eyes alliance typically operates with deep, classified sharing. They do not issue public joint statements lightly. When they align to release a unified message directly to the public and business leaders, it signals that the threat landscape has shifted in a way that regular, incremental IT adjustments cannot handle. In short, Five Eyes doesn’t do “hype.” When it releases a joint warning, it’s to alert governments and corporations to a real, imminent threat.

Usually, the group’s intelligence warnings paint a picture of cybersecurity risks across a multi-year window. This warning explicitly breaks from that convention, shifting the perspective from years to just “months.””While AI will help us improve cyber defense over time, it also accelerates the speed, scale, and sophistication of cyber threats,” the group notes. “Frontier AI models are anticipated to exceed current industry expectations, fundamentally transforming both offensive and defensive cyber capabilities. The timeline is not years; it is months.”

The writing has been on the wall for the last few months regarding an increase in urgency in the potency and capabilities of newer AI models. For instance, earlier this month, the U.S. government took the unusual step of ordering the AI startup Anthropic to suspend access to its powerful Mythos and Fable 5 models for foreign nationals. Policymakers expressed severe national security concerns that these specific models possess unprecedented capabilities to independently identify code vulnerabilities, potentially resulting in a “vulnerability tsunami” if misused by hostile actors.

From the Five Eyes Statement:

Cyber risk can no longer be treated as a purely technical issue. This is a core business risk and leadership responsibility. Boards and executives should ensure cyber resilience is in place and works under pressure. It is not enough to have controls. Leaders must be confident those controls will perform during a real incident. This requires reassessing long-standing trade-offs and using AI deliberately to strengthen defense – not just improve efficiency.

Core principles:
• Secure-by-design and secure-by-default must become standard practice not an aspiration.
• Resilience cannot depend on a single solution or technology.Defense in depth remains essential.
• As AI systems evolve, new and previously unknown vulnerabilities will emerge, including zero day vulnerabilities.
• Breaches will occur. Preparedness helps you contain them quickly and prevent escalation into major operational and financial crises.

Rather than targeting IT administrators with technical alerts, it directly holds boards and corporate executives accountable, framing AI-driven cyber risk as a fundamental threat to business continuity and trust. It demands that leaders move past treating cybersecurity as an IT standalone department and actively use AI defensively to outpace adversaries.”

“What it was saying is that in an age of AI, breaches will occur. It’s not a matter of if, but when, so it’s important to get prepared now,” Olivia Shen, director of the Strategic Technologies Program at the University of Sydney, told CNN. “Sophisticated businesses, usually your large corporations, they already invest in cybersecurity, and they’ll be better prepared,” Shen said. “The ones who are more exposed will be those small and medium-sized businesses who maybe have under invested so far, and they’ll basically be like sitting ducks.”

The speed with which these cyber threats are materializing is putting a damper on some efforts to place significant guardrails on AI. This month, several dozen cybersecurity researchers, AI entrepreneurs, and corporate executives signed an open letter urging the Trump administration to commit to “an open, scientific and transparent process of handling AI risk assessments” and said it was “essential” for security teams to “find and fix flaws in their own newly-written as well as decades of legacy code faster than our adversaries.”

“We know these technologies can be used for both defensive and offensive purposes, and we need a few more guardrails about how we can maximize the benefits for defensive cyber security, while gate keeping it away from potential cyber adversaries and scammers and cyber criminals,” Shen said. When the first major breaches happen, perhaps then we’ll get more serious about the speed with which AI development is outpacing our ability to adequately control it.

Read more …

Drones.. US lags behind.

US To Set Up Testing Ranges Mimicking Ukraine Battlefield (RT)

The US will set up at least two domestic testing ranges that mimic battlefield conditions in Ukraine, Army Secretary Dan Driscoll said on Tuesday. Driscoll said defense contractors will have access to the sites, where the Army and industry “can start to do much more aggressive testing,” according to DefenseScoop. The US has been struggling to keep pace with rapidly evolving drone technology used extensively by both Russia and Ukraine. “You can have a kind of electronic warfare and all of the contested environment created, and you can have drone manufacturers and counter-drone tool-builders engaging together,” Driscoll told reporters at an Army-hosted industry event.


“Then, we also want soldiers to be able to go there so that they can strengthen their skills and work hand-in-hand with developers,” he added. According to the Washington Post, the Pentagon is actively seeking companies capable of producing 300,000 low-cost kamikaze drones and is prepared to spend $54.6 billion next year on an expanded drone warfare program. The widespread use of surveillance and attack drones in the Ukraine conflict has created vast ‘kill zones’ along the front line, with both sides using UAVs to repel mechanized assaults and carry out strikes deep inside enemy territory. Russian Deputy Prime Minister Denis Manturov said earlier this month that domestic companies now have the capacity to produce more than 15,000 FPV drones per day, up from around 15,000 per month in 2023.

Moscow has warned that Western supplies of drone technology and other weapons to Kiev make NATO a de facto participant in the conflict and risk further escalation. Ukraine frequently uses drones to strike civilian targets. Last month, UAVs destroyed a college dormitory in Starobelsk, Russia, killing 21 students. On June 3, a Ukrainian drone struck a commuter bus in Enakievo, killing eight passengers. Two weeks later, a drone hit a bus carrying a youth football team from Belarus near the Russian village of Nelzhichi, killing a pregnant woman and injuring eight people, including six children.

Read more …

“Washington wants to expand weapons production after reportedly depleting key stockpiles in the Iran war and Ukraine”..

US Carmakers Could Produce Missiles – Trump (RT)

US automakers could begin producing missiles and other weapons as Washington moves to expand military output and replenish its arsenals, President Donald Trump has said. Speaking to reporters at the White House on Monday, Trump said car companies with spare factory capacity are discussing deals to manufacture weapons, including Patriot air-defense missiles and Tomahawk cruise missiles. ”They’re dealing with General Motors. They’re dealing with Ford,” Trump said. “I know General Motors is all excited about building weapons now.”


He added that some plants belonging to the two carmakers are expected to be converted to military production, describing the shift as part of a “big strong economic push” to produce arms. His remarks come after the Wall Street Journal reported in April that the Pentagon had approached General Motors, Ford, GE Aerospace, and Oshkosh about retooling civilian factories to produce munitions and other military equipment. The talks were reportedly part of an effort to put US industry on what Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has called a “wartime footing,” echoing the World War II-era conversion of Detroit factories to military production.

The push comes amid mounting concern over the state of US weapons stockpiles after years of arms deliveries to Ukraine under former President Joe Biden and heavy missile use during the recent US-Israeli war against Iran. US media and think-tanks have warned that Washington burned through large quantities of critical munitions during the Iran campaign, including Tomahawk cruise missiles, Patriot interceptors, THAAD missiles, and other advanced systems.

Reuters has also reported that depleted inventories could delay US arms deliveries to fellow NATO members. Trump has downplayed shortage concerns, saying the US has “quite a few” missiles but wants to keep larger reserves. His administration has requested a record military budget of around $1.5 trillion for the 2027 fiscal year, with much of the increase expected to go towards replenishing stockpiles and expanding production.

Read more …

“..psychology as a field is a tool of white power..”

Journal Under Fire for Retracting Article Challenging Claims of Racism (Turley)

We have previously discussed academic journals canceling publications that challenge the orthodox views of mainstream scholars. The latest such example can be found in the Journal of the New Zealand College of Clinical Psychologists, which pulled the 2025 article of Arna Mitchell who questioned claims that psychology as a field is a tool of white power. The editors reportedly declared that such conclusions are inconsistent with the publication’s values.


Dr. Kumari Valentine, a psychologist and former editor of the journal, wrote an article raising concerns over the retraction: The reason given for the removal was not research fraud, plagiarism, ethical misconduct, or factual error. Rather, the NZCCP Council determined that retaining the article was inconsistent with the values of the College and could perpetuate harm to Maori. The article, He Wero Ano: Don’t Just Tell Me, Show Me How Science and Psychology Are Racist in New Zealand, took issue with the broad, unsubstantiated claims of systemic racism in psychology across all levels of the discipline, including that science itself is a social construct of white Europeans and white power.

Mitchell, a Maori woman herself, also took issue with the view that tribal ways of knowing should be given equal weight to scientific ways of knowing in the training and practice of psychologists in New Zealand. One would think that such a viewpoint, particularly from a Maori woman, would, at a minimum, be welcomed as a provocative and interesting perspective. However, various readers were less interested in reading it or even responding to it. They campaigned to cancel it.

Some did respond, saying they felt the critique was based on a misunderstanding of Kaupapa Maori psychology. That should also be a welcome perspective in allowing a free exchange of viewpoints on the subject. Some faculty have cried foul, calling the cancellation raw censorship. This is reminiscent of the controversy at the Emory Law Journal and the firing of an editor at JAMA. These controversies are a reflection of the viewpoint intolerance that has taken hold of much of academia, supporting groups, and journals.

Read more …

Nice pair.

Investigation Launched Into Von der Leyen Over Secret Chat With Zelensky (TASS)

European Ombudsman Teresa Anjinho has launched an investigation into European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen over a secret chat involving German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, French President Emmanuel Macron, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, and Vladimir Zelensky, the Berliner Zeitung newspaper reported. Anjinho notified the European Commission of the investigation last week. She is examining whether the EC violated transparency rules by refusing to grant the Dutch organization Follow the Money (FTM) access to the correspondence.


The European Commission justified its refusal by stating that publishing the chat data could “complicate the international relations of the European Union (and its member states) with third countries.” “I have decided to launch a probe into the European Commission’s actions regarding the applicant’s request in accordance with EU regulations concerning public access to documents,” Anjinho wrote to the FTM organization. She expects to meet with EC representatives by mid-July.

Read more …

Places are hot that were not built for it. 40 people drowned in France alone in a few days.

Sweltering Heat As Europe Heatwave Spreads (BBC)

France is bracing for another day of exceptionally hot weather, with more than half the country remaining under a red heat alert on Wednesday. Tens of thousands of homes have been left without power in western Brittany, while a major wildfire was brought under control overnight in the Maine-et-Loire region. It comes after the country experienced its hottest June day since records began on Tuesday, with an average temperature of 29.8C (85.54F) recorded.


The heatwave is expected to spread to other parts of western Europe on Wednesday, with an orange alert for dangerous weather in place for parts of the Netherlands. Temperatures are expected to peak in the Netherlands and Belgium on Friday, while Germany is expected to see the mercury rise to 40C (104F) over the weekend. The heatwave is also expected to spread to eastern Europe over the next few days, with severe heat warnings issued for countries including Poland, Croatia and Hungary for later in the week.

So far, France, Spain and Italy have been hardest hit by the heatwave. Forty people have drowned in heatwave-related incidents in France since last Thursday, according to the prime minister.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/niccruzpatane/status/2069567930308624607?s=20

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Jun 182026
 
 June 18, 2026  Posted by at 9:17 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  15 Responses »


Priest and scribe Ka-aper ca. 2465-2323 BC


Trump And Iran Sign MOU Deal Ahead Of Schedule (ZH)
Read The 14-Point US-Iran Draft Deal Set For Friday Signing (ZH)
Trump Shifting Focus Back To Ukraine: Where Do Peace Talks Stand? (RT)
Trump Calls Out ‘Dumocrat’ Double-Cross,” Keeps Pulte As Acting DNI (ZH)
5 Arrested in Plot to Attack UFC Event at White House (ET)
How Deep Are the Newsoms In It? THIS Deep. (Stephen Green)
Kamala’s Anti-Trump Meltdown in Austria a Masterclass in Projection (Margolis)
Ease In Our Time (Every)
Nigel Farage’s ‘White Britain’: A Long-Overdue Step (von Hoffmeister)
Nigel Farage’s ‘White Britain’ is a Fantasy (Graham Hryce)
A Social Media Ban for Minors Requires Data From Everyone (ET)
Canada is Next Up (CTH)
The World Is Re-Discovering America In the World Cup — and Loving It (Moran)
Russia’s New Warning Shot From Space (Martin Armstrong)

 


 

https://twitter.com/JesseBWatters/status/2067048468552536132?s=20 https://twitter.com/MAGAVoice/status/2067182879038406656?s=20

 


 


“If [the Iran deal] works out, I’m going to take the credit; if it doesn’t work out, I’m blaming [Vance].”

Trump And Iran Sign MOU Deal Ahead Of Schedule (ZH)

Trump Signs Iran Deal Remotely Ahead Of Schedule. Confirming earlier speculation, Axios reports that the U.S. and Iran have remotely signed their memorandum of understanding to end the war and open the Strait of Hormuz, and the agreement is now in effect. The signing – which took place electronically between Trump, Vance and Ghalibaf – reportedly took place at dinner in France alongside President Emmanuel Macron. The signing was supposed to happen in Switzerland on Friday, but a diplomat from a mediating country and a second source familiar told Axios earlier on Wednesday that there had been discussions about signing and implementing it earlier


The diplomatic source said the discussions around accelerating the timetable were intended to open the strait sooner than Friday, as both parties were in agreement on that issue. Another factor may have been the political pressure on the White House to release the text of the MOU, which it sitll hasn’t done officially. The source familiar with the discussions claimed it was Iran that demanded the text not be published until the formal signing, and denied the White House was responding to political pressure. The only “public release” so far consisted of a senior administration official reading the agreement to reporters in a briefing call on Wednesday, after days of confusion about what was in it.

