Apr 122026
 
 April 12, 2026  Posted by at 9:21 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , ,  60 Responses »


Thomas Cole The Course of Empire – The Savage State 1834


Vance Says Iranian Regime Won’t Make a Deal (Salgado)
VP Vance Departs Pakistan After Failing To Read Deal With Iran (ZH)
Trump ‘Preparing’ US Military If Talks Fail (ZH)
Several US Warships Reportedly Transit Strait of Hormuz (ZH)
For Entertainment Only – The Firehose of Crazy (CTH)
Since the Iran War Began, Trump’s Popularity With Boomers Has Climbed (Pinsker)
Who’s Afraid of Emmanuel Macron? (J.B. Shurk)
The US Separation From Europe And NATO Is Long Overdue (Alt-M)
“Create a Crisis”: Sponsor an Anti-ICE Campaign (Turley)
How the Russiagate Blueprint Has Been Unleashed Against Orban (RT)
Women Step Forward to Outline Swalwell’s Sexual Assault History (CTH)
Women Step Forward to Outline Swalwell’s Sexual Assault History (CTH)
Eric Swalwell’s Political Future is Collapsing Fast (Matt Margolis)
Tesla Gets FSD Supervised Approved in the Netherlands (Electrek)

 


 

https://twitter.com/BalazsOrban_HU/status/2042715739669348539?s=20 https://twitter.com/Niw451/status/2042731794613834012?s=20

 


 


We didn’t expect a deal in 24 hours. It must look difficult. The US needs to hand Iran the words that say whoever’s in charge there didn’t really lose. They must save face.

Vance Says Iranian Regime Won’t Make a Deal (Salgado)

In the least surprising international news this week, Vice President JD Vance provided an update Saturday night on his negotiations with the Iranian regime that included confirmation of that regime‘s refusal to make any reasonable deal. “The bad news is we have not reached an agreement,” he told the press.


“We just could not get to a situation where the Iranians were willing to accept our terms. I think that we were quite flexible. We were quite accommodating,” the vice president stated. But unfortunately, when you deal with genocidal terrorists, flexibility is not likely to end with peace. There is only one language jihadis understand. And now the whole world can see how absolutely determined the Iranian regime is to have war and how totally opposed they are to peace. Vance said that the failure to strike a deal will be much worse for the Iranian regime than for us.

Within two hours of the ceasefire announcement, the Iranian regime was already bombing multiple countries in the Middle East, especially Israel. It also refused to track down and disable the mines it scattered in the Strait of Hormuz, while simultaneously demanding massive tolls from countries that send ships through the strait. Throughout every step of the process this week, the Iranian regime has been arrogant, demanding, defiant, and irrational.

Vance, who went to Pakistan with Steve Witkoff and Donald Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner to talk with the representatives of the murderous mullahs, said April 11 U.S. time, “We leave here with a very simple proposal, a method of understanding that is our final and best offer. I won’t go into all the details, because I don’t want to negotiate in public after we negotiated for 21 hours in private, but the simple fact is that we need to see an affirmative commitment that they will not seek a nuclear weapon, and they will not seek the tools that would enable them to quickly achieve a nuclear weapon.”

He emphasized, “That is the core goal of the President of the United States, and that’s what we’ve tried to achieve through these negotiations.” The Iranian regime has spent almost half a century not only enforcing domestic tyranny but building up a global terrorist network. They are fanatical fundamentalist Muslims, who believe Allah has given them a mission to destroy Judeo-Christian civilization. As tragic as it is, the Iranian regime will never want peace with America and Israel. Of course that is what we want, but we have been waiting for 47 years for the Iranian regime to aim for it as well, and they never have.

The vice president confirmed that he will be returning to the United States after the failed negotiations. “We’ve made very clear what our red lines are, what things we’re willing to accommodate them on and what things we’re not willing to accommodate them on. And we’ve made clear as we possibly could. And they have chosen not to accept our terms,” he stated. President Trump told the press previously, “Let’s see what happens — maybe they make a deal, maybe they don’t. It doesn’t matter. From the standpoint of America, we win.” It is not clear what the Trump administration plans to do next, however.

Read more …

“.. they are LOSING, and LOSING BIG! Their Navy is gone, their Air Force is gone, their Anti Aircraft apparatus is nonexistent, Radar is dead, their Missile and Drone Factories have been largely obliterated along with the Missiles and Drones themselves and, most importantly, their longtime “Leaders” are no longer with us..”

VP Vance Departs Pakistan After Failing To Read Deal With Iran (ZH)

Iranian media are striking a cautiously optimistic tone on the progress of the talks. They say there was progress on implementation of the ceasefire in Lebanon, technical negotiations that went beyond generalities and now an exchange of texts that would put any progress in writing. To be sure, the US side has been much quieter, and sticking points may come into focus once they’re in black and white. Teams of experts joined the main negotiators after about an hour, Iran’s semi-official Tasnim news agency reported. Those technical discussions in Islamabad focused on the Strait of Hormuz, a potential ceasefire extension and phased sanctions relief. Iran’s semi-official Tasnim news agency says, citing its reporter at the venue.


“The issue of the Strait of Hormuz is one of the points facing serious disagreement”, adding that the US delegation “hindered progress” during the text-exchange stage with “its usual excessive demands” Talks have reportedly mostly avoided the core issues that the Trump administration said drove it to war, according to a US official and a Pakistani official familiar with the matter. Those issues include Iran’s support for armed proxies, and the nuclear and missile programs that were at the heart of Trump’s stated reasons for attacking Iran beginning Feb. 28. “We have goodwill, but we do not have trust,” Ghalibaf told reporters after arriving in Islamabad, according to Iran’s semi-official Fars news agency.

“In the upcoming negotiations, if the American side is prepared for a genuine agreement and to grant the rights of the Iranian nation, they will see readiness for an agreement from us as well.” Tasnim said that Tehran’s 71-member delegation also included the Islamic Republic’s central bank governor Abdolnaser Hemmati. Also on the agenda will be the fate of Iran’s uranium stockpile and missile production, as well as US sanctions against the Islamic Republic and broader military presence in the Middle East. Many of those issues were the same ones the two sides failed to resolve in February negotiations before the war began.

Iran’s deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi says Tehran has entered negotiations from a position of strength, arguing that the war on Iran had failed to deliver decisive strategic gains for the US. Trump – as we detailed below – made it clear he sees Iran ‘holding no cards’.

US Starts Clearing Mines In Strait of Hormuz
Seemingly confirming President Trump’s earlier comments on “clearing out the Strait”, U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) confirmed that two U.S. missile destroyers started clearing mines in the Strait of Hormuz on April 11 as peace talks kicked off between Washington and the Iranian regime “Today, we began the process of establishing a new passage and we will share this safe pathway with the maritime industry soon to encourage the free flow of commerce,” CENTCOM Commander Adm. Brad Cooper said in a statement Saturday. The American ships included the USS Frank E. Peterson (DDG 121) and USS Michael Murphy (DDG 112).

CENTCOM revealed that the mission on Saturday is part of a broader goal to make the crucial waterway, located on the southwest coast of Iran, clear of sea mines laid by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. Saturday’s confirmation about the mine clearing came hours after a United States government vessel was spotted entering the Strait of Hormuz, according to the ship-tracking intelligence platform Marinetraffic.com. It’s not clear if this was related to CENTCOM’s mine-clearing mission.

Trump Announces Start Of “Clearing Out” The Strait As A “Favor” To RoW
Earlier reports appears to have been confirmed as three US officials have stated to The Wall Street Journal that two U.S. Navy guided-missile destroyers passed through the Strait of Hormuz on Saturday, marking the first transit of American warships through the waterway since the war began six weeks ago. President Trump took to social media to explain what was going on. But first, he clarified a few things to the ‘fake news media’…

“The Fake News Media has lost total credibility, not that they had any to begin with. Because of their massive Trump Derangement Syndrome (Sometimes referred to as TDS!), they love saying that Iran is “winning” when, in fact, everyone knows that they are LOSING, and LOSING BIG! Their Navy is gone, their Air Force is gone, their Anti Aircraft apparatus is nonexistent, Radar is dead, their Missile and Drone Factories have been largely obliterated along with the Missiles and Drones themselves and, most importantly, their longtime “Leaders” are no longer with us, praise be to Allah!

The only thing they have going is the threat that a ship may “bunk” into one of their sea mines which, by the way, all 28 of their mine dropper boats are also lying at the bottom of the sea. Having got all that off his chest, he then confirmed the operation to open the Strait:We’re now starting the process of clearing out the Strait of Hormuz as a favor to Countries all over the World, including China, Japan, South Korea, France, Germany, and many others. Incredibly, they don’t have the Courage or Will to do this work themselves. Very interestingly, however, empty Oil carrying ships from many Nations are all heading to the United States of America to LOAD UP with Oil. Thank you for your attention to this matter! President DONALD J. TRUMP

But he wasn’t done with that. A few minutes later he followed with a shorter pithier version of the same narrative: The Fake News Media is CRAZY, or just plain CORRUPT! The United States has completely destroyed Iran’s Military, including their entire Navy and Air Force, and everything else. Their Leadership is DEAD. The Strait of Hormuz will soon be open, and the empty ships are rushing to the United States to “load up.” But, if you listen to the Fake News, we’re losing! Iran explicitly informed the Pakistani mediator during talks that if the vessel continued its movement it would be targeted within 30 minutes and the Iran-US negotiations would be damaged.

Read more …

Trump “Proclaims Iran Has ‘No Cards’ As Delegates Arrive In Islamabad”

Trump ‘Preparing’ US Military If Talks Fail (ZH)

A delegation of top Iranian officials has arrived in Islamabad ahead of ceasefire talks with the United States in the Pakistani capital, Iranian state television reported on Friday. The delegation was led by Iran parliamentary speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, along with Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and other security and economic officials, state broadcaster IRIB said on its website. It reiterated Iran’s position, however, that talks would only begin if Washington accepts Iran’s preconditions.


Vice President Vance left Friday for Pakistan and the biggest challenge of his career: negotiating a deal with Iran to solve the nuclear dispute and end the war.”This is a big deal for JD. He is going to the Super Bowl,” one U.S. official told Axios. Mr Vance will lead the American delegation in Pakistan on Saturday, alongside special envoy Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, Donald Trump’s son-in-law.They will attempt to solidify a temporary ceasefire agreed this week. Before boarding Air Force Two to fly to Islamabad, Mr Vance said Mr Trump would not be at the talks but had set “pretty clear guidelines” for his team. He said: “As the president of the United States said, if the Iranians are willing to negotiate in good faith, we’re certainly willing to extend an open hand. If they’re going to try to play us, then they’re going to find that the negotiating team is not that receptive.”

Trump Claims Iran has ‘No Cards’ …but does the White House actually believe this? He suggested that if the Iranians hadn’t agreed to negotiate, they would be dead (cue wiping out entire “civilization” threat from earlier).

Trump Warns Attack on Iran Will Continue if Tehran Doesn’t Comply
President Trump has confirmed to the NY Post that he’s preparing the US military for what would likely be a bigger Iran operation should Tehran not comply, and should Pakistan talks fail. “We’re going to find out in about 24 hours. We’re going to know soon,” Trump told the Post when asked if he thinks the talks will be successful. Already there’s a lot of back and forth over the 10-point plan on the eve of the summit, and with both sides now in Islamabad. A main point of contention remains whether Lebanon is part of the two-week ceasefire agreement. There’s also been much speculation that all of this is just ‘cover’ for a bigger build-up of Pentagon forces in the region. Also, Iranian forces are no doubt using the opportunity to regroup.

Ghalibaf Demands Attacks on Lebanon Cease Or Else…
Iran Parliament spokesman Mohammad Baqer Ghalibaf, considered the official who is likely running the country day-to-day, says there will be no negotiations before the following:
1) ceasefire in Lebanon
2) release of Iran’s blocked assets: “release of Iran’s blocked assets prior to the commencement of negotiations.”
Oil jumped on the news. This as some sporadic Israeli bombings of Lebanese territory have persisted into Friday, despite talk of an Israel-Lebanon ceasefire, with talks expected in Washington next week. It’s unclear whether Tehran and its negotiating team which just touched down in Pakistan will hold to this or not.

Read more …

De-mining has started.

Several US Warships Reportedly Transit Strait of Hormuz (ZH)

Just as indirect talks kick off in Islamabad, a shocking and surprise development is being reported by Axios’ Barak Ravid, though this is not confirmed: https://twitter.com/BarakRavid/status/2042946011400753294


If accurate, are we witnessing Trump suddenly pile on more leverage before negotiations even get off the ground? It seems like the Iranians would have noticed several US Navy warships passing. Either they held off attack for the sake of pursuing peace, or this was truly done ‘stealthily’ and Iranian capabilities are degraded to the point they may have ‘missed’ it. Or is this an attempt to muddy the negotiations? Sabotage? Ravid after all has long stood accused of pushing an Israeli agenda in his reporting.

Talks Begin with Indirect Format Mediated by Pakistanis
By Saturday afternoon (local), the highest-level US-Iran-related talks since the 1979 Islamic Revolution have kicked off in Islamabad. Vice President JD Vance met Pakistan’s Shehbaz Sharif just ahead of the negotiations, and also senior Iranian officials were greeted by Sharif and other Pakistani leaders. Iran’s delegation is led by Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf and Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi. The engagement by each side has begun indirectly.

Pakistan has made clear it is working to facilitate direct negotiations between the US and Iran to fully bring to an end the six-week war in the Middle East. Sharif hailed both sides’ commitment to engaging constructively, and “expressed the hope that these talks would serve as a stepping stone toward durable peace in the region,” his office stated in a news release.

“Vance was joined for the bilateral meeting by special envoy Steve Witkoff and President Donald Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner,” CNN reviews. “Sharif was joined by Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Sen. Mohammad Ishaq Dar, along with Interior Minister Sen. Syed Mohsin Raza Naqvi, according to a news release from the Pakistani prime minister’s office. There was no press coverage of the meeting.”

Read more …

“If people are not careful, their stability will be personally defined by Candace Owens, Tucker Carlson, Megyn Kelly, Alex Jones and a lot more. We become what we consume, both physically and mentally.”

For Entertainment Only – The Firehose of Crazy (CTH)

Several months ago, I was asked to assist with what was called a “firehose of crazy.” I don’t ordinarily pay attention to the goofy stuff, and I didn’t look at most of the citations being referenced. That said and with recent events in view, I have a new appreciation for what that meant.


When President Trump responded to the goofball diatribe of Alex Jones, what he apparently was referencing was a segment Jones put out on his podcast when he first requested the administration to intervene and use the 25th amendment to remove Trump. Mr. Jones followed that call for the 25th amendment, by saying he wanted administration officials to conduct a soft-coup against the President of the United States, because Trump wasn’t following his advice.

https://twitter.com/JayTC53/status/2041314899574305162?s=20

President Trump rightly responded to the quackery of the podcast world, and collectively they have lost their mind over it. In response, Jones is now saying Melania Trump is planning to divorce Donald Trump {CITATION}, and then, if President Trump says one more bad thing, Jones’ is going to unleash his podcast audience to destroy the President of the United States. Folks, these characters are not psychologically stable people. This is a level of weird only evident now because Trump decided to address it. I mean think about it. Stop for a moment, pull back from social media, and think about the stability of mindset here:

Tucker Carlson decides it’s a value to his position to attack Reverend Franklin Graham?Megyn Kelly decides it’s a value to her position to support attacks on Charlie Kirk’s wife? Alex Jones decides it’s a reasonable discussion to talk about organizing JD Vance to take control of the government using the military. Laura Loomer decides it’s a value to her position to attack anyone who she defines as not supporting the government of Israel. One of her targets is Tulsi Gabbard. Mark Levin decides it’s a value to his position to convince the President of the United States to undermine and remove the sitting Director of National Intelligence because his priority aligns with Loomer. All because they disagree with decisions President Donald Trump has made about dealing with foreign policy issues.

I don’t usually watch any of these podcast groups or their internecine battles du jour. But c’mon, these are not stable people. It might be entertainment for many people, but algorithms pushed “for you” are not real life. This stuff, all of it, is just plain goofy.

If this is representative of the minds that have been trying to push “information” into the Trump administration, well, yeah, that would be a ‘firehose of crazy‘. These are not serious people. They are not alone, not by a long shot; there’s a whole infrastructure of crazy voices chasing money that’s provided by a big tech algorithm intentionally designed to promote it. The professional UniParty in DC is watching this unfold with a very big smile on their face. It is very clear where this algorithmic identity tracking and micro-targeting is going. If people are not careful, their stability will be personally defined by Candace Owens, Tucker Carlson, Megyn Kelly, Alex Jones and a lot more. We become what we consume, both physically and mentally.

Read more …

Do boomers remember Khomeini as well as Khameini? Trump does. Trump doesn’t want to leave the world with -the legacy of – Khomeini.

Since the Iran War Began, Trump’s Popularity With Boomers Has Climbed (Pinsker)

It’s eye-opening, because 50 was the magic number in a Pew Research poll on Israel from earlier in the week: Overall, 58% of Republicans have a positive view of Israel — but for Republicans aged 18 to 49, 57% have an unfavorable view. So something age-related is going on, splitting popular opinion. From Newsweek: Donald Trump Scores Approval Rating Boost With Boomers President Donald Trump is narrowing his approval gap with older voters, as new polling shows a steady improvement among Americans age 65 and over. […]


Older voters are among the most reliable participants in U.S. elections, and even small shifts can carry outsized political weight. Changes in this group come as foreign policy dominates headlines and economic pressures hit generations unevenly. Trump’s approval rating among Americans age 65 and over has risen steadily over the past three months, according to a series of Economist/YouGov polls. My theory? Boomers and Gen Xers rely on social media as a primary news source significantly less than Millennials and Zoomers. We’re the last two generations that watched cable TV, read newspapers, and listened to talk radio. We’re political omnivores. All that content we absorbed shaped our worldview. How could it not?

For Millennials and Zoomers, if their favorite YouTuber didn’t talk about it — and it never appeared in their TikTok/Reddit feed — then it didn’t really happen. As such, it makes them uniquely susceptible to digital psyops campaigns. And that’s something Iran does extremely well. It’s led to a profound cultural shift: Thirty years ago, all the good-hearted liberals were protesting for Tibet. Nobody was cooler than the Dalai Lama! At every award show, Hollywood’s biggest celebrities virtue-signaled by shouting, “Free Tibet!” Today, nobody cares.

Between Tibet-related content being shadow-banned (or outright banned) from social media and/or entertainment companies submitting to Chinese censorship, Tibet is an afterthought. All those good-hearted liberals went from “Free Tibet!” to “Free Palestine!” So perhaps Newsweek’s reporting indicates that Americans who are actually knowledgeable about Iran’s anti-American history are most appreciative of Trump’s efforts. Remember, Operation Epic Fury didn’t begin until Feb. 28:

In the earliest of the three surveys, conducted February 6 to 9, Trump posted a net approval rating (those who approve of his job performance minus those who disapprove) of minus 12 among adults 65 and older. In that poll, which surveyed 1,730 U.S. adult citizens and carried a margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percentage points, 43 percent of respondents in the age group approved of his job performance, while 55 percent disapproved. Which means, pre-war, Boomers were 43% positive, 55% negative.

A month later, the March 6 to 9 Economist/YouGov poll showed improvement. Among voters age 65 and over, 45 percent said they approved of Trump’s performance and 53 percent disapproved, narrowing his net rating to minus eight. That survey included 1,563 U.S. adult citizens and had a margin of error of plus or minus 3.4 percentage points.After the first few days of the war, Trump’s popularity ticked up by two points. Instead of deeming it “disgusting and evil,” Boomers nodded in cautious approval.

The trend continued into early April, with the most recent poll, conducted April 3 to 6, showing Trump’s approval rating among those 65 and older on the rise again, reaching 47 percent approval and 52 percent disapproval. The net rating of minus five marks his strongest showing with the age group this year. That survey was based on a sample of 1,750 U.S. adult citizens and carried a margin of error of plus or minus 3.2 percentage points. [emphasis added] And by April 6 — a full month into the war — Trump’s popularity ticked up yet again. The longer the war goes on, the more Boomers seem to support it.

It’s eye-opening because D.C.’s conventional wisdom was always the opposite: Time isn’t on the president’s side. A long war will be a political nightmare. If Trump doesn’t find an offramp post-haste, the GOP will get slaughtered in the midterms. The public is paranoid that Iran will be another “Forever War.”For Boomers, at least, that’s simply not true. They want a solution to the Iran problem — because they recognize that it’s a real problem. You can’t let Islamic nutjobs divide the atom.If those maniacs ever gain a nuclear weapon, the world is in deep trouble.

It also suggests the next PR move for the Trump administration: It needs to invest in an information campaign that’s tailored to the sensibilities of Millennials and Zoomers. That means penetrating the YouTube, TikTok, and Reddit echo-chambers. MAGA messaging must meet voters where they are — and Zoomers are spending 6.6 hours a day consuming digital content. A Truth Social post, a Fox News TV interview, and a primetime speech aren’t enough to win their hearts and minds. Because the more the audiences know about Iran, the more they’ll support the president.

Read more …

Europe’s weak leaders made Europe weak.

Who’s Afraid of Emmanuel Macron? (J.B. Shurk)

French President Emmanuel Macron is doing that peculiar French thing again…acting tough while looking weak. He gave a speech last Friday at Yonsei University in Seoul during which he demanded that nations not become “vassals” of China or the United States. Macron wants South Korea to join Canada, Australia, and the European Union in forming what he calls a “coalition of independence” (because “coalition of the willing” was taken) united by shared love for “international order,” “democracy,” and wasting money on “climate change.”


What a tool. I understand that “the powers that be” have so successfully co-opted the West’s political systems that they regularly install absolute nincompoops as nominal leaders (Biden, Starmer, Carney, Merz, and European Queen Ursula, just to name a few) and call it “democracy,” but Macron is such a doofus that his “leadership” is laughable.

Remember when the little Rothschild banker came to power a few months after President Trump had taken office and he couldn’t stop talking about standing up to “bullies”? After putting on some high-heeled loafers and taking some lessons on masculinity from his former-schoolteacher-turned-much-older-wife, Macron insisted on turning a handshake with Trump into a death grip meant to showcase French power. In that effete style of speech that Gaulish-Roman aristocrats enjoy — in which words sound as if they’re dropping from lips suckling grapes and licking honey — le petit fromage told the world that his fierce handshake and determined stare were the perfect weapons for countering President Trump. Trump just laughed and patted the little French boy on the shoulder as one does to help the weak feel strong.

Fast-forward a decade, and Macron hasn’t learned a thing about being tough. He still prances around the world like a eunuch looking for long-lost cojones. He says he wants countries to resist the “hegemonic powers” of China and the United States by clinging to the rules-based “international order.” Okay. Good luck, tiny dancer.

What’s left of the international order without the two most powerful nations on the planet? The United States has assumed the responsibilities of the globe’s police chief since WWII. Through its naval fleet, it ensures the security of maritime trade. Through its economic clout, it ensures the stability of the international financial system. Through its military might, it decides which dictators get black-bagged in the middle of the night. As China continues its geopolitical ascent, its tentacles have stretched further into international organizations such as the United Nations’ World Health Organization and across continents with its Belt and Road Initiative. Mark Carney has spent his time as Canada’s prime minister practically groveling at the feet of China’s Xi Jinping and begging the communist dictator to save his wintry vassal state from the bad orange man down south.

France, on the other hand, continues to be ejected from former African colonies whose peoples have grown tired of French meddling. The French military excels only at surrendering. And France remains distinct from Germany only because of the United States. When little Macron insists on restoring a French-led “international order,” he sounds a lot like little Napoleon, who insisted on being called “emperor” while imprisoned on Saint Helena.

As for urging all who hear his grating voice to unite in defense of “democracy,” that’s a lark! Europe is where “democracy” goes to die. Every time non-Establishment political parties win the most votes in former nations (now just multicultural zones of Islamic conquest within the federation of European nothingness) such as France, Germany, and the Netherlands, “the powers that be” proudly block the winners from exercising any power.

Europe’s political class shamelessly calls this the “firewall” against “far-right” political parties. Of course, if you believe that nations should have borders and that government powers should be limited, you are designated “far-right.” Just as Democrats bastardize language in the United States by calling everyone who cares about the Bill of Rights a “fascist,” the European Establishment labels anyone who believes in self-determination and personal liberty a “Nazi sympathizer.” Then they prosecute the members of those fake “far-right” parties for expressing opinions out loud.

That’s right! Europe’s little gang of dimwitted yet dangerous dictators — Macron, Starmer, Merz, and the ruling queen — insist on locking up the “fascists” for their speech in the name of “democracy”! When the “firewall” fails — as it did in Romania a little over a year ago — the European oligarchy simply cancels the election and insists on a rigged do-over (or outright overthrows the government as it did, with the help of the U.S. State Department and CIA, in Ukraine in 2014).

When little European tyrants such as Macron stand on footstools, puff out their chests, and shriek about “democracy,” they have no intention of supporting the decisions of the people. What they mean is, let’s form a European Commission of aristocrats, have them choose a ruling monarch, and call that a “democratic” election. That’s how the nations of Europe lost their sovereignty and why the people of Europe must now bow down to unelected Queen Ursula von der Leyen.

Read more …

They expect America to lead NATO into WWIII.

The US Separation From Europe And NATO Is Long Overdue (Alt-M)

As much as many centrists and libertarians are opposed to Donald Trump’s ongoing strikes against Iran, I have to say, the downstream result might end up becoming one of the most libertarian results I have ever seen. For decades, small government activists like those in the Ron Paul movement have been calling for a comprehensive US divorce from NATO and the shutdown of America’s military bases overseas. Trump has, either deliberately or inadvertently, set this very process in motion.


The refusal of most of Europe (and Australia) to provide support in the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz might seem like geopolitical orbiting – In other words, getting involved could hurt them more than it would help them. Of course, these nations are far more exposed to the Hormuz closure and the slowdown in energy exports than the US. You would think their interests would demand a securing of the strait. Europe is already struggling for energy resources due to the Ukraine war (a war they are deeply involved in), and this is where we stumble upon the ideological disconnect.

Europe’s Goal Is WWIII And They Expect America To Maintain The Status Quo
Europeans are perfectly willing to engage in war tensions with Russia while risking energy inflation and WWIII, all over a country that had minimal strategic or economic importance to them before the conflict. They have consistently called on the US to provide weapons and funding and intel to the Ukrainians, which we have obliged. And, they have called for American troops to stand at the forefront should a wider war erupt. NATO and European governments love America…but only as a shield that benefits them. To be clear, it’s true that years ago NATO allies invested troops and equipment into the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, but one could also argue that, at that time, the establishment was in sync on both sides of the Atlantic.

There was no large scale movement to cut foreign aid scams (like Trump shutting down USAID). There was no movement to secure borders and prevent mass immigration. There was no movement against globalism beyond a handful of us in the alternative media working diligently to expose the truth. In the era of the early 2000s, the status quo was in full effect and Europe was happy to help in the Middle East. Today? Not so much. The status quo has been disrupted.

Once The Cash Stopped Flowing Our “Friends” Became Scarce
It’s not surprising that once the cash stopped flowing so easily from American pockets, suddenly all of our “allies” went sour. Cuts to USAID and various foreign subsidy programs have created a shockwave in the global order. Even I have been stunned by the level of dependency of foreign nations on US monetary injections. Once these programs started shutting down, the panic was palpable. And, once Trump demanded NATO countries start paying their fair share (5% of GDP), the breakdown in relations began. Many European social welfare programs exist exactly because they don’t have to pay for their own military defense.

The tariffs are another point of hypocrisy. Nearly ALL major European countries and economies have enforced tariffs and duties on US products for the past 60 years. When those same countries face tariffs imposed by the US, suddenly tariffs are an “act of aggression” and a line in the sand. Trump is called an economic “bull in a china shop”, but he’s only doing to them what they’ve been doing to us for generations. Once again, the moment the status quo changes even a little and other nations are held to a similar standard, our friends no longer want to be our friends.

Read more …

ICE=government.

“Create a Crisis”: Sponsor an Anti-ICE Campaign (Turley)

“Create a crisis.” That call is made in a new campaign sponsored by the American Association of University Professors to force “colleges to drop their contracts with ICE’s key corporate enablers.” Despite years of criticism over the purging of faculty ranks of conservatives and libertarians, university professors continue to double down on far-left ideology that is now an orthodoxy in higher education. I previously wrote about the AAUP’s ideological shift in my book, The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage. After that book, the AAUP then selected Todd Wolfson, a far-left activist, as its new president.


Wolfson ran on the pledge to make AAUP a “fighting organization” for social change. After his selection, Wolfson has called Trump supporters “fascists” and demanded boycotts of Israel. Given that history, it was little surprise to see the AAUP’s sponsorship of this campaign, as reported by the College Fix. The campaign is also funded by Coefficient Giving, associated with liberal billionaire Dustin Moskovitz and his wife Cari Tuna. They have been criticized for reportedly funding groups pushing defund police and other radical agendas.

AAUP joined this campaign with Young Democratic Socialists of America, Sunrise Movement, and the Workplace Justice Lab at Rutgers University. It includes a toolkit instructing students to “create a crisis for university admin through an escalating campaign.” The campaign seeks to organize to combat the “Trump regime” and its “terrorism”: “When students and workers join together in action, we can force our schools to stop funding and normalizing ICE collaborators and take down the whole regime.” They are targeting companies such as Enterprise, Flock, ICE Air Carriers, Hilton, and Target.

The campaign states further that “ICE, and the Trump regime generally, cannot function without the consent and collaboration of the business world. Breaking companies from ICE is the central axis for generating enough leverage to stop the regime’s terrorization campaign.”= So university professors are funding a campaign that actively seeks to create a crisis on campuses. It takes a position as an organization that immigration enforcement is a form of terrorism. The silence among faculty is deafening. Rather than objecting that the AAUP should focus on issues related to academic freedom and protections for its members, there have been virtually no objections to the organization’s ideological agenda.

It is evidence of the new orthodoxy in higher education and the refusal of administrators and faculty to make any meaningful change in their intolerance for opposing views. Many departments no longer have a single Republican faculty member in this academic echo chamber. A Georgetown study found that only 9% of law school professors at the top 50 law schools identify as conservative — almost identical to the percentage of Trump voters in the new poll. There is little evidence that faculty members are interested in changing this culture or creating greater diversity at schools. In places like North Carolina State University, a study found that Democrats outnumbered Republicans 20 to 1.

Yale University has finally achieved the academic version of Nirvana, a state of perfect peace and enlightenment. A recent study found that the faculty had finally purged every Republican donor from its ranks.According to a recent report from the Buckley Institute, there is now not a single Republican found across 27 of 43 departments at Yale University. In a nation roughly evenly divided between Republicans and Democrats (with a slight advantage to the GOP), only 3 percent are Republicans across all Yale departments.

The hostility to opposing views is impacting our students. A new study offers additional data on this problem, showing that almost 90% of students misrepresent their views in class and on assignments to satisfy faculty by adopting more liberal views. In the meantime, the small number of dissenting faculty have no real voice, particularly among legal academics. I have previously written about the similar liberal agenda of the American Bar Association despite plunging membership among lawyers. The ABA now represents just 17 percent of the bar.

Read more …

Elections today, April 12.

How the Russiagate Blueprint Has Been Unleashed Against Orban (RT)

The shadow campaign to swing the Hungarian election against Viktor Orban escalated with the scandal over the wiretapping of Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto. The case offers a rare look into how bureaucrats, journalists, and spies run a regime-change operation in real time. Three weeks out from the April 12 elections, the political opposition to Orban scored what seemed to be a win, when Politico and the Washington Post ran articles alleging that Szijjarto had phoned Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov with “live reports on what had been discussed” at multiple EU meetings. The reports cited anonymous “European security officials.”


Neither Orban nor Szijjarto make any secret of their desire to maintain cordial relations with Moscow, particularly on matters of energy security and the peace process in Ukraine. However, when bundled with more outlandish claims – that Russian “election fixers” are already embedded in Budapest, for example – the reports paint a picture of a government compromised by the Kremlin.Orban’s leading opponent, Peter Magyar, has repeated these claims in his speeches. After the Szijjarto story broke, he accused the foreign minister of “betraying Hungarian and European interests,” and threatened him with “life imprisonment” for treason, should his Tisza party win the election. All it took was one leaked audio file for the scheme to unravel.

The Szijjarto wiretapping plot
In an audio file released by Hungarian conservative outlet Mandiner, opposition journalist Szabolcs Panyi can be heard telling a source how he passed Szijjarto’s phone number to “a state organ of an EU country.” Once they had this number, he explained, agents of this country were able to extract “information about who that number spoke to, and they see who is calling that number or who that number is calling.” In a Facebook post, Panyi confirmed that he was the person on the recording. He said that he was asking his source whether she knew of any alternate numbers used by Szijjarto or Lavrov, “so that I could compare them with information received from the national security service of a European country.”

Panyi’s confession explained how the “European security officials” were able to track Szijjarto’s phone conversations before feeding the information to Politico and the Washington Post. Orban immediately announced an investigation into the wiretapping. We are dealing with two serious issues, the PM stated the same day as Panyi’s post. There is evidence that Hungary’s foreign minister was wiretapped, and we alsohave indications of who may be behind it. Szijjarto explained that as the EU’s longest-serving foreign minister, he regularly speaks to Lavrov with messages from his colleagues in the EU. The real scandal, he said is that a Hungarian journalist is colluding with foreign secret services in order to wiretap a member of the Hungarian government.

Read more …

No leaders, no democracy. And soon no fuel.

What Is Fueling Unrest Across The EU? (RT)

The EU is sliding into a fuel crisis driven by a global supply shock caused by the US-Israeli attack on Iran. It has already triggered protests, early signs of shortages, and warnings of the wider economic impact. This has resulted from the disruption of the Strait of Hormuz, a critical route for global energy shipments. Oil prices surged above $120 per barrel during the escalation, and while crude fell below the $100 mark after a two-week US-Iran ceasefire was announced on April 7, it remains well above the $70 level before the war. Prices have remained volatile amid uncertainty over the truce and continued disruption to shipping through the strait.