Ahead of the signing, Iran’s foreign ministry said the sides had agreed that the MOU should be signed electronically by both presidents. For Iran, the signing represents a major victory as it now stands to receive billions in unfrozen (and other) funds from the US and Gulf sources. While it’s now just a formality, the meeting between the U.S. and Iranian delegations headed by Vice President Vance and Iranian parliamentary speaker Mohammad-Bagher Ghalibaf is still expected to take place as planned on Friday in Switzerland. They are expected to discuss the launching of negotiations on Iran’s nuclear program.

The signing took place after this remarkable press conference earlier in the day in which Trump tried to justify conceding to Iran’s terms: As BBC’s Siavash Ardalan writes, Trump’s responses to the reporters’ questions to justify the agreement with Iran were bizarre and unprecedented in their own way: They asked him how he could allow $300 billion in investment in Iran. He said, “We’ve already inflicted $2 trillion in damage on Iran; $300 billion is nothing in comparison.” They asked why he’s giving Iran tens of billions of dollars. He said, “If we don’t return their own money to them, other countries will be afraid to put their money in our banks, and then the dollar’s position will weaken.”

They asked why the missile issue isn’t in the agreement. He said, “We’ve already destroyed 85% of their missiles anyway; the rest are buried underground, and besides, we sell air defense systems to the countries in the region so they won’t worry about Iran’s missiles.” They asked if he’s not worried that Iran will say, “We’re only producing nuclear energy for civilian purposes.” He said, “You can’t tell everyone else to produce electricity with nuclear power while only Iran can’t.” Finally, he said, “If we continue sanctioning Iran, 91 million Iranians will die of hunger—what’s the point of that, really?” Oh, and he joked that “If [the Iran deal] works out, I’m going to take the credit; if it doesn’t work out, I’m blaming [Vance].”

Read more …

They should talk until about August 20. As the date approaches, Iran will say they need more time.

Read The 14-Point US-Iran Draft Deal Set For Friday Signing (ZH)

With US and Iranian officials preparing to formally sign a memorandum of understanding in Switzerland on Friday, the conflict is entering the much-needed diplomatic phase to avert a potentially disastrous energy cliff. The MoU would open a 60-day negotiating window aimed at ending the war, restoring maritime traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, and hammering out the future of Iran’s nuclear program.


Bloomberg published the text of the 14-point draft MoU, offering the clearest look yet at the proposed trade: de-escalation and sanctions relief for Iran, in exchange for a ceasefire across all fronts, commitments on shipping access, and a broader nuclear deal to be finalized by the end of summer. But Iran’s Tasnim news agency cited an unnamed official earlier today, saying some of the MoU published by Bloomberg is inaccurate. The report did not specify the discrepancies. Bloomberg noted that some of the wording could be different between the English and Persian versions. Below is the text of the 14-point draft MoU:

  1. The Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States, together with their allies in the current war, declare upon the signing of this Memorandum of Understanding an immediate and permanent end to the war on all fronts, including Lebanon, and undertake that from now on they will not launch any hostile action against each other, and will refrain from the threat or use of force against each other. The final agreement will confirm the provisions of this Article and the remaining Articles
  2. The Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States undertake to respect each other’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, and to refrain from interfering in each other’s internal affairs
  3. The Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States undertake to negotiate and reach a final agreement within a maximum period of 60 days, extendable by mutual consent
  4. Immediately upon the signing of this Memorandum of Understanding, the United States Lift the naval blockade and prevent any interference or obstruction against the Islamic Republic of Iran, and restore traffic within a maximum of 30 days to its full capacity; the traffic of ships shall be proportional to the pre-war volume of traffic on the part of the Islamic Republic of Iran. The United States also undertakes to withdraw its forces from the surrounding areas within 30 days after the final agreement
  5. Upon signing this Memorandum of Understanding, the Islamic Republic of Iran will immediately take steps to ensure that the movement of merchant ships from the Persian Gulf to the Sea of Oman and vice versa is resumed within 30 days to the pre-war volume, taking into account the need for the removal of technical obstacles and the neutralization of mines by Iran.
  6. The United States undertakes, together with its regional partners, to create a comprehensive plan agreed upon by both parties for the rehabilitation and economic development of the Islamic Republic of Iran, While ensuring financing of at least $300 billion. The implementation mechanism of this plan, as part of the final agreement, will be formulated within 60 days.
  7. The United States commits to ending, on a schedule to be agreed upon as part of the final agreement, all types of sanctions currently facing the Islamic Republic of Iran, including resolutions of the United Nations Security Council and the Board of Governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), and all unilateral U.S. sanctions, both primary and secondary.
  8. The Islamic Republic of Iran reiterates that it will never produce nuclear weapons. The Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States have agreed that the fate of enriched material and the fate of all other mutually agreed nuclear-related issues, including Iran’s nuclear needs, will be adequately addressed in a final agreement; the final agreement will confirm the provisions of this Article.
  9. The Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States agree that, pending a final agreement, they will maintain the status quo: Iran will maintain the status quo on its nuclear program, and the United States will not impose new sanctions on Iran or strengthen its forces in the region.
  10. The United States undertakes that immediately after the signing of this Memorandum of Understanding, and until the date of the lifting of sanctions, the United States Treasury Department will issue waivers for exports of Iranian crude oil, petrochemical products and their derivatives, and all related services, including banking, insurance, transportation, and the like.
  11. The United States undertakes that, in light of the progress of negotiations towards a final agreement, frozen or restricted funds and assets of the Islamic Republic of Iran will be released and made fully available. These funds, whether held in the master account or transferred, will be used for any final beneficiary payment determined by the Central Bank of the Islamic Republic of Iran and will be fully available for use. The United States undertakes to issue all necessary permits and licenses on this basis.
  12. The Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States agree that an implementation mechanism will be established to oversee the successful implementation of and future commitment to the Final Agreement.
  13. Following the signing of this Memorandum of Understanding, and upon receipt of assurances regarding the commencement of implementation of Articles 4, 5, 10, and 11 of this Memorandum of Understanding, and the continued implementation of these steps, the Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States will enter into negotiations for a Final Agreement solely with respect to the remaining Articles.
  14. The final agreement will be approved through a binding resolution of the UN Security Council

Based on the text above, the first take of the MoU appears to be front-loaded economic relief for Tehran in exchange for a ceasefire, a nuclear freeze, and commitments to negotiate hard topics, such as the nuclear program, at a later date.

Who Stands To Benefit:
Tehran benefits most directly because it gets economic oxygen, oil waivers, frozen funds, sanctions relief language, and reduced US military pressure in the region. Hezbollah and Iran-aligned actors also benefit if “all fronts, including Lebanon” locks in a ceasefire that constrains Israeli operations. And, of course, the global economy because global shippers benefit if Hormuz reopens and war risk premiums in crude oil collapse. The Gulf states benefit if the conflict ends because energy exports through the Strait of Hormuz will resume. A report on Tuesday said that QatarEnergy was planning to ramp up LNG production in the coming months.

Where is Leverage Lost:
The US loses some coercive leverage once the Hormuz blockade ends, oil waivers are granted, and asset-release mechanisms begin. Israel loses freedom of action if the agreement binds the Lebanon front and limits further strikes. Sanctions and hawks lose leverage because the draft moves quickly toward broad sanctions dismantlement. The urgency behind the MoU and locking in peace talks for 60 days, with a formal signing event at the Bürgenstock resort in Switzerland on Friday, stems mainly from the world being headed for an energy cliff, as SPRs globally were being drained to offset the loss of Gulf production with the Hormuz chokepoint shuttered. Brent crude futures edged down overnight, trading around $79 a barrel on Wednesday morning.

One of the biggest uncertainties remains the Strait of Hormuz. President Trump stated that the critical waterway will reopen permanently and be toll-free, but the MoU suggests the toll-free arrangement may only last through the 60-day negotiation period. Another major uncertainty is Tehran’s compliance.

Read more …

Zelensky represents a bunch of deeply corrupt neo-nazis. Trump knows this. For Europeans and US Democrats, Ukraine is a money whitewash vehicle. What is it for Trump?

Trump Shifting Focus Back To Ukraine: Where Do Peace Talks Stand? (RT)

Where do the talks stand?
After Washington resumed direct contacts with Moscow following years of diplomatic freeze under Joe Biden, Russia, Ukraine and the US held three rounds of talks aimed at reaching a settlement. The negotiations yielded several tangible results, including major prisoner exchanges, the repatriation of fallen soldiers, and the exchange of peace memorandums. However, they failed to secure a peace deal, with key disagreements persisting, particularly over Moscow’s demand that Ukrainian forces withdraw from Donbass.A fourth round of talks, expected in March, was postponed after Washington shifted its focus to the Iran war. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has since described the process as being in a “situational pause” pending renewed US engagement.

What settlements have been proposed?
Following the Alaska summit, where Moscow and Washington stressed the need for a lasting settlement rather than the ceasefire sought by Kiev and its European backers, Trump unveiled a 28-point peace roadmap. According to leaked drafts, it called for Ukraine to abandon its NATO ambitions, drop territorial claims, and cap its military at 600,000 personnel. Moscow welcomed the proposal as a potential basis for peace. However, under pressure from the EU and UK, several key provisions were later removed or revised.

The updated 20-point plan reportedly included demilitarized zones, Western security guarantees for Kiev, an 800,000-strong peacetime Ukrainian military, a reconstruction fund for Ukraine, and a path toward EU membership. Russia confirmed receiving the revised proposal but declined to discuss its contents, accusing the Europeans of reshaping the framework and undermining peace efforts.

What are the next steps?
On Tuesday, Trump discussed Ukraine with Zelensky and other leaders during a closed-door G7 session and later held a separate meeting with the Ukrainian leader. While details were not disclosed, Zelensky said afterward that it was important to “coordinate positions.” Meanwhile, Trump’s envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner are expected to resume contacts with Moscow after shifting their focus to the Iran war. Putin aide Yury Ushakov said preparations are under way following Sunday’s call between the Russian and US presidents. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov later said no dates have been set and that the issue will likely be revisited after Washington signs its memorandum with Tehran.

Europeans split
European countries remain divided between those favoring engagement with Moscow and those seeking to maintain pressure on Russia. Hungary and Slovakia have urged direct dialogue with Moscow and criticized policies they say prolong the conflict. Those seeking to maintain pressure, which includes Poland, the Baltic states and much of the EU leadership, argues that political, economic and military pressure must continue. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen reiterated that stance on Monday, calling support for Ukraine a top G7 priority.

France and Germany occupy a middle ground, backing continued aid to Kiev while acknowledging that any lasting settlement will require negotiations with Russia. That approach was tested last week when French, British, and German envoys met Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Galuzin in Moscow. According to Russia, however, they merely repeated calls for a ceasefire and security guarantees for Ukraine, prompting Moscow to argue that the countries arming Kiev cannot act as neutral mediators.

Trump’s position
During the 2024 presidential campaign, Trump repeatedly claimed he could end the Ukraine conflict within 24 hours through direct diplomacy, though he later acknowledged that a settlement would be harder to achieve. Since returning to office, he has criticized both Moscow and Kiev at various times, accusing each side of hindering peace efforts, while consistently arguing that the conflict should be resolved through negotiations rather than prolonged fighting.

https://twitter.com/e3z9b_qI1ytkw/status/2066683484358242763?s=20

After speaking with Putin and Zelensky on Sunday, Trump described both conversations as “very good” and said both leaders were “very open” to peace. According to Kremlin aide Yury Ushakov, he also told Putin he was prepared to “influence” Kiev and its European backers toward a settlement. Speaking at the G7, Trump said he would “look” at what could be done regarding Ukraine, while suggesting the conflict was of limited importance to the US, adding that “it has no impact on us other than we sell weapons.”

Zelensky’s demands
Amid mounting battlefield pressure, Zelensky has insisted on securing a temporary ceasefire and continued Western support, while maintaining that Ukraine will not formally recognize Moscow’s sovereignty over territories that joined Russia through referendums. He has also opposed any settlement negotiated directly between Moscow and Washington without Kiev’s participation, insisting that Ukraine’s European backers be included in the process.

Read more …

“No FISA Without SAVE Act:”

Trump Calls Out ‘Dumocrat’ Double-Cross,” Keeps Pulte As Acting DNI (ZH)

Just two years after Donald Trump urged Congress to kill Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act while on the campaign trail, he’s now livid that Democrats won’t help Republicans pass it. Trump took to Truth Social early Wednesday morning with a lengthy post accusing ‘Dumocrats’ of breaking a bipartisan deal on FISA reauthorization – and announced a series of moves that throw a wrench into Senate plans for both intelligence leadership and surveillance powers.


According to Trump, Republicans played themselves – after agreeing with Democrats to accelerate the removal of Acting DNI William Pulte (by fast-tracking Jay Clayton’s confirmation) in exchange for Democratic support on renewing FISA Section 702 surveillance powers. Now, however Democrats are threatening to vote against FISA anyway.

“The Republicans wound up having fulfilled their commitment, but Dumocrats broke the Deal.” As a result, Trump said he is canceling today’s Senate hearing for Jay Clayton as permanent DNI. He will not move Clayton out of his current role as U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York until Jamie McDonald (a Sullivan & Cromwell partner and Trump’s former personal lawyer, recently nominated to replace him at SDNY) is confirmed – including clearing the “blue slip” process.

In the meantime, Bill Pulte will remain as Acting Director of National Intelligence – who Trump picked to replace Tulsi Gabbard after she said in May she was leaving the administration in June to spend time with her husband following his cancer diagnosis. Pulte has been a controversial pick over his lack of intelligence experience – which led to Trump nominating U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York Jay Clayton to be the next DNI. nTrump explicitly linked his approval of FISA renewal to passage of the SAVE America Act – his priority legislation requiring photo ID, proof of citizenship for voter registration, and strict limits on mail-in ballots.