Diesel and kerosene have emerged as the central pressure points in the crisis. Europe’s benchmark diesel and jet fuel prices have risen above $200 per barrel equivalent from below $100 in January, according to Bloomberg. Jet fuel prices have also surged since the start of the conflict in late February, according to industry data cited by multiple outlets. Why has diesel become more expensive than gasoline? The European market has shifted toward higher diesel consumption following decades of tax policies that lowered diesel taxes compared to gasoline.

The EU’s refining system produces a different mix of fuels than the market consumes. A barrel of crude oil typically yields about 40-50% gasoline, but only around 30–40% diesel and jet fuel combined, with the rest made up of heavier products. This mismatch has left the bloc structurally short of diesel. The region is a major net exporter of gasoline but relies on imports for a significant share of its diesel and jet fuel. Diesel has traded above gasoline prices at the pump in several EU countries.

Rising wholesale costs have fed through to consumers. Diesel prices at the pump have exceeded €2 per liter in multiple countries, according to national data and media reports — equivalent to roughly $8.80–$10.50 per US gallon, compared with about $5.60 per gallon in the US. Governments in Italy, Portugal, Slovenia, Hungary, Spain, Poland, and Ireland have introduced tax cuts and other measures to limit the impact of rising fuel costs.

Why are farmers and truckers protesting?
Rising diesel prices are hitting sectors most dependent on the fuel, particularly agriculture and road freight. The EU’s transport sector is facing a “fast-moving diesel shock,” according to logistics platform Logifie. Ireland has become the most visible flashpoint of the crisis. Fuel protests have spread nationwide since this past Tuesday, led by farmers, truckers and transport workers, disrupting supply chains and transport networks, according to local media.

Blockades have strained fuel distribution, with queues forming at petrol stations with some running dry amid panic buying. On Thursday, the government called in the army to clear the blockades. During a protest march in Dublin on Friday, demonstrators carried a coffin with “RIP Ireland” written on it. Airports across Europe could face “systemic” jet fuel shortages within three weeks if the Strait of Hormuz remains closed, according to a letter sent by an airport industry group to the European Commission, as cited by the Independent.

According to Corriere della Sera, “some airports on the continent have been experiencing shortages in jet fuel quantities for days without officially reporting it.” The outlet cited its sources on Friday as saying that “it’s such a sensitive issue that official talk remains tight-lipped,” adding that Brussels is hoping the truce between the US and Iran will hold. Ryanair, Europe’s largest airline by passenger numbers, has started reducing flights to popular destinations, with chief executive, Michael O’Leary warning that the airline will not be able to run its full summer schedule if the Strait of Hormuz remains closed.

Read more …

Bye!

Women Step Forward to Outline Swalwell’s Sexual Assault History (CTH)

It was building in the background for several weeks; the stories of multiple women who had been raped and sexually assaulted by congressman Eric Swalwell. Today, the San Francisco Chronicle began outlining their stories [SEE HERE], and now an exit of people from his campaign begins.


WASHINGTON DC – Rep. Eric Swalwell’s campaign for governor was reeling Friday after an ex-staffer accused him of sexual assault, with multiple staffers resigning and both a prominent ally and rival candidates calling on the California Democrat to exit the race.

The exodus, which began just before the San Francisco Chronicle published a report detailing a former staffer’s claims, jolted California’s marquee race just weeks before ballots start landing in voters’ mailboxes. The former staffer told the newspaper that Swalwell had sexual encounters with her while working for him, and that he sexually assaulted her twice when she was too drunk to consent.

In September 2019, the woman said, Swalwell invited her out for drinks and she became so severely intoxicated that she does not remember the rest of the night. She said she woke up naked in Swalwell’s hotel bed and could feel the effect of vaginal intercourse. {source}

Top staffers departed the campaign shortly before the story published. Soon after, Rep. Jimmy Gomez said in a statement that he was stepping down from the campaign and urged Swalwell to leave the race — a stunning rebuke from a key surrogate who had helped introduce Swalwell to power players in Sacramento, where Gomez served in the state Assembly.

“Today I learned shocking information about Eric Swalwell containing the ugliest and most serious accusations imaginable,” Gomez said in a statement. “My involvement in any campaign begins and ends with trust. I cannot in good conscience remain in any role with this campaign, and I am stepping down from it effective immediately.”

The fallout extended to prominent interest groups that had backed Swalwell. The California Medical Association, which has dropped more than $1 million into a pro-Swalwell committee, said it was convening an emergency board meeting. The California Teachers Association suspended its endorsement. (read more)

Read more …

“Swalwell has denied the allegations, but that has done absolutely nothing to stop the bleeding. And the bleeding has been catastrophic.”

Eric Swalwell’s Political Future is Collapsing Fast (Matt Margolis)

On Friday, a former staffer to Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) came forward with allegations of sexual assault against the longtime congressman. By the end of the day, the dam had broken wide open — and Eric Swalwell’s political future was crumbling right along with it. The San Francisco Chronicle reported that a former congressional aide accused Swalwell of two non-consensual sexual encounters, including one where she claims she woke up in his hotel room after becoming intoxicated. CNN then dropped its own bombshell, reporting that four women total allege sexual misconduct by Swalwell — one of whom accuses him outright of rape. “I was pushing him off of me, saying no,” the woman said.


Swalwell has denied the allegations, but that has done absolutely nothing to stop the bleeding. And the bleeding has been catastrophic. First, his campaign experienced an exodus. His campaign co-chairs bailed immediately. Rep. Jimmy Gomez called the accusations “the ugliest and most serious accusations imaginable,” and resigned on the spot. Rep. Adam Gray was equally blunt: “Today’s reports about Eric Swalwell’s conduct while in office are deeply disturbing. Harassment, abuse, and violence of any sort are unacceptable. Given these serious allegations, I am withdrawing my support, and Eric Swalwell should end his campaign immediately.”

Top Democrat Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) also pulled his endorsement. Then came a wave of others. Even the institutional pillars cracked. The California Teachers Association suspended its endorsement. So did SEIU California. Sen. Adam Schiff called on Swalwell to exit the race. But the real problem for Swalwell isn’t the loss of staff or endorsements; it’s that his fellow Democrats are also calling on him to drop out of the race. Now, obviously, his Democrat opponents, former Rep. Katie Porter and billionaire Tom Steyer, have called on him to drop out, but so has Nancy Pelosi. And that’s a political death sentence.

“This extremely sensitive matter must be appropriately investigated with full transparency and accountability,” Pelosi said in a statement. “As I discussed with Congressman Swalwell, it is clear that is best done outside of a gubernatorial campaign.” And she wasn’t alone. Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, Minority Whip Katherine Clark, and Democratic Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar piled on in a joint statement, calling for a “swift investigation,” and demanding an end to Swalwell’s campaign. “This is unacceptable of anyone — certainly not an elected official — and must be taken seriously,” they said. “No one in a position of power should be allowed to act above the law or with impunity,” Rep. Ro Khanna said. “The same rules must apply to Eric Swalwell.”

Over on the Republican side, Rep. Anna Paulina Luna said she was weighing censure and other action “if there is evidence brought forward,” and three sources told reporters that House Republicans were already discussing just that by Friday evening. The response of Democrats to the allegations is quite unusual. They’re not issuing statements saying Swalwell is innocent until proven guilty; they’re telling him to bail. That raises some interesting questions on its own. Do they believe the allegations? I’ve long believed Swalwell’s gubernatorial campaign was never really about Sacramento. It was a launching pad for a presidential run. That ambition is finished now. Democrats are abandoning him, which means his political future is over. And frankly, his career might be finished, too.

Read more …

There’ll be a lot of huffing and puffing. But 100+ years of car industry as we knew it is over.

Tesla Gets FSD Supervised Approved in the Netherlands (Electrek)

The Dutch vehicle authority RDW has granted Tesla a type approval for its “Full Self-Driving” Supervised system in the Netherlands, marking the first European country to officially approve the driver-assist technology. The approval, which falls under the UN R-171 regulation for Driver Control Assistance Systems, comes after more than 18 months of testing and is currently valid only in the Netherlands. Other EU member states can choose to recognize it nationally, but that process is not automatic.


The approval
Tesla Europe announced the news on X, stating that “FSD Supervised has been approved in the Netherlands & will begin rolling out in the country shortly.” The company described the system as “trained on billions of kilometers of real-world driving data” and claimed that “no other vehicle can do this.” The RDW confirmed the approval in its own statement, describing it as a “European type approval with provisional validity in the Netherlands.” The Dutch authority stressed that FSD Supervised is a driver assistance system — not an autonomous or self-driving system. The driver remains legally responsible and must be able to take over immediately at all times.

The testing program involved over 1.6 million kilometers of driving on EU roads, more than 13,000 customer ride-alongs, and over 4,500 track test scenarios. Tesla submitted documentation covering more than 400 compliance requirements under UN R-171 and Article 39 exemptions. This approval was originally expected by March 20 but was delayed by about three weeks. Back in late March, the RDW actually pushed back on Tesla’s earlier announcements, saying it had not yet completed its review — a pattern that highlights the disconnect between Tesla’s marketing timeline and the regulator’s actual process.

What it means for Europe
The Netherlands approval does not automatically extend to the rest of Europe. Under EU regulations, other member states can recognize the Dutch type approval nationally, but each country must decide individually. Germany (KBA), France, and Italy are expected to be among the first to act, potentially within 4-8 weeks. Full EU-wide harmonization would require additional regulatory steps beyond national recognition. Tesla has targeted a broader European rollout over the summer of 2026, but that timeline depends entirely on how quickly individual countries process their own approvals.

For context, this is a very different model from how Waymo is approaching Europe. Alphabet’s autonomous driving subsidiary is preparing to launch fully driverless robotaxis in London — an actual Level 4 autonomous system where no human driver is needed. Tesla’s approval is for a Level 2 driver-assist system that requires constant human supervision.

What FSD Supervised actually is
The RDW’s statement is explicit: FSD Supervised “can take over many driving tasks” but the vehicles “are NOT autonomous or self-driving.” The driver’s hands don’t need to rest on the steering wheel, but the driver must be able to intervene immediately. Sensors monitor driver attentiveness and eye focus, and if the system detects inattention, it issues warnings and can temporarily disable itself. Under UN R-171, the system is classified as a Driver Control Assistance System (DCAS) — the regulatory term for Level 2 automation. The driver retains full legal responsibility at all times. The regulation specifically mandates measures to prevent driver overreliance, including a mix of visual, audio, and haptic feedback.

Tesla must also report safety-critical incidents and submit regular performance reports to the RDW — no less than annually. Critically, the RDW notes that the European FSD software “differs substantially” from the US version. European regulation requires type approval before any system can be used on public roads — unlike the US self-certification model where Tesla can deploy software updates without prior regulatory approval. The RDW also points out that other manufacturers already hold similar approvals in Europe: BMW for motorway hands-off driving with lane changes, and Ford for BlueCruise via Article 39. Tesla’s claim that “no other vehicle can do this” is misleading at best.

[..] Tesla’s own tweet claims “no other vehicle can do this.” The RDW’s own statement contradicts that — it explicitly notes that BMW and Ford already hold similar driver-assist approvals in Europe. And if we’re talking about actual self-driving, Waymo vehicles in the US (and soon London) drive themselves with no human supervision required. Tesla’s system requires a fully attentive driver at all times. Framing a supervised driver-assist system as a unique achievement is misleading.

This matters because advanced Level 2 systems create a well-documented complacency problem. As we’ve covered extensively, even experts who understand the risks intellectually get conditioned into overtrusting the system. Research from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety found that after just one month of using adaptive cruise control, drivers were more than six times as likely to look at their phones. FSD Supervised is far more capable than adaptive cruise control — the complacency risk is correspondingly higher.

Tesla has already been found guilty of false advertising over the “Full Self-Driving” name in California and has been forced to change its marketing language. Elon Musk keeps making the same safety claims about every new version, and Tesla will not take responsibility when the system makes mistakes — and it still makes mistakes. New European users encountering this technology for the first time should take the “Supervised” part of the name very seriously. Your hands may not need to be on the wheel, but your eyes absolutely need to be on the road.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Apr 052026
 


John Singer Sargent Palmettos, Florida 1917


EU ‘15 Years Too Late’ To Prepare For Energy Shock – Dmitriev (RT)
Trump Reminds Iran “48 Hours Before All Hell Will Reign Down” (ZH)
Rescue Operation Underway After Iran Downs Two US Fighter Jets (RT)
Has Concern Over Hormuz Made Us Forget the Red Sea? (ET)
What Exactly Is the Purpose of NATO in the Year 2026? (Josh Hammer)
The non-Zionist Israeli Population Could Save the Day (Paul Craig Roberts)
Kevin Hassett on Latest Jobs Data and Economic Impacts from Iran Conflict (CTH)
Will the Jones Act Waiver Undermine Trump’s Immigration Policy? (Landrith)
Kamala Calls to Oppose New Court Nominees “Before They Happen” (Turley)
Trump; Boycott Bruce Springsteen Over ‘Incurable’ TDS (JTN)
The New York Times Made a Humiliating Error (Matt Margolis)
DOJ Is Done Releasing Epstein Files (MN)
SpaceX IPO: Don’t Bet Against Elon Musk (Tim O’Brien)

 


 

https://twitter.com/lovetocook12345/status/2040068475922628876?s=20

 


 


Maybe opening with this will wake some people up.

And yes, I am in Europe. And the lack of competence and vision is scary.

EU ‘15 Years Too Late’ To Prepare For Energy Shock – Dmitriev (RT)

The EU has failed to offer any real solutions to the current energy crisis, Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev has said, arguing that Brussels is too late to start preparing for a supply shock. The remarks came in response to EU Energy Commissioner Dan Jorgensen’s interview with the Financial Times on Friday in which he said that the US-Israeli war on Iran was likely to have “structural, long-lasting effects” on the bloc’s energy security. He added Brussels was preparing for “worst-case scenarios” and “looking at all possibilities,” including releasing strategic oil reserves and possibly rationing jet fuel or diesel. “Still only warnings, NO REAL FIXES,” Dmitriev, who serves as President Vladimir Putin’s special envoy for investment and economic cooperation, wrote on X on Friday.


“EU warns 15 YEARS TOO LATE it is not prepared for a ‘long-lasting energy shock.’ EU failed to diversify energy flows, guided by Russophobic, Green, and woke ideology,” he added.The EU implemented a set of energy reforms in 2009–2011 aimed at accelerating the transition to renewable energy and diversifying away from single suppliers, such as Russia. In his interview, Jorgensen ruled out a return to Russian energy imports, insisting that there would be no change to EU plans to end imports of Russian liquefied natural gas (LNG) by the end of 2026. The US and “other partners” will provide additional supplies, he said. Brussels will also phase out Russian pipeline gas imports by autumn 2027. Russia still accounted for an estimated 13% of total EU gas imports in 2025, according to official data.

President Vladimir Putin warned last month that Russia may withdraw from the EU gas market and redirect its supplies to “emerging markets” without waiting for Brussels’ ban to take effect. The energy crisis in the EU is the result of the “misguided policies” pursued by the bloc over “many years,” Putin said. The conflict in the Middle East has disrupted global supply chains and thrown energy markets into turmoil. On Thursday, the price of crude rose to around $111 per barrel, while the price of gas in the EU spiked to around €50 ($58) per MWh, a 56% increase from February.

Read more …

“Reign Down”?

Trump Reminds Iran “48 Hours Before All Hell Will Reign Down” (ZH)

With U.S. and Israeli air-delivered munitions still striking targets across Iran, and Tehran retaliating by hitting high-value sites around the Gulf area, while continuing to disrupt the Strait of Hormuz, the conflict is now entering its sixth week with no credible signs of near-term de-escalation. Add in President Trump’s speech last week, which warned that intense targeting could continue for a few more weeks, and it’s a very fair assessment that the conflict will carry into next week, with momentum and escalation to the upside.


On Saturday, the U.S. military continued search operations for an American airman who ejected after an F-15E fighter jet was shot down over Iran, marking the first downed U.S. aircraft in the conflict. One crew member was rescued, but the second remained missing, with Iranian forces also racing to find the missing pilot. The downed F-15 jet came shortly after a U.S. Black Hawk was hit by ground fire, and an A-10 Thunderbolt II reportedly crashed Friday near the Hormuz chokepoint. Friday was not a great day for U.S. aircraft as the conflict intensified. C-17 Globemaster IIIs are on the move.

https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/2040333544023621698

In a rapidly escalating phase of the US-Israel war on Iran (now around day 36+ since late February strikes that targeted Iranian leadership and infrastructure), Tehran has intensified its retaliation while the US and Israel press air campaigns. Iranian missiles struck central Israel on Saturday, triggering widespread sirens and causing visible damage, including to residential areas and an industrial zone near Beersheba. Reports mentioned cluster bomb effects and shrapnel injuries, though Israeli defenses intercepted many projectiles.

At the same time, Israel launched heavy strikes on Tehran, targeting Iranian air-defense and ballistic-missile sites, while a projectile also hit the perimeter of Iran’s Bushehr nuclear plant, according to the semiofficial Iranian Tasnim news agency. The International Atomic Energy Agency said Iran had notified them about the incident.

https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/2040412534751313983

Let’s not forget President Trump’s speech on Wednesday, in which he suggested the conflict could continue for weeks and insisted the missing airman would not alter efforts to negotiate an end to the conflict. Iran launched a fresh missile barrage at central Israel, causing fires, damage in areas like Negev, Rosh Haayin, Bnei Brak, and reports of cluster munitions; minor injuries reported, with one man hurt in Bnei Brak. An apparent Iranian drone damaged the Dubai headquarters of the U.S. tech giant Oracle on Saturday after Iranian forces threatened dozens of US firms. Iran has been targeting Gulf area data centers, and reports of a water desalination plant on Friday made headlines.

Read more …

According to American media, two of the three pilots have been located and brought to safety

Rescue Operation Underway After Iran Downs Two US Fighter Jets (RT)

Iran shot down a US fighter jet over its territory on Friday, prompting a rescue operation for the crew, according to US and Iranian media.m,According to multiple outlets citing US officials, one of the two crew members of the twin-seat F-15E Strike Eagle has been rescued, while the whereabouts and status of the second remain unknown. Although Iran claimed it had downed a newer F-35 aircraft, analysts say that images of the wreckage, including an ejection seat, are consistent with an F-15. A second US military aircraft, a single-seat A-10 Thunderbolt II, managed to leave Iranian airspace before its pilot ejected and was rescued, US media reported.


US President Donald Trump has threatened to step up strikes on Iran, saying Iranian power plants could be targeted next. The announcement came just hours after US forces hit the country’s tallest highway bridge linking Tehran and Karaj, rendering it inoperable.“Our Military… hasn’t even started destroying what’s left in Iran,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “Bridges next, then Electric Power Plants! New Regime leadership knows what has to be done, and has to be done fast!” Iranian military spokesman Ebrahim Zolfaghari responded, warning of immediate retaliation if Washington follows through.

“If the US proceeds with its threats regarding Iran’s power plants, immediate retaliatory actions will be taken,” he said in a video address, adding that Israeli energy and IT infrastructure – as well as regional companies with American shareholders – would face ”complete and utter annihilation.” The video featured footage of the Stargate UAE project, a major AI infrastructure hub under construction in Abu Dhabi, part of a US-backed initiative led by OpenAI. Zolfaghari said Iran would ”do whatever it takes” to defend its interests, suggesting these projects could become targets. Earlier, Iran said the Strait of Hormuz would remain closed ”in the long term” to US and Israeli ships. Trump urged Tehran to ”make a deal before it is too late.” Iranian officials have denied they are seeking a ceasefire or engaging in talks.

Latest developments: • Trump said he hopes that the pilot of a downed US aircraft will not be captured or harmed by Iranian forces. • Israel reportedly canceled some planned strikes on Iran to avoid interfering with the ongoing rescue operation. • An Iranian drone struck Kuwait’s Mina al-Ahmadi oil refinery, while the debris from an intercepted UAV set fire to the UAE’s largest gas processing hub, Habshan, authorities in the Gulf state have reported. • Iran has refused a 48-hour ceasefire offer from the US, delivered via a third country, according to Fars news agency. Indirect attempts to secure an armistice have “reached a dead end,” according to the WSJ. • Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said strikes on civilian infrastructure, including bridges, would not force Iran to surrender, calling them a sign of “defeat and moral collapse.”

Read more …

Colorful.

Has Concern Over Hormuz Made Us Forget the Red Sea? (ET)

Wartime concerns about the security of maritime energy traffic through the Strait of Hormuz—connecting the Indian Ocean/Gulf of Oman with the Persian Gulf—have overshadowed the fact that the related issue of Red Sea security is far from resolved and is, in fact, becoming more dynamic. The Red Sea–Suez link between the Mediterranean and the Indian Ocean is of equal strategic importance to global trade as the Hormuz choke point and is, through geography and common players, intrinsically linked with the Persian Gulf conflict.


But it is Ethiopia’s civil war, brewing with different factions and with varying intensity since the coup against Emperor Haile Selassie I in 1974, which is again moving in ways that could prove decisive. Always, in the background, is the reality that Ethiopia could revive its historical influence over the Red Sea–Suez sea line of communication (SLOC). Inside Ethiopia, the conflicts that have been raging since 1974 between different governments and different factions are at a new level.

The four different Fano opposition militia groups, representing different areas of the Amhara heartland, have been fighting against the central government of Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed Ali for several years. In early 2026, they came together with a united manifesto of their intentions. This has revived the momentum of the threat to Abiy’s Prosperity Party government. A statement issued by a united Fano on Jan. 17, 2026 (Tir 9, 2018, in the Ethiopian calendar) noted:

“So that the Amhara struggle may become one, the leaders of the Amhara Fano National Force and the Amhara Fano People’s Organization, through a historic decision that demanded courage, open-heartedness, decisiveness, and trust in the people, have been able to make Fano unity a reality. … We have designated one leader, one organization.” Significantly, the leadership of the united Fano all titled themselves as “Arbegna,” a nod to the Arbegnoch, the Patriots, who, under the banner of Emperor Haile Selassie I, fought against the Italian invaders of Ethiopia from 1935 to 1941. This led to the ouster of the Italians at the Battle of Gondar, in late November 1941, the first major Allied victory of World War II, in the ouster of an Axis power (Italy) from territory it had seized.

Today, the result of the four separate Amhara Fano groups fighting against the Abiy government over the past several years was the creation—finally—of the Amhara Fano National Movement (AFNM) as an umbrella for all civil and military operations. AFNM, however, described itself as working on behalf of all Ethiopians desirous of the restoration of the multi-ethnic empire. (Ethiopia is home to some 80 ethnic and linguistic groups.) Prime Minister Abiy, half-Amhara and half-Oromo, has consistently identified with Oromo causes and first fought against a Tigrean-dominated government of Ethiopia, and then against the Tigrean People’s Liberation Front (TPLF) militia, which was forced into a ceasefire—essentially a military surrender by the TPLF—in November 2022.

Abiy’s Prosperity Party government has increasingly been rejected by his original Oromo militant supporters, who regard him as “insufficiently Oromo” in outlook, and the government’s writ—or its area of focus—now rarely extends beyond the capital, Addis Ababa. The exception for Abiy’s travels is to some major projects such as the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam in the Benishangul-Gumuz Region of western Ethiopia. The dam has been the subject of some hostility from Egypt, which sees its existence as infringing on Egypt’s “right” to control the waters of the Blue Nile, even though they originate in Lake Tana in the Amhara Highlands of Ethiopia, outside Egypt’s territories.

Read more …

NATO’s purpose was anti-Russia. That ended in 1989. Questions?

What Exactly Is the Purpose of NATO in the Year 2026? (Josh Hammer)

One month into Operation Epic Fury against the Islamic Republic of Iran, a long-overdue conversation has finally broken into the open: What, exactly, is the enduring rationale for NATO? For decades, this question has been treated in Washington foreign policy circles as heretical. But it isn’t. And to their credit, President Donald Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio are now saying so plainly. As Trump recently put it, “They haven’t been friends when we needed them. We’ve never asked them for much. … It’s a one-way street.” Rubio has been similarly blunt: “If NATO is just about us defending Europe if they’re attacked but then denying us basing rights when we need them, that’s not a very good arrangement. … So all that’s going to have to be reexamined.”


They’re spot-on. At best, America’s European “allies” have spent decades free-riding on the U.S. security umbrella. Despite repeated commitments to meet baseline defense spending targets, many NATO members still under-invest in their militaries and outsource their national defense to American taxpayers. The imbalance is staggering: The United States accounts for the overwhelming majority of NATO’s military capabilities, logistics, and strategic lift. Overall, American taxpayers contribute about 60% of total spending on NATO defense.

At worst, some of these same European allies actively undermine U.S. operations at critical moments. Major Western European countries such as Spain and France have restricted or complicated U.S. use of their airspace during Operation Epic Fury. That is farcical. A so-called alliance in which members obstruct one another’s ability to wage war is not actually an alliance — it is a liability.This raises the core question: Why, exactly, does NATO exist in the year 2026? Let’s recall its origins. NATO was founded in 1949 with a clear and urgent mission: to contain and, if necessary, defeat the Soviet Union. That mission was compelling — indeed, existential. Western Europe lay devastated after World War II, and the Soviet threat was real, immediate, and hegemonic. But that world quite literally no longer exists.

The Soviet Union collapsed three and a half decades ago. The Berlin Wall fell the year I was born. The Cold War is now a relic of history. By any reasonable metric, NATO achieved its raison d’etre by the early 1990s. But instead of declaring victory and recalibrating, the alliance drifted. It expanded ever further into Eastern Europe and shifted its ostensible mission into… well, something.Simply put, NATO is today an organization in search of a purpose.

Is NATO a collective defense pact against the geopolitical successor to the Soviet Union, the Russian Federation? If so, why do so many European NATO members fail to take that threat seriously enough to invest in their own national defense? Is NATO now instead a vehicle for global counterterrorism? If so, why have its members sat on the sidelines and refused to join the United States as it goes to battle against the world’s No. 1 state sponsor of jihad? Or is NATO nowadays just a political club for liberal democracies? If so, what does that have to do with a hardheaded conception of the U.S. national interest?NATO has become a catch-all institution, long on triumphalist platitudes but short on the strategic realities on which its existence was predicated.

Read more …

“Netanyahu’s party has 23.41% of the vote.”

The non-Zionist Israeli Population Could Save the Day (Paul Craig Roberts)

Trump’s blustering April Fool’s day speech would easily have served as a hilarious April Fool’s day joke. But it was just bluster to take the place of the discarded 10-day ultimatum that replaced the discarded 5-day ultimatum with a 3 or 4 week ultimatum. As I asked, if Iran is as totally destroyed as Trump asserts, what is the purpose of Trump’s ultimatum?


Time is running out for Trump, not for Iran. The last time an American president took America to war Constitutionally was 1941 when Congress gave the executive branch permission to enter the war with the Constitutionally required Congressional Declaration of War. As time went by Congress finally responded to presidential decisions to go to war without a Congressional declaration of war not by impeaching the President, which should have been done in order to protect the Constitutional political order and separation of powers, but by requiring the president who initiates military action without Congressional approval to come to Congress with a deadline of 60 days after initiating military action for congressional approval to continue the military action.

In other words, Congress failed to defend the Constitution’s Separation of Powers by allowing the executive branch to exercise a power it does not have to go to war and, afterward, to come to Congress for approval. In the past Congress has rubber-stamped the President’s decision. But this time it is different. Polls indicate that a majority of Americans do not share Trump’s concern about the Iranian threat to America. They do not support Netanyahu’s war. Even many American Jews do not support the war.

On April 2 the Times of Israel reported that “the US Democratic National Committee is set to consider a resolution at a meeting next week that “condemns the growing influence” of AIPAC. This is extraordinary considering that in the US Senate there are 9 Jewish Democrats and no Republican ones and that of the 25 Jews in the House of Representatives, 21 are Democrats. https://www.timesofisrael.com/democrats-to-weigh-resolution-against-aipac-fueling-concerns-about-undercurrent-of-antisemitism/

The Times of Israel reports that: “A recent NBC poll found that 57% of Democratic voters have a negative view of Israel, compared to 13% who have a positive view of the country. Meanwhile, a growing number of the party’s congressional candidates—and politicians thought to be seeking its 2028 presidential nomination—are swearing off AIPAC, and crossing its red line of supporting conditions on military aid to Israel.” What Trump has done is to ally the American Democrat Party against Israel and the Republicans with Israel Or to put it more correctly with the current Zionist government of Netanyahu.

Netanyahu’s party has 23.41% of the vote. To be in office Netanyahu has to rely on far right-wing extremist parties who fervently believe in Greater Israel from the Nile River to Pakistan. It is for this Greater Israel agenda that Americans have been fighting for the first quarter of the 21st century. But support for this agenda is not only weak in the US, it also seems to be week in Israel. Zionism has always been a minority position among Jews and the Israeli population. The Israelis tolerated Zionism because it did them no harm. No missiles fell upon them and the Americans protected them with money, weapons, and diplomatic cover.

But now the vaunted Israeli Iron Dome is penetrated at Iran’s will. The Iranian missiles have destroyed the American radar systems that enabled US defenses to prevent attacks on the Persian Gulf states and Israel. If Trump declares victory and goes home, Zionist Israel has no chance of survival. Israel’s nuclear weapons are cancelled by Iran’s demonstrated ability to hit the Israeli nuclear reactor at Dimona and Israel’s storage site of its nuclear weapons. Iran doesn’t need nukes to destroy Israel. A strike on the Dimona nuclear facility would suffice to spread radiation over tiny Israel.

Trump cannot stay in the war, because he cannot risk Congress rejecting his justification for attacking Iran and for continuing the war. For Trump, being defeated by Congress is worse than being defeated by Iran. Trump has until April 28 to extricate himself from the war. So what happens to Israel, defenseless from Iranian missile attack, when Trump leaves the scene? mNetanyahu, who is under indictment in Israel, also faces elections this autumn. What if he cannot put together another ruling coalition? What if the Israelis for the first time are experiencing heavy costs of the Zionist Agenda of Greater Israel and decide that the Zionist agenda does not serve the security of Israel?

There is a possibility that Trump and Netanyahu have made the Israeli population aware of the heavy cost of the Zionist agenda. I do not know what the odds might be, but it is not impossible that Israelis, with the cost of the Zionist agenda now brought home to them, will reject the Zionist agenda and announce that they are satisfied with Israel’s current borders. It is possible–I do not know the odds–that the non-Zionist population of Israel will take the agenda out of the hands of the Zionist war-mongers, and form a government that rejects the Zionist agenda of Greater Israel. This, other than Israel’s destruction, is the only avenue to peace in the Middle East.

Read more …

MAGAnomic .

Kevin Hassett on Latest Jobs Data and Economic Impacts from Iran Conflict (CTH)

National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett appears on Bloomberg News to discuss the US March jobs report and oil market supply disruptions related to the military action in Iran against the impact of oil prices on the US economy. Director Hassett notes the continued goal of the Trump MAGAnomic plan is to build momentum, keep driving domestic investment and the short-term impact from Iran should mitigate quickly.

Read more …

“The Jones Act, formally known as the Merchant Marine Act of 1920..”

Will the Jones Act Waiver Undermine Trump’s Immigration Policy? (Landrith)

There are moments when a temporary policy change forces an examination of deeper legal and strategic questions. The 60-day Jones Act waiver issued last month is one of those moments. While framed as a narrow national security measure, this waiver raises serious concerns about whether the very laws designed to protect American maritime strength and national sovereignty will be inadvertently undermined.


The Jones Act, formally known as the Merchant Marine Act of 1920, is a cornerstone of American maritime policy. It requires that goods transported between U.S. ports be carried on vessels that are built in the United States, owned by American citizens, and crewed by American mariners. The law was enacted as a vital national security safeguard. A strong domestic merchant marine provides critical sealift capacity during wartime or national emergencies, ensuring the military can move troops, equipment, and supplies without relying on potentially unreliable foreign vessels. On March 17, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) exercised its purported authority to issue a temporary waiver of the Jones Act for certain commodities.

Supporters argue this was a prudent, limited step to address immediate logistical needs amid ongoing global tensions. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has since implemented detailed compliance procedures: operators must provide advance notice, submit cargo manifests, meet vessel entry requirements, and file final voyage reports with the Maritime Administration (MARAD), which then posts them publicly.These steps show the government is attempting to maintain oversight. However, the waiver only suspends certain “navigation and vessel-inspection laws” under 46 U.S.C. § 501. It does not address — and cannot automatically override — other important bodies of federal law, particularly immigration regulations governing foreign crew members.

This is where the problem becomes serious. Most foreign mariners enter the United States under C-1/D or D crewman visas. These visas are intended for international voyages only. Federal immigration law is explicit: crewmen in this status “may not be employed in connection with domestic flights or movements of a vessel.” The law was written with the assumption that foreign vessels would engage primarily in international trade, not domestic shipping between U.S. ports. A Jones Act waiver may relax one statute, but it does not clearly authorize foreign crews to engage in purely domestic transportation under their existing immigration status.

This creates a gray area that has received far too little attention. During a time of heightened national security concerns — particularly with Operation Epic Fury underway against Iran — we should be increasing scrutiny of foreign personnel entering U.S. waters and ports, not potentially loosening controls. The risks are practical as well as legal. Immigration law imposes real obligations and penalties on both crew members and vessel operators. Overstays, unauthorized activities, and violations of crewman status carry civil and criminal consequences. Shipowners and charterers relying on this waiver may believe they are fully protected because CBP has approved the cargo movement. But satisfying one agency’s requirements does not necessarily satisfy every applicable federal statute.