“Therefore, to add a slight bit of intrigue but, for the Good of the Nation, and the People of our Country, I will not approve FISA without THE SAVE AMERICA ACT going along with it. Not complicated, actually, the Republicans fell into a trap.” The SAVE America Act – which requires Americans to show proof of citizenship to register to vote and a valid ID to cast a ballot, has stalled in the Senate after the House passed the legislation in February.

Read more …

What amazed me was the scale.

“.. the aim of the attack [..] was to create chaos and overthrow the U.S. government.

5 Arrested in Plot to Attack UFC Event at White House (ET)

Five men have been arrested for allegedly plotting to attack the mixed martial arts event that was held at the White House on June 14. The charges include conspiracy to murder. The men were planning to set off explosives at the event and force people there to flee a certain way, according to court documents. Snipers would be positioned to take out high-level targets, including President Donald Trump, according to the charging papers. One of the men, Tycen Proper, 19, told law enforcement that the attack would “jumpstart” a revolution in the United States, according to the FBI. Proper’s mother called the police on June 10. Officers arrived and learned that Proper had met people online and had been planning “recons” and “missions” with them, according to prosecutors.


He had also spent $3,000 on guns, ammunition, ballistic plates, and other items, and planned to leave during the upcoming weekend to meet with the people, his father said. Proper was admitted to a local hospital because of “homicidal ideations,” the FBI said. Proper later spoke to investigators and shared with them images and messages from accounts he was using, including accounts on TikTok and Signal. Proper said that the group with which he was involved believed the United States was headed in the wrong direction, and needed to be “torn down so that it could be rebuilt,” according to the FBI. He said the plan was for people to leave their homes on June 12 or 13 and meet in Fredericksburg, Virginia. They would stage a demonstration near the White House.

During the demonstration, the group would fly drones laden with explosive devices and set them off in a specific area, forcing the crowd to evacuate in view of waiting snipers, who would shoot people as they fled. Targets included Sens. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), and Rep. Carol Miller (R-W.Va). Through the information Proper provided, law enforcement identified four other men involved with the attack plan, according to officials. One of the men, Abraham Hermosillo Alvarez, 31, discussed the targets during the attack. “As many and as deadly as we can get,” he allegedly wrote. Another man, Daniel Eskridge, 32, wrote that the plan required five teams of three people each, and that the teams would each consist of a sniper, a drone operator, and a look-out.

The other two men allegedly involved in the plot are Bryan Omar Roa, 24, and Michael Alan Thomas, 32. Roa told the FBI during an interview that he had planned to protest at the UFC event but “his vehicle malfunctioned and he had to return home.” His relatives told law enforcement that he had planned to go to Washington and appeared ready to carry out an act of violence, and he discussed how a person could hypothetically use drones armed with explosives to bomb buildings near the White House, according to charging documents. Thomas told the FBI that he was a planner and adviser for the group, the FBI said. Thomas allegedly said the aim of the attack, and subsequent planned attacks, was to create chaos and overthrow the U.S. government.

“This is still an active, ongoing investigation,” U.S. Secret Service Deputy Director Matthew Quinn told reporters at a press conference on Tuesday. “There are still suspects at large, and we’re going to work it until everyone’s been identified.” Quinn also said that the event on Sunday was “never at risk. Period.” A public defender appointed to represent Alvarez declined to comment. Lawyers representing Proper and Eskridge did not respond to requests for comment by time of publication. It was not clear whether Roa and Thomas had retained legal counsel.

FBI Director Kash Patel said in a statement that “thanks to the rapid action of this FBI, our partners, and the Department of Justice in a multi-state operation, multiple individuals are now in custody and allegedly planned attacks were stopped cold.” He added, “I want to thank our great agents and partners, this work remains ongoing and we will continue to update the public as permitted.”

Read more …

It is sad to look at the potential Democrat candidates.

How Deep Are the Newsoms In It? THIS Deep. (Stephen Green)

It seems impossible — or just too revolting — to keep up with the financial hanky-panky of California Gov. Gavin Newsom and First Partner (gag) Jennifer Siebel Newsom. But thanks to a couple of investigative reporters with stronger stomachs than I have, let’s see if I can’t put everything you need to know into one easily digestible column. I love it when other people do my dirty work for me, so let’s get started. “Today, my wife & I joined Donald Trump’s hit list,” Newsom practically boasted on Monday. “He has directed his Department of Justice to investigate us. They have not found a crime — they are simply trying to find one.”


Well, let’s see what Fox Business anchor Liz MacDonald and my old friend and Red State colleague Jen Van Laar have to say about that. MacDonald said Tuesday that the DOJ probe “is about California Democrats’ modern-day machine politics,” which she described as a “feedback loop of Sacramento-corporate lobbyists-governor/wife nonprofit-behested nonprofit donations-lucrative state contracts-Sacramento.” Don’t bother writing all this down — there won’t be a quiz at the end of today’s column. You’re welcome.

“The modern Sacramento machine trades corporate compliance and nonprofit funding/donations for policy access and state business,” MacDonald added, and then explained how that grift (allegedly!) worked for the Newsoms: According to IRS Form 990 disclosures, her nonprofit frequently buys from Siebel Newsom’s for-profit film company—Girls Club Entertainment LLC—writer, producer and director services and the licensing and production rights for her documentaries. Then it sells the docs to the state and public schools.

IRS records show that her nonprofit has paid her Girls Club Entertainment LLC roughly $1.64 million for these production and licensing rights since 2012, which includes a steady annual contracting fee of $150,000 since 2018. TL;DR: Siebel Newsom produced unwatchable propaganda videos for children, for which Democrat-dominated schools then paid her handsomely. Or as MacDonald summed it up, “Over the past decade, Siebel Newsom has collected over $3.7 million in combined personal salary and LLC payouts funded by the nonprofit.”

Then there are behested payments, which MacDonald explained are “a unique mechanism in California politics where an elected official asks a corporation, labor union, or wealthy individual to donate money to a specific charity, nonprofit, or government program.” Unlike campaign donations, there are no caps. As governor, Newsom requested a record $226 million in behested payments in one year. “Hundreds of thousands of dollars went to the California Partners Project,” MacDonald wrote, “a nonprofit founded by his wife.” “Many of the biggest donors were corporate giants (like health insurers and utility companies) actively bidding for lucrative state contracts or fighting state regulations.”

One hand washes the other with filthy lucre, if you’ll allow me to mix metaphors. Which brings us to Jen Van Laar, and her hip-deep-in-the-muck wade through the Newsoms’ finances, going back years. Way back in 2021, Jen asked, “Somebody Paid $3.7 Million Cash for CA Gov Newsom’s Estate – But Who?” But couldn’t come up with any satisfactory answers. That’s because the Newsoms alternately claimed that “the Newsoms’ cash was used to purchase the home but was done through an LLC managed by his first cousin,” or that “Newsoms obtained a loan… to purchase the home because the sale happened so quickly that they didn’t have time to obtain a mortgage.”

Then, California’s First Couple played similar LLC games, buying a second home for $9.1 million in ritzy Marin County. “Based on my examination of 15+ yrs of Newsom’s financial disclosures, tax returns, and real estate transactions,” Jenn explained in March, “they absolutely did not have $9.1M in cash.” Clearly, somebody did. The shenanigans were so egregious that — no matter what TDS nonsense Newsom’s social media team posts on X — the DOJ investigation began under the Biden administration. As I quipped on Instapundit this week, maybe Newsom needs to take a break from social media and lawyer up.

Then there are the real-world effects, the fallout from personal corruption and statewide, one-party rule. On Tuesday, Victor Davis Hanson wondered if California is “reaching critical mass,” thanks to one-party rule creating a “neo-feudal society” that is “hardly democratic.” The most egregious example was the fate of 2014’s Proposition 1, a $7.12 billion water bond “designed to solve the state’s chronic water storage deficit.” Even though Prop 1 is an actual constitutional amendment, including “$2.7 billion specifically designated for new reservoirs,” an alliance of bureaucracies, elected officials, and green activists still managed to block any new reservoir construction.

“Adding insult to injury,” Hanson continued, “Governor Gavin Newsom instead used $250 million from the Proposition 1 fund to blow up four dams on the Klamath River.” Californians voted for more water infrastructure. Newsom’s party blocked them, and Newsom himself had four dams destroyed that had “once provided storage, electrical generation, recreation, and flood control.” Tell me again about Muh Democracy™. All of which is my long-winded way of concluding that, as corrupt as the Newsoms appear to be, they are merely a symptom of the progressive disease killing our once-greatest state.

Read more …

As long as she’s around, how can you take that party even a little bit serious?

Kamala’s Anti-Trump Meltdown in Austria a Masterclass in Projection (Margolis)

Kamala Harris took the stage at the Austrian World Summit on Tuesday and delivered the most shameless masterclass in projection I have ever seen. The moderator, Elex Michaelson, asked Harris about the news that California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-Calif.) is now under investigation by the Department of Justice.


It was a loaded question, of course, and, as you might expect, she responded with a classic Kamala word salad. “So I am not surprised that he may be using the Department of Justice to go after a political enemy in the current governor of California,” she said, “and this is why I do believe this, upon many other examples of what is, essentially — you’re gonna ask me questions about the current president, I’m gonna be candid — what is essentially the most callous, corrupt, and incompetent presidential administration America’s ever experienced, and for that reason, I have no question or doubt that we will win the midterms, and it will be a result of people of every background and political association who will contribute to that outcome.”

She claimed that President Donald Trump told everyone he’d weaponize the DOJ against his enemies, and now he’s doing it. It’s an absolute joke that anyone connected with the Biden-Harris administration would even attempt to play that card, because they didn’t just talk about using government power against political opponents. They did it, repeatedly, and boy, did they do it with gusto.

They jailed nonviolent January 6th protesters and denied them due process. They prosecuted pro-life demonstrators for praying outside abortion clinics. The Biden-Harris DOJ targeted Catholic churches. The FBI labeled parents who showed up at school board meetings as domestic terrorists for the crime of caring about their kids’ education. And, of course, the Biden-Harris administration literally sent the FBI to raid the home of President Trump in a blatant scheme to put him in prison so he couldn’t return to the White House.

Sorry, but Kamala Harris has no business accusing the Trump administration of weaponizing the Department of Justice, especially while citing the Newsom case, which, as PJ Media previously reported, actually began under the Biden-Harris administration.

While I’m here, we might as well address Kamala’s accusations of incompetence, too. This is the vice president who watched Afghanistan collapse into the hands of the Taliban, abandoned American allies to their fate, and presided over a withdrawal that got 13 U.S. troops killed. That’s before we even get to the border crisis her administration refused to control, the unchecked inflation that gutted American paychecks the administration claimed would be transitory, the bungled response to the East Palestine train derailment, the confused handling of the Chinese spy balloon, the disastrous and ultimately abandoned Gaza pier project, the sluggish response to the Maui wildfires, and the failure to deter Russia from invading Ukraine in the first place. And that’s just a few examples off the top of my head.

And don’t get me started on corruption. Between the Biden Crime Family and the whole cover-up of Joe Biden’s cognitive decline, the last thing Kamala should want is for anyone to go there — not that Michaelson would call her out on any of those things.

So when Kamala stands on a stage in Austria and calls the Trump administration the most callous, corrupt, and incompetent in American history, conservatives can be forgiven for laughing. She’s not describing Trump. She’s describing the administration she was a part of for four years.

Read more …

“.. maqluba (a deal, flipping the rice) or muqlaba (no deal, flipping the peace)..”

Ease In Our Time (Every)

Yesterday saw the BOJ hike rates to 1%, the highest level since 1995, and the RBA hold at 4.35%, with some chatter of the next move being down, not up, despite inflation running way above 2%. Today it’s the turn of new Fed Chair Warsh who, like the other central banks, has to deal with a geopolitical backdrop which may or may not allow for any monetary policy easing.


There, the text of the 14-point US-Iran MoU has been leaked ahead of its Swiss signing ceremony on Friday: ironically, it says “Ease in our time.” It allows Iran to immediately sell oil again, including the waiver of all banking and transport sanctions (though US legislation may prove an obstacle re: IRGC terror designation). It also includes the private sector $300bn investment fund for Iran, which Reuters claims has already been half committed.

What does this imply? It’s either a giant TACO that markets look past the full implications of to embrace; or a can-kick until the midterms (after which what?); or the Middle Eastern dish maqluba –not muqlaba (‘confrontation’)– layers of rice, veggies, and meat prepared one way up, then flipped when served. In other words, a behind-the-scenes-and-rhetoric normalisation from Iran. Ultimately, the proof of that dish is in the eating, and there are still many points to choke on.

NBC reports Iran has continued to fire multiple drones toward ships in Hormuz since the MoU was agreed, with the US shooting them down. The US Navy underlines the Strait still holds “substantial” risk. Insurers therefore remain wary, and as noted yesterday, maritime traffic is more likely to flood out than back in ahead.

Iran is demanding an Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon, which Israel states it will not and just struck Hezbollah again, with Iran now threatening to respond if Israel continues. Trump yesterday suggested Syria, with a history of looking at Lebanon as its own, should take care of Hezbollah (which the Lebanese government wants to disarm, but is unable to), not Israel. Given Syrian president Al-Sharaa’s Al Qaeda background and links to Turkey, with its history of looking at Syria as part of the Ottoman Empire, this does not seem the panacea some might hope for.