Additionally, Congress recently strengthened the public reporting requirements attached to Jones Act waivers. Operators must now disclose the vessel name, flag state, ports of call, cargo details, and the specific national defense justification. MARAD is required to publish this information promptly. While transparency is generally positive, it also creates a public paper trail that could invite future congressional oversight, lawsuits, or enforcement actions if questions arise about immigration compliance.

This waiver is not occurring in a vacuum. America’s maritime industry has already been weakened over decades by high costs, regulatory burdens, and declining shipbuilding capacity. The Jones Act exists to prevent further erosion. Waiving it — even temporarily — sends a signal that domestic shipping rules can be set aside when convenient. If foreign-flag vessels and crews can now perform work traditionally reserved for Americans, there is a risk of accelerating the decline of our domestic merchant marine at the very time when great power competition and supply chain vulnerabilities make it more important than ever.

Supporters of the waiver argue it is narrowly tailored and time-limited. That may be true on paper. But policy often creates precedents. Once foreign vessels are allowed into domestic trade routes, pressure will build to extend or expand such waivers in the future. Shippers naturally prefer lower costs, and foreign operators will seek to expand their access to the lucrative U.S. domestic market and bypass visa requirements.

Before embracing this or future waivers, policymakers and industry participants should ask a disciplined set of questions: Exactly which laws have been waived? Which laws remain fully in force? Have we properly reconciled the conflict between navigation waivers and immigration restrictions? And most importantly, does this action strengthen or weaken America’s long-term maritime, immigration, and national security posture?

A temporary waiver may solve a short-term logistical problem. But if it creates uncertainty, invites legal challenges, or further weakens America’s domestic maritime capabilities or immigration enforcement capabilities, it could ultimately do more harm than good to national security. In an increasingly dangerous world, preserving the integrity and strength of the Jones Act should remain a high priority — not an afterthought.

Read more …

Nobody likes Kamala.

Kamala Calls to Oppose New Court Nominees “Before They Happen” (Turley)

Former Vice President Kamala Harris is rallying Democratic donors to oppose “additional justices” that might be nominated by President Donald Trump “before they happen.” Harris is heralding the fundraising by Josh Orton, president of the dark-money group “Demand Justice” (made infamous for its campaign to push Justice Stephen Breyer to resign). Demand Justice has pushed a radical agenda, including court packing. In a post on X, Harris highlighted a New York Times article on the “liberal organization” “preparing a multimillion–dollar effort to oppose potential Trump Supreme Court appointees before they happen.” Orton announced that “the project would cost $3 million to start and $15 million more if vacancies occurred.”


The group expressly cited the possibility of Justices Clarence Thomas (77) and Samuel Alito (76) retiring. Harris pushed people to contribute, posting that :“We must be clear eyed about what is at stake with the Supreme Court right now. We cannot allow Donald Trump to hand pick one, if not two, additional justices. The nation’s highest court must be stopped from becoming even more beholden to him.” Harris reportedly supports court packing and could use radical groups like Demand Justice to push through an expansion of the Court to produce an immediate liberal majority if Democrats take power. Harris is right about one thing. This is an clear-eyed, remorseless strategy on the left to remove an obstacle to an equally radical agenda.

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.,mLikewise, Democratic strategist James Carville explained how this process of how the pack-to-power plan would work:

“I’m going to tell you what’s going to happen. A Democrat is going to be elected in 2028. You know that. I know that. The Democratic president is going to announce a special transition advisory committee on the reform of the Supreme Court. They’re going to recommend that the number of Supreme Court justices go from nine to 13. That’s going to happen, people.” The rhetoric for this renewed push for court packing and war chests on the left remains entirely unconnected to the actual record of conservatives on the Court, who have been repeatedly attacked by President Trump for voting against major cases by the Administration. From the tariffs decision to the expected birthright citizenship ruling, the conservative justices have routinely voted against the Administration.

Moreover, the vast majority of opinions on the Court remain unanimous or nearly unanimous. The ideological split on the Court is only present in relatively few cases each term. While those cases admittedly have significant impacts, this is not a rigidly or robotically divided court in most cases. Indeed, liberal justices have pushed back on the left calling for court packing or describing the Court as conservative or ideological. Yet, Harris continues to rally donors and voters with claims of an “activist” court.

What is most striking about the “clear-eyed” leadership of Harris is that her model for a new justice appears to be the only Biden nominee, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. Both conservative and liberal justices have publicly criticized Jackson in past opinions. Jackson has lashed out at her colleagues while adopting analysis that would effectively gut areas like First Amendment jurisprudence. Many of us have found Jackson’s opinions to be unnerving and unhinged. However, liberal groups and Harris would like to replicate her approach to jurisprudence — suggesting not only a packed court but one populated by unrestrained jurists.

For her part, Justice Jackson shocked many by effectively endorsing Harris in her presidential run. Jackson publicly praised her nomination on ABC’s The View as “historic” and something that “gives a lot of people hope.” With the millions being raised and radical groups positioning themselves for a court-packing push, there are many who see a second Harris nomination as a cause for “hope.” For the rest of us, it is not just “clear-eyed” but unblinking dread at what could await this country if this strategy succeeds in the coming years.

Read more …

He’s Obama’s best friend. And the people he would sing about, all vote Trump.

Trump; Boycott Bruce Springsteen Over ‘Incurable’ TDS (JTN)

Springsteen has been a long-time critic of the president, stating in 2016 that the “republic is under siege by a moron,” and spoke out against Trump last year in Europe. President Donald Trump called for his supporters Thursday morning to boycott famed singer Bruce Springsteen and his concerts over the icon’s “incurable case of Trump Derangement Syndrome.” The president’s call comes after Springsteen launched his new tour this week in Minneapolis, where he claimed: “The America that I love, the America … that has been a beacon of hope and liberty around the world is currently in the hands of a corrupt, incompetent, racist, reckless and treasonous administration.”


Springsteen has been a long-time critic of the president, stating in 2016 that the “republic is under siege by a moron,” and spoke out against Trump last year in Europe. He also released a song about the fatal shooting of two protesters earlier this year titled “Streets of Minneapolis.” “Bad, and very boring singer, Bruce Springsteen, who looks like a dried up prune who has suffered greatly from the work of a really bad plastic surgeon, has long had a horrible and incurable case of Trump Derangement Syndrome, sometimes referred to as TDS,” Trump ranted in a post on Truth Social.

“The guy is a total loser who spews hate against a President who won a landslide election, including the popular vote, all seven swing states, and 86% of the counties across America,” he continued. “Under Sleepy Joe and the Dems, our country was dead, and now we have the ‘hottest’ country, by far, anywhere in the World. “MAGA should boycott his overpriced concerts, which suck,” he added. “Save your hard earned money. America is back!” Springsteen’s union, the American Federation of Musicians, slammed the president for “personally” attacking the singer, who it lauded as one of its “most celebrated members,” according to Deadline.

“Bruce Springsteen is not just a brilliant musician, he is a voice for working people, a symbol of American resilience, and an inspiration to millions in this country and around the world,” the union’s leaders said in a statement. “Musicians have the right to freedom of expression, and we stand in complete solidarity with Bruce and every member who uses their platform to speak their conscience. Local 802 and Local 47 will always defend that right.”

Read more …

“It’s hard to see how any European country will now be able and willing to trust the United States to come to its defense..”

The New York Times Made a Humiliating Error (Matt Margolis)

The New York Times set out Friday to embarrass President Donald Trump over his hardline stance on NATO. It wound up spectacularly backfiring on them. Several NATO nations have declined to join a U.S.-Israel military operation targeting Iran. Alliance members also refused Trump’s requests to deploy their forces to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, much to the chagrin of President Trump, who figures that if NATO allies won’t help the United States, then the alliance has become meaningless. So the paper ran a piece criticizing Trump’s threats to withdraw from the alliance, and the print edition’s headline asked a pointed question: “A North American Treaty Organization Without America?”


There’s just one problem. NATO stands for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. The Times apparently forgot that detail, and, after being mocked on social media, quietly issued a correction through its communications team on X. Trump also joined in on the mocking. “The Failing New York Times, whose lack of credibility, and their constant Fake News attacks on your favorite President, ME, has caused its circulation to absolutely PLUMMET, referred to our severely weakened and extremely unreliable ‘partner,’ NATO, as the North American Treaty Organization,” Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social Saturday morning. ‘The correct name is the North Atlantic Treaty Organization – A very interesting mistake! The hiring and educational standards have gone way down at the NYT.”

He added, “Bring back, ‘ALL THE NEWS THAT’S FIT TO PRINT’ and, Make America Great Again!” Here’s what makes this especially painful for the Times. The article wasn’t some throwaway weekend filler. It was a deliberate piece designed to frame Trump as reckless for pushing back against an alliance his critics treat as sacred. “Since his re-election, President Trump has threatened to leave the NATO alliance several times. On Wednesday, he did it again, frustrated that European nations had refused to join the so-far indecisive United States-Israeli war against Iran,” the article began. “But the more he disparages NATO and threatens to abandon it, the more hollow it becomes.”

The alliance, built after World War II to deter the Soviet Union and keep the peace in Europe, is in crisis, with some questioning whether it can survive. The Mideast war has brought existing doubts about American commitment to the alliance to the fore, argued Ivo Daalder, a former American ambassador to NATO. “It’s hard to see how any European country will now be able and willing to trust the United States to come to its defense,” he said. “Hope, perhaps. But they can’t count on it.” In his speech to the nation Wednesday night, Mr. Trump did not mention NATO, to the relief of allies. But a senior European official said he thought most Europeans did not believe that Article 5, the NATO commitment to collective defense, still had teeth.

The United States now seems part of the problem of world disorder, the official said, speaking anonymously given the sensitivity of the topic. The country is no longer the solution and the guarantor of last resort, he said. The whole premise depended on the Times looking like the serious, credentialed adults in the room. Instead, they demonstrated that they didn’t even know the true name of the organization they were defending — right there in the headline, in print, that no amount of corrections can erase.NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte is scheduled to travel to Washington next week to try to smooth things over with Trump directly.

Read more …

And now they can all go after Todd Blanche..

DOJ Is Done Releasing Epstein Files (MN)

In a move sparking fresh skepticism among Americans demanding full accountability, the new acting Attorney General Todd Blanche has declared the Jeffrey Epstein files chapter closed. This came just hours after President Trump reassigned Pam Bondi, with Blanche – Trump’s former personal attorney – stepping in as acting AG and signaling it’s time to move on from the scandal. “The DOJ has now released ALL the files with respect to the Epstein saga,” Blanche stated on Fox News. He added, “I think that to the extent the Epstein files was a part of the past year of this Justice Department, it should not be a part of anything going forward.”

Jesse Watters pressed Blanche directly on whether he thought Bondi mishandled the Epstein files. Blanche responded, “First of all, I have never heard President Trump say that the Attorney General was, that anything that happened to her had anything to do with the Epstein files. So look, the Epstein files has been a saga that’s lasted for the entire for the past year.” He further defended the process, noting that Bondi and he “appeared in front of Congress voluntarily a couple weeks ago to answer any questions they had” and made documents available for review.

https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2039865199729983783

When Watters asked, “Who was Epstein spying for?” Blanche replied, “I don’t know that he was spying for anybody. Nobody’s ever said that.” He claimed there is “no evidence in the Epstein files” suggesting Epstein worked for a foreign country.

On the question of releasing names of men who abused girls, Blanche previously pushed back, asking “What does that mean? I don’t understand what that means.” He also stated plainly, “It’s not a crime to party with Mr. Epstein.”

https://twitter.com/Xx17965797N/status/2039969129382228244

Blanche doubled down on the administration’s position: “When Trump said let’s release the Epstein files… we did it.”The timing aligns with Trump’s decision to move Bondi to the private sector amid reported frustrations over her pace on key matters, including the Epstein files. Critics had highlighted her earlier claims of possessing a client list and distributing repetitive binders, followed by a DOJ memo stating no such list existed. Yet the assertion that “all files” are out faces immediate pushback. The DOJ reviewed roughly six million potentially responsive documents but released only about 3.5 million publicly, leaving millions still unreleased, redacted, or withheld.

This latest development deepens concerns over an Epstein cover up. FBI officers have raised alarms, with suspicions of document shredding after his death. Separately, a foreign hacker who cracked into the FBI’s Epstein files in 2023 was reportedly disgusted at the scale of child sexual abuse material uncovered, underscoring how much sensitive content may still remain hidden. Epstein survivor reactions and ongoing victim calls for transparency continue to highlight the stakes.

Blanche has remained guarded on specifics. His responses often circled back to congressional access rather than new public disclosures, while emphasizing a pivot to other fraud cases nationwide. The Epstein operation represented far more than one man’s crimes — it exposed a network that reached the highest levels of power, protected for years by institutional gatekeepers. Declaring the files “done” while millions of pages stay locked away does little to rebuild trust in a system long accused of shielding the elite. Americans who supported Trump’s mandate expect genuine sunlight on these matters, not a premature shutdown dressed as completion. The deep state’s habits of concealment die hard, and the demand for full disclosure — for the victims and the public’s right to know — will not fade quietly.

Read more …

Uomo Universalis?!

SpaceX IPO: Don’t Bet Against Elon Musk (Tim O’Brien)

Tesla isn’t just a car company, and SpaceX isn’t just a space exploration company. Elon Musk’s two marquee companies, and his many other ventures have a lot in common and complement each other by design. The common thread is that Musk wants to leave his mark on this world having changed civilization’s footprint. If he does that, he would be one of the most consequential humans who ever lived. To accomplish that, he had to create technologies that didn’t exist. Benchmark accomplishments have had to happen and still need to happen that, each one in its own right, is almost equivalent to the significance of Christopher Columbus discovering America.


In the course of creating self-driving, electric vehicles (EVs) at Tesla, Musk has been advancing robot and artificial intelligence (AI) technologies. At SpaceX he’s led the way on space travel innovation in ways NASA once monopolized. He’s not doing these things just to say he did them. He’s got a vision, which he constantly talks about. He wants to colonize the Moon and Mars. He wants mankind to start to think bigger. His company Neuralink has created a brain-computer interface that translates neural signals into actions. The initial applications for this are for disabled people who can be aided by his devices which control computers and robotic arms with thought. As this technology evolves, it’s not hard to imagine how it can be used by able-bodied or disabled astronauts and human colonizers on other celestial bodies.

Musk’s satellite internet provider company Starlink is yet another capability that may become critical to realizing his vision in space. Already, the company operates thousands of satellites in low-Earth orbit to give users on the ground wireless internet access. While rural users and people in Third World have been some of the early beneficiaries of the technology, its future applications are limited only by Musk’s imagination. Another little-known Musk company is called The Boring Company, which is a tunnel-building firm. Right now, that company’s technology and capabilities are used to more efficiently build affordable tunnels faster. In Las Vegas, you can go to the Convention Center Loop and see how Teslas are used underground to transport people rather than use rail cars.

It’s never a good idea to judge a tech company by the first uses of its technology or platform. If you did that when Amazon first started, you would have just seen that company as an online bookstore, which is what it was at first, but that was never founder Jeff Bezos’s full vision for the company. The same is true here. Long before anyone took him seriously on any of this, Musk started seriously looking at what it would take for him to realize his vision. He knew he had the money to get started, and he knew if his ventures were successful, the money to further invest in his ideas would come.

So he worked backward. He started with that wild vision, and then he followed the pathway back to our current reality. With that, he had a list of technologies and solutions that needed to be invented. He knew the kind of companies that needed to be started. And he knew what problems those companies needed to solve in their infancy before they could do the big stuff. To date, all the headlines around Tesla was its EV advantage, helping people and governments realize the benefits of electric vehicles. But already, it’s possible to see that this was just a baby step for Tesla. The autonomous vehicle development at the company made it as much a robot company as an automotive one. In March, Musk’s Tesla and SpaceX launched a joint venture to consolidate all phases of semiconductor production in the same plant. That venture is called Terafab.

Self-sufficiency To more fully appreciate what Musk is doing, a term comes to mind – self-sufficiency. Musk realized he couldn’t achieve his master vision if he were counting on others and other firms for key parts of the puzzle. He needed the self-sufficiency it will take to get to Mars. He needed it to generate all the sustainable energy you need from the sun, to use that energy to power satellite networks. He’s needed it to go about city-building, for underground tunnel construction, and to do all of this while creating your own chips, doing the work with your own people, your own robots, and using your own AI platforms.

Compatibility is just as important and is part of the self-sufficiency equation. Anyone who has worked in tech knows that once you have two separate companies, a good deal of time, effort and work is focused on helping two companies’ technologies to talk to each other and work with each other. Musk’s consolidated approach eliminates a lot of that. When you look at it that way, the tunnel company makes perfect sense. Underground tunnels enable you to create more controlled environments on planets and moons. They reduce certain risks associated with living in these harsh environments, and they make the notion of living there more sustainable and a pragmatic possibility.

My colleague Rick Moran wrote about the potential opportunities that could come from mining asteroids, and in the process, he touched on the planned SpaceX Initial Public Offering (IPO). He also mentioned Musk’s role in all of this, which cannot be overstated. At the moment, Musk is even looking at ways to build datacenters in space which would generate power to be used here on Earth. Once again, Musk focuses on solving a real problem on Earth that falls right in line with giving him the new tools he needs to achieve his goal of expanding the human race to the moon and beyond. Since Musk is who he is and has lived the life he’s lived, he’s learned not to hit people with his grand vision all at once. It’s too easy to laugh off a guy like that. He’s learned to reveal his master vision over time to provide context by emphasizing his near-term focus.

Henry Ford spent his entire life on the automobile, and society was never the same as a result. Steve Jobs and Bill Gates spent their active careers personalizing computer technology, and once again, society was never the same. Musk has always thought so much bigger than that, that he’s had to learn to rein himself in so that he tends to talk about each step in its own time. NASA’s Artemis mission to the moon, along with increasing disclosures centered on that SpaceX IPO are making it more obvious that Musk’s disparate ventures are starting to converge. It’s becoming more apparent what he’s ultimately trying to do, and it’s not just talk.

https://twitter.com/defense_civil25/status/2039482814031167526

NASA has already selected the SpaceX Human Landing System (HLS) for Artemis as the means to land people on the moon. SpaceX’s Raptor engines and reusable rocket technology may also come to play.

https://twitter.com/theinformant_x/status/1986890516043337983

Not coincidentally, SpaceX this week took a major first step towards its IPO which will generate the cash SpaceX will need to further realize its potential and Musk’s vision. According to Bloomberg, SpaceX’s IPO could be the largest public offering ever after filing with the U.S. Securities Exchange Commission (SEC). The newswire reported that SpaceX could raise up to $75 billion through the IPO.

Reuters has reported that while the company is valued at $1.25 trillion right now, Musk and SpaceX are seeking a valuation of $1.8 trillion through the IPO. While no official date has been disclosed, reports are to expect it in June. If you’ve only been casually paying attention to Musk and his various business ventures because they may have seemed too far out for you to get your head around, now may be the time to start paying closer attention. Even if all you have is a 401(k) or an IRA account, chances are pretty good that a part of your own nest egg will depend on Musk to achieve some of those goals of his.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Apr 042026
 
 April 4, 2026  Posted by at 9:47 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , ,  35 Responses »


Paul Gauguin Apatarao 1893


Strait of Hormuz Won’t Return to Pre-War Status Quo – Iranian Official (RT)
EU To Be Hostile Alliance For Russia, Worse Than NATO – Medvedev (TASS)
Western Leaders Demand More Sacrifices From Their People (RT)
Germany’s Economy Minister Urges Nuclear Rethink As Energy Prices Surge (ZH)
Bondi’s Replacement is Important, But Not as Important as Perceived (CTH)
Is This the REAL Reason Trump Fired Pam Bondi? (Matt Margolis)
Why States Are Right to Reject AI Legal Personhood (ET)
Trump Offers Cabinet Position With Perks, Power, and Zero Job Security (Turley)
The Red Line (James Howard Kunstler)
Most Powerful Energy Crisis In Human History Is Looming – Putin Envoy (RT)
Primary Fundraising Mechanism of Democrats Accepted Foreign Donations (CTH)
HUGE March Jobs Report Leaves Democrats Speechless (Margolis)
Chicago Bulls Release Forward After He Speaks Out Against Pride Month (Turley)

 


 

https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/2039840056316186806?s=20 https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/2039925796454772799?s=20 https://twitter.com/TRUMP_ARMY_/status/2040004781306208600?s=20 https://twitter.com/Nob0dymyname/status/2039622739867103741?s=20

 


 

 


 


“The key waterway is closed for the US and its allies, but ships from other countries are able to use it, the official told RT..” A French ship crossed through the Strait of Hormuz yesterday. Is there hope from that angle?

Strait of Hormuz Won’t Return to Pre-War Status Quo – Iranian Official (RT)

The Strait of Hormuz will not return to the status quo enjoyed before the US-Israeli war against Iran, a security official has told RT. The waterway, through which around 20% of seaborne crude oil trade passes, remains effectively closed due to the fighting during the past month. The deadlock has caused economic strains for many countries – including the US, where gas prices surpassed $4 per gallon earlier this week. The Iranian official said in an interview with RT on Thursday that the “conditions in the Strait of Hormuz will not return to the pre-war status quo.”


At the moment, transit through the waterway “remains operational,” but ships “are subject to the approval of the Iranian side and require the flag state of the vessel to establish contact with Tehran,” he said, adding: “To date, no vessel belonging to the enemy or its partners has been granted permission to pass,” referring to the US, Israel, and their allies. The Iranian authorities have established a “secure route” through the strait, the official said. “Given the insecurity caused by American aggression across various parts of the Persian Gulf, this corridor remains the only viable path for the transport of goods and products.”

He also urged the international media “to ignore the disinformation campaigns by the US-Israeli side and [US President Donald] Trump personally.”“Iranian regulation and control over the Strait continues and will persist,” he told RT. In an address to the nation on Thursday, Trump suggested that countries that depend on oil shipments through the Strait of Hormuz should “build up some delayed courage… and just take it.” He added that the waterway could “open up naturally” after the war ends, without providing details.

Earlier this week, the Iranian parliament approved a “new regime,” according to which Tehran will collect payment from ships going through the strait. Lloyd’s List magazine said earlier that one vessel has already paid $2 million for transit. Tasnim news agency estimated that Tehran could make around $100 billion annually under the scheme once traffic in the strait is fully restored.

Read more …

“European political freaks, especially in Brussels, are seriously thinking about creating a full-fledged military component within the EU..”

EU To Be Hostile Alliance For Russia, Worse Than NATO – Medvedev (TASS)

The European Union could turn into an extremely hostile military alliance toward Russia, “worse than NATO,” Dmitry Medvedev, Deputy Head of the Russian Security Council, said on Max. “It is obvious that there are powerful contradictions within the alliance, which have been exacerbated by the Iranian campaign. And European political freaks, especially in Brussels, are seriously thinking about creating a full-fledged military component within the EU. But this is altering the picture of the world,” Medvedev warned. He said until now the Russian rhetoric about EU membership has been restrained and calm in relation to all neighbors, even to Ukraine: join it, if you want.


“But now everything has to change – now the EU is no longer an economic union. It can quickly turn into a full-fledged and extremely hostile military alliance against Russia, in some ways worse than NATO,” the politician said. “It will be a disgusting rabble of rabid European parasites and their task will be to earn political capital and, of course, dough by inflating Russophobic hysteria. It’s time to abandon the tolerant attitude towards joining the military-economic European Union of our neighbors.” Medvedev said that Russian President Vladimir Putin had already done this neatly when he told Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan that Moscow was calm about the development of Yerevan’s relations with the EU, but Armenia would not be able to be in two customs unions at once – the European Union and the Eurasian Economic Union.

Read more …

Until the people say no more.

Western Leaders Demand More Sacrifices From Their People (RT)

The leaders of the UK and Australia have told their citizens to cut fuel consumption and prepare for months of hardship as a result of the US-Israeli war with Iran. But Keir Starmer and Anthony Albanese couldn’t bring themselves to name who’s responsible. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and his Australian counterpart, Anthony Albanese, delivered a pair of seemingly coordinated addresses to their nations on Wednesday. “The economic shocks caused by [the Iran war] will be with us for months,” Albanese said, telling Australians to switch to public transport if possible, and promising to cut fuel taxes and prepare for the possibility that “the global situation gets worse and our fuel supplies are seriously disrupted.”


“Australia is not an active participant in this war,” he claimed, despite his government being the first in the world to back the US and Israel’s opening strikes on Iran on February 28. Starmer struck a similar tone, declaring that “this is not our war,” but warning that “the impact of this war will affect the future of our country.” The British PM promised that “no matter how fierce this storm is, we are well placed to weather it,” and vowed to help “reopen” the Strait of Hormuz.

How bad is the energy crisis?
The US-Israeli war with Iran has triggered the most severe energy crisis since the 1970s, if not in history. Around 40% of the world’s oil comes from the Middle East. Nearly a third of the world’s seaborne crude oil transits the Strait of Hormuz, a waterway less than 40 km wide at its narrowest point, which through a combination of Iranian attacks on tankers and hesitance by Western insurers, is de facto closed to maritime traffic. Additionally, Iran’s retaliatory attacks on Gulf states hosting American troops have taken refineries and export terminals out of action. Qatar, which supplies 20% of the world’s liquefied natural gas (LNG), completely halted production almost a month ago.

As a result, Brent oil prices – which serve as a barometer for 80% of the world’s crude oil – have sat above $100 per barrel for three weeks, while gas prices have surged 60% in the EU and more than 100% in the UK. While the crisis is global, its effects are particularly acute in the EU, UK, and Australia, all of which have sanctioned Russian oil and gas, shutting themselves off from a potential lifeline amid the crisis. The EU once relied on Russia for 45% of its gas imports, before switching to more expensive American and Qatari supplies after 2022. With no date in sight for the resumption of Qatari imports, and with inflation spiking across Europe, European Central Bank President Christine Lagarde warned last week that “we are facing a real shock…probably beyond what we can imagine at the moment.”

The Strait of Hormuz was open to maritime traffic until the US and Israel launched an unprovoked attack on Iran in the middle of nuclear talks. However, neither Starmer nor Albanese mentioned the US or Israel in their speeches. Instead, both the UK and Australia issued a joint statement – along with 32 other US allies in Europe and the Gulf – blaming the closure of the strait squarely on “Iran’s actions.” “We call on Iran to cease immediately its threats, laying of mines, drone and missile attacks and other attempts to block the Strait to commercial shipping,” the statement reads, accusing Tehran of posing “a threat to international peace and security.

Read more …

You can’t just have a “Nuclear Rethink”. It’ll take a decade at the very minimum.

Germany’s Economy Minister Urges Nuclear Rethink As Energy Prices Surge (ZH)

Germany’s Economy Minister Katherina Reiche has openly called for a fundamental reassessment of the country’s long-standing rejection of nuclear power, warning that heavy dependence on gas has left Europe’s largest economy dangerously exposed to repeated energy shocks. Speaking at the launch of a new international investor conference aimed at drawing foreign capital into Germany, Reiche told the Financial Times that the decision by previous governments to phase out nuclear generation has eliminated any realistic alternative for reliable baseload electricity. “We need gas to secure our supply – that is the only baseload supply I have left,” she said. “Politically speaking, I have no alternative.”


Reiche, a senior figure in Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s Christian Democratic Union, made the remarks as fresh data highlighted the mounting costs of the nuclear exit, originally decided under Angela Merkel in 2011 and completed under Olaf Scholz. While the policy was accompanied by a massive push for renewables, it has left Germany more reliant on gas-fired power stations to keep the lights on when the wind doesn’t blow and the sun doesn’t shine. European gas prices have risen more than 60 per cent since the outbreak of conflict in the Middle East, delivering the continent’s second major energy price crisis in under five years. Futures contracts for German electricity in May are trading at four times the level seen in France, Europe’s biggest nuclear producer, according to the energy exchange EEX.

Reiche urged Germany to stop sitting on the sidelines of Europe’s nuclear revival. France, Sweden and Poland are all either building new reactors or extending the life of existing ones, attracted by the technology’s ability to deliver large volumes of low-carbon, dispatchable power. “We can decide that we are not interested. Then we stick to gas and become more dependent on one energy source,” she said. “Or we can say that we are interested in technology again.” With Germany’s renowned engineering expertise, Reiche argued the country should at minimum engage constructively in European nuclear projects and international forums. “Anyone standing on the sidelines simply commenting loses influence. You must be on the pitch if you want to play.”

The vulnerability of Germany’s gas strategy was brutally exposed after Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine cut off pipeline supplies. Berlin was forced to pivot rapidly to liquefied natural gas, much of it from the United States, which now accounts for around 10 per cent of the country’s gas supply. Energy costs have remained stubbornly high ever since. In the second half of 2025, gas prices for private households were 79 per cent above 2021 levels, while electricity prices rose 23 per cent, official statistics show. The latest price spike is already hammering industry and derailing growth forecasts. A consortium of leading German economic institutes warned on Wednesday that the energy shock would erase more than half the GDP growth previously expected for 2026.

The new projection is just 0.6 per cent, down from 1.3 per cent in September, with 2027 growth seen at 0.9 per cent. Reiche acknowledged the strain on energy-intensive sectors but insisted Germany faced no immediate supply shortages. She noted that Chancellor Merz, who heads a year-old coalition between the CDU and Social Democrats, has long described the nuclear phase-out as a “huge mistake.” While the government has ruled out restarting closed conventional reactors, it is now supporting research into small modular reactors and nuclear fusion. Merz has also pledged to end Germany’s previous opposition to nuclear power at EU level.

The renewed energy debate comes as Berlin battles to revive an economy weighed down by high costs, Chinese competition and structural weaknesses. Despite a €1 trillion decade-long infrastructure and defence spending package – the largest since reunification – growth remains elusive. To counter the gloom, the government is hosting the first “Invest in Germany” summit in Berlin on 19-20 October. Reiche hopes the event, modelled on France’s “Choose France” initiative, will secure concrete investment pledges and reposition Germany as a stable, diversified alternative for global capital. “I don’t see a flight from the dollar … but we see a lot of inquiries from America,” she said.

Investors she speaks to recognise the country’s underlying strengths, she added: a powerful industrial base, well-capitalised small and medium-sized companies (Mittelstand) and strategic importance. “Germany is currently in a weak phase,” they tell her, “but … you are of great strategic interest to us.” Whether a more pragmatic stance on nuclear power can help restore that interest – and ease the pressure on German households and factories – will be one of the defining tests for Merz’s government in the months ahead.

Read more …

The intelligence community controls the DOJ. That is significant.

Bondi’s Replacement is Important, But Not as Important as Perceived (CTH)

In a two-week period right after the 2024 election, the most energy expended by the transition team putting a cabinet together was toward Main Justice or the Dept of Justice. As a consequence, those around Lutnick and Wiles spent an incredible amount of time thinking about the Attorney General pick. Following an insider discussion, I spoke with several people about positions and appointments, focused on pointing out that the transition’s priorities were misplaced. The AG needed to be someone with exceptional moral character, capable of gathering information and presenting it for public consumption, with the option of supporting criminal referrals if necessary.


The Attorney General wasn’t going to be the tip of the spear in any operation to confront the Deep State, because if Main Justice wanted to confront Lawfare they needed to confront the Intelligence Community first. The IC controls all of the activity within the Dept of Justice. Read that again for emphasis. For the issues of greatest importance, the Intelligence Community controls all of the activity within Main Justice. The IC is in control of the source material. The IC is above the DOJ. If you don’t strategize a confrontation with the IC first, it doesn’t matter what you do with the Dept of Justice.

The best example I could reference at the time was the Mar-a-Lago documents case and Judge Aileen Cannon. In that example the Executive branch was targeting Trump through the DOJ/FBI, and representing the Judicial branch Judge Cannon was the firewall ensuring the appropriate administration of justice. Trump’s defense, through Cannon, pushed back against the DOJ (Jack Smith) while Smith leveraged all his Lawfare tools back against Cannon. You might remember the “classified document” issue went to the 11th CCA.

The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with the government position that any documents defined as “classified” by the executive branch that claimed, “national security,” should not be disclosed to the defendant, Trump. The 11th CCA said when it comes to matters of national security, the judicial branch must defer to the determinations of the executive. Basically, if the intelligence community decides certain information is tied to national security and labels it as classified for the DOJ, that decision can’t be challenged. The U.S. Supreme Court has backed this view. As a result, when it comes to national security issues, the judicial branch has to defer to the executive, giving the IC significant control over the DOJ.

If you drag former CIA Director John Brennan into court and Brennan’s lawyers argue ‘national security’ as a defense against indictment, inquiry or questioning, it’s not the DOJ (Attorney General) who matters – it’s the ‘national security’ determination of the Intelligence Community (Tulsi Gabbard) who controls the outcome. Over and over, I kept emphasizing this point. If you want to hold the Spygate/Russiagate folks accountable, it’s not going to be the DOJ who matter; not directly. It is the Intelligence Community that matters.

If you seek accountability, and if you want to stop Lawfare from exploiting the silo defenses, it’s the IC that matters; not the Dept of Justice. The transition team was putting emphasis on the wrong syllable. Remember, my emphasis was on the need for institutional accountability on Spygate and Russiagate, and the DOJ is a tool toward the goal but not the ultimate weapon.

Read more …

I doubt it. She just never arrested anyone.

Is This the REAL Reason Trump Fired Pam Bondi? (Matt Margolis)

On Thursday, we learned that President Donald Trump fired Pam Bondi as attorney general, making her the second Cabinet member he’s axed in less than a month. Trump’s official send-off was gracious, but the question remains: Why did he fire her? Bondi has come under fire for her handling of the Epstein files. Her muddled public statements about the existence of a so-called “client list” turned a political liability into a full-blown firestorm, drawing bipartisan condemnation and fueling accusations of a transparency cover-up. But there may be another nugget to the story.