The MoU text is vague on uranium: it “will be adequately addressed in a final agreement.” Again, is it maqluba (a deal, flipping the rice) or muqlaba (no deal, flipping the peace)? China is warning the next phase of US-Iran talks will be “more difficult,” which is very clear.

The US is also weighing boosting ties with the Palestinian Authority as it seeks to advance its Gaza Board of Peace and an expanded Abraham Accords, while Israeli PM Netanyahu is said to be dropping election campaign posters showing him alongside Trump, as his opponents are all as hawkish as him re: Hezbollah and Iran, if not on the Palestinian issue.

In short, there are so many layers of rice, veggies, and meat here that’s not clear if anyone can flip the dish without spilling the food: and that’s just the Middle East, which is a current pivot point within a larger global negotiation.

Read more …

RT has a pro- as well as a counter article.

Nigel Farage’s ‘White Britain’: A Long-Overdue Step (von Hoffmeister)

Nigel Farage’s recent Substack post lays bare the reality of Britain’s “two-tier” system, where native white Britons face systemic disadvantages in policing, housing, employment, and justice while ethnic minorities receive preferential treatment under the guise of “equality.”


This is not an aberration or a policy glitch. It is the predictable outcome of attempting to impose liberal democracy on a multiracial society. Different ethnic groups possess distinct collective interests rooted in both biology and culture. Where those interests diverge, genuine democracy, meaning rule by the people for the common good, becomes impossible. Only one outcome prevails: the slow disenfranchisement of the historical white majority.

Human beings are not blank slates. Evolution and genetic similarity theory demonstrate that people favor their own ethnic group. This is not “racism”; it is kin selection, an adaptive strategy honed over millennia. Studies of in-group preference, crime statistics, voting patterns, and nepotistic networks across the globe confirm it: most non-white groups operate tribally as a matter of course. Middle Eastern clans, African kinship networks, South Asian extended families, East Asian ethnic solidarity, and Latin American mestizo patronage systems all prioritize “our people” first. This is normal human behavior.

Whites are the glaring exception. Through Christianity’s universalism, Enlightenment individualism, and post-World War II indoctrination via education, media, and elite institutions, Europeans have been brainwashed into viewing themselves solely as atomized individuals. “Race doesn’t matter,” “we’re all the same,” and “diversity is our strength” are articles of faith, not empirical observations. Whites extended this universalism outward – abolishing slavery, spreading human rights, and building institutions based on merit and fair play – only to then have it weaponized against them. Other groups never adopted it; they simply exploited white openness. The result is asymmetric competition: cohesive ethnic blocs practice nepotism, bloc voting, and resource extraction, while whites compete as isolated individuals, handicapped by their own self-imposed scruples.

In a heterogeneous society, this cannot produce a fair democracy. Democracy assumes a shared conception of the public interest. When ethnic groups have irreconcilable preferences – on crime and policing, welfare redistribution, immigration, family structure, time horizons, and cultural dominance – majoritarianism becomes ethnic spoils. Non-White groups act for their tribe’s advantage. Whites, crippled by individualism, appeal to abstract principles that no one else honors. Nepotism always defeats naive individualism in the long run. Look at any Western city with significant demographic change: ethnic enclaves, parallel societies, demands for Sharia accommodations, affirmative action, and reparations. The social whole dissolves.

The West invented the highest expressions of universalism: rule of law applied equally, individual rights, and merit-based advancement. These are noble achievements responsible for unparalleled prosperity and innovation. Yet in a world of group differences, they function as unilateral disarmament. Non-whites import their tribal strategies into open societies while whites cling to universal rules that prevent collective self-defense. Elites, often insulated by wealth, celebrate this as ‘moral progress.’ The autochthonous population pays the price: suppressed wages, strained welfare systems, skyrocketing crime in ‘diverse’ areas, cultural displacement, and two-tier justice.

[..] Whites must rediscover their own ethnic consciousness, not out of supremacy but survival and reciprocity. Rejecting universalist suicide does not require hating others; it requires realism. Other groups pursue their interests unapologetically. Only when whites do the same can stable, high-trust arrangements emerge. Farage’s critique of a two-tier Britain is a starting point. The deeper truth is that without halting demographic replacement and rethinking governance along lines of peoplehood, democracy itself becomes a fiction masking tribal conquest.

This is the hard reality many conservative thinkers have warned about for decades. Pretending otherwise accelerates decline.

Read more …

“The Reform UK leader’s manifesto attacks DEI and immigration, but beneath the outrage lies a thin program built on grievance and biology..”

Nigel Farage’s ‘White Britain’ is a Fantasy (Graham Hryce)

Nigel Farage, the leader of Reform UK, has published a lengthy personal manifesto on his Substack this week. Farage is not noted for making detailed policy pronouncements, and his long-winded writeup provides an interesting insight into Reform’s policy agenda – revealing, as it does, both its intellectual and political shortcomings. Farage’s manifesto is titled “Britain is a two-tier state – against white people” and it was clearly triggered by the recent Henry Nowak and Stephen Ogilvie cases, in which white British citizens were brutally attacked (and in Nowak’s case, killed) by a Sikh and a Sudanese respectively, neither of whom were illegal immigrants. Farage sets out in detail the circumstances surrounding the Nowak case, and his strident criticisms of the police are entirely valid.


Farage’s central contention is that white people in Britain are treated much less fairly than other ethnic groups, and that the mainstream political parties – he calls them “the establishment parties” – are unwilling to acknowledge the fact that “anti-White racism is embedded into the heart of the state” – because they created this state of affairs and are ideologically committed to maintaining it. Farage sees the “ideology of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI)” and the Equality Act, passed by Labour in 2010 and subsequently strengthened by the Conservatives, as being the main culprits here, and argues that “every section of the state… has been ideologically compromised” by these “toxic ideologies.” According to Farage, this has created a less harmonious and less fair Britain.

Farage claims that this “two-tier state” has created a “two-tier market” in employment, social housing, education, the military, policing, and healthcare – which discriminates against white people, especially the young. Ominously, according to Farage, the situation can only get worse in the future – because while “White Brits” are a sizable majority at present, they “will become a minority in this country before the end of the century.” Notwithstanding this bleak state of affairs, Farage nevertheless maintains that “there is reason for hope” because Reform “has the will and the ability to ensure that no young White person ever has to grow up feeling ashamed of who they are again.”

How precisely does Reform propose to bring about this miraculous social transformation? Farage sets out a number of specific policy proposals that Reform proposes to implement if the party wins government, including the following:
• abolish the Equality Act and prohibit national and local government bodies from implementing DEI policies;
• prevent foreign nationals from having access to welfare benefits;
• ensure that students receive a “balanced and patriotic education” and compel every school to “fly the Union flag” and prominently display a picture of the King;
• restore pride to Britain’s armed forces.

The flimsiness of these policies is obvious, and even if they were implemented, they would do little or nothing to alleviate the serious and longstanding problems that bedevil contemporary Britain – including a declining economy, the cost-of-living crisis, a ballooning public debt, and rising crime rates. Liberal commentators have long been critical of the Equality Act and illiberal ideologies like DEI – and Farage is correct to condemn them and point out how destructive they are of social cohesion. But, even here, Farage underestimates how difficult it will be to abolish them. Britain is still bound by the EU Human Rights Act and a raft of other EU laws, and the UK Supreme Court will fight tooth and nail to retain the status quo.

Read more …

And the people pushing these laws know that very well.

They push “safety for kids” only to get -legal- access to -grown-up- you.

A Social Media Ban for Minors Requires Data From Everyone (ET)

In debating a social media ban for minors, it appears we face a choice between two perceived harms. One is the reported damage that social media is doing to the mental health of children and adolescents. The other is the normalization of mass age verification systems—most likely involving biometrics—that would apply to everyone, not just minors. This carries real risks of privacy invasion, data breaches, and future mission creep.


There is little dispute that many Western countries have experienced a rise in youth mental health problems beginning around 2010–2012 (when Smartphones and social media exploded). Anxiety, depression, self-harm, and suicide rates among adolescents, particularly girls, have increased dramatically since this period. There is disagreement, however, not over whether these spikes exist, but whether they can be attributed specifically to social media. The lingering effects of the pandemic and lockdowns, and family breakdown are just some of the other factors that could be in play.

Data debates aside, most Canadians with common sense and personal experience using social media for prolonged periods of time would admit that doing so is harmful for their mental health, no matter their age. So, what should we do? Whatever steps we take, resorting to broad government-mandated bans and mass surveillance should not be one of them.

Australia offers the clearest real-world test of such a policy. Since its under-16 social media ban took effect on Dec. 10, 2025, platforms operating in the country, including Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, Threads, TikTok, X, YouTube, Reddit, Twitch, and Kick, have been required to take “reasonable steps” to prevent users under 16 from creating or maintaining accounts. Platforms guilty of breaching this new law can reach up to AU$49.5 million.

Australia’s legislation “specifically prohibits platforms from compelling Australians to provide a government-issued ID or use an Australian Government accredited digital ID service to prove their age.” To comply with the law, platforms have implemented widespread use of behavioural analysis, device signals, and facial age estimation scans. By mid-December 2025, platforms had already removed access to approximately 4.7 million suspected under-16 accounts.

But large numbers of teenagers quickly found workarounds. Surveys conducted in early 2026 show that more than 60 percent of under-16s who had accounts before the ban continue to access at least one restricted platform. Common methods include using borrowed phones or parents’ ID, fake age declarations, VPNs, and printed mesh masks to fool facial recognition. Without robust age verification systems, therefore, a meaningful ban doesn’t exist. It might initially remove under 16s, but millions of ineligible minors will find a way to return to these platforms, as has taken place in Australia.

This begs an important question: What is the point of an age verification system that is only half effective? This would create a new set of problems including the loss of privacy rights for everyone, without actually solving the underlying problem the legalization is reportedly designed to fix.= Canada is aware of this conundrum. What would Canada do, then, to both kick minors off the platforms and keep them off the platforms? There is no reason to think that parental oversight or enforcement will be any different here than across the Pacific.

One possibility is social media users must submit verification of identity every time they log in to the platform. The most obvious way to do this would be a government-mediated login system. This would essentially grant government an immense amount of metadata about who logs in to what, how often, etc.

Another possibility would be for social media platforms themselves to monitors users’ data, either by periodically scanning faces and matching it to submitted photo ID, or by evaluating user behaviour (i.e., what content is being accessed and predicting the age of users). This would give an immense amount of data to social media companies that, if retained, could lead to significant privacy violations. Imagine a camera monitoring you every time you use Instagram or Facebook. Think about the fact that biometric technology can already be used to predict age based on wrinkles, skin texture and elasticity, facial proportions, eye shape, hairline, and bone structure. Researchers have even found statistical correlations between typing speed, error patterns, touch pressure, and age.

In this latter possibility, Canadians would be handing highly sensitive biometric data (faces, fingerprints, typing style, etc.) to foreign corporations that are subject to foreign laws (U.S. CLOUD Act, Chinese national intelligence law, etc.). These companies can be compelled by their own governments to hand over your personal and identifiable data. This type of data is also permanent. If it gets hacked, leaked, or demanded by a foreign government, you cannot change it like a password.

Finally, a mandatory social media ban for minors under 16 would significantly restrict their ability to access information about the world. Freedom of expression under the Charter section 2(b) includes not only the right to speak, but also the right to receive information. Canadian courts have recognized this in several cases. Social media platforms have become one of the primary ways many young people receive news, public debates, educational content, and diverse viewpoints.

One doesn’t have to be an absolutist to value freedom and privacy, but the fact of the matter is we have not tried alternative strategies that would minimally impair this fundamental freedom of privacy for everyone, and freedom of speech for minors. Yes, facial recognition is already used voluntarily on some platforms (such as dating apps). And a driver’s licence is often required from gambling sites to ensure compliance with the law. But there is a profound difference between choosing to use one of these sites and being required by law to submit biometric data to participate in modern public discourse. The scale is also vastly different.

We should pursue less invasive strategies instead of choosing between an ineffective ban or a robust and draconian one. Aggressive cultural campaigns against early smartphone use, phone-free schools until at least Grade 9 or 10, and better parental control tools have all shown meaningful results for youth mental health in multiple studies. Stronger platform liability for addictive design specifically aimed at children could also be pursued. At the end of the day, parents are responsible for their children’s social media use with or without a law that requires everyone share their digital data. In other words, even if a robust law existed, parents would still be responsible to ensure their children avoid workarounds.

The instinct to protect children is good, but we cannot protect them by quietly dismantling the privacy and freedom of the entire society. The cure must not be worse than the disease.

Read more …

5 eyes.

Canada is Next Up (CTH)

It is not coincidental that we have seen Australia, New Zealand, the U.K, and now Canada trigger online ‘age verification’ laws; simultaneous with a political push inside the USA to maintain FISA (702) legislation. Separating the USA for a moment. The intelligence services of Australia, New Zealand, U.K and Canada make up four of the intelligence services 5-eyes. In essence, the British Commonwealth is the IC commonality. [Yes, there is some validity to the Lyndon LaRouche perspective (Promethean Action PAC)] Additionally, I would also posit a reminder of the international assembly who structured the originating financial sanctions against Russia; again, a commonality.