Trump, for what it’s worth, praised her in a post on Truth Social, calling her “a Great American Patriot and a loyal friend, who faithfully served as my Attorney General over the past year,” crediting her with doing “a tremendous job” overseeing a crackdown on crime that drove murder rates to their lowest point since 1900. “We love Pam, and she will be transitioning to a much needed and important new job in the private sector, to be announced at a date in the near future.” That’s a warm sendoff, atypical for Trump, who often kicks people out the door and trashes them immediately after. It’s a welcome change, as far as I’m concerned. I’ve never been a fan of his constantly trashing and making enemies out of people he had served in his administration.

According to a report from the Daily Mail, the reason Trump gave Bondi the axe is that he believes Bondi tipped off Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) about the FBI’s plans to release documents tied to his decade-old relationship with a suspected Chinese spy. “She’s intervening in those matters,” a source close to the situation told the paper. “The White House wasn’t pleased she was intervening due to her personal friendship with Swalwell.” Trump had also grown privately furious that Bondi wasn’t prosecuting the political enemies who spent years targeting him. He made it known — publicly — posting last September that the delays in those cases were “harming our reputation and credibility.”

According to a senior administration source, Trump informed Bondi of her dismissal on Wednesday night, just before he delivered his Iran speech. And she didn’t take it well. Bondi reportedly pleaded for more time, and the confrontation at the White House grew tense. “She was unhappy and tried to change his mind,” the source said. Bondi stayed at the White House throughout the Iran speech, then quietly flew home to Florida. The Swalwell angle is an interesting one. But still bizarre. “It is unclear why Bondi would have intervened, but it is believed that Bondi and Swalwell have a friendly relationship,” explains the Daily Mail. “Swalwell, a fellow lawyer, has openly criticized her since she took the AG position after failing to prosecute multiple death threats against him and his family.”

Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, Trump’s former personal attorney, is now serving as acting Attorney General until a permanent nominee is identified. Some are speculating that EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin is a possible candidate.

Read more …

An AI system can easily be smarter than a human. But it’s not accountable?

“..a clear chain of human accountability from every AI action to every AI consequence. When an AI system causes harm, there must always be a human who answers for it.”

Can a human “answer” for a system that is much smarter than him/her?

How would an AI system answer that?

Why States Are Right to Reject AI Legal Personhood (ET)

A quiet but consequential legal movement is gathering momentum. Idaho and Utah have enacted statutes declaring that artificial intelligence systems are not legal persons. Ohio’s House Bill 469 proposes to declare that AI systems are “nonsentient entities” and bars them from acquiring any form of legal personhood. Similar bills are advancing in Pennsylvania, Oklahoma, Missouri, South Carolina, and Washington. The legislatures driving this movement are not technophobes. They are drawing a necessary line that philosophy, law, and common sense all demand.


The pressure in the opposite direction is real. In January, at the World Economic Forum in Davos, historian Yuval Noah Harari described AI as “mastering language.” Since language is the medium through which law, religion, finance, and culture are constituted, AI may soon be capable of acting within every institution humans have built. Harari asked whether countries would recognize AI as legal persons—whether AI could open bank accounts, file lawsuits, and own property without human supervision. The prospect is not science fiction. It is a policy choice, and the wrong choice would be deeply consequential.

Phantasms versus Nous
Aristotle argued in De Anima that all sentient creatures share a basic cognitive capacity to perceive the world, retain impressions of it, and recombine impressions into new configurations—what he called phantasia, imagination. A dog, a crow, and a chess grand master possess this competency.

Aristotle distinguished human beings as categorically different: possessing nous, the capacity to grasp universal, abstract concepts—ideas like justice, causation, and the good—that cannot be derived from any sensory experience alone. A dog can recognize its owner, but it cannot grasp the concept of ownership. A parrot can reproduce a sentence about fairness, but it has no understanding of fairness.

vWhat is the distinction? Can’t we simply feed an AI system Webster’s definition of “fairness” and let it work from there? No—feeding a machine the dictionary definition only gives it more words to pattern-match against—the concept is not in the words. Any child who grasps fairness can apply it correctly to a situation no definition anticipates. AI can only produce text that statistically resembles how humans talked about fairness before.

This is not a gap that more computing power or better training data will close. Computer scientist Judea Pearl demonstrated mathematically that no amount of pattern recognition over observational data can substitute for genuine causal inference. The appearance of understanding is not understanding itself. And it is precisely the capacity for genuine understanding—for deliberating about what is good and right—that grounds moral responsibility, which is the only coherent basis for legal personhood.

The Problem With the Corporate Analogy
Proponents of AI personhood often invoke corporate personhood as precedent. Corporations are not natural persons, yet the law treats them as legal persons capable of owning property, entering contracts, and being sued. Why not extend this pragmatic fiction to AI? The analogy breaks down at accountability.

Corporate personhood is a legal convenience built on human moral agency. Behind every corporation is a structured network of natural persons—board members, executives, shareholders—who bear fiduciary duties, can be deposed and held liable under piercing-the-veil doctrine, and face reputational and criminal consequences for their decisions. The corporation is a vehicle for organizing human action, not a substitute.

Ohio’s HB 469 captures this logic by denying AI legal personhood, prohibiting AI systems from serving as corporate officers or directors, and assigning all liability for AI-caused harm to identifiable human owners, developers, and deployers.

Labeling a system “aligned” or “ethically trained” does not discharge human responsibility. Granting AI legal personhood would shatter this accountability architecture. An AI “person” could own intellectual property, hold financial assets, and bring lawsuits—all without a human principal who can be held responsible. Sophisticated actors could construct chains of AI-owned shell companies that dissolve liability through layers of nominal personhood. The result would not be extending rights to a new class of beings; it would be creating accountability vacuums that benefit the powerful humans who deploy AI while insulating them from consequence.

The Moral Stakes for Real People
A deeper moral issue underlies all of this. Legal personhood is not merely an administrative category; it carries normative weight. It signals that an entity has standing to make claims, to be wronged, and to bear obligations. Extending that status to systems that cannot genuinely deliberate, cannot suffer, and cannot be held morally responsible would dilute the concept of personhood in ways that could ultimately harm the humans who most need its protections.

We have not yet secured the full benefits of legal personhood for all human beings in practice—for the displaced, stateless, and structurally invisible. Rushing to extend a contested status to machines while that work remains unfinished would be a profound misallocation of moral and legal energy.

None of this requires hostility to AI as a technology. AI systems can be powerful, useful, and—when properly governed—enormously beneficial. What AI systems cannot be is persons. The states passing anti-personhood legislation are preserving something more important than a competitive advantage—a clear chain of human accountability from every AI action to every AI consequence. When an AI system causes harm, there must always be a human who answers for it. That principle is not a constraint on technology; it is the foundation of a just society.

Aristotle taught that law is reason without passion—a framework for coordinating human beings capable of living well together. AI can help us pursue the good life, but it cannot deliberate about what that life requires. As states across the country move to codify this distinction, they are doing exactly what legislatures exist to do—drawing lines that protect persons: all of them, and only them.

Read more …

Lee Zeldin.

Trump Offers Cabinet Position With Perks, Power, and Zero Job Security (Turley)

There is an old joke that scientists switched from lab rats to lawyers because you do not get as attached to lawyers. President Trump has shown the same tendency not to become attached to either private or public counsel. Attorney General is only the latest in a long line of lawyers let go by a president made famous with the tagline “You’re fired.” There is no evidence of bad blood between President Trump and Bondi. The Attorney General has been attacked over her loyalty to the President and has been by his side in some of the most precarious moments from his impeachment to his criminal defense. As his “apprentices” learned, this is not personal. It’s business.


Jeff Sessions. Rex Tillerson. Bill Barr. Mark Esper. Kristi Noem. Trump’s “cabinets” are known more for shelving than storage.Indeed, being a cabinet member in a Trump administration is about as secure as being a quarterback on the Cleveland Browns. Trump has always viewed terminations as a way to spur higher performance levels. There is a reason why Trump may have wanted to move now in swapping out Attorneys General. There are growing predictions that the Republicans will lose the House and could also lose the Senate. Democrats are running on pledges of unleashing a new spasm of investigations and impeachments, targeting not just President Trump but anyone who supports him.

Figures like Susan Rice, top policy adviser to both President Barack Obama and Joe Biden, have promised “revenge” against all those who pushed Democrats out of power and warned that “it’s not going to end well for them.” Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) pledged that, as soon as they regain power, they will start throwing Trump people in jail when they retake Congress. Democratic strategist James Carville previously threatened that “collaborators” may be treated in the same way as they were after World War II.Trump has to decide who will be the best hand on the wheel in those coming choppy waters.

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche has the street cred that Trump values. An accomplished litigator and former prosecutor, Blanche is neither flashy nor gregarious. He is a lethal litigator who can gut you like a trout without breaking a sweat. He has been at the president’s side in and out of court. While he will be a lightning rod for Democrats who have attacked him for his role in the release of the Epstein files, his firmness in dealing with a hostile media likely appealed to the President.

Blanche offers a seamless transition for the Department. He literally only has to walk down the hallway to take the reins from Bondi. Another name reportedly under consideration is EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin, who would likely be the easiest to confirm and the most popular with members of Congress. Zeldin transformed the EPA in short order, including clearly away barriers to increasing energy production. Almost elected governor of New York, Zeldin has cross-over appeal in Washington as someone who cut his teeth in this town.

Other candidates include state attorneys general, as well as wild cards like U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro, a former judge with a tough-as-nails reputation in Washington, D.C. It is a deep bench. There will be no shortage of applicants for the job. The office of the Attorney General in the Trump Administration has everything that one could want in Washington. Everything, that is, except job security.

Read more …

“The ends must justify the means — the only question is what means are necessary.” —Saul Alinsky

The Red Line (James Howard Kunstler)

Why do the news anchor ladies of CNN, Erin Burnett, Kate Bolduon, always look so depressed on the air? They never smile. Their faces always register something between grave concern and hysteria. Is it the network’s cratered ratings? The pending hostile takeover by Paramount / Skydance (led by conservative David Ellison)? Too much botox, zombifying the small facial muscles? Or is it self-loathing from being compelled to slant everything they report on in the direction of a lie?


There does seem to be some hidden hand in Narrative Central issuing prescribed story-lines to the networks, and that hand seems to be tinged with malice for anything and anyone seeking to rescue our country from chaos, penury, psychosis, and jihad. It looks like the hidden hand wants the country to go down in flames, and will resort to any means necessary to get it done. The template for that is so-called “color revolution,” which is a hyper-accelerated version of Antonio Gramsci’s “march through the institutions” to capture the transmitters of culture so as to produce a communist utopia.

Gramsci (1891 – 1937) founded the Italian communist party. The fascist Mussolini tossed him in jail where Gramsci scribbled out three thousand pages of his Prison Notebooks, in which he laid out his strategy for destroying civil society, later adapted by the Americans Saul Alinsky (1909-1972) in his Rules for Radicals and Gene Sharp (1928-2018), who penned several concise manuals of strategic mechanics for dismantling targeted governments.

These are the mentors of chief Lawfare ninja Norm Eisen, who has made a specialty of marching through the institution of American law in order to advance the agenda of the Democratic Party allied with cohorts of the permanent Washington bureaucracy (or Deep State) to fend off any challenge to the corruption and racketeering embedded in those two symbionts.

The challenge obviously presents in the form of Donald Trump, the once and current president battling an increasingly rabid set of opponents. Norm Eisen has been deeply involved in every attempt to undermine and disable Mr. Trump since 2016. He wrote briefs for the Mueller Special Counsel operation; he acted as prosecutor in Trump’s impeachment # 1 (prompted by CIA agent and so-called “whistleblower” Eric Ciaramella, as facilitated by then Rep. Adam Schiff); he assisted ex parte in the House Jan 6 Committee proceedings; he prepared legal arguments for the Fani Willis prosecution of Mr. Trump and 18 co-defendants; and he helped construct the legal framework for Special Counsel Jack Smith’s cases against Mr. Trump. In short, Norm Eisen spent the past decade laboring to brand Donald Trump as a criminal and shove him out of the political arena. His efforts failed.

Norm Eisen founded or is associated with several swamp NGOs active in Trump-hunting operations, including Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), the States United Democracy Center, the Democracy Defender’s Fund, Democracy Defenders Action — all posing as anti-autocracy operations. Eisen and his orgs have filed hundreds of lawsuits against the Trump administration to obstruct any initiative the President advances to stop Democratic Party sanctioned grift, deport illegal aliens ushered in during the “Joe Biden” years, and especially to derail investigations of election fraud. These orgs are well-funded by George Soros’s Open Society NGO and it’s spinoffs, Arabella Advisors (rebranded as Sunflower Services), the Tides Foundation, that is, the usual suspects.

Read more …

“The EU and the UK are unprepared and face deindustrialization after rejecting Russian oil and gas, Kirill Dmitriev has said..”

Repeated from a few days ago. It seems that important.

Most Powerful Energy Crisis In Human History Is Looming – Putin Envoy (RT)

The world is heading toward the most severe energy crisis in history and Europe is unprepared, Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev has said. The warning comes as the escalating conflict in the Middle East has driven volatility in global energy markets. Speaking on Thursday, Dmitriev – who heads the Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF) and is President Vladimir Putin’s special envoy for investment and economic cooperation – said he earlier predicted that oil would exceed $100 a barrel if a conflict like this broke out. “Back then, no one believed,” he said, adding that some market participants are now discussing the possibility of prices rising to $150 or even $200.


“We see that the most severe energy crisis in the history of mankind is approaching. Neither the EU nor the UK is at all prepared for it,” Dmitriev said on the sidelines of the RDIF congress. Brussels and London “shot themselves in the foot” by rejecting Russian oil and gas, and the consequences of this are only beginning to emerge, he added. Dmitriev warned that the EU faces deindustrialization, and that “big problems” await the UK, arguing that this the result of choices made by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and other “Russophobic politicians.” Western governments will eventually be forced to seek renewed access to Russian energy, he said.

Oil and gas prices have spiked since the escalation of the Middle East conflict, triggered by the US-Israeli strikes on Iran and subsequent Iranian retaliatory attacks across the region, which have led to the effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz to Western shipping. The strait normally carries around a fifth of the world’s daily oil supply, and the IEA has warned that disruptions could last months or years. European gas prices have risen by around 70% since March 1; Brent crude has topped $110 per barrel, prompting Washington to ease the sanctions on Russian oil.

The EU was already grappling with the fallout from its decision to cut energy ties with Russia following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict, as well as the costs of its green transition policies. The European Commission has said there will be no return to Russian energy, and it will continue to pursue a full phase-out of Russian fossil fuels by 2027. This week, however, it put plans for a complete ban on Russian oil on hold, due to what some officials reportedly called “current geopolitical developments.”

Read more …

ActBlue.

“.. the Eric Holder law firm Covington & Burling, the primary legal mechanism for the ActBlue/DNC machinery, lies at the heart of the matter.”

Primary Fundraising Mechanism of Democrats Accepted Foreign Donations (CTH)

ActBlue is to the Democrat party fundraising machine as WinRed is to the Republican side of the equation.


In a rather stunning outline by the New York Times [SEE HERE] the progressive outlet is reporting of serious concerns within the leadership of ActBlue related to their willfully blind reception of foreign sources of money to fund Democrat candidates. The remarkable aspect is not just that ActBlue takes foreign funds, but rather the New York Times revealing internal legal discussions about it. According to the Times reporting, the Eric Holder law firm Covington & Burling, the primary legal mechanism for the ActBlue/DNC machinery, lies at the heart of the matter.

(NYT) […] The firm concluded that ActBlue’s chief executive had given a potentially misleading response to congressional Republican investigators in a 2023 letter explaining how the organization vetted donations to ensure that they were not illegally coming from foreign citizens. The letter from the chief executive, Regina Wallace-Jones, said ActBlue carried out “multilayered” screenings of contributions that helped “root out” those from overseas. In fact, the law firm found, some of the steps she had described were not always followed.

“This presents a substantial risk for ActBlue,” the law firm, Covington & Burling, wrote in one of two memos expressing legal concerns. One memo raised the specter of a criminal investigation if prosecutors believed that ActBlue had tried to conceal facts about its efforts to prevent foreign contributions. To really appreciate the scheme that seems to be outlined by the internal documents, it is worth remembering that James O’Keefe previously did some boots on the ground research into ActBlue and found that multiple, perhaps thousands, of “donor” names and addresses were assigned to contributions the donors said they never made.

Put the two issues together and it appears that ActBlue may have been laundering foreign money into the DNC by using donor identities to cover the funding mechanism. Foreign funds, broken up into separate, smaller components and then attributed to Smurf donor identities. As many surmised at the time, the donor IDs would be useful – only to launder the funds. That would explain why thousands of donors denied making contributions, yet FEC reports filed by ActBlue officials assign, falsely, their identity to donations. Shortly before the 2024 federal election, on October 24th, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton also submitted a criminal referral to the DOJ following his own investigation of this activity.

TEXAS – “Attorney General Ken Paxton made a criminal referral to the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) detailing the results of an investigation that revealed how suspicious actors seemingly use ActBlue’s political fundraising platform to make illegal straw donations.” Put the New York Times story together with the James O’Keefe investigation, and then overlay the Texas AG investigation and criminal referral, and there’s not just smoke -or fire- there’s an inferno ablaze.

[…] ActBlue is now all but declaring war on its own past lawyers, an extraordinary turn of events at a moment when President Trump has already ordered a Justice Department investigation into the organization. Democrats are nervous that any additional upheaval at ActBlue could destabilize the party’s critical fund-raising apparatus ahead of the midterm elections. All levels of Democratic candidates, from incumbent presidents to school board aspirants, use ActBlue to raise campaign money from online donors. The platform has processed nearly $19 billion in contributions since its founding in 2004, building a donor database with millions of credit card numbers that is unmatched in American politics. Nearly 23,000 candidates and groups used the site in 2025, ActBlue has said, raising almost $1.8 billion from 52 million contributions, some of which recur every month.

[…] “It can be alleged that ActBlue accepted and/or facilitated the acceptance of foreign-national contributions into American elections,” one memo states. “In addition, because ActBlue’s staff was aware that its system was not as robust as necessary, it could be alleged that these violations were ‘knowing and willful,’ a standard that both increases the penalties the F.E.C. might seek and gives the Justice Department jurisdiction for a potential criminal investigation.” (more)

It’s called, Money Laundering.

Read more …

Strong numbers. Not much attention.

HUGE March Jobs Report Leaves Democrats Speechless (Margolis)

The so-called experts didn’t just miss the mark on March jobs numbers; they got steamrolled by reality. Economists predicted a weak 59,000 jobs. The actual number came in at a stunning 178,000. Talk about getting it completely wrong. And it’s the latest reminder that the same crowd that spent months warning about economic doom under President Donald Trump still doesn’t understand what’s actually happening on the ground. Even CNN couldn’t deny that this was huge. CNBC couldn’t contain its excitement.


Unemployment dipped again, falling from 4.4% to 4.3%. Even more telling, the rate dropped across multiple groups, including women, black Americans, Asians, Hispanics, and veterans. That kind of broad-based improvement doesn’t happen in a weak economy. It doesn’t even happen when a Democrat is in the White House. Meanwhile, jobless claims are now hovering near a two-year low. In other words, fewer people are losing jobs, and more people are finding them. That’s the formula for sustained momentum. Manufacturing and construction both saw real growth, the kind that signals strength in the backbone of the economy. Let’s keep going, shall we?

Since Trump returned to office, the private sector has added 609,000 jobs. At the same time, federal government employment has dropped by 352,000. On top of that, native-born Americans are benefiting, too. A total of 218,000 native-born workers have gained employment, and 193,000 have entered the labor force. That’s no accident; that’s by design. Trump’s designWages are also moving in the right direction. Average hourly earnings rose 0.2% in March and sit 3.5% higher than a year ago. It gets better. Blue-collar workers, who took a beating during the Biden years, have now recovered those lost wages in just one year under Trump.

As for inflation, it continues to cool. It now sits at 2.4%, down from 3.0% when Trump took office — and way below the 9% it reached under Biden. Core inflation has dropped to 2.5%, its lowest level in five years. That’s a major shift after the price spikes Americans endured not long ago. What does this mean for Americans? It means prices for everyday staples like bread, meat, fruit, and dairy have all come down. Egg prices, which became a symbol of runaway inflation, have plunged nearly 50% since Trump took office and 60% compared to last Easter. Housing is showing signs of relief as well. Mortgage rates have declined, and rents are down 1.7% over the past year.

Put it all together, and it’s clear that the Trump economy is working. Jobs are growing faster than expected. Wages are rising. Inflation is falling. And everyday costs are easing. The “experts” can keep predicting collapse if they want. The numbers keep telling a very different story. Trump’s golden age is coming through. Neither Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, DNC Chairman Ken Martin, nor the Democratic Party has addressed the new jobs report on X.

Read more …

”Ivey expressed his opposing religious beliefs, including criticizing the NBA’s Pride Month celebrations.”

Chicago Bulls Release Forward After He Speaks Out Against Pride Month (Turley)

This week, the Chicago Bulls waived guard Jaden Ivey for “conduct detrimental to the team.” No, Ivey did not assault anyone or gamble on games. He did not call for violence. Ivey expressed his opposing religious beliefs, including criticizing the NBA’s Pride Month celebrations. There is no question that private companies have the right to control employees’ on-the-job speech, including barring demonstrations such as kneeling during the national anthem. However, the Ivey controversy exposes the hypocrisy of sports associations and teams in the combination of corporate virtue signaling and athlete speech limitations.


Companies in various fields have asserted the right to condition contracts on the possibility of termination due to public behavior or comments that are detrimental to the company. Notably, this was a player speaking off the basketball court who was deemed “detrimental” to the brand. The main concern is the lack of consistency. Actors such as Rachel Zegler have tanked their own movies to use their platforms to advance their own political viewpoints. Likewise, athletes have routinely espoused controversial views on racial divisions or law enforcement without losing their contracts. Recently, teams supported athletes espousing anti-ICE sentiments. In other words, it is not advocacy but the cause that these companies focus on when allowing or punishing speech.

At the same time, the NFL and NBA require players to wear and espouse views that some of them — like some in the nation — may oppose. Ivey was objecting that he does not feel that Pride Month is espousing “righteous” lifestyles. Ivey was not attacking the Bulls or the game. He was asserting that he does not support the virtues or values being endorsed by the company. Many of us were offended by social media postings by Ivey in referring to Catholicism as a “false religion.” He also drew the ire of many by telling a fan that “God does not hear your prayer if you are a sinner.”

However, it appears that it was his criticism of the LGBTQ community and Pride Month that ended the matter with the NBA. Ivey objected to the advocacy required by the NBA, objecting “they proclaim it. They show it to the world. They say, ‘Come join us for Pride Month,’ to celebrate unrighteousness.” The issue of “talent” becoming notorious has long been a focus of sports and entertainment contracts. Hateful or divisive public comments can impact a brand or corporate image. For example, a team does not have to continue an association with a racist spewing hateful remarks about fans.

The Ivey controversy should force a discussion of the countervailing responsibilities of the teams and the NBA. Some of us have previously criticized the virtue-signaling of associations like the NFL, with giant statements in the end zones and on players’ helmets. Many fans would like these teams to stop lecturing them and simply play sports. We do not need morality or civics lessons from the likes of NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell. However, if the NFL and NBA are going to get into the business of shaping fans’ values, they may need to accept greater leeway for athletes who hold opposing values. Instead, they are expecting athletes like Ivey to effectively endorse approved values while barring them from expressing dissenting views.

This is not the first such controversy. Years ago, former coach Tony Dungy was the subject of a cancel campaign because he expressed his faith at a pro-life rally. Former Washington Commanders defensive coordinator Jack Del Rio was punished for expressing a dissenting view of what happened on January 6th and what he viewed as the different treatment given to these cases, including excessive sentences. Likewise, recently, Chicago Cubs player Matt Shaw was the target of a campaign to trade him after he attended the funeral of Charlie Kirk.

Sports organizations, like other businesses, have every right to bar protests and political statements at games. They should, however, apply the same standard to themselves. It is time to get virtue signaling and social statements out of sports. Teams need to stop picking sides on social and political issues while blocking opposing views from their athletes. Once out of the business of shaping public values and views, these teams will be in a better position to demand that athletes avoid controversial public statements that alienate fans or harm a brand.

Otherwise, teams could simply bar such commentary during games and allow athletes the same freedom of expression outside of the game that the teams enjoy during games. None of this means that Jaden Ivey is right or admirable in his specific statements. It only means that, if teams want him to just play basketball, they should do the same.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/BROKENBRITAIN0/status/2039988689246298534?s=20 https://twitter.com/CatholicArena/status/2039794549229322271?s=20 Half an hour of your time. You will come away a lot smarter. https://twitter.com/farzyness/status/2039760304805220662?s=20

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Apr 032026
 


Vincent van Gogh The garden of the asylum at Saint-Rémy 1889


Elon Musk’s SpaceX Set To Go Public in $1 Trillion Share Listing (BBC)
Trump Fires Pam Bondi As Attorney General, Blanche To Be Acting AG’ (ZH)
Iran’s Friends To Make Life Much Harder For Israel And The US (Sadygzade)
The Price of Underestimating Iran (Lukyanov)
Mojtaba Breaks Silence, In Message Praises Hezbollah & Shia Leaders (ZH)
European Allies Show ‘Shock And Anxiety’ to Trump Threat to Leave NATO (JTN)
EU Leaders Utterly Bewildered at Energy Vulnerabilities Now Evident (CTH)
Could an Orban Win Trigger ‘Maidan on Steroids’? (RT)
Judge Keeps Democrats’ January 6 Witch Hunt Against Trump Alive (Margolis)
We May Finally Be Close to Ending the Democrats’ DHS Shutdown (Margolis)
AI Giant Anthropic Suffers Strategic Code Hemorrhage (RT)
Nano Nuclear Submits Construction Permit For Kronos Reactor In Illinois (ZH)
Artemis II and the ‘Waste of Space’ (Rick Moran)
The Soul-Crushing Cost of NOT Returning to the Moon for 50+ Years (Pinsker)

 


 

https://twitter.com/MichaelARothman/status/2039494266263867828?s=20 https://twitter.com/MrJohnJnr/status/2039319089810682219?s=20 https://twitter.com/PecanC8/status/2039361697069072753?s=20

 


 


Let’s open with the first trillionaire.

“Musk’s own holding in SpaceX would put the billionaire on track to become the world’s first trillionaire. ”

Well, he’s not yet. Maybe that’s a comfort to some..

The smartest man is also rhe richest?

Did you knowL there are only 20 or so countries in the world with a GDP over $1 trillion.

Elon Musk’s SpaceX Set To Go Public in $1 Trillion Share Listing (BBC)

Elon Musk’s SpaceX is poised to become one of the most valuable publicly traded companies in the world. The company, which manufactures rockets, space exploration technology and Starlink satellites, is currently privately held. But on Wednesday it made a confidential filing with the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) for an initial public offering, which would allow shares to be traded in the stock market. The value of SpaceX once it goes public is expected to surpass $1tn (£751bn). That would make its eventual stock market debut one of the most financially significant in history.


Musk’s own holding in SpaceX would put the billionaire on track to become the world’s first trillionaire. The company is aiming to officially go public sometime in June, according to reports in Bloomberg, Reuters and the New York Times. A confidential IPO filing with the SEC allows a company to avoid immediately revealing information to the public while it requests feedback from the regulator. The next step will be for company executives to hold “roadshows” – meetings with big investors to convince them to buy shares. By making shares of SpaceX available for purchase by the public, the company is looking to raise $50bn or more, according to the reports.

Earlier this year, SpaceX took over xAI, Musk’s artificial intelligence venture. After that all-stock merger, SpaceX is believed to have become the most valuable private company in the world, with an internal valuation of $1.25tn. Recently, Musk’s various companies have been becoming increasingly intertwined. Last year, xAI, best known for its chatbot Grok, took over X, the social media platform previously called Twitter that Musk bought in 2022. This degree of consolidation was a clear sign to investors that SpaceX was preparing to go public. Emily Zheng, a senior analyst at Pitchbook, earlier told the BBC that by bringing xAI under SpaceX, Musk could show potential investors that he was consolidating costs and able to easily share resources between his companies.

With its large-scale ambitions, SpaceX is in need of a massive cash infusion that going public can provide, Zheng added. The company is racing to keep up with the “sheer cost of compute, infrastructure, and energy” needed to expand, she said. Earlier this year, Tesla, Musk’s electric vehicle company, revealed it had invested more than $2bn in xAI. The billionaire said a significant share of Tesla’s manufacturing would begin to shift toward building robots, which would make use of xAI technology like Grok.Grok is already included in some Teslas as an AI assistant. SpaceX would also partner with Tesla and xAI in the massive chipmaking endeavour Musk announced last month, which he is calling Terafab. “

Tesla, xAI and SpaceX have all done amazing things that people did not think could be done before,” Musk said in a March presentation discussing Terafab. Musk started SpaceX in 2002 with the aim of reducing the cost of launching crafts into space, mainly by making rockets that could be launched more than once. It first contracted with Nasa in 2006. Today, most of SpaceX’s work continues to revolve around rockets and the operation of Starlink, a fleet of satellites offering internet connectivity across the globe. But Musk often discusses grander ambitions for the company, including putting data centers needed for AI in space and building a self-sufficient city on Mars, which many experts have said could be impossible to realise.

Read more …

Epstein victim?!

Trump Fires Pam Bondi As Attorney General, Blanche To Be Acting AG’ (ZH)

President Donald Trump has ousted Attorney General Pam Bondi, multiple outlets report. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche is serving as acting AG in the interim. The move comes amid White House frustration with Bondi’s leadership at the Justice Department – particularly her handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files and what Trump viewed as insufficient aggression in targeting his political opponents. Trump had privately discussed firing her and floated EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin (or Blanche) as a possible replacement. Bondi met with Trump in the Oval Office Wednesday night ahead of his speech to the nation on the war in Iran, where she reportedly was informed of her ouster, according to two sources familiar with the meeting.


One of those sources said that by the time Trump took his place behind the podium for the address, Bondi already lost her job and was on her way back to Florida. -Fox News.And according to the WSJ, Trump weighed firing her in January but was persuaded not to do so. In a Thursday statement, Trump called Bondi “a Great American Patriot and a loyal friend, who faithfully served as my Attorney General over the past year,” adding “she will be transitioning to a much needed and important new job in the private sector, to be announced at a date in the near future, and our Deputy Attorney General, and a very talented and respected Legal Mind, Todd Blanche, will step in to serve as Acting Attorney General.”

Earlier:
Leaky little sharks are circling in DC – telling the NY Times and CNN that Pam Bondi may soon be out as Attorney General, and replaced with EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin. The frustration, per sources close to the White House cited by The New York Times and CNN, centers squarely on Bondi’s catastrophic mishandling of the Jeffrey Epstein files – a saga ZeroHedge has chronicled in excruciating detail as one of the most embarrassing self-inflicted wounds of the second Trump term. Recall Bondi’s infamous February 2025 Fox News appearance where she claimed the “client list” was literally “sitting on my desk right now to review.” Fast-forward months later: no list, endless redactions for “national security,” millions more pages “discovered” at the 11th hour, and zero indictments of any high-profile co-conspirators.

Beyond her disastrous testimony in front of the House Judiciary Committee in February – the House Oversight Committee has also subpoenaed her over the “troubling disappearance” of documents, with her deposition still looming on April 14. Even Trump ally and White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles admitted Bondi “completely whiffed” the response.

Trump is also reportedly pissed that Bondi has an apparent allergy to actual justice – namely, her failure to deliver on promises to go after his political foes (former FBI Director James Comey or New York AG Letitia James). Bondi’s DOJ has also been dragging its feet on broader accountability: no real movement on COVID-era prosecutions despite the obvious targets, a bizarre pivot toward “hate speech” crackdowns that even drew fire from the right, and a general pattern of not prosecuting what many see as a laundry list of potential criminals from the prior regime. Perhaps it was all by design. Either way, looks like Pam’s time is short.

What’s more, Bondi’s DOJ has been actively sabotaging the Trump coalition by maintaining Biden-era policies in court – rpeatedly mooting litigation on key issues rather than letting judges deliver precedent-setting knockout blows, defending outdated gun control measures like the 1934 National Firearms Act in suppressor cases, and choosing temporary tactical retreats over permanent wins that would prevent future Democrat administrations from simply flipping the switch back on.

Bondi’s nightmare before Congress was more or less the crescendo of her implosion. On February 11, she was hauled before the House Judiciary Committee for what was supposed to be a straightforward oversight hearing – and instead delivered one of the most disastrous performances in recent memory. As we reported live, Bondi exploded into a full-blown shouting match with Rep. Thomas Massie and top Democrats, dodging more than a dozen direct questions on why – after months of “reviewing” the files – the DOJ still had zero indictments of Epstein’s high-profile co-conspirators.

https://twitter.com/DerrickEvans4WV/status/2021639156611629391

She hemmed and hawed over the selective redactions (victims’ names left exposed while alleged abusers were blacked out), the sudden “discovery” of a million more pages, and the complete lack of accountability for the powerful men who enabled the operation. At one point she even whipped out what insiders called a “burn book” of lawmakers’ search histories in a desperate whataboutism that backfired spectacularly, drawing jeers from Epstein survivors seated in the gallery. So basically an angry stonewalling with clips that went absolutely viral. The base watched in real time as the woman tasked with draining the swamp instead looked like she was guarding it.

The timing is telling. Rumors of Bondi’s exit have swirled for months, but they intensified this week after Trump met with Zeldin (a reliable MAGA foot soldier who ran New York and has been showered with praise by the president for his EPA work). Bondi was still glued to Trump’s side yesterday – riding in the motorcade to Supreme Court arguments and sitting in the audience for his primetime Iran address – but the non-denial denial from the White House speaks volumes: “Attorney General Pam Bondi is a wonderful person and she is doing a good job.” AKA – “you’re on thin ice.”

Zeldin, for his part, has zero of the Epstein baggage and a track record of hawkish loyalty during Trump’s first term. If the move happens, it would mark the second high-profile Cabinet shakeup of the term after Kristi Noem’s ouster at DHS – a clear signal that even Trump is no longer willing to tolerate the kind of institutional inertia and base-alienating fumbles that defined too much of his first go-around.

For now, Bondi remains in place… but the clock is ticking. As one person familiar with the discussions put it, the Epstein fallout has become a genuine political liability.

Read more …

The reason to attack them.

Iran’s Friends To Make Life Much Harder For Israel And The US (Sadygzade)

The war’s second ‘ring of fire’ is no longer forming around Iran. It is already there. What we are witnessing is not a limited clash between a state under pressure and its immediate enemies, but the gradual emergence of a wider regional confrontation in which Tehran’s allied forces are moving from symbolic solidarity to practical engagement. In Lebanon, Iraq, and now once again in Yemen, groups aligned with Iran are opening new fronts and making any American or Israeli campaign far more difficult to execute. If Iran cannot stop pressure by matching superior military power plane for plane or missile for missile, it can still answer by stretching the battlefield across time and space.


That is the real significance of the current escalation. Wars are easiest to sell and easiest to sustain when they look concentrated, technically manageable, and politically clean. They become much harder to continue when every strike produces another zone of instability, when every advance prompts retaliation, and when every promise of decisive success runs into a new and costly complication. Iran and the forces loyal to it understand this perfectly well. Their goal is not necessarily to win a spectacular conventional victory over Israel or the US. They are trying to deprive their adversaries of a quick result, to turn military superiority into strategic over-extension, and to make the price of escalation rise with every passing week.

Israel is getting mired in Lebanon
Lebanon has become the clearest example of this dynamic. Israel entered the confrontation with Hezbollah expecting that greater firepower, harsher pressure, and deeper incursions would eventually impose a new reality in the south of the country. But so far the campaign has not produced the kind of result Israeli leaders would need in order to claim genuine success. Israeli officials are still speaking openly about expanding operations and about the need for a broad security zone in southern Lebanon. That does not sound like a completed military mission. It sounds like a campaign still searching for a workable outcome.

Israel remains capable of inflicting enormous damage on Lebanon. It can devastate border villages and infrastructure, and force large numbers of people from their homes. But the ability to destroy is not the same as the ability to impose control. A military campaign can appear overwhelming on television and still fail to neutralize the armed force it was meant to break. Hezbollah remains capable of hitting Israeli territory, and that single fact tells us that the war in Lebanon has not been resolved in Israel’s favor.

Israel is also suffering losses, not only in military terms but in political and psychological terms. Reports of fallen soldiers and continuing battlefield casualties show that Hezbollah is still able to turn southern Lebanon into a dangerous combat zone for the Israeli army. This is important because Israel’s military doctrine relies heavily on speed, on offensive initiative, and on the demonstration of dominance. A campaign that drags on, consumes manpower, exposes soldiers to attrition, and leaves northern Israel under continuing threat is not simply unfinished. It becomes strategically corrosive. It undermines the image of effortless superiority on which deterrence partly depends.

There is also the issue of equipment and operational pressure. Public claims about destroyed Israeli vehicles are often difficult to verify independently, and any serious analysis should avoid repeating battlefield propaganda as fact. But even without dramatic and unverifiable numbers, the broader reality is evident.

Read more …

“The United States desperately needs a decisive victory in its war ..”

The Price of Underestimating Iran (Lukyanov)

The outcome of the war with Iran will determine America’s capabilities on the world stage for years to come. That is what makes the current conflict in West Asia so consequential, far beyond the region itself. US policy toward Iran has become increasingly erratic. Rather than focus on the president’s shifting rhetoric, it is more useful to examine the logic underpinning the confrontation. Washington appears to have convinced itself that the moment is right to act decisively against Tehran, exploiting what it perceives as a window of vulnerability.


The objective, viewed in isolation, has a certain cold rationality. A single, well-executed strike could, in theory, achieve several long-standing goals at once: settle the historical grievance of the 1979 embassy crisis, remove a regime seen as hostile to Israel, gain leverage over key energy resources and transport routes, and weaken emerging Eurasian integration projects. Advisers appear to have presented this as a rare opportunity. The president accepted the argument. But such ambitions rest on a fundamental miscalculation. Iran is not Iraq in 2003, nor Afghanistan in 2001. Its military capabilities are far more substantial than those of any adversary the United States has confronted directly in recent decades. It is a large, resilient state with deep strategic depth and a capacity to inflict serious disruption on global trade and energy flows.

This last point is critical. Iran’s geographic position gives it leverage that few countries possess. Even limited escalation could threaten shipping routes and economic stability far beyond the Middle East, directly affecting the interests of the United States and its allies. That reality alone complicates any attempt at a quick, clean victory.Moreover, the political context is very different from past US interventions. The current display of force, lacking even the formal justifications that accompanied earlier campaigns, has unsettled Washington’s partners. Allies that might once have felt compelled to support the United States are now more hesitant, weighing the risks of involvement against uncertain outcomes.

The original assumption appears to have been that Iran would capitulate quickly. What that capitulation would look like was never entirely clear: regime collapse, coerced compliance along the lines of Venezuela, or a negotiated settlement sharply limiting Tehran’s power. In any case, a prolonged conflict was not part of the plan.= Now that the conflict has dragged on, a more fundamental question has emerged: what exactly constitutes success?

This dilemma reflects a broader shift in American foreign policy. “America First” is often interpreted as isolationism or restraint. In practice, it has meant something else entirely, the pursuit of US objectives without responsibility and, ideally, without cost. The underlying principle is simple: achieve maximum benefit while minimizing commitments. For a time, this approach appeared to work. In his first year, Donald Trump managed to pressure partners into accepting American terms, often by leveraging overwhelming economic power. But that strategy depends on the absence of meaningful resistance. It becomes far more dangerous when applied to a situation that cannot be controlled.

Creating a major geopolitical crisis and expecting others to absorb the consequences while Washington extracts advantages is a different proposition altogether. It risks destabilizing not just adversaries, but the entire system in which the United States itself operates. In earlier decades, US leadership was framed in terms of a “liberal world order,” where advancing American interests was presented as beneficial to all. The concept of a “benevolent hegemon” emerged from this period. Trump’s worldview rejects that premise. Instead, it assumes that US prosperity must come at the expense of others, and that it is time to reverse the old balance.

This shift carries profound implications. A hegemon that no longer seeks to provide stability must rely more heavily on coercion. But coercion, to be effective, requires credibility. The dominant power must demonstrate clearly that it can impose its will when necessary.

Iran has become the test case.

Read more …

Recently someone wrote it would be incorrect to label him “ayatollah”. Anyone remember who?

Mojtaba Breaks Silence, In Message Praises Hezbollah & Shia Leaders (ZH)

The new, younger Ayatollah Khamenei – who may have been wounded in the early days of US-Israeli strikes, hasn’t been seen in any public way, not even on TV, throughout the war. There have not so much as been any official recent images of him circulated. But Mojtaba Khamenei has apparently been issuing some limited written statements, mainly encouraging foreign proxies in their joining the war against US and Israeli forces in the region. State media has indicated he’s not making public appearances given the ongoing relentless bombing campaign and the Islamic Republic’s wartime footing.


After a long period of relative silence, a message from Khamenei was publicized on Monday. In the message attributed to him, he “expressed his appreciation to the supreme religious authority (in Iraq) and the people of Iraq for their clear stance against aggression against Iran and their support for our country,” Iran’s ISNA news agency said, referring to the Iraq-based Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani. Sistani is based in Iraq and has long been a highly revered Shia cleric in the region.

The 56-year old Khamenei has on Wednesday apparently broken his silence again, this time praising Hezbollah for joining the war against Israel. Hezbollah has been launching hundreds of rockets on northern and central Israel, amid an emerging ground campaign in southern Lebanon, also as Israel bombs Beirut from the air.In the new words carried by Iranian state media, he praised Hezbollah for its “perseverance, steadfastness and patience” against “the most ruthless enemies of the Islamic world.”

Meanwhile, the CIA and Mossad are said to be trying to uncover Mojtaba Khamenei’s whereabouts and status. His 86-year old father did not appear to have been in hiding at all when he was slain by airstrike on the very first day of Operation Epic Fury.

The most likely explanation could be that the younger Khamenei is directing the war from a much more secure and hidden setting, for example a deep underground bunker – or in a remote part of the country. But some analysts have questioned why he wouldn’t make a video address, even if pre-recorded, offering to the world proof that he is a alive and is running the country and war. As for the most visible day-to-day leader, this is parliament speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf.

Read more …

A.K.A. Shock and Awe.

European Allies Show ‘Shock And Anxiety’ to Trump Threat to Leave NATO (JTN)

European media responded to President Donald Trump’s remarks about the United States leaving NATO as an “existential threat” to the 77-year-old security alliance. Speaking with The Telegraph, a right-of-center British daily newspaper, Trump called the alliance a “paper tiger” and said he was “strongly considering” withdrawing from the 32-nation pact. Trump’s comments come after repeated criticisms of NATO member states for not joining the Israeli- and U.S.-led conflict with Iran. In the latest developments, Spain, France, and Italy refused U.S. access to their military bases or airspace for military actions against Iran.


“I was never swayed by NATO,” Trump said. “I always knew they were a paper tiger, and [Russian President Vladimir] Putin knows that, too.” Thirty of 32 NATO member states are in Europe (the U.S. and Canada are the exceptions). Israel is not a member of the alliance. The Guardian, another U.K. newspaper, said Trump’s remarks represented an “existential threat” that could be the “worst crisis in NATO history.” In Spain, El País said there was “shock and anxiety across Europe.” Among the European Union’s three largest economies, German media stressed that the Israeli and U.S. bombings of Iranian targets were “not our war” and said it was “correct” for the government to reject U.S. demands for support.

French media pursued a similar line, stressing that NATO was created to assure trans-Atlantic security, not offensive missions in the Middle East. Italy, meanwhile, tried to balance ties with the U.S. and European and NATO allies, trying to organize a coalition to discuss strategies to assure security in the Gulf region without entering the conflict. Trump might not be able to follow through on his threat to leave the NATO alliance due to a 2023 U.S. law that “prohibits any withdrawal from NATO” without approval from two-thirds of the U.S. Senate.

Read more …

More Shock and Anxiety.

EU Leaders Utterly Bewildered at Energy Vulnerabilities Now Evident (CTH)

They stopped their oil and gas exploration. They chose to chase ‘net zero’ academic pontifications. They closed their refining operations. They took apart their coal-fired electricity plants. They disassembled their nuclear power capabilities. Then, the absolute cherry on the proverbial cake, they voted to stop purchasing oil and gas from Russia.The EU is now in the Find Out stage of their FAFO positioning. Gasoline prices have skyrocketed. The last shipments of jet fuel have arrived. Major airline carriers are cancelling flights due to lack of fuel. Faster than the EU can organize meetings to discuss their position, EU destined LNG shipments have diverted to southeast Asia and India as the ASEAN nations bid higher purchase prices for the vessels literally on the water.


Folks, it’s quite an article written by EU Politico as they outline how each of the leaders from the nation states are now discussing how vulnerable they are to the changed oil/gas environment with the mid east conflict ongoing. The entire energy sector in Europe is now in crisis mode with leaders predicting it will get much worse within days, not weeks.mEU Politico – “Germany’s Friedrich Merz warns the economic fallout from the war in Iran is on track to rival that of the Covid pandemic or the Russian invasion of Ukraine. […] With the war in Iran threatening to choke off energy flows for the foreseeable future, Europe is facing a supply shock that promises to cripple manufacturing, ground airlines, hike up the price of food, spike borrowing costs and send inflation spiraling back to crisis levels.

As the last tankers carrying fossil fuels from the Persian Gulf pull into European ports, the scale of what is about to hit seems to be dawning on the continent’s leaders. “I’m living with the reality of this war and its consequences 24 hours a day,” Italian Defense Minister Guido Crosetto told the La Repubblica newspaper. “I’m forced to know things that don’t let me sleep.” The conflict could last “years,” Christine Lagarde, the president of the European Central Bank, warned in an interview with the Economist last week. The long-term effects, she added, are “probably beyond what we can imagine at the moment.”

[…] “Markets are now grappling with a scenario long discussed in theory but rarely thought of as a legitimate possibility — the effective shutdown of the world’s most critical energy chokepoint,” said Ana Maria Jaller-Makarewicz, lead energy analyst for the Europe team at the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis.One immediate worry is that Asian countries, which before the war relied on the Gulf for some 80 percent of their gas and oil, are beginning to bid up the price of those products as they fight over dwindling supplies. That has diverted merchants with more flexible contracts toward Asia to exploit the higher profit margins, turning them away from Europe.

According to Charles Costerousse, a senior energy analyst at maritime consultancy Kpler, 11 U.S.- and Nigerian-flagged LNG tankers have been redirected from Europe to further east in the past few days. Within the next few days, the last tanker bearing Qatari LNG will arrive in Europe, he said.[…] For now, as the final Gulf tankers finish unloading their cargo this week, the clock officially starts ticking for Europe’s policymakers. The continent has weeks, not months, to brace for an impact that could reshape its economy for a generation. (read more)

The one element missing from the lengthy diatribe of EU leader quotes is any self-reflection; any admission their EU vulnerability was entirely driven by their own policies. No, that part of the equation is missing entirely. Everything in their mindset is a discussion of external events happening to them. There is no reconsideration of their prior stupidity, and/or a responsive effort to reposition their vulnerability. The EU is in a state of cognitive paralysis, and things are about to get much, much worse.


Read more …

Could it trigger the end of the EU?

Could an Orban Win Trigger ‘Maidan on Steroids’? (RT)

Polls ahead of the Hungarian elections point to an opposition victory, but players behind the scenes expect Prime Minister Viktor Orban to come out on top. Others say it’s a scenario ripe for a Kiev-style ‘color revolution’. With two weeks to go until Hungary’s parliamentary elections, Orban is facing the most credible threat to his power yet. Opposition leader Peter Magyar’s Tisza party is currently leading Orban’s Fidesz by 15 points, according to an aggregate of polls compiled by Politico. When looking at pollsters linked to Tisza or funded by the EU, the results are even more stark. A poll by the opposition-linked Median, for example, shows Tisza a whole 23 points ahead of Fidesz, at 58-35%.

However, Politico has also reported that “many” EU leaders secretly believe an Orban victory is “likely.” Hungarian EU Affairs Minister Janos Boka thinks that the disparity between public surveys and private sentiment is no accident, and that by skewing polls, Magyar and his allies in Brussels are “building the narrative that if they lose the election, then this is an illegitimate result.” Notorious intervention hawk Michael Weiss put Boka’s worries into words last week. “If Orban tries to steal this – and he almost certainly will – it’ll be Euromaidan on steroids in an EU/NATO country. Watch closely, America,” he warned in a post on X.

Weiss, who previously ran a Ukraine regime change outfit he claimed was journalism, was referring to the post-election coup that toppled a democratically elected president, Viktor Yanukovich, in 2014. Orchestrated by the US, the Maidan/Euromaidan coup set in motion a chain of events that culminated in the Russia-Ukraine conflict, which has claimed hundreds of thousands of lives.However, there are some fundamental points war hawks in armchairs would like you not to notice; differences between Budapest and Kiev that would make forced regime change a far more difficult prospect if Orban wins.

How the US masterminded Maidan
Presented by Western media as a popular uprising, the ‘Maidan’ revolution was a creation of the US State Department and run out of a very compliant US embassy. The National Endowment for Democracy (NED), a State Department sub-agency, pumped around $14 million into Ukrainian activist groups from 2011 to 2014, the US embassy funded pro-Maidan media outlets, and between 1991 and 2014, the US funnelled a total of $5 billion into “democracy-building programs in Ukraine,” a State Department spokesperson said in 2014.

The NED boasted in a 2015 report that US-funded organizations “played important roles in the peaceful protests in Kiev.” By the time the report had been published, the “peaceful protests” had descended into a bloodbath, with Western-funded far-right militias massacring nearly 100 pro-Western protesters in a false-flag operation, and pro-Western neo-Nazis burning 46 anti-Maidan protesters alive at the Trade Unions House in Odessa. Awkward questions for the neocons, neolibs, and the righteous.

Assistant Secretary of State for Europe Victoria Nuland promised military aid and a billion-dollar loan to opposition politicians, and famously handed out cookies to pro-Western activists in Kiev. Together with US Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt, she helped choose the government that would replace Yanukovich’s. When asked by an obsequious Pyatt in a 2014 phone call if the Europeans might disagree with her choice of candidate, the notorious hawk infamously declared “f**k the EU.”

Now the US backs Orban
The situation in Hungary is radically different. US President Donald Trump is a staunch ally of Orban, and has endorsed the Hungarian PM’s reelection campaign, while Vice President J.D. Vance is scheduled to make a high-profile trip to Budapest just days before the April 12 election.

Read more …

“Even though Trump’s team can appeal, the damage is real. This ruling will probably keep Trump tangled in civil litigation for the rest of his presidency and likely beyond..”

Judge Keeps Democrats’ January 6 Witch Hunt Against Trump Alive (Margolis)

A federal judge appointed by Barack Obama ruled this week that President Trump’s speech at the Ellipse on January 6, 2021, is not protected by presidential immunity — keeping a Democratic-driven civil lawsuit alive and ensuring Trump will be fighting this battle for years to come. U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta ruled that Trump’s rally remarks fell outside the “outer perimeter” of his official presidential duties, applying the framework the Supreme Court established in its immunity ruling back in 2024. That ruling gave presidents full immunity for core official acts and presumptive immunity for acts within the outer perimeter — but left unofficial acts exposed. Mehta used that opening to let this bogus lawsuit walk right through.


Mehta was nominated to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia by Obama in 2014 and confirmed the same year. In 2021, he was appointed to the U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, succeeding Judge James Boasberg, who served as presiding judge from 2020 to 2021. It sure is a small world when it comes to Obama-era appointees making consequential rulings against a Republican president.

It should come as no surprise that this is not Mehta’s first rodeo targeting Trump. He previously refused to dismiss these same claims back in February 2022, ruled against Trump in a case involving congressional access to his financial records, and sentenced former Trump adviser Peter Navarro to four months in jail for defying a January 6 committee subpoena. Mehta has had his fingerprints on the anti-Trump legal machine for years.

Mehta denied Trump’s motion to dismiss the civil litigation, meaning Democratic lawmakers and Capitol Police officers who sued Trump can continue to pursue their case. The plaintiffs falsely claim Trump’s Ellipse speech incited the crowd to riot. The problem with their claim, of course, is Trump’s speech itself. Trump literally told the crowd at the Ellipse to “peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.” That’s the “incitement” Democrats keep telling us about. The speech itself is the best evidence that the insurrection narrative is a myth, but Mehta waved that aside anyway.

Joseph Sellers, an attorney for the Democratic lawmakers suing Trump, couldn’t contain his excitement. “We’re very pleased that the court recognized that President Trump cannot avoid accountability for his conduct on Jan. 6, 2021,” he said. “This decision, if it holds up, is going to pave the way to a trial in federal district court on these claims.”Trump’s legal team made it clear they’re not done fighting this.

“The facts show that on January 6, 2021, President Trump was acting on behalf of the American people, carrying out his official duties as President of the United States,” the team said in a statement. “President Trump will continue to fight back against the Democrat Witch Hoaxes and keep delivering historic results for the American People.”

Even though Trump’s team can appeal, the damage is real. This ruling will probably keep Trump tangled in civil litigation for the rest of his presidency and likely beyond — precisely what Democrats designed these lawsuits to accomplish. While the president focuses on governing and delivering results for the American people, a group of partisan plaintiffs and their enabling activist judges are still obsessed with their January 6 lies.

Read more …

Too small brains.

We May Finally Be Close to Ending the Democrats’ DHS Shutdown (Margolis)

The Democrats’ DHS shutdown may finally be ending soon, after Republican leaders and President Donald Trump hashed out a plan. The two-track strategy announced Wednesday strips the left of one of its most effective tools for obstruction — and leaves them with nobody to blame but themselves.


The partial shutdown has dragged on since mid-February, making it the longest of its kind in American history. The core fight came down to one thing: Democrats refused to fund Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border Patrol after two anti-ICE agitators attacked federal agents and were killed in self-defense. The left, blaming the agents for the deaths, demanded reforms that would have effectively made immigration law unenforceable. Republicans wouldn’t budge. Then Democrats finally caved last week, agreeing to fund DHS without the reforms they had demanded. But House Speaker Mike Johnson rejected the deal because it didn’t fully fund ICE and Border Patrol, which were already funded through 2029.

Trump broke the logjam Wednesday with a Truth Social post endorsing funding ICE and Border Patrol through budget reconciliation — the legislative process that will bypass Senate Democrats entirely. “We are going to work as fast, and as focused, as possible to replenish funding for our Border and ICE Agents, and the Radical Left Democrats won’t be able to stop us,” Trump wrote.

Speaker Mike Johnson, who initially opposed the funding deal announced Friday, and Senate Majority Leader John Thune quickly got on board. Their joint statement outlined the two-pronged approach: fund most of DHS through the standard appropriations process until October, then lock in three years of immigration enforcement funding through reconciliation — completely insulated from Democratic obstruction. “In the coming days, Republicans in the Senate and House will be following through on the President’s directive by fully funding the entire Department of Homeland Security on two parallel tracks: through the appropriations process and through the reconciliation process,” they said.

The Senate Budget Committee had already begun building the reconciliation framework to make it happen. That process allows the Senate to move legislation with a simple majority instead of the 60-vote threshold that typically gives Schumer and his caucus veto power over Republican priorities. This plan looks almost identical to what the Senate tried to pass just last Friday — the same bill House Republicans shot down in spectacular fashion, with Johnson himself calling it a “joke.” House conservatives had demanded that immigration enforcement funding stay bundled with the rest of DHS appropriations.

Johnson’s reversal also signals something significant. I previously wrote that Johnson may have been attempting to force the Senate GOP to nuke the filibuster. If that were the case, this agreement would mean Republicans have effectively conceded that nuking the Senate filibuster isn’t happening. If killing the filibuster were on the table, there would be no need for a two-track workaround. The reconciliation path is a creative solution, but it’s also an acknowledgment of the limits of the current Senate majority.

“It is now abundantly clear that Democrats place allegiance to their radical left-wing base above all else,” Thune and Johnson said. “We cannot allow Democrats to any longer put the safety of the American public at risk through their open border policies, so we are taking that off the table.” If Republicans can push the reconciliation package through, Democrats will lose the ability to use DHS appropriations as a weapon against Trump’s immigration agenda for the rest of his term. They spent months blocking ICE funding to protect their base, and now they may end up with zero leverage to show for it.

Read more …

We have questions.

AI Giant Anthropic Suffers Strategic Code Hemorrhage (RT)

AI giant Anthropic has mistakenly published its own top secret internal code, triggering a viral wave of github rewrites and inflicting potentially catastrophic commercial damage on the Amazon-backed business model. The developer of the Claude chatbot described the incident as a release issue “caused by human error, not a security breach,” according to US technology news website VentureBeat on Tuesday. Anthropic was designated a “risk to national security” by US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth in February after disagreements with the Pentagon over the use of its artificial intelligence systems.


The leak involved more than 500,000 lines of code linked to Claude Code, Anthropic’s AI coding assistant, which helps users write and manage software through natural language commands, according to Axios and The Verge. The material included unreleased features, performance data, and developer notes. The code spread rapidly online, with versions of the code being placed on code-sharing platform GitHub and replicated thousands of times within hours, according to Ars Technica and The Verge. Anthropic moved to remove the material and issued takedown notices, but the material had already been widely copied and circulated, the reports said.

According to VentureBeat, by exposing the “blueprints” of Claude Code, the leak may have given “bad actors” a “road map” to bypassing security checks or tricking the tool into running hidden commands or accessing data without the user’s knowledge. A separate data leak reported in February exposed internal materials revealing details of Anthropic’s unreleased model, known as Claude Mythos, after thousands of draft documents were left accessible in a public data cache.

The model was described in the leaked material as the company’s most powerful system to date which could pose “unprecedented cybersecurity risks” if deployed widely. The company has withheld its release due to concerns over its capabilities and potential misuse, according to US business magazine Fortune.

Read more …

Just passing on. Are mini-nukes the answer?

Nano Nuclear Submits Construction Permit For Kronos Reactor In Illinois (ZH)

Nano Nuclear submitted a Construction Permit Application (CPA) to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for their Kronos microreactor project at the University of Illinois. The filing marks the latest step in a project we’ve tracked since site characterization began last fall. Kronos is a high-temperature gas-cooled reactor (HTGR) engineered for commercial deployment. It delivers 15 megawatts of carbon-free baseload power using meltdown-resistant TRISO fuel and helium coolant. The design emphasizes walk-away safety, autonomous operation during grid outages, and scalability through multiple units. Intended uses include powering artificial intelligence data centers, industrial electrification, military bases, and remote communities.


Nano Nuclear acquired the technology in 2024 from Ultra Safe Nuclear Corp. and positioned it as one of the first commercially ready microreactor platforms. The University of Illinois partnership targets the first full-scale Kronos research reactor deployment. We detailed the October 2025 launch of geotechnical drilling and site characterization work, followed by a ceremonial groundbreaking. Those steps built on state support from Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker and positioned the campus project as the lead effort in Nano’s broader commercialization roadmap. The company has since expanded discussions for additional deployments in Texas, South Korea, and at U.S. federal sites.

Under the NRC process, staff will first review the application package for completeness and docketing. Once accepted, the agency will conduct a formal technical and environmental evaluation. Nano estimates this formal review phase will take approximately 12 months, after which the NRC could authorize construction. The timeline aligns with recent agency efforts to streamline advanced reactor licensing while maintaining rigorous safety standards.

Company executives described the submission as validation of years of engineering and pre-application engagement. Chief Technical Officer Florent Heidet called it “a defining moment” that separates ready projects from those still in early development. The milestone keeps Nano on track for initial test operations at Illinois by the late 2020s and supports its goal of factory-built, fleet-scale microreactor production.

Read more …

What on earth happened since 1969?

We beat the Russians back then, only to be losing to China 57-odd years later?

Artemis II and the ‘Waste of Space’ (Rick Moran)

Yesterday, four human beings sat atop the most powerful machine ever built and launched themselves toward the moon. Commander Reid Wiseman, Pilot Victor Glover, Mission Specialist Christina Koch, and Mission Specialist Jeremy Hansen of the Canadian Space Agency are set to fire their engine and send their spacecraft toward the moon. They won’t land on the surface. They won’t even go into orbit. They will slingshot around the moon and return to Earth. It’s a $60 billion space stunt. That’s the total cost of the Space Launch System (SLS) program to date, and given the fact that the astronauts are doing little except proving they can go into space, travel to the moon, and come back alive, it seems an awful “waste of space.”


How do we know it’s a “stunt”? The crew consists of one white guy, one black guy (Glover), one woman, and a Canadian. Hansen will be the first non-American to visit the moon. That sounds like a “made-for-TV” extravaganza. In the 1997 film Contact, 12-year-old Ellie Arroway’s widowed father, Ted, is helping his daughter discover the wonders of the universe through a telescope. “The universe is a pretty big place,” the father tells the daughter. “It’s bigger than anything anyone has ever dreamed of before. So if it’s just us… seems like an awful waste of space.”

Ellie and Ted (the elder Ellie played by Jodie Foster alongside David Morse) were talking about the vastness of space and how it would be highly unlikely that humans were the only intelligent life. In the case of Artemis II and the SLS, the “waste of space” is the sheer, frustratingly stupid mix of politics, inefficiency, inexplicable decisions, and poor management that created a black hole for taxpayer dollars, a “forever program” that had the zombie-like ability to resist being killed, and the real possibility that the machine those four brave souls are flying in is not as safe as it should be.

NASA has inefficiency and waste built into its DNA. Because it’s government-funded, the agency needs friends in Congress to get anything done. This forces the agency to spread the pork as widely as possible. Key members of Congress who are lucky enough (or skilled enough at logrolling) to have a NASA contractor in their district make sure that programs that benefit that contractor, even if they’re wasteful and accomplish nothing, never get canceled or have their budgets cut.

Congress does not see the space program as a scientific endeavor or even as a national security necessity. To Congress, the space program is a means to gain cash for campaigns and jobs for constituents. Even when the White House tries to cancel or cut a program, Congress will inevitably restore the funding. That’s why the SLS is still going strong despite being six years late and billions of dollars over budget.

Reason.com: “As development began on the rocket, the projected budget cost through 2017 was $18 billion, a number that would soon start growing. Early in development, each launch was projected to cost $500 million, a number very optimistic in hindsight: According to the White House’s 2026 budget proposal, an SLS launch costs about $4 billion. Through last year, the total cost of the program has exceeded $60 billion.

The SLS program isn’t just way over budget. It’s way behind schedule too. Congress told it to fly by 2016, but the first launch didn’t come until 2022. The second launch will be Artemis II. When the first Trump administration started the Artemis program in 2017, the vision was to send Americans to the moon and then Mars. As the program developed, officials set a goal of having humans on the moon again by 2024. In April 2021, SpaceX won the bidding process to build the Human Landing System—the lunar lander that would deliver the astronauts to the moon’s surface. Blue Origin then sued NASA over losing out to SpaceX, and NASA had to pause work until the lawsuit ended. The suit was resolved in November, at which point SpaceX and NASA returned to work.

The oft-delayed launch of Artemis II was due to a series of hydrogen fuel leaks. The mission was pushed from its original February window to April as engineers worked to replace seals and address a subsequent issue with a clogged helium pressurization line. The rocket had to be rolled back to the Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB) for these specialized repairs.It should be noted that Artemis II is a new system and will have bugs that need to be ironed out. But the same leaking hydrogen problem experienced in February also canceled the March launches. The RS-25 engine, which is being fueled by hydrogen, is considered very reliable. It’s also considered “too big to fail” because of its powerful congressional backers.

The engines are manufactured by Aerojet Rocketdyne, and the program supports thousands of jobs across multiple congressional districts. This makes a total engine redesign or a switch to a different propulsion system (like SpaceX’s Raptor or Blue Origin’s BE-4) politically difficult. Critics argue that the traditional contracting model incentivizes maintaining the current hardware rather than starting over with a cheaper, leak-resistant fuel like methane. Instead of replacing the engine, NASA and lead contractor Boeing have focused on “kindler, gentler” loading procedures and redesigned flight seals to fix the leak issues that plagued the February and March launch attempts.

NASA is shooting for a Moon landing by 2030. Given their track record, that seems more like wishful thinking. It’s more than likely that China will beat them there. It’s even possible that Elon Musk, who has abandoned his Mars dreams to go to the Moon, will reach the lunar surface before NASA. Sixty billion tax dollars for space could have been spent far more wisely. The magnificent unmanned probes we’ve sent to Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn have made spectacular discoveries that have not only expanded our knowledge of the universe but also shown us the way to a future in which humans aren’t tied to Earth or the Moon.bArtemis II is a helluva “waste of space” when you consider what that money could have been spent on.

Read more …

Good points.

The Soul-Crushing Cost of NOT Returning to the Moon for 50+ Years (Pinsker)

Question for our readers: What’s the greatest accomplishment in all of human history? Some might point to religious breakthroughs, i.e. the development of theological and/or legal doctrines. If you’re in the Ozymandias camp, you may favor big, impressive monuments — like the Great Pyramid of Giza. Or maybe you’re thinking of something more basic, like the invention of written language, which was developed independently at least four times. There are many more options, of course: The discovery of the New World. Metallurgy. Agriculture. Seafaring. The printing press. Germ theory. Unlocking the power of the atom. All the above altered the course of humanity.


But in my opinion, the single greatest accomplishment was walking on the moon. Even today, nearly 57 years after Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin left their footprints on the lunar surface, the accomplishment remains so utterly mindboggling that 10% of Americans don’t believe it happened. And, arguably, for good reason: No human has returned to the moon since 1972. If you’re under 55, the moon landing was something you read about — not something you remember watching live. For generations of Americans (including this 52-year-old scribe), there hasn’t been a day in our lives when we’ve gazed up at the sky and beamed with pride, knowing an American astronaut has “slipped the surly bonds of Earth,” soaring farther than an “eagle flew,” and “touched the face of God.”

About 25 years ago, when I worked in talk radio, I spoke to Buzz Aldrin on the phone. It was one of the few times a celebrity made me tongue-tied. I haven’t even been to Australia yet — and this guy walked on the flippin’ moon?! How can anyone compete with THAT? Imagine being at a bar, bragging about your Australian vacation, and in walks Buzz Aldrin. “Wow, you made it all the way to Australia, did you? How impressive. By the way, y’know that big white ball in the sky? It’s called the moon. That’s where I went, but please, tell me more about Australia.” Baby Boomers were shaped by the Kennedy assassination. Even today, 60+ years later, everyone still remembers where they were when they heard the fateful news.

Gen-X was shaped by the Challenger disaster. Until 9/11, it was the most jarring catastrophe of our lifetime, because it shattered America’s aura of technological invincibility. After all, we had so thoroughly conquered the cosmos, NASA actually let a schoolteacher named Christa McAuliffe hitch a ride on the shuttle as a PR stunt. Space travel was considered so mundane that none of the three major TV networks bothered to air the Challenger launch live. (CNN, still in its early years, was the exception.) How could the space shuttle blow up? We’re the nation that put a man on the moon! America doesn’t make mistakes like that!

The Challenger disaster took place on Jan. 28, 1986. That was over 40 years ago. And in the decades that followed, instead of inspiring wonder, pride, and belief in the American Dream, NASA became synonymous with budgetary bloat, technical malfunctions, and aborted missions. Uncoincidentally, as NASA’s achievements became a distant memory, each generation that followed has had less pride in America. 83% of the Silent Generation is extremely or very proud to be an American. For Boomers, it’s 75%. For Gen-X, it’s 71%. For Millennials, it’s 58%. And for Gen-Z, it’s just 41%.