Focusing on the most recent political creation in Canada, there are three bills currently being rushed through the Canadian House of Parliament, C-34: keep kids safe on social media; C-36: stronger privacy rules, and C-22: modern tools for police. Not surprisingly, it is difficult to find non-govt-approved information about this legislative construct online. Canadian media must remain compliant with approved government narratives in order to maintain their business model. However, putting together some various information found on non-controlled information sources, it is possible to begin discussion of the situation. The two issues that merge with the greatest impact are Bill C-22: The Surveillance Bill, and Bill C-34: The Children’s Safety Bill.

Bill C-22 requires that all information transmission providers, every telecom and internet company, retain metadata on all Canadian users for up to one year. This is electronic metadata which we all know encompasses a lot more than just content. Signal app, NordVPN, Windscribe, DuckDuckGo, Apple, and Meta have all formally opposed it. Signal app has threatened to leave Canada entirely rather than comply. This is a government mandated metadata storage library on all electronic communication and activity by Canadian users. Then there’s Bill C-34: The Children’s Safety Bill, as noted by Lucy Hargreaves, a bill that ‘Applies to Everyone’, not just kids.

“The government’s social media ban for under-16s is genuinely popular, with 75% of Canadians supporting it in polling. The problem is what it requires in practice. To stop anyone under 16 from creating an account, platforms need to know how old everyone is. There is no way to identify who is under 16 without identifying everyone who isn’t. This means every Canadian adult would need to submit government ID or a face scan to a third-party verification company before posting a photo, using cloud storage, or playing an online game. The bill also creates a new Digital Safety Commission with sweeping powers to set the rules, decide which platforms must comply, and approve or deny exemptions — with almost no criteria written into the law itself.”

“Australia introduced the same social media ban in December 2025. Six months later, the eSafety Commissioner told Parliament she was “not really keen” on it from the start and called it a “blunt force approach” drafted too quickly. 70% of young Australians reported the ban had little effect on their social media use. It didn’t reduce cyberbullying. What it did produce was a surge in VPN use… pushing young people to darker, less-monitored platforms.

The UK implemented age verification under its Online Safety Act in mid-2025. Within one month, VPN downloads hit over two million — the highest ever recorded — and monthly downloads stayed above one million for a year as users raced to bypass the requirement. The EU considered its own version of mandatory message scanning (dubbed “Chat Control”) and its own Parliament voted it down in March 2026, with the EU’s legal service concluding that indiscriminate scanning of private communications is incompatible with fundamental rights.

The government’s core justification for C-22 is that Canada is the “only Five Eyes country” without a lawful access framework. But the United States has no federal mandatory metadata retention law. The EU’s highest court has struck down blanket retention twice as incompatible with human rights. When the Public Safety Minister claimed Canada’s provisions would be “in line with U.S. counterparts,” he was forced to walk back the statement within hours.”

Think about what all the critics (correctly) point out as the bigger issue behind the “age id” social media stuff. What is the unspoken goal of Australia, New Zealand, the U.K and Canada? Ultimately control. Govt online surveillance, correct? Some form of legal, legislated, govt authorized data surveillance that permits law enforcement to have actionable mechanisms, right? If that is indeed the goal, then in the USA we overlay FISA (702). NZ, AU, UK and CA get digital IDs. The USA gets 702. It’s the same basic premise; the same govt motive; the same underpinning reasoning. Just different and nuanced approaches.

Read more …

One more admirer. Part of this story is that the US economy erupted since 2008, while Europe just about stood still. Today, the US looks like paradise to Europeans (no, not the food).

The World Is Re-Discovering America In the World Cup — and Loving It (Moran)

About 250 years ago, America cast a spell on Europe and the rest of the world. That magic compelled 15-18 million people to uproot themselves and escape war, poverty, crop failures, and political instability to start all over again in the new nation between 1800 and 1900. More than 15 million immigrants arrived in the first 15 years of the 20th century, mostly from Eastern Europe and Russia. Funny how America’s critics gloss over that astonishing fact. Whenever they bother to mention it, they point to the industrial revolution, which created an insatiable demand for labor, as capitalism “enslaved” these unsuspecting workers.


Still, people kept coming. As bad as the left believes America is, people of all races, all religions, and from every nation ignored the portrayal of the United States as a racist, sexist country of white supremacists and came anyway. This is something America’s most vicious critics can’t get around. The people of the world voted with their feet, and while many of us may not like it, the promise America holds for a better life is irresistible. For the next month, more than 1.7 million foreigners will come to America to watch a soccer tournament. It hardly matters why they’re coming. They come with their preconceived notions about the U.S being a horrible place. Their own governments tell them so. American leftists amplify that message.

But once these soccer fans get here, an amazing transformation happens to many of them. They fall in love with the U.S. Perhaps they have relatives who left the old country to come here and have heard about America all their lives. Whatever their preconceptions about the U.S., nothing prepared them for how completely different it is from what they’ve been told or what they imagined. PJ Media editor Chris Queen wrote about this phenomenon last week, chronicling a German tourist’s travels through the South. Many other visitors in the U.S. for soccer find themselves delighted with what they’ve found.

New York Post: “Bright red fire trucks. Walmart’s cathedral of abundance. The miracle of free refills.” These are just a few of the American wonders World Cup tourists are encountering during their travels through the heartland — and they can’t seem to get enough of them. Visitors from all over the world are documenting their journeys across the United States on social media, much to the delight of every American who doesn’t think patriotism is a dirty word.“A place like this could ONLY exist in America and I LOVE it,” posted Sean from Scotland as he toured a Texas Buc-ees in abject astonishment.

“The vibes are insane!” exclaimed Freddy from Germany while road-tripping through Louisiana to New Orleans. Elsa from Sweden is demanding of X, “Why did no one tell me ranch sauce is like crack?” It seems that Gen X and Y had no idea of the “real” America. “One thing I love about the European World Cup tourists right now is that they’re not just being dropped off in the middle of Los Angeles or New York City or some overhyped metropolitan hub that most Americans like myself don’t even like,” X user @realmikolson observed. “They’re being dropped right in the middle of the heart of middle America.”

Fox News: “Olson said international tourists driving nine hours across Texas and experiencing Auburn University fraternity houses are witnessing “overwhelming American kindness.” “A lot of the locals in these areas have no idea who these people are or why they’re even there,” he said, adding that there’s been very little World Cup news or marketing, particularly in small towns.

Nevertheless, he’s heard of instances of restaurant owners driving World Cup fans to games because they can’t find an Uber. A deli owner gave British tourists free lunch “just because they came all this way,” he said. Some Alabama firefighters reportedly gave foreign visitors a tour of their fire department and free merchandise. Of course, there are many Americans who wish the foreigners would just go home and leave us alone. But there are enough Americans still imbued with small-town values and principles that make coming to America an incredibly rich and rewarding experience.

Read more …

Blocking GPS would have a paralyzing effect.

Russia’s New Warning Shot From Space (Martin Armstrong)

For years, politicians have been obsessed with tanks, artillery, missiles, and troop counts while the real battlefield has quietly moved into space. The latest reports suggesting that Russian satellites may be capable of disrupting GPS signals on a continental scale should be sending shockwaves through military circles. If these findings prove accurate, then we are looking at a capability that extends far beyond simply making a driver’s navigation system malfunction. GPS is embedded in aviation, shipping, banking, telecommunications, emergency services, power grids, financial transactions, military operations, and virtually every aspect of modern infrastructure.


According to researchers, dozens of GPS interference events detected across Europe since 2019 may have originated from Russia’s EKS satellite constellation. These satellites were originally designed as part of Russia’s missile early-warning system, but testing suggests they may also possess the ability to transmit powerful signals capable of disrupting GPS reception across vast regions. The significance is not whether a disruption lasts a few seconds or a few minutes. The significance is proving the concept works. Once a nation demonstrates it can interfere with navigation systems from orbit, the entire strategic equation changes.

What many fail to appreciate is how dependent modern warfare has become on satellite navigation. Precision-guided weapons rely on GPS. Drones rely on GPS. Aircraft, ships, logistics networks, battlefield communications, and intelligence systems all depend on accurate positioning data. Remove that capability and armies suddenly find themselves operating under conditions that resemble an entirely different century. During the Ukraine conflict, both sides have aggressively pursued electronic warfare, jamming systems, and signal disruption technologies. What appears to be emerging now is the possibility of extending those capabilities far beyond localized battlefields and into continental-scale operations.

Financial markets depend on precise timing synchronization. Cellular networks require timing signals to coordinate traffic. Shipping companies use satellite navigation to move trillions of dollars worth of goods annually. Airlines depend on navigation systems to safely manage thousands of flights every day. Even modern agriculture relies heavily on GPS-guided equipment. The public views GPS as a convenience. Governments and corporations know it has become a critical piece of economic infrastructure.

This development also highlights something I have warned about repeatedly. The next major conflict will not resemble the wars of the twentieth century. Future wars will target infrastructure before populations even realize an attack has occurred. A cyberattack can disable communications. A satellite disruption can interfere with transportation networks. Financial systems can be disrupted electronically. Power grids can be targeted remotely. The battlefield increasingly consists of networks, satellites, data centers, and communications systems rather than simply soldiers crossing borders.

The timing is noteworthy. We are entering the most dangerous phase of the geopolitical cycle. The 2026 Panic Cycle year has already begun exposing vulnerabilities across the global system. Relations between Russia and NATO remain strained. The United States and China are engaged in a rapidly escalating technological competition. Military spending is rising globally. Governments everywhere are preparing for contingencies that most citizens never consider. Space is no longer a peaceful frontier. It has become a strategic domain where the major powers are competing for dominance.

What should concern policymakers is not merely that Russia may possess this capability. The real question is how many nations are developing similar systems. The United States, China, Russia, and other powers have invested heavily in electronic warfare, anti-satellite technology, cyberwarfare, and space-based military assets. Every major power understands that controlling information, communications, and navigation systems may prove more decisive than controlling territory itself.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Jun 152026
 


Robert Campin A man 1435


Trump Announces Peace Deal with Iran Is Complete (Margolis)
Trump: Hormuz To Reopen Friday After Signing Of “Great Peace Deal” (ZH)
Iran Reveals Draft Of Trump-Touted MoU To Be Signed Sunday (ZH)
Scott Jennings Hammers CNN Panel Over Elon Musk Trillionaire Status (Amy Curtis)
Bakari Sellers Calls Elon Musk a White Supremacist (Margolis)
Elon Musk and the Politics of Envy (Tim O’Brien)
Carney: “Middle Powers” Can Collectively Counterbalance U.S. Global Power (CTH)
Pompeo Unmasked (CTH)
Buttigieg Joins the Calls to Take Over the Supreme Court (Turley)
‘Birth Tourism’ Networks Around the World Exploiting the U.S. (Salgado)
Puffy Putin Peril: The West’s Latest Attempt To Scare Itself (Amar)
Thinking for Oneself: Schopenhauer on Reflection vs. Regurgitation (Eskeldson)

 


 

https://twitter.com/Samdani4232/status/2065834962687873189?s=20 https://twitter.com/BarronTNews_/status/2065789421379572045?s=20 https://twitter.com/Real_RobN/status/2065854007722311794?s=20 https://twitter.com/FarmGirlCarrie/status/2065912335248826563?s=20

 


 


What a way to spend your 80th birthday! He did it! Hats off. So many people wanted him to fail even if it was against their own interests, just to spite him.

Trump Announces Peace Deal with Iran Is Complete (Margolis)

On Sunday, President Donald Trump announced that a peace deal with Iran had been finalized, immediately lifting the U.S. naval blockade on Iranian ports and reopening the Strait of Hormuz to global shipping. The region that has defined American foreign policy anxiety for decades just changed dramatically — and it happened on Trump’s watch. “The Deal with the Islamic Republic of Iran is now complete,” Trump wrote on Truth Social, offering “congratulations to all!” He followed that up by authorizing what he called the “toll-free opening of the Strait of Hormuz” alongside the simultaneous removal of the naval blockade. Then, in classic Trump fashion, he added, “Ships of the World, start your engines. Let the oil flow!”


Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif confirmed the deal in a statement of his own. He announced that “the Peace Deal between the United States of America and Islamic Republic of Iran has been REACHED” after what he described as “intensive talks.” He continued, “We would like to thank the United States of America and the Islamic Republic of Iran for their commitment to finding a diplomatic solution to the conflict. We would also like to extend our sincere appreciation to our brothers in this mediation effort, the great leadership of State of Qatar, for their support in reaching this agreement. I would also especially thank the visionary leadership of Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and Republic of Türkiye for their immense contributions in this regard.”

A formal signing ceremony is scheduled for June 19 in Switzerland, with mediators facilitating preliminary technical meetings this week to lay the groundwork.Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi confirmed the deal from Tehran’s side, saying an immediate and permanent halt to war and military operations — including in Lebanon — would begin Sunday. He also made clear that Iran would respond if the other side violates its commitments and that the next phase of negotiations hinges on Iranian assets being unfrozen. Make no mistake about it, Tehran is going to test the limits of this thing. That’s what Iran does. But the framework is there, and the verification mechanisms matter.

Vice President JD Vance laid out the significance on Sunday on Fox News. “Three things that I think are important for the American people just to appreciate about what this deal does for all of us as Americans,” Vance said. “Number one, this is the immediate opening of the Straits of Hormuz and, of course, the lifting of the naval blockade that we’ve had on Iran along with it. The number two thing that it means is that Iran will never have a nuclear weapon, and not just pursue a nuclear weapon, but procure or try to buy a nuclear weapon as well that’s built into this agreement.”

The third element, Vance explained, depends on Iranian compliance. Still, the upside is enormous. “If the Iranians comply with this deal, it is going to fundamentally transform the Middle East for the next 50 years,” he said. “It’s going to end the war. It’s going to make the Middle East more investable. It’s going to mean a lot of prosperity, lower energy prices for the American people. This region of the world has been a basket case for my entire life and longer than that.”

Obviously, there’s still work ahead. And there’s reason to be skeptical of Iran because this is a regime with a long history of buying time while running out the clock. But, we aren’t sending them plane-loads of cash in the dark of night, or giving them a path to nuclear weapons, as Barack Obama did. And that’s the key here. Trump built in verification. Vance was explicit that the benefits flow only if Iran delivers. The approach is trust nothing, verify everything, and tie every concession to compliance. That’s exactly the kind of deal the Obama-era Iran agreement was never structured to be.

Read more …

“Pakistan’s prime minister, Shehbaz Sharif, also confirmed: “that the Peace Deal between the United States of America and the Islamic Republic of Iran has been REACHED.”

Trump: Hormuz To Reopen Friday After Signing Of “Great Peace Deal” (ZH)

“This Great Deal will bring Peace and Security to the whole Region. Many presidents have tried to make Peace with Iran, and all have failed before me. The Leaders of the Region have, for the first time, found a President who can help them achieve real Peace. With the opening of the Strait upon the signing of the Deal on Friday, for purposes of mine removal, oil will flow on both ends again for the Region, and the World!” Trump wrote on Truth Social.


The timing of the peace deal is critical. The world was approaching a dangerous energy cliff, with strategic petroleum reserves being quickly drained to offset lost Gulf production and stabilize physical markets. Still, even with a deal in place, energy flows through the strategic maritime chokepoint will not normalize overnight. It will likely take several months, if not quarters, to clear the backlog, restore shipping confidence, de-risk insurance markets, and bring regional production and export flows back to pre-crisis levels. As for damaged energy assets such as those in Qatar, it’ll take years to get production back to pre-war levels.

Deal Confirmed By Trump, Pakistan PM, Just Ahead Of NY Futures Opening. Just 30 minutes before futures open in New York, President Trump announced on Truth Social that a “Deal” with Iran is now complete. “Congratulations to all! I hereby fully authorize the toll-free opening of the Strait of Hormuz, and, simultaneously herewith, authorize the immediate removal of the United States Naval blockade. Ships of the World, start your engines. Let the oil flow!” Trump said.

Pakistan’s prime minister, Shehbaz Sharif, also confirmed: “that the Peace Deal between the United States of America and the Islamic Republic of Iran has been REACHED.”

Sharif said, “The official signing ceremony will be on Friday, 19 June in Switzerland.”

Israeli journalist and Iran affairs correspondent/analyst for Israel’s Channel 14 reports that hardliners in Iran, including IRGC forces, will not derail the peace deal.

Read more …

From the lead-up to the accord.

Iran Reveals Draft Of Trump-Touted MoU To Be Signed Sunday (ZH)

Bloomberg and Reuters are reporting Sunday some fresh details on Iran’s version of what the MoU to be signed – which President Trump says will happen today (albeit remotely) will inlcude. “A draft of the US-Iran memorandum of understanding included diluting highly enriched uranium within Iran and the release of $25b of Iran’s frozen assets, Reuters reports citing a senior Iran official it didn’t identify,” writes Bloomberg in the latest. This includes:


• Final deal to be discussed in the 60 days following agreement by the two sides
• Also includes Iran immediately reopening Hormuz Strait to all commercial vessels and US lifting its naval blockade
• Tehran in draft agrees that will neither produce nor acquire nuclear weapons
• To maintain the nuclear status quo until final deal is reached, including by not enriching uranium and not expanding nuclear facilities

One potential major complication to the two sides actually signing is what’s happening in the Beirut suburbs, which the Israeli Air Force has just struck for the first time in about a week:

Provocative Israeli military actions previously effectively torpedoed prior Washington-Tehran attempts to get back to the negotiating table. Will the same hold-up happen again? Pro-Israel supporters and lobbyists in the US have been raging against what they see as a ‘failure’ of a deal, and ‘capitulation’ to Iran on kicking the can on the nuclear issue… not least among them is on display in the following:

The usual caveats which proved all prior ‘deal imminent’ headlines to be premature and wishful thinking still apply. Some latest from Iranian state media according to Al Jazeera: “Iran’s Fars news agency, citing a source close to the negotiating team, is reporting that Iranian officials were discussing the ceasefire points with the Qatari mediators in Tehran. The report added that the deal is yet to be finalised and “no agreement will definitely be signed at the time Trump announced”. The comments were made to the agency prior to Israel’s deadly attacks on Lebanon’s southern suburbs today.

Sunday Iran Deal (or rather: MoU Remote Signing) Expected Sunday, per Trump. President Trump said Saturday that an interim U.S.-Iran deal to reopen the Strait of Hormuz and wind down the four-month conflict could be signed as soon as Sunday. However, Tehran has pushed back on that timeline, signaling that no final decision has been made while Iranian officials continue to review the terms of a potential memorandum of understanding. “The Deal is scheduled to get signed tomorrow, and immediately after it is signed, the Hormuz Strait is OPEN TO ALL,” Trump said in a Truth Social post on Saturday, while claiming that Iran “no longer wants a Nuclear weapon.”

The president continued, “At the appropriate time, when all is calm, we will go in and get the Nuclear Dust, buried deep under the powerful sunken granite mountains, thanks to our beautiful B-2 Bombers and their brilliant pilots, and downblend and destroy it, whether in Iran, or the United States.” Pakistan and Qatar are mediating, with technical talks expected to follow any signing and last up to 60 days. The MOU is structured as a step-by-step framework, meaning the Hormuz maritime chokepoint will reopen first, followed by economic rewards for Iran as conditions are met.

Pakistan, which has served as one of the mediators, is preparing to sign the peace deal electronically, followed by technical-level talks next week, according to Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif. He said those talks would last two months and focus on Iran’s nuclear program. Meanwhile, the Iranian media outlet Fars News Agency reported earlier that Iran has not made a final call on a potential MOU with the U.S. Iranian authorities are still reviewing the political, legal, and technical details, with no final decision announced as of Sunday morning.

The urgency behind securing an MOU to reopen the Hormuz chokepoint is clear: the world is drifting dangerously close toward an energy cliff. Strategic petroleum reserves are being drawn down rapidly around the world to offset the loss of Gulf production, while China’s weakening fuel demand is helping to offset some of the broader supply shock. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi made clear Friday that Iran understands that terms related to its nuclear program will be finalized within 60 days of the initial agreement being signed. So in essence, this means Iran could get its wish of pushing nuclear negotiations back, only after the hot conflict has clearly ended. Iran has long sought to separate the issues of a final end to the war from consideration of its nuclear program.

Energy markets priced in de-escalation last week, with Brent crude futures sliding as much as 5.1% Friday and European gas dropped as much as 8.4% after Trump canceled planned new strikes on Iran. IG’s weekend markets are pricing in a 50 bps decline in Brent crude when futures open on Sunday evening. But throughput traffic through the Hormuz chokepoint remains far below pre-war levels, and a vessel was struck off Oman on Saturday. Normalization could take weeks, if not many months. Bloomberg noted, “Roughly 140 ships passed through the narrow chokepoint each day before the conflict erupted.”

Read more …

“If Elon Musk had never gotten involved in politics, and never supported Trump, he’d be getting ticker tape parades right now for building this amazing company and sending rockets into space..”

Scott Jennings Hammers CNN Panel Over Elon Musk Trillionaire Status (Amy Curtis)

While Leftists melt down over Elon Musk becoming the world’s first trillionaire, they’ve demonstrated that they don’t understand how value works, or stocks, or how the economy works. Scott Jennings pointed out a very obvious truth: if Elon Musk were a Leftist, this wouldn’t be an issue.



“Are you saying because Elon Musk exists and is a wild success that that is somehow to the detriment of all the people you’re mentioning?” Jennings asked. “Elon is creating an environment where entrepreneurship, where success, where building is celebrated.” Then came the truth bomb. “The only reason anybody’s mad about this, let’s just be honest, is because he supported Donald Trump for President,” Jennings said.

“If Elon Musk had never gotten involved in politics, and never supported Trump, he’d be getting ticker tape parades right now for building this amazing company and sending rockets into space. It’s all political, and the people who should love Elon Musk hate him for that reason.” “But do you agree that one person should have control of American policy?” asked Gina Hinojosa. “That’s what money does.”

“It’s all about access to the United States,” she continued, “It’s not just about Donald Trump. There are races all across the country where he has access on policy.” “Call me when you’re made about Soros,” Jennings said.Do people with money have more influence in politics? Does CNN have a chyron for this? That’s how it’s always been. If money influenced policy, we’d have President Ross Perot. Hillary Clinton raised $770 million in 2016 and Kamala Harris raised $1.6 billion for her campaign.

https://twitter.com/wxmel/status/2066178897012490748?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2066178897012490748%7Ctwgr%5E8aab5d0d89583224ad4976df81987866feaa71be%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Ftownhall.com%2Ftipsheet%2Famy-curtis%2F2026%2F06%2F14%2Fscott-jennings-hammers-cnn-panel-over-elon-musk-trillionaire-status-n2677733

Clean vehicles, clean energy sources, space exploration, and Internet access via Starlink. Those are just some of his achievements and contributions. Bingo. If he funded Leftist causes and politicians, this wouldn’t be an issue.

https://twitter.com/Sinnersaint39/status/2066185825411273006?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2066185825411273006%7Ctwgr%5E8aab5d0d89583224ad4976df81987866feaa71be%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Ftownhall.com%2Ftipsheet%2Famy-curtis%2F2026%2F06%2F14%2Fscott-jennings-hammers-cnn-panel-over-elon-musk-trillionaire-status-n2677733

It doesn’t matter what the narrative is today, as long as the Democrats can scream and whine about the “oligarchy” and against Donald Trump, Republicans, and anyone who isn’t their political ally.

Read more …

Sure.

Bakari Sellers Calls Elon Musk a White Supremacist (Margolis)

A CNN panel meant to discuss extraordinary wealth lurched far off the rails Friday night when one commentator went into full-on slander mode on Elon Musk, who became the world’s first trillionaire this week. He’s been getting attacked from the left for his success because that’s what the left does. Well, that and fantasize about spending other people’s money, which is exactly what CNN contributor Cari Champion started with. “If you spent a million dollars every single day, it would take you more than 2700 years to spend a trillion dollars,” Champion said.


“What you could effectively do with a trillion dollars is get rid of global poverty. You could end world hunger, you could cure major diseases like malaria, and you could completely transition the global energy sector to renewables. The fact that he has this type of money only tells me that his power will be more prevalent and that I could not — I cannot guarantee someone like this man would use his power for good.” Then Bakari Sellers took things further. After blaming Elon Musk’s influence for USAID cuts that he claimed killed thousands of women and children, Sellers leveled a charge that sent the panel into a frenzy: “Elon Musk is a white supremacist who believes in things like the —”

Criminal defense attorney Arthur Aidala jumped in. “Oh, boy,” Aidala said. “I wasn’t even finished a sentence,” Sellers shot back. Scott Jennings had a warning ready for Sellers. “You may need a lawyer when this is over,” he quipped. Sellers pressed on. Musk “believes in things like the Great Replacement Theory,” he said. But Aidala pushed back hard. “Considering we have about 12 defamation cases in my office right now,” he said, “before you start throwing things around like someone’s a white supremacist — I would win that case.”

He’s right. Democrats and the media often label mainstream conservative arguments about immigration and electoral incentives as “great replacement theory” and imply racism, but it’s not like Democrats haven’t made the very argument that, because of declining birth rates, the United States needed immigration to sustain population growth and the workforce. “We have a population that is not reproducing on its own with the same level that it used to. The only way we’re going to have a good future in America is if we welcome and embrace immigrants,” Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said in 2022. But I digress.

In fact, Jennings cut through the whole exercise with a few pointed questions. “I’ve been listening to liberals count and spend Elon’s money for him,” Jennings said. “This envy, jealousy, hatred of success. Why is it immoral? Why is it wrong for somebody in our system — our capitalist system, in the greatest nation on earth, to go out and build a company — build companies, build technologies, go into space, aim to go put a colony on Mars, give internet to half the world. All the things he’s doing. Why is any of this wrong or bad? Why would we want to discourage entrepreneurship? Why would we want to discourage anybody building anything? That is the nature of it.”

Read more …

“Since the signs were pre-printed and funded by the usual funders of anything good for America …”

Elon Musk and the Politics of Envy (Tim O’Brien)

Unless you’ve been living under a rock, you know by now that with SpaceX’s Initial Public Offering (IPO), Elon Musk has become the world’s first trillionaire. The implications of this for all of us and our grandchildren are many and far-reaching. Of course, the left has found a way to narrow it all down to one simple idea: “His money is our money, or it should be.” That’s not the way they say it. What leftists actually are saying is he doesn’t pay enough in taxes. Why? For the sole reason that he’s rich. If you’re a leftist, rich people are never paying “their fair share.”


This is the politics of envy, and if you study the vast majority of leftist messaging at any time on any topic, envy is a critical component. In fact, I’d go so far as to say that if the Democrats, and the left at large, decided to quit being jealous of the right, the left would die as a movement in less than 24 hours. Envy is the lifeblood of leftist politics, and Musk is merely their latest, biggest, and most convenient target. But it’s worth being reminded that to the left, you are no different than Elon Musk. Let me explain. The left is miserable when you’re happy. It feels entitled to be the only source of your happiness, but it has no desire to make you happy. Rather, it simply wants to control how happy it will allow you to be.