There’s a crisis of patriotism among young Americans. If you want to know why so many young people are turning to socialism and communism, it’s because they lost their faith in the American Dream: Among the under-30 crowd, 34% have a favorable opinion of communism — and a whopping 62% feel favorably towards socialism. Just 50% favor capitalism.

These are damning trendlines. As the older generations die off, faith in America’s greatness is dying with them. It’s why Zoomers are now favoring socialism over capitalism by double-digits. Unless we (quickly) right the ship, we’re cheating our children and grandchildren of their American birthright. And if we’re not careful, it’ll cost us everything. It’s the responsibility of our leaders — whether they’re in government, the private sector, or in our homes — to inspire the next generation. To inscribe in their hearts and souls the belief that they can make the impossible possible — as long as they dream big, work hard, and pray with all their might. Why do you think the phrase “Make America Great Again” resonated so deeply?

Greatness is inspirational. Aspirational. Given a choice between greatness and mediocrity, greatness wins every single time. It brings out the best in us. That was the hidden cost of not returning to the moon for 50+ years: It cheated our children and grandchildren of their dreams. And sapped their pride in American greatness. But imagine a new national trajectory — where NASA, SpaceX, and American ingenuity rewrite the history books. One where Zoomers look to the sky and see a moon flooded with American astronauts and American footprints — and a permanent American moon base.Then, after reconquering the moon, we set foot on Mars. And from there, we venture even further.

Or we could do nothing. And then, when China lands a man on the moon by 2030 and builds a moon base, young Americans would gaze to the cosmos with resentment, rage, and regret: They’ve inherited a country whose best days are long gone. The Boomers got all the glory — and they got a nation in decline. And if you’re already worried about so many young Americans abandoning capitalism, what do you think will happen if America is lapped by a communist nation? More likely than not, the allure of communism and socialism will skyrocket — to the moon and beyond. Space travel isn’t cheap. Some, including my PJ Media colleague Rick Moran, argue the juice isn’t worth the squeeze. But dollars and cents aren’t the only way to measure cost: Dreams matter, too.

Dreamers are optimists; they believe our future will be greater than our past. They’re men and women of faith. The greater our dreams, the greater our country. A nation without dreams is a dying nation.As President Ronald Reagan said in his final primetime address: “We were meant to be masters of destiny, not victims of fate. Who among us would trade America’s future for that of any other country in the world? And who could possibly have so little faith in our America that they would trade our tomorrows for our yesterdays?”

After 50+ years, it’s time to give our kids a dream worth dreaming: Because they deserve nothing less.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/RealHellenist/status/2039580324997582892?s=20 https://twitter.com/DiogenisSinopis/status/2039376870970470404?s=20

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Apr 022026
 
 April 2, 2026  Posted by at 9:49 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , ,  63 Responses »


Vincent van Gogh A Lane near Arles (Side of a Country Lane) 1888


Trump Reassures Americans: Iran Operation Won’t Be a Forever War (Chris Queen)
US, Iran Discussing Ceasefire In Exchange For Reopening Strait (ZH)
Rubio Delivers a Reality Check on Iran, NATO, Cuba, and Venezuela (Anderson)
Marco Rubio, the Question Must be Asked: “Why are we in NATO”? (CTH)
NATO Without America? A Slow Shift Is Already Underway (Zevelev)
Keir Starmer Gives a National Address – Things Will Never be the Same Again (CTH)
Chuck Schumer Is Losing Control of His Party; They Turn On Him (Margolis)
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson Warns Against Unbridled Free Speech (Turley)
How Many Times has the EU Screwed Itself Over in the Past Year? (Marsden)
Europe Needs to Hear This Harsh Truth (Stephen Green)
A Civilization Whose Defense is Abandoned, is Lost (Paul Craig Roberts)
Charlie Kirk Bullet Doesn’t Match Suspect’s Rifle – Lawyers (RT)
More Than Half of Americans Believe AI Will Do More Harm Than Good: Poll ET)

 


 

https://twitter.com/andweknow/status/2039304266775740853?s=20 https://twitter.com/WallStreetMav/status/2039126040686248240?s=20 https://twitter.com/ScaryEurope/status/2039236276709376095?s=20 https://twitter.com/BasilTheGreat/status/2039088940129391074?s=20

 


 

 


 


He has to wrap it up quickly, nobody wants a long war, or heavy casualties, and it’s midterms soon.

Trump Reassures Americans: Iran Operation Won’t Be a Forever War (Chris Queen)

President Donald Trump delivered a speech on Wednesday night with the intention of informing Americans about what’s going on with our joint military operations with Israel against Iran. It was remarkably restrained for a Trump speech and relatively brief. Side note: My favorite phrase from the speech was when Trump referred to the “green, green cash” that Barack Obama threw at the Islamic regime during his presidency. The president remarked that Wednesday was the one-month mark for Operation Epic Fury:


As we speak this evening, it has been just one month since the United States military began Operation Epic Fury targeting the world’s number one state sponsor of terror, Iran. In these past four weeks, our Armed Forces have delivered swift, decisive, overwhelming victories on the battlefield — victories like few people have ever seen before. Tonight, Iran’s navy is GONE. Their air force is in ruins. Their leaders, most of them — the terrorist regime they led — are now dead. Their command and control of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Core is being decimated as we speak. Their ability to launch missiles and drones is dramatically curtailed and their weapons, factories, and rocket launchers are being blown to pieces — very few of them left. Never in the history of warfare has an enemy suffered such clear and devastating large-scale losses in a matter of weeks.

He reminded viewers that disabling Iran was one of his earliest campaign promises: “From the very first day I announced my campaign for President in 2015, I have vowed that I would never allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon. This fanatical regime has been chanting ‘Death to America, ‘Death to Israel,’ for 47 years. Their proxies were behind the murder of 241 Americans in the Marine Barracks bombing in Beirut, the slaughter of hundreds of our servicemembers with roadside bombs, they were involved in the attack on the U.S.S. Cole, and they’ve carried out countless other heinous acts… For these terrorists to have nuclear weapons would be an intolerable threat. The most violent and thuggish regime on earth would be free to carry out their campaigns of terror, coercion, conquest, and mass murder from behind a nuclear shield. I will never let that happen.”

The president expressed that his goal was to resolve Iran’s issues diplomatically, but Iran wouldn’t allow that to happen: “My first preference was always the path of diplomacy — yet, the regime continued their relentless quest for nuclear weapons and rejected every attempt at an agreement. For this reason, in June, I ordered a strike on Iran’s key nuclear facilities in Operation Midnight Hammer… The regime then sought to rebuild their nuclear program at a totally different location, making clear they had no intention of abandoning their pursuit of nuclear weapons… For years, everyone has said that Iran cannot have nuclear weapons — but in the end, those are just words if you’re not willing to take action when the time comes.”

Trump acknowledged the pain Americans are feeling at the gas pump. (As somebody who recently bought a new vehicle that gets much lower gas mileage than my prior car, I can testify.) “Many Americans have been concerned to see the recent rise in gasoline prices here at home… This short-term increase has been entirely the result of the Iranian regime launching deranged terror attacks against commercial oil tankers and neighboring countries that have nothing to do with the conflict. This is yet more proof that Iran can never be trusted with nuclear weapons. They will use them and they will use them quickly. It would lead to decades of extortion, economic pain, and instability worse than we can ever imagine. The United States has never been better prepared economically to confront this threat.”

He called out nations that are dealing with the effects of the closure of the Strait of Hormuz: “To those countries that can’t get fuel — many of which refused to get involved in the decapitation of Iran, we had to do it ourselves — I have a suggestion. Number one, buy oil from the United States of America; we have plenty. We have so much. And Number two, build up some delayed courage… Go to the Strait and just take it. Protect it. Use it for yourselves. Iran has been essentially decimated. The hard part is done.”

After assuring the public that operations in Iran should be done in “two to three weeks,” Trump reassured his viewers that Iran’s days as a threatening power are almost over. “Tonight, every American can look forward to a day when we are finally free from the wickedness of Iranian aggression and the specter of nuclear blackmail,” he declared. “Because of the actions we have taken, we are on the cusp of ending Iran’s sinister threat to America and the world.”

Tonight, the president gave a speech that was characteristically Trumpian. But it achieved the objectives that he wanted of informing the American people that Operation Epic Fury is nearly over and won’t be a “forever war.”

Read more …

A ceasefire or “back to the stone age”, everything’s on the menu.

US, Iran Discussing Ceasefire In Exchange For Reopening Strait (ZH)

Ahead of Trump’s address tonight at 9pm ET, Axios reports citing three sources that the US and Iran are discussing a potential deal that would involve a ceasefire in exchange for Iran reopening the Strait of Hormuz “The officials did not say whether those discussions had taken place directly or only through mediators, and they cautioned that it was unclear whether a deal could be reached. But the officials said President Trump was discussing the possibility with officials inside and outside the administration.” As a reminder, earlier in the day Trump claimed on Wednesday that Iran had asked the U.S. for a ceasefire, but stressed he would only consider it if the strait was reopened. In response, Iran countered that it had not requested a ceasefire. https://twitter.com/BarakRavid/status/2039352788468003220
* * *

Iranian Supreme Leader Vows To “Continue Supporting The Resistance Against The Zionist-US Enemy”
Amid speculation that he is dead or badly wounded, moments ago Iran’s new supreme leader Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei said on X that he “emphatically declare that the consistent policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran, following on the path of Imam Khomeini and the martyred Leader, is to continue supporting the Resistance against the Zionist-US enemy.”
* * *

Iran: Not True that Iran Requested a Ceasefire
Iran has again rejected Trump’s narrative, after he hours ago claimed that “Iran’s New Regime President” has just “asked the United States of America for a CEASEFIRE!” Iran’s Foreign Ministry has responded by saying “there is no truth” to “Trump’s statements that Iran requested a ceasefire.” The Iran FM spox statement continues: “No decision has been made yet. We have many considerations. Our conditions for ending the war are very clear. We do not accept a ceasefire; We seek a complete end.” As a reminder, President Masoud Pezeshkian has been Iran’s president since July 2024 – and he’s made public appearances in Tehran, even over the last days. There is not a “new regime president”.= Additionally, Trump is now threatening to bomb Iran “back to the stone age” if Hormuz is not reopened, but just yesterday suggested he’s fine with it staying closed and that ultimately others should open it.

Preparing American Public for an Exit?
President Trump has issued new words to Reuters on his highly anticipated speech tonight (9pm ET): The United States will be “out of Iran pretty quickly” and could return for “spot hits” if needed, President Donald Trump tells Reuters, hours before he was scheduled to make a primetime address to the nation. Trump also says he would state in the speech that he is considering withdrawing the US from the NATO alliance. There’s expected to be heavy focus on chastising NATO. If this is indeed the Bush-style ‘mission accomplished’ moment, it may be that he’s ready to blame Western allies for the closure of the Hormuz Strait – a problem which didn’t exist before Operation Epic Fury.

Trump: Iran President has Asked for Ceasefire
President Trump on Truth Social has claimed the US has been directly asked for ceasefire; however, he coupled this with the typical threat of bombing Iran “back to the Stone Ages!!!” Here’s what he said (note: Iran does not have a new president): Iran’s New Regime President, much less Radicalized and far more intelligent than his predecessors, has just asked the United States of America for a CEASEFIRE! We will consider when Hormuz Strait is open, free, and clear. Until then, we are blasting Iran into oblivion or, as they say, back to the Stone Ages!!! President DJT

And yet the Hormuz question lingers, after just yesterday Trump strangely said the vital energy shipping waterway would “automatically open”. Oil prices initially dumped on the Trump message, and quickly rebounded – perhaps based on the latter part of Trump’s statement. A lot would have to happen – for one Washington is likely to require that Tehran giving up charging a some $2 million fee for tankers to make safe passage. Oil unimpressed…

Read more …

“Cuba has no economy, and no one there can fix the economy because they’re incompetent. ..”

Rubio Delivers a Reality Check on Iran, NATO, Cuba, and Venezuela (Anderson)

Secretary of State Marco Rubio has been doing a lot of MSM interviews lately, and I kind of get the feeling he’s… fed up. He’s tired of having to correct false narratives on Iran, Cuba, and Venezuela. As I reported on Monday, he got to a point where he told George Stephanopoulos that maybe he needed to “write down” Donald Trump’s objectives for Iran because no matter how many times Rubio told him what they were, he implied that he didn’t understand them. While it was entertaining, it does get old, I imagine.


The three main points about these topics that he’s asked about in every interview — and there have been a lot; perhaps Trump is prepping him to cover for Karoline Leavitt when she goes on maternity leave (kidding) — are as follows: 1) We’re very close to meeting our objectives in Iran. Not months, not days but weeks away. 2) Cuba has no economy, and no one there can fix the economy because they’re incompetent. 3) Venezuela is in phase two of the three-phase plan he and Trump have for its recovery, and things are going very well there. But no matter how many times he says these things, to hear the MSM tell it, the administration has no idea what’s going on in Iran, the people in Cuba are suffering because of Trump, and Venezuela isn’t improving at all.

Well, on Tuesday night, Rubio appeared on Hannity on Fox News, where he was actually allowed to talk without being asked asinine questions. He hit on all three countries (and NATO), and while he didn’t necessarily say anything new, he was able to lay it all out clearly and without dealing with stupidity, so it was nice to watch. Plus, as I said, he’s fed up with these MSM narratives, and it’s always fun to watch him get a little worked up. I’m going to kick back here and let him do most of the talking. I feel like i’m taking the lazy way out, but sometimes, it’s best just to let him talk. On how efficiently our military has achieved its objection and how it will “go down in history”:

On the threat to the United States and the rest of the world:

On why it’s the regime’s fault that we’ve gotten to this point:

Read more …

“The NATO membership is now a one-way street where they demand our military protection..”

Marco Rubio, the Question Must be Asked: “Why are we in NATO”? (CTH)

Secretary of State Marco Rubio appears on Fox News to discuss the various goals and objectives of the U.S. military operation against Iran. As part of the interview Secretary Rubio was asked about the strategic conflicts and hypocrisies now flowing from NATO member states. The U.S. supports our NATO posture in Europe in part because it provides us with strategic military bases and operations that are considered vital to our national interests. However, as outlined in the Iran conflict, when we need to use those strategic bases the NATO member states withdraw previous permissions. France has blocked us from flying over their airspace, Spain and Italy have said the U.S. cannot use our military bases on their soil for operations. The U.K has refused to protect and/or escort their own energy assets.


The NATO membership is now a one-way street where they demand our military protection, but Europe blocks us from using our own military assets for our independent operations. Europe, while hiding behind the NATO protection skirt of the U.S, is simultaneously telling the U.S. what we can and cannot do with our own military. Secretary Rubio and President Trump are now confronting this very visible one-way benefit head on.

Read more …

80 years ago.

NATO Without America? A Slow Shift Is Already Underway (Zevelev)

US President Donald Trump’s approach to foreign policy is often dismissed as chaotic or erratic. In reality, it reflects a deeper shift that is unlikely to disappear when he leaves office. Beneath the surface lies a consistent worldview, one shaped by populism and nationalism, that’s steadily gaining ground, both within the United States and globally. This shift is already reshaping long-standing institutions. Nowhere is this more visible than in Washington’s relationship with its European allies. For decades, US foreign policy rested on a simple premise: alliances, above all NATO, were the foundation of American power and influence. That consensus held across party lines for nearly 80 years. Today, it’s breaking down.


Trump is not merely skeptical of alliances, he openly questions their value. His reaction to the refusal of European allies to support US and Israeli military action against Iran was telling. Writing on Truth Social, he described NATO as a “paper tiger” and accused American allies of cowardice. “Everyone agrees with us, but they don’t want to help. And we, as the United States, must remember this,” he said. The message is blunt: if allies don’t act when Washington calls, then their status as allies is called into question. This doesn’t mean the United States is about to withdraw from NATO. What is unfolding is more gradual, and arguably more significant – a quiet dismantling of the alliance’s traditional structure.

There are growing signs of this shift: sharper rhetoric, fewer high-level engagements, and plans to reduce the American role within NATO’s command system. This is no longer just political theater.Even when constrained by Congress, as in the decision to block a rapid reduction of US troops in Europe, the administration has adjusted tactics rather than abandoning its objective. The restriction on cutting troop levels below 76,000 slows the process, but doesn’t change its direction. The broader aim remains clear: shifting responsibility onto Europe.A key element of this strategy is the gradual transfer of operational control. Reforms to NATO’s integrated command structure are already underway.

Soon, all three of the alliance’s operational commands will be led by Europeans. This marks a significant step towards transforming NATO into a European-led organization. If the United States relinquishes its central role in force planning and command, the consequences will be profound. NATO may remain intact in form, but its substance will change. Washington will no longer lead the alliance in the way it once did. This isn’t simply a matter of one president’s preferences. Trump reflects a broader shift in American public opinion.

There’s growing fatigue in the United States with the idea of underwriting the security of others. Years of costly conflicts in the Middle East, rising national debt, and pressing domestic concerns have made the traditional role of global guarantor increasingly unpopular. Don’t mistake it for isolationism. The recent strikes on Iran demonstrate that Washington remains willing to use force when it chooses. The change is more subtle, and more consequential. The United States no longer wants to be bound by obligations. Alliances and institutions that once defined American leadership are now seen as constraints. The emerging model is one of leadership without commitments: the ability to act freely, without being tied to the interests or expectations of partners.

That is a fundamentally different approach to international relations. It leaves NATO in an uncertain position, still formally intact, but increasingly hollowed out. In time, the alliance may survive. But it will no longer be the same organization that defined the transatlantic relationship for generations. And it’s far from clear that Europe is ready for what comes next.

Read more …

“.. if it remains alone, without key support and protection from the USA, the British empire is at risk of collapse.”

Keir Starmer Gives a National Address – Things Will Never be the Same Again (CTH)

Against the backdrop of the Iran conflict, crisis in the middle east and the disruption of energy supplies due to the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, U.K Prime Minister Keir Starmer held an urgent meeting with British business leaders, finance and bankers as well as U.K insurance leaders. At the conclusion of that meeting he informed media of a national address. During the national address to the people of Great Britain, Prime Minister Starmer emphasized that events in the middle east have forever changed the landscape of U.K. economic and geopolitical policy. Signaling an inflection point crossed, the British prime minister announced that urgent actions were being taken to mitigate a national crisis.


Additionally, accepting the U.S. position toward NATO and the U.K appears to be permanently shifted, Starmer said the British relationship with Europe now becomes critical to their vital national security interests. Against the backdrop of an end to the “special relationship” with America, the Brexit independence from the European Union is now a threat. The United Kingdom must find a way to reunite with the European Union, because if it remains alone, without key support and protection from the USA, the British empire is at risk of collapse.


Read more …

“..while he may be the most recognizable congressional leader, that familiarity isn’t doing him any favors ..”

Chuck Schumer Is Losing Control of His Party; They Turn On Him (Margolis)

A quiet rebellion is brewing inside the Democratic Party, and Chuck Schumer is sitting right in the crosshairs. Even as the Senate Minority Leader works to claw back the majority he lost in 2024, several Senate candidates are making it a point of pride to say they won’t support him as leader — before they’ve even won their races. The clearest shot came from Illinois. Lieutenant Gov. Juliana Stratton, who won her Democratic Senate primary earlier this month, made her position crystal clear during a January debate. “I’ve already said that I will not support Chuck Schumer as leader in the Senate, and I’m the only person on this stage that has said so,” Stratton declared. She’s not alone.


Michigan state Sen. Mallory McMorrow has also called for Schumer to step aside. Texas Senate Democratic nominee James Talarico is keeping his options open, saying he wants to hear from leadership candidates before making any commitment. And when Sen. Chris Murphy was offered the opportunity on NBC’s Meet the Press to back Schumer directly, he ducked it with a classic non-answer: “Well, no, we are united as a caucus right now.” United, sure. Just not necessarily behind Schumer.

Sen. Andy Kim (D-N.J.), appearing on CNN’s State of the Union, was careful to keep his support firmly in the past tense. “I’ve been supportive of our leadership right now,” Kim said, which is a far cry from saying he’d vote to keep Schumer in charge after November, and it’s quite the insult to the sitting leader. “And I think that that’s really what the American people are seeing is what we get when the Democrats are united, and the Republicans are constantly fighting themselves,” Kim concluded.

The Hill reports: “Schumer, 75, has led the Senate Democratic Conference since 2016, when he replaced longtime party leader Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.), who died in 2021. But in recent years, the New York Democrat has faced calls to give up power from various corners of the party, including from progressive groups, House Democrats, and even Democrats running for Senate. Criticism of Schumer particularly ramped up after eight Democrats, a group he was not part of, joined Republicans in voting to end the record-long government shutdown in November.

Illinois Lt. Gov. Juliana Stratton, the Democratic nominee in the race to succeed retiring Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), told liberal YouTuber Jack Cocchiarella earlier this month that she does not support Schumer serving as Senate Democratic leader for another Congress. We all know that Schumer’s problems with the base go back to this vote to keep the government open last March. That one vote cost him dearly with the base, and he’s never recovered from it. Schumer told The Hill he is just focused on winning the majority in November.

“The way to counter Trump more effectively is to win the majority in 2026 and put gavels in the hands of Democrats. That’s my North Star, and that’s what I’m focused on doing every single day,” Schumer said. A recent Morning Consult poll found that while he may be the most recognizable congressional leader, that familiarity isn’t doing him any favors. Compared to John Thune, Mike Johnson, and Hakeem Jeffries, Schumer is viewed the most negatively.

Read more …

“No One Knows What Will Happen Now”:

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson Warns Against Unbridled Free Speech (Turley)

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson is again warning of a growing threat to the nation. In her lone dissent in Chiles v. Salazar, Jackson observed that “to be completely frank, no one knows what will happen now.” The ominous tone stemmed from the fact that free speech had prevailed over state-imposed orthodoxy in a Colorado case. Eight justices, including her two liberal colleagues, ruled that Colorado could not prevent licensed counselors from “any practice or treatment” that “attempts or purports to change” a minor’s sexual orientation or gender identity. The win for free speech was catastrophic for Jackson and many on the left. Allowing counselors to discuss the causes and basis for sexual orientation changes, Jackson maintained, would “open a can of worms.” It would be far better for the majority to simply silence such dissenting voices in the name of science.


The dissent in Chiles is only the latest example of the chilling jurisprudence of Justice Jackson, including a pronounced dismissal of free speech values. Consider the holding of her colleagues that Jackson finds so horrific. Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote that the First Amendment “reflects … a judgment that every American possesses an inalienable right to think and speak freely, and a faith in the free marketplace of ideas as the best means for discovering truth … any law that suppresses speech based on viewpoint represents an ‘egregious’ assault on both of those commitments.” What a nightmare.

Instead, Jackson would have declared the ban on anything deemed “conversion therapy” to be “conduct,” not speech. It is that easy. You simply impose an orthodoxy and then treat any dissenters as being regulated for their conduct, not their viewpoints. Justice Elena Kagan could not withhold her frustration with her colleague, noting that “[b]ecause the State has suppressed one side of a debate, while aiding the other, the constitutional issue is straightforward.” She added that Jackson’s view “rests on reimagining—and in that way collapsing—the well-settled distinction between viewpoint-based and other content-based speech restrictions.”

Other countries have embraced Jackson’s permissive approach to speech curtailment. Recently, Malta failed to convict a man who was facing five months in prison for merely discussing his own abandonment of homosexuality due to a religious conversion. Of course, we just went through a pandemic when censorship and orthodoxy were dressed up as science. Leading scientific figures were canceled and harassed. That was the case with Jay Bhattacharya, who co-authored the Great Barrington Declaration and was a vocal critic of COVID-19 policies. Bhattacharya was target due to his dissenting views on health policy, including opposing wholesale shutdowns of schools and businesses.

He and other scientists were later vindicated. European allies that did not shut down their schools fared far better than we did, including avoiding a national mental health and learning crisis. We simply never had that debate. He was recently honored with the prestigious “Intellectual Freedom” award from the American Academy of Sciences and Letters. He is also now the 18th director of the National Institutes of Health. Yet, years ago, the courts, the media, and politicians joined in treating dissenting views as “conspiracy theories.”

Some argued that the virus’s origin was likely the Chinese research lab in Wuhan. That position was denounced by the Washington Post as a “debunked” coronavirus “conspiracy theory.” The New York Times Science and Health reporter Apoorva Mandavilli called any mention of the lab theory “racist.” Federal agencies now support the lab theory as the most likely based on the scientific evidence.Likewise, many questioned the efficacy of those blue surgical masks and supported natural immunity to the virus — the government later recognized both positions.

Others questioned the six-foot rule, which shut down many businesses, as unsupported by science. In congressional testimony, Dr. Anthony Fauci later admitted that the rule “sort of just appeared” and “wasn’t based on data.” Yet not only did it result in heavily enforced rules (and meltdowns) in public areas, but the media further ostracized dissenting critics. For years, pundits portrayed those who questioned gender reassignment surgeries and treatments as bigots. Now, leading medical associations and European nations have decided that such procedures should not be generally allowed. All of it was orthodoxy masquerading as science.

Yet, Jackson sees the protection of dissenting scientific and professional views as a “can of worms” that the courts should avoid in favor of state and assocational imposed truths. She wrote that allowing such opposing views “ultimately risks grave harm to Americans’ health and wellbeing.”

Read more …

“Ursula von der Leyen recently announced the need to yank another €200 million from taxpayers to “support investment in innovative nuclear technologies.”

How Many Times has the EU Screwed Itself Over in the Past Year? (Marsden)

Hey, good news! The EU has found a new source of desperately needed gas amid the current energy crunch. The bad news? It’s in the US. So it will serve America, first. With Europe getting any sloppy seconds that Daddy Trump feels like overcharging it for when he isn’t threatening to invade. It’ll be the French energy multinational, TotalEnergies, serving it up to the US like a waiter at a Montmartre bistro, forced to smile and bow while the guest pockets the silverware.


Even better? The company wasn’t even supposed to be over there doing that. They had planned to be building offshore windfarms. But instead, Trump’s Department of the Interior now says that they made a deal with the French company to spend roughly a billion dollars investing in American gas operations in exchange for getting about the same amount of cash back for agreeing to say goodbye to its green wind dreams in the US. Team Trump calls it an “innovative agreement driven by President Donald J. Trump’s Energy Dominance Agenda.” But the CEO of the European company is making the cucking sound like a big win.

“TotalEnergies is pleased to sign this settlement agreements with the DOI and to support the Administration’s Energy Policy. Considering that the development of offshore wind projects is not in the country’s interest, we have decided to renounce offshore wind development in the United States, in exchange for the reimbursement of the lease fees,” said TotalEnergies CEO Patrick Pouyanne, while adjusting his knee pads, before continuing to service Trump via official US government press release.

“Furthermore, these agreements, under which we will reinvest the refunded lease fees to finance the construction of the 29 Mt Rio Grande LNG plant and the development of our oil and gas activities, allows us to support the development of US gas production and export.” Hold up. So this company gave the US about a billion dollars in exchange for access to green energy. Then the US gave them back their money. And now they’re reinvesting it to serve Trump’s agenda? And publicly “pleased” about it?

Well, good riddance to – er, I mean, so much for Europe’s green dreams, I guess. But at least it means they’ll get easier access to more desperately needed LNG, right? Since they’re the ones doing the heavy lifting. Not without securing a trade agreement on America’s terms, they won’t. Which is why they’re aiming to ratify a trade agreement with their tormentor.

Brussels had been concerned about the agreement that was struck with Trump back in 2025, named the Turnberry Agreement after the US president’s Scottish golf resort where it all went down. The deal was about tariffs. Specifically, it gave a huge break to the US with ZERO tariffs on some of its exports to the EU, while slapping a 15-percent tariff on EU imports to the US. Another master stroke of cuckoldry. And yet Trump still won’t stop talking about how the EU is constantly stiffing America on trade. Which explains why the EU has been dragging its feet on ratifying it, worried that maybe it was putting too many eggs in a very unstable basket. Something that the US warned it against doing with Russia, being only too happy to step up to offer a costlier overdependency on itself instead.

The EU is doing the exact same with green energy, turning its back on nuclear power before its beloved green renewables were even ready for prime time. Which also went about as well as you might expect from these central planning geniuses. Calling it a screwup, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen recently announced the need to yank another €200 million from taxpayers to “support investment in innovative nuclear technologies.” The same ones they’d been busy vilifying until recently.

Read more …

“Europe believes that their needs must be our priority, and that, furthermore, we’re required to do their job for them.”

Europe Needs to Hear This Harsh Truth (Stephen Green)

Shipping and military expert John Konrad spent all day in D.C. on Tuesday talking to his military sources and concluded that “the Navy appears to be in no rush to reopen the strait,” even while Iran dictates whose oil tankers are allowed to pass. “What is this administration trying to leverage?” Konrad wondered, and that nobody he talked to was willing to discuss the fate of Hormuz “until European politicians and media stop calling Americans war criminals and monsters.”


While Konrad admitted he has “no idea” when Hormuz will reopen, “but if the price is a modicum of cooperation and respect for everything America has done for decades to keep Europe safe, the strait could stay closed for months, or turned into a toll booth for years, because the majority of Americans…. and the vast majority of Trump administration officials I’ve talked with… seem fed up with their arrogance.” The self-styled sophisticates in Brussels and Europe’s capitals remain remarkably provincial in their outlook, and that’s why today we will speak some harsh truths to our friends in Europe — not because the truth is harsh, but because they believe that we naïve Americans don’t recognize it.

So here comes the truth bomb, laser-guided right into the atrium of the EU’s Berlaymont building. The harsh truth is that Hormuz is their priority, not ours, and yet they refuse to make any serious contribution to the war effort. The U.S. is a net exporter of oil and liquified natural gas (LNG), and we buy hardly anything from the Gulf. Closing the Strait of Hormuz is an inconvenience for us (in the price of gas and diesel) and hardly a strategic necessity. In both military and economic terms, Hormuz is way down our target list. Complicating the decision matrix even further, re-opening Hormuz at this stage likely requires ground troops — so it’s simply smarter for us to continue the bombing campaign and see if we can’t wait out an increasingly split and brittle regime that might still collapse under pressure.

Europe, of course, doesn’t see things the way we do. Europe believes that their needs must be our priority, and that, furthermore, we’re required to do their job for them. [And Another Thing: We could do more to stabilize energy prices, but in 2024, the Biden Cabal declared a moratorium on the construction of new LNG export terminals. So while the rest of the world suffers an LNG supply shock, our producers are forced to, at times, pay people to take LNG off their hands, and even burn off excess. Crazy, right?]

Before Epic Fury, something like 20% of the world’s LNG and 25% of seaborne oil trade passed through the strait each year and accounted for something like 10-15% of Europe’s energy supplies. Losing that hurts, and Politico reported on Tuesday that one “top Brussels official urges Europeans to work from home and drive less.”nEU energy chief Dan Jørgensen says Europe faces a “very serious situation,” and that “even if… peace is here tomorrow, still we will not go back to normal in the foreseeable future.”nSucks to be EU, chief. Meanwhile, Europe’s contribution to the actual military effort is barely minuscule, and a handful of nations, including France (duh), Spain (fricken commies), and even Giorgia Meloni’s Italy, have closed their airbases to our military traffic headed to the Gulf. Apparently, “lead, follow, or get out of the way” isn’t a part of Europe’s lexicon.

Read more …

The UK today.

A Civilization Whose Defense is Abandoned, is Lost (Paul Craig Roberts)

For many years I have expressed concern that Western Civilization was being destroyed intentionally from within by failing to convey the civilization’s achievements to succeeding generations via education. Instead, education was used to alienate generations from their own civilization by stressing evils such as wars, slavery, oppression of blacks and women, oppression of other peoples as the result of colonial rule, abuse of children by parents, religious prejudices, class prejudices, and so on. The history of Western Civilization as a series of great reforms was kept from generation after generation so successfully that today hardly anyone under sixty years of age knows about them.


Western civilization has many achievements in science, technology, architecture, music, art, but perhaps the greatest achievement of Western Civilization began in the ninth century during the reign of Alfred the Greet in what became England. Alfred established law based on the people’s beliefs and behavior–the English Common Law–not on the edicts of a king. This was the beginning of developments over the centuries that culminated in the Glorious Revolution of 1680 that established that the king was subject to the law and the law was established by the commoners and the aristocrats in Parliament, thus making the king accountable to the people. The accountability of government rested on free speech. Without free speech truth cannot be ascertained.

The Americans who inherited the notion of government accountable to the people inscribed in the US Constitution the right to free speech.In recent years this right on which accountable government rests has been eroded in the US and essentially destroyed in the UK. In America today citizens who use the Constitutionally protected right of free speech can lose their jobs, can be prohibited from contracting with or having jobs with many state governments. If they are students who protest Israel’s genocide of the Palestinians, they are expelled from the university, and if they are foreign students they are deported. The universities do nothing to protect the free speech that the US Constitution guarantees. Neither do the bar associations nor the law schools.

Free speech is in the way of anti-Western civilization ideologies. We must believe that white racism, not the black King of Dahomey’s slave wars, is the cause of black slavery. We are denied the fact that blacks held blacks in slavery and the fact that the blacks sent to the New World were enslaved by blacks, and that colonists in the New World purchased already enslaved blacks for a labor force. White people did not enslave black people. Black people sold as slaves were enslaved by the black King of Dahomey. You will not be able to find this fact in any Black Studies program in any university. The generations of indoctrination of white people against themselves, called education, has produced a situation in which law is no longer applied to the guilty but to his victim. Black immigrant-invaders are protected against hate speech and an accusation of rape has become hate speech.

In the UK, and also I believe in Norway and Sweden and perhaps throughout the EU, a white woman who reports a rape or a gang-rape might be charged with a hate crime against a “person of color.” This possibility essentially conveys rape privileges to black immigrant-invaders to rape white European women. The police are as likely to hold the rape victim accountable for a hate crime as to hold the rapist accountable for rape. In England these rapes went on for 30 years with the police and the British government doing nothing about it except covering it up. A year or two ago former British prime minister Liz Truss said that for 30 years the British government covered up the rapes. It stilll does.

Read more …

Tyler Robinson’s defense team may use this argument in an attempt to get the charges against him dropped”

Charlie Kirk Bullet Doesn’t Match Suspect’s Rifle – Lawyers (RT)

Investigators could not match the bullet that killed conservative influencer Charlie Kirk to the rifle used by his alleged assassin, lawyers for the suspect have claimed. The accused killer’s defense team is using this fact to push for a delayed trial. Tyler Robinson’s lawyers said in a recent court filing that the US Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) could not conclusively connect a bullet fragment recovered from Kirk’s body to a rifle found at the scene, citing an internal report by the agency.


The full ATF report has not been made public, but Robinson’s lawyers cited excerpts from the document in a request to delay a preliminary hearing scheduled for May. The 22-year-old suspect’s legal team stated that they need more time to review the bullet analysis, and to analyze the DNA of multiple other people found at the crime scene. Kirk, the founder of Turning Point USA (TPUSA), was shot in the neck and killed almost instantly at an event on a Utah college campus last September. His death sent shockwaves through the US, with President Donald Trump posthumously awarding Kirk the Presidential Medal of Freedom and describing the conservative icon as “a visionary and one of the greatest figures of his generation.”

Robinson was arrested two days after Kirk’s death. Investigators quickly linked him to a Mauser model 98 rifle found near the scene, which had apparently been modified at some point to fire the American 30.06 round used in the assassination. Text messages between Robinson and his transgender lover were then unearthed, in which Robinson confessed to the killing and revealed almost every detail of the plot, down to how he cleaned his fingerprints off the gun before stashing it in a nearby patch of woods.

Prosecutors have said that DNA matching Robinson’s was found on the trigger of the rifle, but the case has nevertheless spawned multiple conspiracy theories – including the widely spread claim that Kirk was killed for turning on TPUSA’s pro-Israel donors and opposing US strikes on Iran. Every firearm leaves a unique imprint on a bullet as the projectile leaves the barrel. When enough fragments are found in good condition, ballistic analysts can match the projectile to the weapon with almost 100% confidence. Robinson’s lawyers suggested in the filings that they may point to the lack of a match in an attempt to dismiss charges against their client.

Read more …

People hear it will take their jobs, and that’s all they can understand.

More Than Half of Americans Believe AI Will Do More Harm Than Good: Poll ET)

About 55 percent of Americans surveyed in a 2026 Quinnipiac poll said artificial intelligence (AI) will be more harmful than helpful. The survey, released on March 30, was conducted in collaboration with the Quinnipiac University School of Computing & Engineering and the Quinnipiac University School of Business. In April 2025, only 44 percent believed AI would do more harm than good in their daily lives. In the 2026 poll, 21 percent answered that AI affects their lives a lot, while 29 percent said only somewhat, and 30 percent believed AI impacts are minimal. Only 17 percent said they are not impacted at all.


Regarding education, 64 percent of survey respondents said AI is more harmful, compared with just 27 percent who believe it will help. For health care issues, 45 percent of those surveyed believed AI will do more harm, while 43 percent said AI will be more helpful. The employment outlook showed the greatest percentage of people worried about the future of AI, as 75 percent said continuous advancements in AI will most likely lead to a decline of job opportunities for people. While 18 percent said AI will not have much of an impact on jobs, only 7 percent said jobs for humans will increase as a result of AI.

In just one year, the fear of possible job losses due to AI increased by nearly 20 points. In April 2025, 56 percent of respondents said AI would be detrimental to human jobs. All generations surveyed remain pessimistic about the job outlook as a result of AI’s rapid growth, with Gen Z—including ages 18 to 29—exhibiting the highest percentage at 81 percent. For millennials, aged 30 to 45, 71 percent said jobs are likely to decrease as AI grows, and 67 percent of Gen Z, aged 46 to 61, agree. Of the baby boomer generation, aged 62 to 80, 66 percent indicated that human jobs will decline.

“Younger Americans report the highest familiarity with AI tools, but they are also the least optimistic about the labor market,” Tamilla Triantoro, associate professor of business analytics and information systems at Quinnipiac University School of Business, said in the report. “AI fluency and optimism here are moving in opposite directions.”Among those currently employed, 30 percent reported being very or somewhat concerned about AI rendering their jobs obsolete, but 69 percent said they are not very worried about it. Compared with last year’s survey, only 21 percent of employed Americans expressed fear of losing their jobs to AI.

“Americans are more worried about what AI may do to the labor market than about what it may do to their own jobs,” Triantoro said. “People seem more willing to predict a tougher market than to picture themselves on the losing end of that disruption—a pattern worth watching as the technology moves deeper into the workplace.”

An overwhelming 85 percent of Americans said they would be unwilling to work a job where their direct supervisor was an AI program that assigned their tasks and schedules. When asked how much they trust AI, 76 percent of respondents said that they hardly ever trust it, while just 21 percent admitted they do trust AI. Still, 51 percent said they often use AI for researching topics. Only 20 percent said they relied on AI for medical advice, and just 15 percent for personal advice.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Mar 182026
 
 March 18, 2026  Posted by at 10:05 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , ,  86 Responses »


Sophia Loren seated by the Parthenon on the Athenian Acropolis during filming for ‘Boy on a Dolphin’, 1957


Trump Calls SAVE Act ‘Most Important & Consequential’ Legislation (ZH)
Voter ID Has Massive Public Support: Why Is Congress Standing In The Way? (ZH)
Debunking the Left’s Favorite Lies About the SAVE Act (Matt Margolis)
Japan Constitution Forbids Overseas Military Operations (CTH)
Your Gas Prices Are Up? Cry Me a River. (A.J. Christopher)
‘We No Longer Need Or Desire’ NATO’s Help On Iran: Trump (ZH)
The Dems’ Iran Attack Strategy Is Backfiring, and CNN Admits It (Margolis)
Megyn Kelly Said Mark Levin Has a “Micropenis” (Sundance)
UK, EU No Longer Hide Their Anti-Trump Sentiments — Dmitriev (TASS)
‘I Am Extremely Disappointed In Donald Trump’ – AfD Co-Leader (RMX)
Sen. Kennedy Just Shut Down the UK Over Iran…and It Was Epic (Matt Vespa)
Cuban Chaos: What’s Real and What’s Speculation (Sarah Anderson)

 


 

https://twitter.com/NicoHQ1/status/2033523556211155204?s=20 https://twitter.com/robertdunlap947/status/2033500757668831561?s=20

 


 

 


 


It is obvious.

Trump Calls SAVE Act ‘Most Important & Consequential’ Legislation (ZH)

President Trump on Tuesday called on Congress to pass the SAVE Act which requires ID to vote in federal elections, warning that lawmakers who vote against it will have a “guaranteed loss” in future campaigns. “The Save America Act is one of the most IMPORTANT & CONSEQUENTIAL pieces of legislation in the history of Congress, and America itself. NO MORE RIGGED ELECTIONS!” Trump posted to Truth Social. “Voter I.D., Proof of Citizenship, No Rigged Mail-In Voting (We are the only Country in the World that allows this!), No Men in Women’s Sports, No Transgender MUTILIZATION of our Children. 90% to 99% ISSUES ALL!,” he added. (Mutilization?) Trump’s suggestion seems to be that if Democrats are allowed to steal elections, all of the woke societal ills will continue. “Only sick, demented, or deranged people in the House or Senate could vote against THE SAVE AMERICA ACT. If they do, each one of these points, separately, will be used against the user in his/her political campaign for office – A guaranteed loss!” Trump added. Trump also said on Tuesday that he won’t endorse anyone who votes against it.
Read more …

Why? Cheap political gain.

Voter ID Has Massive Public Support: Why Is Congress Standing In The Way? (ZH)

The “controversy” in the US over voter ID requirements is an entirely fabricated affair, and a primary source of obstruction is the very government supposedly elected to represent the public will. That is to say, the only people that don’t support the SAVE Act are politicians, and some of them claim to be conservative.Roughly 80% of all adult Americans support voter ID requirements for US elections; this includes a majority in every minority group and a majority among 95% of Republicans and 71% of Democrats. In other words, voter ID is one of the few issues both sides universally agree on. Public support was enthusiastic before Donald Trump was reelected in 2024.


• Pew Research Center (August 2025): 83% of U.S. adults strongly favored or favored “requiring all voters to show government-issued photo identification to vote.”
• Rasmussen Reports (January 2025): Asked if requiring photo ID to vote is “a reasonable measure to protect the integrity of elections,” 77% of likely voters said yes.
• Gallup (October 2024): 84% of U.S. adults favored “requiring all voters to provide photo identification at their voting place.” Also, 83% favored “requiring people who are registering to vote for the first time to provide proof of citizenship.”

Around 90% of all countries with free elections have laws requiring ID and proof of citizenship before a person votes. The US is one of the few democratic nations in the world that does not secure its elections from interference by non-citizens. It is also the country most targeted by special interests for cultural replacement through mass immigration. It might make more sense if the US was entirely insulated and protected from illegal migrants. One could then argue that elections don’t need identification measures because there is no threat. Of course, the US is far from secure. The Biden Administration’s open border bonanza flooded the country with approximately 10 million illegals. Official estimates suggest there were 20 million total illegals residing in the US before deportations.

The problem is Congress. More specifically, the Senate. The U.S. House of Representatives passed the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act (H.R. 22) in April 2025. A subsequent, expanded version known as the SAVE America Act also passed the House on February 11, 2026 by a vote of 218-213, requiring strict documentary proof of citizenship to register and photo ID to vote in federal elections. The SAVE Act is relatively simple: A person must provide an ID and proof of citizenship when registering to vote. This could include a birth certificate or a passport. When actually voting, that person needs to have their ID on hand at the polling station. This is not difficult for the vast majority of citizens, yet, Democrats and a handful of Republicans assert that this will “disenfranchise” million of voters.

On the Republican side, Senate Majority Leader John Thune has been a persistent obstacle. Democrat Senators absolutely refuse to pass the bill into law, likely because they know a contingent of illegal migrants vote in state and federal election to keep them in power. There is no other rational reason for them to oppose the measure.

Read more …

“The passport fees, the birth certificate hunt, the cost and inconvenience — they all collapse the moment you actually read the legislation.”

Debunking the Left’s Favorite Lies About the SAVE Act (Matt Margolis)

Democrats have been running the same tired playbook on the SAVE Act. They’ve claimed it’s racist, but those attacks haven’t exactly worked because majorities of minority voters support it. So, they try to scare people with outlandish claims like it will make it impossible for married women to vote. It’s a stupid claim, but some people are willing to believe it. And there are plenty of other accusations that are just as untrue.mSen. Dick Durbin tried to push those fake claims in a recent Senate hearing, rattling off a list of grievances about the bill’s voter registration requirements.


Durbin kicked things off with the passport argument, a favorite among critics of the legislation, when it comes to registering to vote. “What is acceptable is a passport,” he said. “50% of Americans do not have a passport. Those who want to obtain it so they can vote will pay $186 and wait three or four weeks for that to happen.” He kept going with the married woman claim, arguing that anyone who changed their name after marriage would have to dig up not just a birth certificate but additional documentation to prove their eligibility. However, it’s all a lie, and Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), the lead sponsor of the bill, was ready for him.

Lee let Durbin finish and then, with barely concealed amusement, delivered the kind of response that makes committee hearings worth watching. “I’m happy to report to my dear friend and colleague Senator Durbin from Illinois — you’re in luck,” Lee said. “We’ve taken care of that.”He went on to point out that the SAVE Act includes an explicit accommodation for people who can’t produce traditional documentation. Lee spelled it out in plain English: “When you read the bill, what you’ll discover is that we’ve made special accommodation for those who don’t have documentation, for those who can’t find their birth certificate. Maybe their house burned down, maybe their dog ate it, or whatever it is.”

So what happens if someone genuinely has no paperwork? The bill has an answer for that, too. “When all else fails, if you don’t have documentation establishing the information on your birth certificate or what would be in a passport or otherwise, the bill contains a provision requiring each state to allow an alternative mechanism by which someone can, by attestation, issue a sworn statement establishing the critical facts underlying their citizenship,” Lee explained. The state then takes responsibility for verifying that sworn statement, using its own records and reciprocity agreements with other states.

Durbin tried to interject a few times. He didn’t get far. Lee kept going, methodically dismantling the argument piece by piece. “We took great pains to go out of our way to make sure that no American, no American would be left in the dark,” he said. “This will not cost them a dime. And no one will be excluded if they can’t find their documentation.”

Well, that’s a big problem for the Democrats because this undermines the whole Democratic line of attack. The passport fees, the birth certificate hunt, the cost and inconvenience — they all collapse the moment you actually read the legislation. The bill anticipates exactly the scenarios Democrats claim to be worried about and has a built-in workaround. With that in mind, they have no reason to oppose the legislation, that is, if those were truly sticking points for them

Lee even extended an invitation at the end, suggesting Durbin would surely want to support the bill now that his concerns had been addressed. “I’m sure you’ll be elated to hear that, and we look forward to having your affirmative vote when we vote on the SAVE America Act.”

Read more …

So did Germany’s constitution until recently..

Japan Constitution Forbids Overseas Military Operations (CTH)

Responding to questions about whether Japan would send military ships to the middle east to participate in escorts through the Strait of Hormuz, Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi noted the current constitution blocks Japan from conducting overseas military operations. Exactly as we outlined when President Trump first made the request via Truth Social {SEE HERE} Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi may want to support the request, but Japan’s post WWII constitution about military operations doesn’t permit it. Japan’s military can be constitutionally defensive only.


While an argument might be made that escorting oil destined for eventual arrival in Japan may technically squeeze within a narrow interpretation of ‘defense’, considering the operation would take place far from Japan a highly conservative Sanae Takaichi is not going to try and thread that precarious needle.

TOKYO, March 16 (Reuters) – Japan has no plan to dispatch naval vessels to escort vessels in the Middle East, Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi said on Monday, after U.S. President Donald Trump called on allies to protect tankers traversing through the Strait of Hormuz. “We have not made any decisions whatsoever about dispatching escort ships. We are continuing to examine what Japan can do independently and what can be done within the legal framework,” Takaichi told parliament. Trump’s call in a social media post for U.S. allies, including Japan, to help protect oil and gas shipments through the strategic waterway puts Tokyo in a difficult position because while it relies heavily on Middle East energy its war-renouncing constitution limits the scope of overseas military operations it can conduct.

Japan’s Maritime Self-Defense Force has conducted anti-piracy operations in waters near the Middle East, but those missions were policing operations rather than combat missions against state actors. Japan can deploy its military overseas to respond to what it determines to be an existential threat to the nation, but that would be politically difficult and a high legal threshold for Takaichi’s government to justify. Takaichi will travel to Washington this week for talks with Trump that she said will cover the conflict with Iran.“I would like to engage in solid discussions based on Japan’s views and position regarding the need for early de-escalation,” she told lawmakers. (link)

Read more …

“He holds the title of being the only person to ever lose a debate to Joe Biden. And that’s a shame, because Ryan was correct on every single debate point. And yet he lost the debate ..”

Your Gas Prices Are Up? Cry Me a River. (A.J. Christopher)

And so it begins. “Mission creep.” “Quagmire.” “The Ghosts of Iraq.” And no “conservative” armchair assessment of a military conflict that’s extended past ten minutes would be complete without that kiss of death phrase “forever war.” Hey “conservatives,” it’s been two weeks. Two. Weeks. Breathe. Relax. And when you’ve stopped hyperventilating, take a sober look at what’s happening and assess the situation with a rational mind.


President Donald Trump began moving the chessboard pieces into place at the beginning of February. That’s February 2026 for those with short memories. The military campaign was launched in the morning hours of February 28. And what the United States and Israel alone are trying to do is destroy (and hopefully unseat) an entrenched dictatorship that’s had 47 years to dig in and prepare. So, yeah. It’s gonna take more than two weeks. Most conservatives know this, and they themselves are mentally prepared to do whatever it takes to get the job done. But a few too many of us are preemptively freaking out] regarding the political impact of a prolonged conflict. Oh sweet lawdy, what will this mean for the midterms?

What will the RINOs in Congress do to gum up the works? President Trump assured us this would take four weeks….but what if it’s five weeks?!?!?! What if it’s MORE THAN THAT?!?!?!?! These “conservatives” aren’t scared of Iran. They’re scared of swing voters in Arizona. So here’s what we actual conservatives need to do. We have to make our case and make it forcefully. We have to make the case to our wobbly-kneed friends and neighbors and family members and co-workers. And the case to be made, simply and straightforwardly, is this:

This is a 47-year-old war that Iran has intentionally expanded to the point where it can almost be classified a world war, and a nuclear one at that. The Cold War mentality of mutually assured destruction will not deter apocalyptic maniacs whose goal is nothing short of world domination. Yes, oil prices are volatile right now. Yes, our 401(k)s suck right now. Guess what. DEAL WITH IT. If that’s the most you’re being asked to sacrifice in your pampered life, consider yourself blessed. There is no military draft. There are no higher taxes. Nobody is being asked to give up meat or bread for the troops, or to grow victory gardens, or to buy war bonds. So have another spoonful of flax seeds and go fire off an angry email to the airline company for not letting you take your comfort peacock on the plane. Get out of the way and let the leaders lead.

Because the American voter has been conditioned to think that the government must neutralize every global threat, but with the absolute bare minimum disruption to their Starbucks routines, we’ve reached the absurd position of expecting our military to wage a pain-free, cost-free war. It’s up to us conservatives not to go all Paul Ryan. Remember him? He holds the title of being the only person to ever lose a debate to Joe Biden. And that’s a shame, because Ryan was correct on every single debate point. And yet he lost the debate.

Read more …

NATO without US. Not what the Dems want.

‘We No Longer Need Or Desire’ NATO’s Help On Iran: Trump (ZH)

President Trump is not happy with NATO and is letting the world know it. First countries like Spain, Germany, and Greece made it clear they would not heed his call for a coalition to open the Strait of Hormuz, and on Tuesday France’s Macron stated it is “not our war”. Trump said in a fresh Truth Social Post “I am not surprised by their action, however, because I always considered NATO, where we spend Hundreds of Billions of Dollars per year protecting these same Countries, to be a one way street — We will protect them, but they will do nothing for us, in particular, in a time of need.” And more:


Because of the fact that we have had such Military Success, we no longer “need,” or desire, the NATO Countries’ assistance — WE NEVER DID! Likewise, Japan, Australia, or South Korea. In fact, speaking as President of the United States of America, by far the Most Powerful Country Anywhere in the World…Without doubt, these countries have memories of Iraq and Afghanistan, which were multi-national efforts (and largely failures in terms of becoming unanticipated ‘forever wars’ and quagmires).


Macron: France Won’t Join Trump’s Hormuz Ops
President Emmanuel Macron has just slammed the door on Trump in a huge way, though he did so in his classic meager and weak, somewhat ambiguous fashion.He said Tuesday that though France will not immediately take part in efforts to militarily unblock the Hormuz Strait, it will continue to prepare for a potential future coalition that could provide freedom of navigation once the conflict ends.

“We are not party to the conflict and therefore France will never take part in operations to open or liberate the Strait of Hormuz in the current context,” Macron said at the start of a cabinet meeting.As a reminder, Trump on Monday said of Macron: “I have spoken to him. On a scale of 0 to 10, he’s been an eight. Not perfect, but it’s France…” And the US president added, “I think he’s going to help. I spoke to him yesterday. I don’t do a hard sell on them because my attitude is that we don’t need anybody. We’re the strongest nation in the world. We have the strongest military by far in the world.”

Read more …

“.. 84% of Americans say they care a lot about the U.S. economy. That’s nearly double the number for Iran, and it tells you everything you need to know about where people’s heads are at right now.”

The Dems’ Iran Attack Strategy Is Backfiring, and CNN Admits It (Margolis)

Have you noticed how Democrats and their media allies have been working overtime to turn Operation Epic Fury into a political liability for President Trump? The rhetoric was nonstop about how Trump was starting an “endless war” and that things weren’t going well. Well, the public isn’t buying it. Just over two weeks in, the attacks just aren’t landing, and even CNN’s own data analyst is admitting it.


CNN anchor Sara Sidner and chief data analyst Harry Enten took a look at the numbers Monday morning, and what they found wasn’t exactly the anti-Trump bombshell the left has been hoping for. The American public, it turns out, is largely tuning out the Democrats’ rhetoric on Iran.

“There’s kind of been a little bit of a collective shrug from the American public,” Enten said. Only 45% of Americans say they care a lot about the situation in Iran — a number that, as Enten pointed out, falls below the majority threshold. Meanwhile, 84% of Americans say they care a lot about the U.S. economy. That’s nearly double the number for Iran, and it tells you everything you need to know about where people’s heads are at right now.

It gets worse for the anti-Trump crowd.

Google search data shows Americans’ interest in Iran is actually collapsing. Searches are down 84% compared to Feb. 28, when the initial strikes began. And over the weekend? Americans were (surprisingly) far more interested in the Academy Awards. I didn’t even realize they were on, but apparently, searches for the Oscars ran three to four times as high as searches for Iran. That’s a brutal number if you’re a Democrat trying to make this a liability for the GOP before the midterms.

“At this point, outside of the situation in Iran perhaps affecting the U.S. economy, which of course is the number one issue, is what Americans are focusing on,” Enten said, “I’m just not thinking that this is necessarily going to be the big political mover and shaker that you might expect, given that this has kind of been a pretty gosh darn big deal, at least globally speaking.”

And then there’s the approval rating data. Oh boy, is that a gut punch for Democrats.

Trump’s overall approval rating stands at 41% — the same as before Operation Epic Fury began. All the breathless media coverage, all the Democratic messaging, all the hand-wringing about escalation and consequences, and none of it moved the needle. Not a single point.

“Despite all the hubbub, despite all the critics of the president of the United States, what we are seeing right now is a president whose approval rating is steady,” Enten said. He added bluntly, “This has been politically a big ball of nothing.”

Enten did leave the door open for things to shift if gas prices climb significantly or broader economic pain sets in. But, of course, the opposite is also true. The war in Iran is not expected to last long. This means that the increase in gas prices will be temporary, and when it’s over, they’ll come down, and Trump will get the credit for finally ending the Iran problem that so many presidents have avoided. https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/2033601657536450691?s=20

Read more …

“President Trump Stands in Support of Levin..”

Megyn Kelly Said Mark Levin Has a “Micropenis” (Sundance)

I dislike Mark Levin immensely. Long-time CTH readers know I have a very valid reason to dislike Mark Levin immensely. My approach was to essentially ignore old yeller as he shouts and rants about all the things he always shouts and rants about. I dislike Mark Levin very much; beyond what most here would define as immense. That said, I also accept that -for whatever reason he has- President Donald J Trump does not hold the same opinion of Mark Levin. In fact, Donald Trump seems to like Mark Levin. As a consequence, I retain my peace and ignore everything that circles around their time together. However, this is also an πopportunity.


Mr Levin’s audience has been shrinking quite fast. The downward spiral has been happening with greater speed and increasing slope for around 15 years. The diminutive Mr Levin is now a visual representation of the Black Knight Monty Pyton skit. If the name was raised, I quietly just stared in southern. Within the great podcaster war of 2026, apparently Mrs. Megyn Kelly and Mr Mark Levin have been having a very public feud. I don’t know the details but given the reality of the past 12 months it probably surrounds Mr Levin’s Israel-First approach toward everything political. In the latest drama du jour, Mrs Kelly is said to have mentioned that Mr Levin has a small penis, a “micropenis.”

Mr Levin apparently picked up the phone and called his loyal friend, President Donald Trump. Likely looking for an ally of considerable consequence to boost his member-ship status. After all, Levin’s circle of influence is rather, well, small and shrinking.

PRESIDENT TRUMP – “Mark Levin, a truly Great American Patriot, is somewhat under siege by other people with far less Intellect, Capability, and Love for our Country. Mark is Tough, Strong, and Brilliant, hence the nickname, “THE GREAT ONE,” conceived by our MAGA friend, the wonderful Sean Hannity, after years of dealing with Mark in Legal, Media, and other capacities. Mark would often do Sean’s show, speaking as a lawyer, and Sean realized then, as did others, that he was special.

Mark Levin was not looking to do Television, Radio, or anything else, but he was drafted by very smart people who understood that there are few like him. He is a true Conservative, and Intellect, far smarter than those who criticize him but, above all, he is a man of Great Wisdom and Common Sense who truly loves our Country. When you hear others unfairly attack Mark, remember that they are jealous and angry Human Beings, whose “sway” is much less than the Public understands, and will, now that they know where I stand, rapidly diminish. Other than for his wonderful wife and family, Mark Levin only cares and wants one thing, GREATNESS AND SUCCESS FOR AMERICA!

Those that speak ill of Mark will quickly fall by the wayside, as do the people whose ideas, policies, and footings are not sound. THEY ARE NOT MAGA, I AM, and MAGA includes not allowing Iran, a Sick, Demented, and Violent Terrorist Regime, to have a Nuclear Weapon to blow up the United States of America, the Middle East and, ultimately, the rest of the World.MAGA is about stopping them cold, and that is exactly what we are doing. GOD BLESS OUR GREAT MILITARY, WHICH I HAVE REBUILT SINCE THE BEGINNING OF MY FIRST TERM, TO ACHIEVE EVERLASTING PEACE THROUGH STRENGTH. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN! Thank you for your attention to this matter.”
~ President DONALD J. TRUMP

Read more …

“Warmongers in the UK and EU..”

UK, EU No Longer Hide Their Anti-Trump Sentiments — Dmitriev (TASS)

MOSCOW, March 17. Warmongers in the UK and EU no longer hide the depth of their opposition to US President Donald Trump, said Kirill Dmitriev, the Russian President’s special representative for investment and economic cooperation and CEO of the Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF). “The masks have slipped. Warmongers in the UK and EU are demonstrating how anti-Trump they truly are. They tried to hide it for a long time, but now it’s clear for everyone to see. Trump will remember,” he wrote on the X social network.


Earlier, Politico, citing European diplomats, reported that relations between the European Union and the US were once again on the brink of a deep crisis due to disagreements over security in the Strait of Hormuz. According to diplomats, foreign ministers meeting in Brussels on Monday almost unanimously opposed the US request to participate in ensuring shipping security. They pointed out that EU countries will not put their ships and troops in danger unless the US administration is prepared to do so. Trump previously stated that countries importing oil through the Strait of Hormuz should participate in ensuring shipping security by sending their warships there.

Read more …

You should focus on your own country. Fix that mess and then talk about Trump.

‘I Am Extremely Disappointed In Donald Trump’ – AfD Co-Leader (RMX)

The co-leader of the Alternative for Germany (AfD), Tino Chrupalla, is actively voicing his disapproval of the American and Israeli war against Iran. He has gone so far as to warn that the war could lead to a third world war and indicates that Trump has broken his campaign promises by launching the war. “I am extremely disappointed in Donald Trump when it comes to his campaign promises,” Chrupalla during an appearance on Markus Lanz, generally considered the most influential talk show host in Germany.


“During the election campaign, he also accused Kamala Harris, that she would start World War III. And now we are on the cusp of having probably started the Third World War with Donald Trump. And that’s a breach of his word, which I really resent and which the American people also resent, who incidentally reject this war in Iran at a much higher rate than Germans. So, 70 percent of Americans do not want this war and do not support it. Chrupalla also stated it was clear the United States was dragged into the war by Israel.

“And I think the Americans, as you can really see now if you look at all the events, were dragged into this war by Israel. There were serious negotiations where Oman, as a peacemaker, came to an agreement with Israel together with the USA, and they basically started bombing Iran on the same day. The Omani Foreign Minister has described this as a huge mistake. The entire Arab world has labeled it a mistake. The Norwegian Foreign Minister has described it as a mistake. It has also been labelled a mistake by Turkey. You can’t ignore all that. These are all countries in this region that are naturally extremely worried that this will escalate into a conflagration. And that’s what we’re seeing now. It’s a huge wildfire.”

The AfD co-leader also warned that thousands have already died in the conflict, but in the worst-case scenario, this could reach even into the millions. He further warned that another refugee crisis could ensue, not just from Iran, but also from Lebanon, where Chrupalla said that 700,000 people have already been displaced. Chrupalla said the AfD party program remains against regime change in other countries, adding the end result is often worse, pointing to Libya, Syria, and Afghanistan — all of which have also fueled Europe’s migration crisis. He acknowledged there was internal division within his own party on the strike on Iran and on the topic of Israel, but said that the party can tolerate these divisions, as the AfD is a “pluralistic” party. Chrupalla indicated that if voters do not agree with his positions or the positions of others within the AfD, then they can be voted out or in.

Chrupalla noted that at the beginning of his presidency, he was convinced that Trump was ending wars. In fact, the AfD co-leader traveled to the United States specifically for Trump’s inauguration in January 2025 to show his support. “Now, we are on the cusp of probably starting World War III with Donald Trump. These are broken words that I resent, that the American people also resent,” he said. Now, he said that Trump has to “explain his line to the voters.” Regarding the killing of Khamenei, Chrupalla stated: “So I think it’s difficult when you have a head of state, whether you like him or not. And Khamenei is certainly not a head of state who has done good things for his people. I want to make that very clear. Nevertheless, I think it is rare or unique for a head of state to be killed or eliminated in this way. And the question is: what is the purpose of this and what does it achieve?”

Read more …

“.. taking advice from a nun about sex:”

Sen. Kennedy Just Shut Down the UK Over Iran…and It Was Epic (Matt Vespa)

I mean, the British Empire fell decades ago. Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) finished what was left of our cousin’s once proud standing in the world. The United Kingdom is flooded with Muslims and woke leftists who have been engaged in a long campaign of suicidal empathy that is going to destroy the island nation soon if it doesn’t get a grip on reality and change its immigration policy, though that’s the least of it. It’s well-known that UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer isn’t involved in Operation Epic Fury because he can’t risk offending Muslims at home. So, please, spare us your usual snobby Eurotrash advice, dude. We don’t need guidance from a prime minister who’s afraid and stuck on his own island. And we don’t care what those in the cheap seats have to say. Kennedy, with his epic one-liners, delivered this blow to the UK, likening Starmer’s advice to listening to a nun about sex:

You’re too scared to fight. That’s good to know. Europe remains one of the most feckless lots we can be attached to at present. Here are some more great lines from Kennedy:

https://twitter.com/townhallcom/status/1904616539979907145

Read more …

Next up. No violence.

Cuban Chaos: What’s Real and What’s Speculation (Sarah Anderson)

We’ve reached the point where everyone and no one is an expert on what’s happening in Cuba. I just watched this happen with Venezuela in the weeks leading up to Nicolás Maduro’s arrest, and I’m not in the mood for a rerun, but here we are. It’s quite painful to see people whom I would normally respect read off talking points from MSM “anonymous sources” as if they know them to be facts, especially when they haven’t been paying attention to what’s actually happening. With that in mind, I’m going to lay out what we actually know and what’s just speculation in Cuba from the last week or so.


Fact #1: Trump is still talking “takeover,” but he hasn’t confirmed any details.

Trump has been talking about taking over Cuba since January. He’s let us know that Marco Rubio is largely handling it, and that’s about the only thing he’s confirmed. He keeps his responses to the media purposely vague, but many in the inner circle claim he has a plan. His most recent comments occurred in the Oval Office on Monday, where he said, “I do believe I’ll have the honor of taking Cuba.” “Taking Cuba?” the reporter asked. “Taking Cuba in some form… whether I free it, take it — I can do anything I want with it if you want to know the truth. They’re a very weakened nation,” Trump replied. “They were for a long time — very violent leaders. [Fidel] Castro was a very violent leader. His brother’s a very violent leader — extremely violent. That’s how they governed, they governed with violence.”

And on Tuesday morning, Trump said, “Cuba right now is in very bad shape. They’re talking to Marco, and we’ll be doing something with Cuba very soon.”

Fact #2: Cuba is still in the dark.
As I reported on Monday, Cuba’s National Electric System (SEN) suffered a total collapse, leaving almost the entire island without power. Blackouts are the norm in Cuba, but this one is, by far, the worst it’s seen in a long time. Hospitals are running on generators, people have no running water, and food is spoiling. Another significant problem is that people are finding it more difficult to communicate their situation to the outside world. They have no internet and can’t charge their phones, which I’m sure is just fine with the regime. Some have called on Elon Musk to offer Starlink as a solution, but Musk himself has confirmed that Starlink is technically available in Cuba. The problem is that the regime considers it illegal interference, and it can’t be sold or distributed.

The regime blames the U.S. for blocking oil, but the fact is that this isn’t just about a lack of oil. The energy infrastructure has been neglected for years and is crumbling as fast as the regime itself. As of Tuesday, some power has been restored, but it’s slow going, and most of the country remains in the dark. The U.S. Embassy warns that there is no timetable for restoration.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/upholdreality/status/2033617692280676437?s=20 https://twitter.com/IslanderWORLD/status/2033680043424235810?s=20

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Feb 262026
 
 February 26, 2026  Posted by at 10:39 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,  58 Responses »


Piet Mondriaan Composition No. 10 1939-42


Cuban Regime Kills Four in Shootout With Florida Vessel (Sarah Anderson)
CNN’s Instant Poll of the State of the Union Will Trigger the Left (Margolis)
A Masterclass in Giving a Speech Without Giving a Speech (Stephen Green)
Which Party Represents Americans? (Paul Craig Roberts)
Sen. Chris Murphy Joins Pledge to Throw Trump Figures in Jail (Turley)
Trump Admin to Launch New Free Speech Site to Combat Censorship Abroad (ET)
A Continental Revolution Is Brewing In Europe (Zemánek)
RFK Jr. Defends Trump’s Glyphosate Order (ET)
EU To Start Permanent Ban on Russian Oil 3 Days After Hungarian Election (CTH)
Solidarity Simulacra: Zelensky’s Four-Year Reality Check (RT)
Moscow Will Respond If NATO Gives Nukes To Nazi Regime In Kiev – Medvedev (RT)
Zelensky Demands €90 Billion EU Loan (RT)
Bill Gates Begins Apology Tour Over His Epstein Ties (ZH)
Fani Willis Plotted Trump Case Closely With Biden DOJ, J6 Democrats (JTN)
Comey’s Leaker Claims The Epstein Files Shouldn’t Have Been Released (Pinsker)

 


 

https://twitter.com/tesla_archive/status/2026300209794630110?s=20 https://twitter.com/_MAGA_NEWS_/status/2026280929224986641?s=20

 


 

 


 


Are the Cubans especially jittery for some reason?