You saw this during the COVD-19 pandemic when the left rationed aspects of your previous life to you in small portions. The desire to control you in this way came from a fear that you might find a way to be happy in spite of conditions, in this case a pandemic. The thoroughness with which arbitrary measures were taken to deny you the simplest of pleasures was rooted in envy. Around the same time and in the same environment, Black Lives Matter (BLM) and the whole entitlement movement accused you, if you were white, of having “white privilege” and and said that you don’t deserve to be happy. Instead, you should feel guilty because some on the left are unhappy.

The “white privilege” guilt trip was not only one of the purest forms of the politics of envy, but it worked to get leftist and otherwise weak white people to voluntarily surrender their happiness. At some point, almost all leftist politics comes back to envy. And so, when Musk took SpaceX public and the company’s value skyrocketed (sorry, I couldn’t help myself), the left fell back on its most core strategy – the politics of envy. Leftist billionaires and their pawns were well prepared to opportunistically try to capitalize on Musk’s good fortune with protest signs, messaging, and rent-a-mobs ready to go.

A union representing leftist college professors showed up alongside all the other envious union members, paid protestors, and disgruntled leftists, complete with their pre-printed signs. They were there to air their grievance that someone was having a good day and just might be happy. Their signs alone showed an extremely high level of financial illiteracy and ignorance regarding just about everything related to the SpaceX IPO. They read: “Billionaires are a scam”; “Elon is stealing your pension”; “Overthrow the oligarchs”; “This billionaire is stealing from you”; “Elon is stealing your 401K”; and, of course, “Stop Elon. No Trillionaires.”

Since the signs were pre-printed and funded by the usual funders of anything good for America, we can only assume that the evil strategists on the left conceived of these messages because they knew the phrases would appeal to their illiterate base. First off, how could Elon making money from willing investors represent him stealing your pension? There is no relationship at all, and there can’t be. The money Musk and everyone else made from the IPO came from the market, not from unwilling American citizens or taxpayers. It came from institutional investors through mutual and index funds, universities, large pension funds, and millions of willing individual investors. People invested because they hoped to make profits at some later point. The protestors either don’t understand that, or they pretend not to.

Another sign that actually sidesteps all rational thought is the one that says Elon is stealing your 401(k). The truth is, the SpaceX IPO very likely already helped your 401(k), and if it didn’t, it soon will. Many, if not most of the big mutual funds are riding on the fortunes of a handful of companies like Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, Meta, maybe Tesla, and Alphabet. SpaceX just joined the club. That means if you have a 401(k), it’s in your best interest to want SpaceX to do well. That can only grow your retirement savings. And then there’s that argument the left makes when it has no argument: “Stop Elon. No Trillionaires.” Why? I mean, really, why? What’s the point? If someone else becomes rich and it has no effect on you, why should you even care? I mean, other than pure jealousy.

That post from Rep. Sara Jacobs (D-Calif.) is rich, literally. She’s playing upon jealousy and envy to encourage more taxation, but only of the rich, so we’re told (for now). They play this “lower effective tax rate” game to try to pretend Elon doesn’t pay a ton of taxes, which he does. Also, like the financially illiterate protestors in New York, Jacobs is drawing no distinction between income, which is taxed, and assets like stock, which only convert into taxable money if you sell shares. What makes Jacobs’ post curious is that she is one of the richest people in Congress. She’s got an estimated net worth of $76 million, and she didn’t earn any of it. She was born into it.

If ever there is such a thing as privilege, she’s got it. Her father is billionaire Irwin Jacobs, who founded semiconductor company Qualcomm. So, when she demonizes Elon for being a billionaire, or now a trillionaire, she’s pretty much demonizing her own daddy, and she’s not doing herself any favors. She just wants you to think she’s one of the good kind of millionaires. What’s obvious is she wants you to feel like a “have not,” and she wants you to hate Elon simply because he’s a “have.” Something Jacobs did not do and would not do is acknowledge all those who have immediately benefited from the SpaceX IPO. A lot of leftists are making money here. The University of North Carolina, Washington University in St. Louis, and the University of Virginia bought in early and have huge stakes in the company.

According to Fortune, “In total, more than 4,400 current and former SpaceX employees are expected to become millionaires in the IPO.” My colleague, David Manney, reported on how some of Musk’s loyal employees at different levels of the company will be rewarded. SpaceX counts 22,000 employees at the moment, and all of them pay taxes. The average salary of SpaceX employees is $155,000-$176,000, according to the company. All of these people pay local, state and federal taxes. Many, if not most, pay property taxes. Those who just made millions each on the IPO will ultimately pay a collective billions more in federal taxes. That means more money headed into the local, state, and federal piggy banks.

Over time, millions of individual investors will make profits on their SpaceX stock at some point, and they will pay taxes on the profit. The point is, the government will see its share of cash from the IPO, and it didn’t have to do a thing except sit back and wait for the profits to roll in. Yet, Democrats like Jacobs and the rest of the left somehow want you to feel like only Musk is the beneficiary of the IPO. That’s not stopping the left from engaging in envy porn. Check out this post from millionaire Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), decrying the rich as she rides in the back of her limo. Or this common refrain that attempts to blame Musk for people putting themselves on government entitlement programs that you, the taxpayer, pay for anyway.

In other words, people getting free stuff are big mad that Musk is winning. Since he’s making more money, naturally, they want more free stuff…just because. That poster blamed Musk for just about every economic challenge anyone in America could face, but one thing he posted that deserves to be addressed is this notion that Musk is getting federal handouts to make his money at SpaceX. As though he’s running a non-profit that doesn’t reward the federal government. His rockets are the delivery system for satellites that protect our national security, among many other things. Oh, and remember the time NASA couldn’t rescue those astronauts, so Musk had to bail out the government?.

Read more …

I feel like I’m in the Shire (but of anti-heroes).

The Little People flock together

“Carney Affirms that “Middle Powers” with Same Ideological Construct Can Collectively Counterbalance U.S. Global Power..”

Carney: “Middle Powers” Can Collectively Counterbalance U.S. Global Power (CTH)

Making his ninth trip to Europe since become prime minister 15 months ago, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney once again outlined his governing model to combat a U.S. administration that he claims has fractured the globalist norms. During his press conference with Micheal Martin, Ireland’s taoiseach (Prime Minister), Carney once again built upon the idea of “middle powers” uniting together in common ideology against U.S. dominance until such a time as the U.S. government can once again return to a leftist ideology.


The specific objectives become clear about halfway through the presser today as Carney notes the importance of grouping nations together who agree on climate change, energy controls and the green agenda. Canada’s alignment with Europe is seemingly centered on the net-zero carbon model. This perspective makes sense from Carney as it is the same priority he’s carried since his time as governor for the Bank of England. WATCH:

As the former Governor of the Bank of England and Bank of Canada, Carney used his platform to position climate change as a systemic financial risk. He then championed the view that private capital must be the primary tool to force an economic energy transition. [Post-COVID this was known as “Build Back Better.“] President Trump’s perspective and the majority American view on climate change and energy development is against the core professional effort of Carney and the banking interests he has always represented. This becomes very important to understand as the U.S-Canada conflict is about to hit an inflection point.

HISTORY: Through the “Net Zero” Banking Alliance (NZBA) Mark Carney pushed banks to agree with policies and protocols that forced them to set lower lending targets to high-carbon industries and clients. The goal was to force companies to ‘decarbonize’ or find themselves starved of capital. While working at the Bank of England and Canada Carney famously warned multinational interests and insurance companies, most of which were centered in London, that fossil fuel assets that did not fit the net-zero industrial model would become “stranded assets” worth nothing because they could not be capitalized or insured. This threat signaled to multinationals that any investment in a project that was against the “Paris Climate Treaty” was a bad financial risk.

This approach endeared Mark Carney to King Charles III, who is himself a major climate alarmist. Unfortunately, U.S. politicians -particularly during the Trump first term- accused the Carney banking/finance and insurance alliance of operating an illegal banking cartel to choke the larger American energy sector. Facing legal threats over antitrust violations, in combination with obvious violations of fiduciary duty, NZBA has to strip out its strict, mandatory lending restrictions. Slowly banks began retreating from the net-zero alliance.

Regional and national banks began citing the economic necessity of supporting traditional energy companies, and energy security became more important than adherence to voluntary restrictions on carbon emissions. This angered Carney as his life construct was under pressure. Carney then entered Canadian federal politics and sought to downplay his ideological climate agenda. However, all of his energy policies essentially come from the same mindset of opposition to fossil fuels.

The disparity in energy production is the core issue inside the details of the USMCA. The United States and Mexico are both aligned with low-cost fossil fuel use, which is particularly important for large scale industrial manufacturing (steel etc.). Whereas Canada doesn’t want the dirty jobs and wants only to focus on electricity production.

You can make electricity from windmills, solar farms and nuclear power. However, you cannot make iron, steel or aluminum without fossil fuels. In scientific fact, part of the largest global irony is because it’s impossible to make windmill components, solar panels or nuclear power equipment without using fossil fuels.

In the video below, while he was a banker you can see Mark Carney admitting on tape: When voters blocked his ESG plans, “We” (Central Bankers) shifted into the position of “Regulators” to work around the voters through the back door of finance and insurance. They manipulated fossil fuel production and prices by withholding lending and insurance.

https://twitter.com/vesperdigital/status/2064518878005174439?s=20

Read more …

“One month later we were in beginning of SARS-CoV-2, which we now accept in hindsight was a U.S. military and intelligence operation..”

Pompeo Unmasked (CTH)

Many of you will likely remember December 29, 2019, when Secretary Pompeo, Joint Chief’s Mark Milley and Secretary Mark Esper flew to Mar-a-Lago to inform President Trump about military strikes they had just conducted in Northern Syria and Iraq. At the time of the strike, President Trump was negotiating the exit of U.S. troops from Afghanistan and even having direct talks with the Taliban which was proclaimed as controversial by the traditional war machine elements in DC. The action by Pompeo, Milley and Esper did not align with the moment based on Trump’s ongoing effort.


President Trump made no comments about the strike they carried out, nor did President Trump post anything about the events. In fact, President Trump made Pompeo, Milley and Esper stand at the podium and inform the media and public. CTH said at the time nothing about this made sense. Our suspicion was that Pompeo, Milley and Esper had acted unilaterally without approval. Events later on indicated our suspicion was accurate. One month later we were in beginning of SARS-CoV-2, which we now accept in hindsight was a U.S. military and intelligence operation utilizing a virus created in a Wuhan, China biological lab. The global response to the virus was a combined military and intelligence operation.

The most excessive ‘western’ reactions to the virus were carried out by New Zealand, Australia, the U.K and Canada, all five-eyes countries. The November 2020 election result was specifically an outcome of the virus and fraudulent mail-in ballots. It’s also worth remembering that in 2016 the Trump-Russia collusion material originated from the U.K via former intelligence operative Christopher Steele and the Fusion GPS network in the U.S. That’s the context for last week Mike Pompeo paying tribute to his old friend in British intelligence who worked with him as CIA Director following the 2016 election of President Trump.

Mike Pompeo – Within hours of being announced as the nominee to be the U.S. Director of the CIA, I received a hand-delivered message on MI6 stationery congratulating me on my nomination. It was signed simply “C” in green ink. Legendary. I shared it with my son and even he thought I was now cool! More than that, this note, from Sir Alex Younger, Chief of the Secret Intelligence Service of the United Kingdom, confirmed what I already believed: the work that the CIA and MI6 did together mattered, that the partnership was critical, and that two leaders focused on the mission could save lives and provide tools for our nations to deter our adversaries.

Alex’s passing this week brought back so many memories of our time in service together. He flew to Langley to see me the day I was confirmed. We brought our two senior teams together in the UK to plan and coordinate and build in the first several weeks of my time on duty: making clear to them all that this relationship was more than special – it was critical for the security of our two countries.”

Read more …

“Drinking the Court-Packing Kool-Aid..”

“This Nike School of Constitutional Law is catching on with a wide array of pundits and professors. Just do it.”

Buttigieg Joins the Calls to Take Over the Supreme Court (Turley)

Former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg apparently got the message this week that he cannot hope to win the Democratic nomination without promising radical measures, including the packing of the Supreme Court. After denouncing the current Court as “rogue” for not ruling as the left has demanded, Buttigieg endorsed the plan of Democrats like Sen. Elizabeth Warren to pack the Court to reverse adverse constitutional interpretations.


For years, the Supreme Court had a liberal majority that overturned dozens of long-standing cases. That was not viewed as the work of a rogue court. Yet, even as President Donald Trump attacks this Court for ruling repeatedly against him, liberals are now demanding court packing. As the party becomes more radicalized, any candidate expressing doubts over radical demands like court packing is unlikely to make it out of the primaries. Accordingly, “Mayor Pete” is reaching for Court-Packing Kool-Aid. In making his pitch to the Rainbow PUSH Coalition convention, Buttigieg knew that he had to offer some radical bona fides. He decided to offer up the Supreme Court:

“We have to do [something] with the Supreme Court, that is now a rogue Supreme Court. To see them eviscerate the Voting Rights Act is to see them reverse some of the most important progress this country ever made, wiping out Black political representation, but also wiping out part of what actually is great within the complex American story.” That description is part of a campaign of disinformation about the Court’s recent decision to end racial gerrymandering. The Court reaffirmed that the Voting Rights Act would be used to prevent any intentional racial discrimination. It banned states (almost entirely Democratic states) from engaging in racial discrimination to guarantee election results based on the race of the candidates.

He then thrilled the crowd by promising to pack the Court to guarantee the results that he and they are demanding. Declaring that it is “time to think big,” Buttigieg explained: “Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that there have to be nine Supreme Court justices. That one doesn’t even take a constitutional amendment. It just takes a readiness to set up a court that fits this country. We could have 13 seats matching the district structure of the federal judiciary, but also a process that makes it less partisan.” Buttigieg appears to be referring to the circuit system, not the district court system. What is most striking is that he promises to reverse decisions on issues like racial gerrymandering by packing the Court, but then says it will make the Court “less partisan.”

The whole point of adding four new justices selected by the Democrats is to create an instant majority to their liking and to reverse past rulings. Years ago, I wrote an academic piece on the possible expansion of the Supreme Court, but there is a world of difference between that and a court-packing plan. Under my proposal, the court’s expansion would take almost two decades to ensure that no president could pack the court. Various Democrats have been pledging to not only impeach Trump (and a long list of other figures), but to pack the Supreme Court as soon as they regain power.

James Carville declared, “If the Democrats win the presidency and both houses of Congress, I think on day one, they should expand the Supreme Court to 13. F— it. Eat our dust. Don’t run on it. Don’t talk about it. Just do it.” This Nike School of Constitutional Law is catching on with a wide array of pundits and professors. Just do it.

Years ago, Harvard professor Michael Klarman laid out a radical agenda to change the system to guarantee Republicans “will never win another election.” However, he warned that “the Supreme Court could strike down everything I just described.” Therefore, the court must be packed in advance to allow these changes to occur.Former Obama Attorney General Eric Holder has put packing the Supreme Court front and center, explaining, “[We’re] talking about the acquisition and the use of power if there is a Democratic trifecta in 2028.”

At base is a fundamental misunderstanding of the role of the Court. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) not only renewed her previous call to pack the court but said the court was illegitimate for rendering decisions against “widely held public opinion.” Former Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) said the court “defies the will of the people.” Reporter John Haltiwanger insisted that “the court is clearly not representative of the U.S. public. It’s supposed to be the people’s court.”

In reality, the court was never meant to be that. It was meant to be the Constitution’s court, designed to stand against everyone and everything except the Constitution. In a system designed to protect the minority, the court (like the Constitution) is counter-majoritarian in much of what it does. With the Supreme Court removed as a barrier to the left’s radical agenda, Democrats could indeed fulfill the objectives laid out by figures like Klarman to ensure they never lose power again.

That will make the 2028 election the most consequential election for our constitutional history in decades. The outcome will most immediately decide the fate of an institution that has been a stabilizing force for centuries. Even though this Court has ruled against the Trump Administration on a variety of key issues, the left is still demanding that it either yield to all of their demands or face a hostile takeover. On our 250th anniversary, these reckless and radical voices remind us that (as Benjamin Franklin warned us) this is our Republic if we can keep it.

Read more …

” Incidentally, Western and Northern Africa are two areas where Islam dominates the countries.”

“And if the Supreme Court does not make the right decision on birthright citizenship, we might as well kiss our country goodbye.”

‘Birth Tourism’ Networks Around the World Exploiting the U.S. (Salgado)

The U.S. State Department has uncovered sophisticated and dangerous “birth tourism” networks from West Africa, Europe, and North Africa exploiting our current unconstitutional “birthright citizenship” system. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is one of the biggest abusers of our idiotic “birthright citizenship” system, but plenty of other bad actors around the world cash in as well. Contrary to the original understanding of the Fourteenth Amendment, America now says any child born on our soil is automatically a citizen, even if his parents just flew into or walked into the country. Unsurprisingly, this has for years encouraged abuses.


Besides the practice of “anchor babies,” where illegal aliens give birth in America and use their new citizen kids to keep the family here, there’s also “birth tourism.” From The Daily Wire: In West Africa, a U.S. embassy uncovered a “sophisticated birth tourism network” wherein more than 100 foreign nationals were using fraudulent documents to obtain visas and secure U.S. citizenship for their children. The State Department shut down this birth tourism network and revoked the foreign nationals’ visas. State is also coordinating with local authorities to “systematically identify and cut off any similar operations.” Incidentally, Western and Northern Africa are two areas where Islam dominates the countries.

“Under President Trump, the State Department is defending the integrity of U.S. citizenship by ending illegal birth tourism schemes,” The Daily Wire quoted the State Department. “No foreigner is permitted to obtain a visitor visa for the primary purpose of acquiring U.S. citizenship for a child by giving birth in the U.S.” This is why the upcoming Supreme Court decision on birthright citizenship is so important. The Daily Wire went on: A U.S. embassy in Europe found that more than 400 suspected birth tourism cases had occurred since 2024.

In this case, investigators traced the birth tourism to at least six companies that were coaching applicants on what to say in their visa interviews, arranging housing, and setting up delivery plans. State again shut down the process, revoked the visas, and permanently banned “several fraudsters from traveling to the United States ever again.” An embassy in North Africa revoked more than 100 visas for “birth tourist” parents who came to the United States specifically to give birth to children who would get U.S. citizenship. State Department consular officers worked with law enforcement and used data analytics to identify the networks abusing the visa system in this case.

“A U.S. visa is a privilege, not a right,” the federal department said. “The State Department is taking action around the world to stop this abuse, dismantle birth tourism networks, and hold accountable those who try to scam our system.” But even all these networks are small beans compared to the vast CCP apparatus for helping loyal party members come to the United States to give birth to kids who become automatic citizens of our country, even though many of them are then raised back in China. You can read more here. Up to a million Communist Chinese could be voting in United States elections by 2030, thanks to this huge “birth tourism” industry.

And if the Supreme Court does not make the right decision on birthright citizenship, we might as well kiss our country goodbye.

Read more …

“Headlines about the Russian president’s looks and ‘erratic’ behavior are a symptom of terminal Russophrenia..“

Puffy Putin Peril: The West’s Latest Attempt To Scare Itself (Amar)

You can’t argue with a man observing the obvious: We are living in unusually perilous times. In the Middle East, for instance, the Israeli-American infernal duo have been on a rampage of war, state terror, all-purpose devastation, and genocide that, as a bonus, has also brought the world economy to the verge of cardiac arrest by clogging one of its vital fossil fuel arteries. Indeed, that particular risk is so obvious that even Germany’s less than brilliant Friedrich Merz has long spotted it.


In the Far East, Taiwan is currently ruled by a government so hell-bent on antagonizing their fellow Chinese on the mainland that Taipei’s political reflexes seem almost as perverse as those of Berlin. In the West, you have the German elite which can’t find enough billions to fork over to Ukraine when Kiev and friends blow up Germany’s vital pipelines and lethally cripple its already ailing economy. In the East, there is Taipei, getting really, really angry when the Philippines and Japan start negotiating away Taiwan’s maritime Exclusive Economic Zone. Angry, that is, at Beijing.

And in the EU, that “garden” of “values” that really is a swampy jungle of eternal confusion and corruption, the catastrophe that in its foreign policy is now obvious enough for several European bigwigs to gang up on the abysmally, ragingly incompetent Kaja Kallas. Her tenure as de facto EU foreign minister has been so breathtakingly blundering that her employers aren’t merely itching to kick her out but thinking about, in essence, abolishing her job.

Being so horrible at something that you won’t just get fired yourself but take it down with you – perhaps only the Baltic Girl Boss Wonder could pull that one off. But then, maybe it’s really all just another power grab by EU’s German queen (of the absolute kind) and US viceroy (of the submissive kind) Ursula von der Leyen. Either way, frightful insanity abides. We could add more scary and grotesque evidence, but things are clear enough: It’s a grim picture all around. So, fair enough if you feel like being a big sad downer and doom monger. Where it gets weird is when you get your scare priorities all upside down.

Granted, from a hapless NATO-EU European perspective, Russia may look a little unsettling: after all, once you have waged years of proxy war, sanctions, and propaganda war against it, who knows what the mood is really like in Moscow? As a good NATO-EU apparatchik, you certainly would not, because you have displayed the foresight of a gnat by proudly not talking – or listening – to the Russians. So, when you feel a little insecure, that might really be your bad conscience calling (in a merely professional, not moral sense, which you are likely to lack).

But, generally speaking, the worse the stupidities and mistakes you have produced but keep repressing, the higher the price. Old Sigmund Freud called it “affective debility.” In essence, it means that lying to yourself makes you dim. And once you are BS’ing yourself for years as if there’s no tomorrow, you’ll turn positively imbecilic.

That’s the only way to explain a fresh wave of transparently hysterical scare mongering about Russia in the West, in particular, this time, in Britain. Thus, on the occasion of the recent St. Petersburg International Economic Forum (SPIEF), centrist mainstream flagship The Independent came out with a fascinating piece of fiction masquerading as analysis. Under the clickbait title “‘Puffy-looking’ Putin is acting weirder than ever – and that should chill us to the bone,” readers were treated to a highly imaginative horror tale about, in essence, a terrible loose cannon in the Kremlin pondering staged incidents and nuclear terrorism and ready to blow up the world or at least Europe or perhaps just Britain because Russia is losing the war. Also, he looks “puffy”!

All of this backed up (not really) by yet another statement from a high British military officer that things are dire as never before in (his) living memory. He and his comrades in arms – plus a few tweedy spy gents and dames – produce these Cassandra screams at least twice a month; it seems to be a standing order.

Indeed, there is such an inflationary over-production of men and women in khaki and with stiff upper lips crying big bad Russian wolf that even Politico has already produced at least one ‘best of’ collection, gathering “The 5 doomiest Russia warnings from Britain’s military chiefs.” Perish the thought any of this may have anything to do with fattening defense budgets and driving up the obscene profits of His Majesty’s military industrial complex!

Generally speaking, The West has a rich tradition of declaring Russia vanquished, its president Vladimir Putin at death’s door or on the verge of being regime-changed away, and, of course, Ukraine (and, really, the West) on the cusp of winning the war. And, at the same time, of predicting that Russia will attack all of Europe, likely tomorrow. Notwithstanding occasional and intriguing anomalies, when a NATO commander (from Trump’s US, of course) lets slip a fragment of truth, such as that actually Moscow is not looking for conflict.

In short, we are speaking about the severe and very sad but also funny mental condition already well known as Russophrenia: the afflicted live with an imaginary Schrödinger’s Russia occupying their suffering minds, a Russia that is always simultaneously half-dead and yet so alive and kicking, it’s about to roll into their living room on a tank.

Read more …

Don’t learn from books, learn from life!

Thinking for Oneself: Schopenhauer on Reflection vs. Regurgitation (Eskeldson)

Arthur Schopenhauer’s argument is that thinking for oneself is better than regurgitating information from books and that the two produce very different effects in a learner. In the beginning of his essay, he compares the difference between regurgitation and reflection (or critical thinking) to two different libraries. Regurgitation is represented by a disorganized library with books all over the floor, furniture, shelves, or wherever else they have been mislaid. Similarly, someone who exclusively regurgitates information may have jumbled facts in his mind and will not have a clear picture of anything specific, despite learning (allegedly) so much about that thing. In the public domain essay “On Thinking for Oneself,” Schopenhauer shows us some men who appear to know so much about specific countries from travel books, but they cannot form their ideas into a gestalt to describe those countries as a whole. They cannot see the bigger picture because they were habitually exposed to only small bits of information.


Billie Pritchett writes, “Wouldn’t it be better for someone to discipline his mind by being instructed in the fundamentals of a subject, and then begin thinking within that framework?” as he recognizes an objection that Schopenhauer’s readers likely had in his day. The framework of other people’s observations on a given subject appears to be useful and airtight, but Schopenhauer believes it is more rewarding to learn that framework after doing critical thinking of one’s own. As he puts it, “the mind is deprived of all its elasticity by much reading, as is a spring when a weight is continually applied to it,” and “the surest way not to have thoughts of our own is for us at once to take up a book when we have a moment to spare”; furthermore, “the truth acquired through our own thinking is like the natural limb; it alone really belongs to us.”

After being spoon-fed material from book after book, someone will lose the ability to creatively solve problems and will learn to rely on others’ mental pictures exclusively in the effort to comprehend a subject. That person will essentially forget how to figure things out for himself. All of humanity will benefit from spending time reflecting on their thoughts.

Schopenhauer anticipated another likely objection: “What if all you get from your own thinking is the same material that has already been discovered and published by another person, or several other people, many times?” If someone tries hard to solve a problem himself, but finds out later that his solution had already been a well-publicized discovery, Schopenhauer would still appreciate the mental effort the person used to come to that conclusion. He would call that “small volume” of experimentation “valuable.”

Schopenhauer’s broader philosophical point is that the human mind forms a sort of stabilizing structure to make sense of an irrational, crooked world of “vicious little men.” People are so entwined in their self-centered desires that they “commit atrocities” to get their way and generally only use reason to justify their actions. The human mind must form a force of good intellect and strong moral character as a guard against falling into these irrational ways, according to Schopenhauer. Critical thinking is a way to strengthen the mind and develop good character traits (i.e. diligence), so it should be encouraged by all means. Regurgitation may become fuel for selfish desires (i.e. laziness) because of how easy and mentally painless it is, so it must be discouraged.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/2065445696287703472?s=20 https://twitter.com/tslaming/status/2066131447992443060?s=20

 

 

 

 

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