Cuban Regime Kills Four in Shootout With Florida Vessel (Sarah Anderson)

The Cuban regime may have just sealed its fate. Cuba’s Interior Ministry announced on Wednesday that four men on a Florida-registered vessel, possibly a speedboat, were shot and killed by its Border Guard after entering Cuban waters near Santa Clara Province. Six other people aboard the boat were wounded. The regime claims that the people on board the vessel shot at the Border Guards first. It’s not yet clear if the people on board were United States citizens, though many are assuming so since the boat was registered in the U.S. The Interior Ministry’s full statement reads:


“On the morning of February 25, 2026, a violating speedboat was detected within Cuban territorial waters. The vessel, registered in Florida, United States, with registration number FL7726SH, approached up to 1 nautical mile northeast of the El Pino channel, in Cayo Falcones, Corralillo municipality, Villa Clara province.” When a surface unit of the Border Guard Troops of the Ministry of the Interior, carrying five service members, approached the vessel for identification, the crew of the violating speedboat opened fire on the Cuban personnel, resulting in the injury of the commander of the Cuban vessel.


As a consequence of the confrontation, as of the time of this report, four aggressors on the foreign vessel were killed and six were injured. The injured individuals were evacuated and received medical assistance. In the face of current challenges, Cuba reaffirms its determination to protect its territorial waters, based on the principle that national defense is a fundamental pillar of the Cuban State in safeguarding its sovereignty and ensuring stability in the region.


Investigations by the competent authorities continue in order to fully clarify the events. There’s been no word from President Donald Trump or Secretary of State Marco Rubio yet — Rubio is currently in Saint Kitts and Nevis for a CARICOM meeting, where the situation in Cuba has been a hot topic. Rep. Carlos A. Gimenez (R-Fla.) has issued a statement, calling for an immediate investigation into the “massacre.” Gimenez, who was born in Cuba, also suggested that “his regime must be relegated to the dust bin of history!”

Read more …

“Let that line marinate: two-thirds positive .. “

CNN’s Instant Poll of the State of the Union Will Trigger the Left (Margolis)

After Donald Trump’s 2026 State of the Union address, CNN political director David Chalian broke down the network’s instant poll — and it didn’t exactly produce the outrage or “failing Trump” narrative that the left likes to see. It was the kind of segment that left-wing pundits will be scrambling to spin before breakfast. You could tell the numbers would be bad for the left when Chalian immediately began qualifying the findings. “I just want to take a moment here to explain. This is a poll of speech watchers,” he began. “So it is not a poll that is reflective of the population overall.” Yeah, that’s kind of how polls of speeches work. Thanks for reminding us. But seriously, the fact that he made sure to emphasize that point twice, you just knew. It was like he was really about to say, “Hey, don’t get too happy, MAGA world.”


Oh yeah, and there was another caveat before he began. “What we know about people who tune in to State of the Union addresses,” Chalian added, “they tend to be fans of the president, whichever president is giving the speech.” He explained that the “polling universe here is about 13 points more Republican than the overall population usually is.” You ready? “So just keep all that in mind as we go to the results,” Chalian continued, doing damage control in real time. “Get this reaction from those that watch the speech tonight. 38% said they had a very positive reaction to the speech, 25% somewhat positive, 36% negative.” He paused just long enough for the math to sink in. “So roughly two-thirds in the positive territory, one-third negative among speech watchers.”


Let that line marinate: two-thirds positive ..

On CNN.

For Donald Trump.


https://twitter.com/WarMachineRR/status/2026530396821758073?s=20 Chalian also noted that among speech watchers, 64% “say his policies will move the U.S. in the right direction.” But here’s a metric I think is really important: the change from pre-speech to post-speech. According to the poll, before the speech, 54% of speech watchers said Trump’s policies would move the United States in the right direction — a 10-point jump. “So Donald Trump made some progress with people watching the speech from their pre-speech expectations to what they saw in the speech itself,” Chalian observed. “And that 64% number, that’s pretty much in range across all of his State of the Union addresses, in his first term, last year, the joint session, that’s about what we’ve seen is roughly two-thirds have walked away from his speeches thinking he’s going to move it in the right direction.”

https://twitter.com/RapidResponse47/status/2026531073459355793?s=20


Since this is CNN, Chalian still tried to cast the moment as a low point, even though most people who tuned in clearly liked what they heard, and even he had to admit that it was a good night for Republicans running in this year’s midterm elections. “If you’re a Republican on the ballot in 2026, I think you leave this speech being as happy as you could possibly be that he sort of stuck to the script on the economy,” Chalian said. “He gave red meat to the base on immigration, and they can leave the hall tonight and sort of take that out on the campaign trail.”

Read more …

“Trump addressed exactly one person: the American watching at home.”

A Masterclass in Giving a Speech Without Giving a Speech (Stephen Green)

Let’s set aside “the optics,” what the polls might show in a few days, who got “destroyed,” how many “truth bombs” Trump dropped, the “What it All Means” chin-scratcher pieces — ugh, I give up. I went MEGO again just mentioning those things, so that’s the last of them you’ll see in this column, and also, you’re welcome. But President Donald Trump’s whirlwind, time-defying performance left me (and maybe you, too) with a nagging question/realization that I’ll try to explain today: How do you give a speech — particularly a speech of two hours — without giving a speech? It was the longest State of the Union in history, but it was no slog.


“I wasn’t even planning to watch the whole thing and I just kept watching,” blogfaddah Glenn Reynolds posted to Instapundit last night, and my friend and partner in thoughtcrime Stephen Kruiser added in today’s Morning Briefing, “It may seem weird to say it about a speech of that length, but there was an economy to it that made it effective.” Plenty of the non-speech speech was scripted, of course, primarily penned by Ross Worthington. The wrap was particularly effective, and delivered with a grace that Trump throws aside whenever he likes. But not this time: “The revolution that began in 1776 has not ended. It still continues, because the flame of liberty and independence still burns in the heart of every American patriot. And our future will be bigger, better, brighter, bolder, and more glorious than ever before.”

Good stuff. But what people will and ought to remember are the moments when Trump at least appeared to go off-script. One instant classic example was when he called on Congress to outlaw insider trading — by Congresscritters. The ad-lib — and you can watch Trump wait for the perfect moment to sink the barb — comes at the 0:29 mark. “They stood up for that, I can’t believe it.”But then Trump pauses and waits again, the audience primed for a segue into the next topic, when he sinks the second barb, this one more direct: “Did Nancy Pelosi stand up, if she’s here? Doubt it.”

If. She’s. Here. A joke inside the joke that followed the joke. There were many such seemingly unscripted moments, particularly when Trump addressed his guests in attendance, or presented TWO Congressional Medals of Honor.While the congresscritters in attendance all played their party-mandated roles, Trump wasn’t speaking to them. He was speaking to us. More than that, I think he was speaking for us. That’s how a billionaire real estate mogul and reality TV star manages to maintain what we used to call “the common touch.” Bill Clinton — who grew up without any of Trump’s privileges — had to whack audiences over the head with how common he was. “I feel your pain,” indeed. Trump, on the other hand, does it more subtly.

Did I really just write “subtly” about Trump? Indeed, I did. Not quite a speech, Trump’s SOTU, I noted on Instapundit today, was more like a conversation — with the American people, with heroes in attendance, and even at times with surly Dems — that made the two hours fly. But the real secret is that Trump wasn’t speaking to the pundits with their mostly pre-written chin-scratchers based on the text of Trump’s talk. Trump addressed exactly one person: the American watching at home.

Read more …

” Just as Democrats have made it clear that they represent illegal aliens and not American citizens, Republicans have made it clear that they represent Israel and not American citizens”

Which Party Represents Americans? (Paul Craig Roberts)

For sometime I have made the point that America’ s enemies are at home, not in Iran, Russia, and China. Last night at Trump s State of the Union speech, the Democrats proved me to be correct. Trump asked the members of the US Congress to stand up if they agreed with his statement: the first duty of the American government is to protect American citizens, not illegal aliens. Many Democrats did not stand, which proves my point that if Democrats represent Americans at all, Democrats represent Americans as second-class citizens whose interests are sacrificed to illegal immigrant-invaders.


This is not an endorsement of Republicans. Unlike Democrats, Republicans do not hate white Americans. But Republicans, along with many Democrats, do sacrifice America’s interest to Israel’s. The US fights Israel s wars at the expense of American blood, money, and reputation. Federal state and local governments censor and punish Americans for criticizing Israel. Criticism of Israel is gradually being turned into an antisemitic hate crime, which means among other things that Americans cannot criticize the genocide and destruction of Palestine. In some American states, a person who is a critic of Israel cannot hold a state job or provide goods and services under contract to the state.

Currently in Texas the Israel lobby has brought a vote before the Texas legislature that incorporates Israeli propaganda as a mandatory part of statewide education in Texas. Is a bought and paid for Texas legislature going to permit Israel to shape the outlook of the rising American generation? If so, will it be an American generation or an Israeli one? Just as Democrats have made it clear that they represent illegal aliens and not American citizens, Republicans have made it clear that they represent Israel and not American citizens. The representation of Israel is manifest in the chant you can’t be an American if you don’t love Israel. Allegedly, America is a democracy, but neither political party represents Americans who are forced to support Israel and illegal aliens.

Read more …

Dems want, no, need, to see Trump not as The Other Party, but as The Enemy. i wonder why that is.

Sen. Chris Murphy Joins Pledge to Throw Trump Figures in Jail (Turley)

Before the State of the Union, Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) joined other leaders in promising Americans that the Democrats will unleash a revenge tour after taking power in November, pledging to start throwing Trump people in jail when they retake Congress. Murphy went on MS NOW to feed the rage addiction that has taken over his party.We recently discussed how Susan Rice joined the mob in stating that “When it comes to the elites, you know, the corporate interests, the law firms, the universities, the media … it’s not going to end well for them.”mShe followed other Democrats, assuring voters that, if they returned Democrats to power, they would crack down on their political opponents.


Republicans and law enforcement are now regularly called “Nazis” and “fascists” by Democratic leaders. Some are promising arrests from the President to individual police officers. Last week, Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner promised to “hunt down” ICE officers like “Nazis.” Democratic strategist James Carville previously threatened that “collaborators” may be treated in the same way as they were after World War II. Gov. Tim Walz, who has called ICE officers “Gestapo,” said that this may be our “Fort Sumter” moment, a triggering event for a civil war that killed hundreds of thousands of Americans.

Democratic members have been warned that they have to join the mob or be devoured by it. Bravo star and liberal podcast host Jennifer Welch praised footage of a “No Kings” protester celebrating the death of Charlie Kirk. After playing the clip, Welch laughed with joy and declared, “So listen up, Democratic establishment. You can either jump on board with this s—, or we’re coming after you in the same way that we come after MAGA. Period.” Murphy clearly got the message and added his voice in declaring that “they’re going to get their clocks cleaned this November, and a bunch of people are probably gonna end up going to jail.” It is a curious pledge, since the Democrats could retake the House and Senate in November. That would not give them the ability to throw people into jail even if they had actual crimes to charge.

What is clear is that the Democratic Party has now decided to try to ride the rage wave to power, leading the mob with such reckless rhetoric. In “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution,” I explore the rise of what I call the “new Jacobins,” establishment figures who are calling for radical changes to our constitutional system and for retaliation against political opponents. It is a book about revolutions and how they can consume those who start them.These Democratic politicians will learn this lesson from history that they are likely to be devoured by the very mobocracy that they are unleashing through rage politics.

Read more …

Europe depends on it. A dark curtain is about to be drawn.

Trump Admin to Launch New Free Speech Site to Combat Censorship Abroad (ET)

In response to what the Trump administration says is a rising tide of censorship in Europe, the State Department is launching a new app that will give users worldwide access to content that has been censored in other countries. This includes not only Europe but also China and Iran. The platform, called Freedom.gov, will go live over the next several weeks, according to the State Department, and will be operable on iOS and Android devices.“Freedom.gov is the latest in a long line of efforts by the State Department to protect and promote fundamental freedoms, both online and offline,” the State Department stated in an email to The Epoch Times. “The project will be global in its scope, but distinctly American in its mission: commemorating our commitment to free expression as we approach our 250th birthday.”


Lauding the move, Jeremy Tedesco, senior counsel at the Alliance Defending Freedom, a civil rights legal group that has been critical of recent EU speech laws, stated on X that “for 250 years, this is what America does,” citing examples such as Radio Free Europe, which broadcast into communist countries during the Cold War. “If Europe’s bureaucrats don’t want you to see it, that tells you everything,” Tedesco stated. “Because even if your government fears freedom—ours doesn’t.” The First Amendment, which prohibits the U.S. government from “abridging the freedom of speech,” has provided a legal restraint against government censorship that most other countries lack.

Recent European speech laws, most notably the Digital Services Act (DSA), were ostensibly written to combat what lawmakers deemed “hate speech,” “harmful speech,” and “misinformation,” as well as pornography and abusive AI deep fakes. But critics of European speech codes say they are becoming increasingly draconian. In 2025, Virginie Joron, a French member of the European Parliament, called the DSA a “Trojan horse for s urveillance and control.” In Finland, Paivi Rasanen, a member of parliament, was charged for quoting Bible verses online in 2019, criticizing her church’s participation in a gay pride event. “I never imagined that quoting the Bible in a Twitter post would lead to years of criminal charges, yet this is now the reality in Europe,” she told The Epoch Times.

In Germany, illegal online speech could include insulting government officials. German police conducted early morning raids in June 2025 as part of Germany’s 12th annual “day of action against hate-posts,” and arrested 140 residents in the process. In the UK, people praying silently in the vicinity of abortion clinics were arrested in 2023 and 2025. Left-wing ruling parties in Canada are likewise working to remove religious exemptions from their “hate speech” laws. Increasingly, U.S. companies are facing extensive fines for allowing online posts that are illegal in Europe. In December, social media company X was fined $140 million for violating EU speech laws.

Such fines on U.S. tech companies, both for speech code violations and for what the EU deems to be anti-competitive behavior, could become a trade issue for the Trump administration. In January, President Donald Trump posted on Truth Social that the “EU makes more from fines on US tech, than tax from ALL of public European tech,” noting that in 2024, the EU fined American tech companies a total of 3.8 billion euros. In addition, legal experts have warned that Europe’s online censorship laws could also silence Americans if U.S. tech companies are forced, on a global basis, to take down content that violates EU speech codes.

A House of Representatives report released on Feb. 3 and titled “The Foreign Censorship Threat” stated that “The European Commission, in a comprehensive decade-long effort, has successfully pressured social media platforms to change their global content moderation rules, thereby directly infringing on Americans’ online speech in the United States.” According to the Digital Services Act, illegal online speech could include anything that is prohibited in any EU member country. And in one of the more explicit efforts to regulate speech globally, European Commissioner Thierry Breton warned X owner Elon Musk during the 2024 U.S. presidential campaign that his company could face penalties for posting an interview with Trump.

In a 2025 interview with The Epoch Times, Andrew Puzder, U.S. ambassador to the European Union, stated: “When a company like Facebook or Twitter or X has to change its algorithm, and that algorithm might impact the free speech rights of Americans, that’s something that we really can’t tolerate. I know President Trump is not going to allow a foreign government to restrict the free speech rights of American citizens in ways that even our own government couldn’t restrict them.”

Read more …

“The future of the region is being written east of Brussels – and Marco Rubio’s tour confirmed exactly what Brussels fears most ..”

A Continental Revolution Is Brewing In Europe (Zemánek)

When US Secretary of State Marco Rubio left the polite but brittle atmosphere of the Munich Security Conference and headed for Bratislava and Budapest, the contrast could not have been sharper. In Munich, the old guard of transatlantic liberalism clung to its vocabulary of ‘rules-based order’ and ‘shared values’, even as its political base erodes across the continent. In Central Europe, Rubio encountered something different: Governments confident in their mandates, unapologetic about sovereignty, and aligned with Donald Trump’s insistence that nations – not supranational bureaucracies – are the primary actors of history.


Last week’s visit was a statement of intent. Washington under Trump has made a deliberate choice: If Europe is to be a partner rather than a liability, it must be rebuilt from its healthiest political core. And that core lies not in Brussels, but along the Danube. In Bratislava, Rubio met with Prime Minister Robert Fico and President Peter Pellegrini. The agenda – regional security, nuclear cooperation, military modernization – was substantive. But the subtext was unmistakable. “Under President Trump, this administration is going to make not just Slovakia but Central Europe a key component of how we engage the continent and the world,” Rubio said. It was a diplomatic sentence with revolutionary implications.

For years, Central Europe was treated by Brussels as a problem to be managed: Too conservative, too attached to national identity, too resistant to cultural engineering. Now it is being treated by Washington as an asset to be cultivated. Fico’s remarks revealed why this shift matters. When he visited Moscow and Beijing last year in pursuit of Slovakia’s national interests, the reaction from EU institutions was furious – accusations, insinuations, moral lectures. Genuine diplomacy, in Brussels’ view, is acceptable only when it aligns with the prevailing orthodoxy. Yet from the White House, Fico encountered no hysteria – only what he described as “common-sense pragmatism.” The contrast speaks volumes.

Central European leaders have grown weary of an EU that polices internal politics more aggressively than it secures external borders. They have watched as energy supplies became instruments of political pressure and as ideological conformity became a condition of financial solidarity. Slovakia and Hungary have both experienced the weaponization of gas and oil transit routes by Kiev and Brussels – an illustration of how geopolitics, under Brussels’ watch, too often morphs into leverage against dissenting member states. Trump’s America reads the situation differently. Stability requires diversification, not dogma. Slovakia’s negotiations with Westinghouse Electric Company to build a new nuclear power plant by 2040, along with plans to expand its fleet of F-16 fighter jets, represent more than procurement decisions.

They symbolize a rebalancing: Energy sovereignty anchored in American partnership rather than EU dependency. Slovakia’s upcoming presidency of the Visegrad Group offers an even broader horizon. A potential V4-US summit would institutionalize what is already happening politically: The consolidation of a Central European bloc that sees Washington – not Brussels – as its most reliable strategic interlocutor. The Visegrad countries are not seeking rupture with the EU necessarily. They are seeking a radical reform within it. And they are finding in Trump’s America an ally that understands the difference.

Read more …

‘Unfortunately, our agricultural system depends heavily on these chemicals,’ Kennedy said.

Poison or hunger.

RFK Jr. Defends Trump’s Glyphosate Order (ET)

Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on Feb. 22 said that glyphosate is poisonous but necessary as he backed President Donald Trump’s recent order designating the production of the herbicide as critical to national security. In a lengthy post on social media, Kennedy said pesticides and herbicides are toxic. “When we apply them across millions of acres and allow them into our food system, we put Americans at risk,” he wrote. “Chemical manufacturers have paid tens of billions of dollars to settle cancer claims linked to their products, and many agricultural communities report elevated cancer rates and chronic disease. Unfortunately, our agricultural system depends heavily on these chemicals.”


If the United States were to stop using the products, then “crop yields would fall, food prices would surge, and America would experience a massive loss of farms even beyond what [it is] witnessing today,” Kennedy said. He described Trump’s order as protecting national defense and the nation’s food supply, stating that Trump inherited the current agricultural system and that his administration is shifting from it without destabilizing the food supply. “We are accelerating the transition to regenerative agriculture by expanding farming systems that rebuild soil, increase biodiversity, improve water retention, and reduce reliance on synthetic chemicals, including pre-harvest desiccation,” Kennedy wrote.

“We are also driving the rapid adoption of next-generation technologies, including laser-guided weed control, electrothermal and electrical systems, robotics, precision mechanical cultivation, and biological controls that replace blanket spraying with precision intervention. “These solutions are not theoretical. Farmers are already putting them to work. Markets are scaling them. Now the federal government will act with urgency to expand their reach and accelerate adoption nationwide.” Kennedy said later: “The Make America Healthy Again agenda forces us to challenge long-standing assumptions about how we grow food, structure markets, and measure success in this country. Reform at this scale will test entrenched interests, and it will not move in a straight line.”

In his Feb. 18 order, Trump said herbicides with glyphosate are widely used in the United States and enable farmers to achieve high yields and low production costs. “There is no direct one-for-one chemical alternative to glyphosate-based herbicides,” the president wrote. “Lack of access to glyphosate-based herbicides would critically jeopardize agricultural productivity, adding pressure to the domestic food system, and may result in a transition of cropland to other uses due to low productivity.“Given the profit margins growers currently face, any major restrictions in access to glyphosate-based herbicides would result in economic losses for growers and make it untenable for them to meet growing food and feed demands.”

He designated production of glyphosate as a critical national security and directed Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins to ensure that there is an adequate supply of the herbicides and elemental phosphorus, one of the ingredients in the products. Some people supportive of the Make America Healthy Again movement criticized the designation. Kelly Ryerson, coexecutive director of American Regeneration, told The Epoch Times that it “doubles down” on a system that is making the U.S. population sick and killing the soil. “We already have a limited number of harvests left,” she said.

Bayer, which produces glyphosate-based herbicide Roundup, just proposed a $7 billion settlement to resolve thousands of lawsuits that allege that Roundup caused cancer. Bayer maintains that Roundup is not carcinogenic and can be used safely. That stance is shared by the Environmental Protection Agency, although the International Agency for Research on Cancer lists glyphosate as probably carcinogenic.

Kennedy, while running for president in 2024, said in a post on X that glyphosate was “one of the likely culprits in America’s chronic disease epidemic” and that the Department of Agriculture would, if he won the election, ban its use as a desiccant on wheat. His Make America Healthy Again Commission in 2025 also said that glyphosate studies “have noted a range of possible health effects, ranging from reproductive and developmental disorders as well as cancers, liver inflammation and metabolic disturbances.”

Kennedy said in a previous statement to The Epoch Times, after Trump signed the new glyphosate order: “When hostile actors control critical inputs, they weaken our security. By expanding domestic production, we close that gap and protect American families.” Zen Honeycutt, founder of Moms Across America, said in response to Kennedy’s post on X that she understands aspects of his position but that after about a year of the Trump administration being in power, officials have not worked to limit people’s exposure to pesticides. “We love you Bobby but this administration needs to keep their word,” she said in a Feb. 23 post on X. “We were promised specifically clean air, clean water, and addressing of the pesticides [in] our foods.”

Read more …

If the EU wins, everybody loses.

EU To Start Permanent Ban on Russian Oil 3 Days After Hungarian Election (CTH)

I guess we can put this in the open admission file surrounding the all-out effort by the European Union to defeat Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban According to a leaked document received by Reuters, the European Union is scheduled to permanently ban all EU nations from importing Russian oil. They have scheduled the ban to trigger on April 15th, three days after the Hungarian election.


BRUSSELS, Feb 24 (Reuters) – “The European Commission will submit a legal proposal to permanently ban Russian oil imports on April 15, three days after Hungary’s parliamentary election, according to EU officials and a document seen by Reuters. Two EU officials told Reuters the timing was designed to prevent the oil ban becoming a major factor in Hungary’s election campaign. Hungary and Slovakia, still reliant on Russian oil imports, are strongly opposed to any ban.In the April 12 election, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban and his nationalist Fidesz party are facing the biggest challenge to their hold on power in 16 years.

The EU has already imposed sanctions on imports of seaborne Russian oil. But it wants to enshrine a full phase-out of Russian oil in legislation that would remain in place, even if a peace deal in the Ukraine war led to the EU lifting sanctions. nThe Commission plans to propose the Russian oil ban on April 15, according to a draft agenda seen by Reuters. Asked about the matter, a Commission spokesperson told Reuters the EU executive’s agendas were provisional and that it did not have a confirmed timeline for submitting the proposal.” (read more)

Read more …

“To UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer, the true goal of Tuesday’s get-together seemed to be ensuring that Ukraine keeps winning in the imagination of the Western public.”

Solidarity Simulacra: Zelensky’s Four-Year Reality Check (RT)

Vladimir Zelensky brought some of his most ardent fans to Kiev to mark the fourth anniversary of his wartime leadership, but the supporting actors in the Ukraine Cinematic Universe had little to offer him.mA look at the guests who showed up suggests Ukraine’s backers are divided into those who have to and those who don’t. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and European Council chief Antonio Costa arrived in Kiev on Tuesday morning, along with the leaders of Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania, Croatia, Norway, and Sweden. Von der Leyen declared “that Europe stands unwaveringly with Ukraine, financially, militarily, and through this harsh winter,” and promised to help Zelensky achieve “Peace on Ukraine’s terms.”

“In Kyiv for the tenth time since the start of the war.To reaffirm that Europe stands unwaveringly with Ukraine, financially, militarily, and through this harsh winter.To underscore our enduring commitment to Ukraine’s just fight.And to send a clear message to the Ukrainian”… pic.twitter.com/iULkEQji16 — Ursula von der Leyen (@vonderleyen) February 24, 2026

In reality, von der Leyen’s plan to keep Ukraine afloat until 2028 with a €90 billion ($106 billion) debt-funded loan package has been vetoed by Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban. Von der Leyen arrived in Kiev empty handed, and in a video address to the European Parliament later on Tuesday, Zelensky held out the begging bowl once more, asking for the loan, for fast-tracked EU membership, and for more sanctions on Russia – which Orban has also vowed to veto. The European leaders who accompanied von der Leyen are in no place to help Zelensky either. The Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania have long ago emptied their arms stockpiles, with former Lithuanian Foreign Minister Gabrielius Landsbergis admitting in 2023 that he could only provide “political arguments” for arming the Ukrainian military, as Lithuania does not have its own “significant stockpile of weapons.”

All of the European leaders who visited Zelensky on Tuesday have authorized weapons purchases from the US for Ukraine under NATO’s PURL initiative. However, NATO’s European members have spent just over $4 billion on American weapons in the five months since August. When the US was arming Ukraine directly, it spent $10 billion every five months.

Where are the Americans?
The US, despite still indirectly arming Ukraine through PURL and providing intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance data to its forces, remains the only Western power capable of forcing Zelensky to make the necessary concessions to resolve the conflict. Whereas the US has participated in three rounds of trilateral talks with Russian and Ukrainian officials, the Kremlin sees no point in talks with the Europeans. In the words of Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, “the current generation of European leaders…have entrenched themselves too deeply in a posture of hatred towards Russia” to be taken seriously.

Not a single US official made the trip to Kiev on Tuesday. Their absence was conspicuous, after a year of Zelensky lobbying US President Donald Trump to visit the Ukrainian capital, and after a BBC interview on Monday in which the Ukrainian leader begged Trump to “stay on our side.” The British, French, Germans, and Italians also skipped the junket, choosing to send their messages of solidarity remotely during a meeting of the ‘Coalition of the Willing’ later in the afternoon. If Zelensky hoped for something more concrete from the coalition, his hope was misplaced.

During the meeting of the 34-nation group, Ukraine received the promise of “full and sustained support,” according to a statement published by the UK, which co-chaired the virtual gathering. In reality, the coalition’s members could only echo Zelensky’s calls for more money and weapons, without actually offering any of either. Talk by coalition members France and the UK of sending troops to Ukraine remains a post-conflict hypothetical, and a red line for Russia. To UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer, the true goal of Tuesday’s get-together seemed to be ensuring that Ukraine keeps winning in the imagination of the Western public.

”We’ve got to shift the narrative,” Starmer said. “Whatever Putin tells himself and his people, Russia is not winning, and we must shift the narrative into that place with greater force and determination.” Starmer’s statement sums up the current state of play for Zelensky and his Western backers. Narrative management is the best they can offer. Think more ‘Ghost of Kiev’ myths instead of actual deliveries of fighter jets. More pomp and circumstance, troop reviews, and deal memos.

The danger exists that once Ukraine’s most committed European backers come to terms with the fact that they’ve poured all their money and political capital into a hopeless cause, drastic solutions could become more appealing. In that light, Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) on Tuesday accused Britain and France of plotting the “covert transfer of relevant European-made components, equipment, and technologies” for the production of nuclear weapons to Ukraine. Both nations are also reportedly considering handing over a French TN 75 warhead to Kiev, or encouraging the Ukrainians to build a dirty bomb.

While London and Paris have both denied any plot to supply Ukraine with nukes, one line in the statement stands out – that the leaders of Britain and France have “lost touch with reality.” When reality does catch up with Zelensky and his ‘Avengers’, the results will be messy.On February 24, four years to the day since the constant killing in Donbass escalated into open conflict, Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky trudged through the snow outside his offices in Kiev to a Soviet-era air raid bunker with a camera crew in tow. In a concrete tunnel once built to ensure continuation of government in the event of a Western attack, Zelensky opened his fourth anniversary video address with a now-famous anecdote:

”Here I spoke with [US] President [Joe] Biden, and it was right here that I heard: ‘Vladimir, there is a threat, you need to leave Ukraine urgently’. And here I replied that I need ammunition, not a ride.” The quote was entirely fake – fabricated by US intelligence agents for Western consumption. But four years into a conflict that could have been easily settled in 2022, with tens of millions of Ukrainians dead, injured, or emigrated, and with his country sentenced to lifetimes of unpayable debt, Hollywood one-liners and Marvel-comic optics are all Zelensky has left.

Read more …

France and the UK are considering covertly handing nuclear capabilities or a ‘dirty bomb’ to Kiev, Russian intel has claimed..

Moscow Will Respond If NATO Gives Nukes To Nazi Regime In Kiev – Medvedev (RT)

Russia would launch a nuclear response if NATO countries supplied atomic weapons to Ukraine, former President Dmitry Medvedev has warned. Medvedev, who now serves as deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council, was commenting to RT on Tuesday on claims by Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) that London and Paris are considering ways to provide nuclear weaponry or related components to Kiev.m“I will be blunt and state the obvious,” Medvedev said, adding that the reported intention by the UK and France to hand over nuclear capabilities to the “Nazi regime in Kiev” would change the situation entirely. “This is a direct transfer of nuclear weapons to a country at war,” he stated.


According to the SVR, British and French officials are weighing the “covert transfer of relevant European-made components, equipment, and technologies to Ukraine,” and preparing an information campaign to portray any resulting capability as domestically developed. “There should be no doubt whatsoever that in such a scenario Russia would be forced to use any means at its disposal, including non-strategic nuclear weapons, against targets in Ukraine that threaten our country,” Medvedev stated. “And if necessary, against the supplier nations now implicated in a nuclear conflict with Russia. This is the kind of symmetrical response that the Russian Federation would be entitled to,” he added.

The SVR also alleged that another option under discussion was the provision of a complete French TN 75 nuclear warhead used on submarine launched ballistic missiles, or assistance in building a radioactive “dirty bomb” using conventional explosives and nuclear materials. Kiev could seek “more advantageous terms” in any negotiations if it possessed such weapons, the SVR suggested, adding that Germany had “prudently refused” to participate. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov described the reported plans as “potentially very dangerous,” saying they would threaten the global non-proliferation regime. Ukraine has argued that it gave up its nuclear arsenal in exchange for security guarantees that later proved worthless. While a significant portion of Soviet nuclear forces were stationed in Ukraine, Kiev never controlled the missiles.

The 1994 Budapest Memorandums provided assurances – but not legally binding guarantees – to Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan that their territorial integrity would be respected after transferring Soviet nuclear weapons to Russia. At the 2022 Munich Security Conference, shortly before the Ukraine conflict escalated, Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky suggested Kiev could reconsider its non-nuclear status.Moscow maintains that after the 2014 Western-backed coup in Kiev, Ukraine’s new authorities breached the neutrality pledge underpinning its post-Soviet independence by making NATO membership a key foreign policy goal.

Read more …

“.. if approved, the EU loan would end up being stolen by corrupt Ukrainian officials..”

Zelensky Demands €90 Billion EU Loan (RT)

Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky has demanded that the EU approve a €90 billion ($106 billion) loan backed by the bloc’s taxpayers that has been vetoed by Hungary. Provisionally agreed upon last December, the plan envisages an interest-free loan to Ukraine for 2026-2027, with €60 billion earmarked for military needs and €30 billion for “general budget support.” It would be covered through joint EU borrowing and only repaid if Ukraine receives war reparations from Russia. Hungary, Slovakia, and the Czech Republic opted out of contributing to the loan, which is estimated to result in up to €5.6 billion in annual interest payments for member states. The scheme was approved after the bloc failed to agree to use Russia’s frozen central-bank assets to finance Ukraine due to opposition from several member states over the legal hurdles and risks.


Addressing the European Parliament via video link on Tuesday, Zelensky said that “right now there is an important decision… on the table – €90 billion in support for Ukraine over two years.”“This is a real financial guarantee of our security and our resilience, and it must be implemented,” the Ukrainian leader insisted. On Monday, Hungary vetoed the EU’s proposed emergency loan for Ukraine, as well as the latest package of sanctions against Russia. Budapest accused Kiev of jeopardizing the “security of Hungary’s energy supply” by deliberately blocking use of the Soviet-era Druzhba pipeline for political reasons. The transit of Russian oil to EU consumers via the conduit has been on hold since late January, with Kiev blaming Moscow for damaging it. Russia has denied the allegations.

Ukraine expects its Western backers to cover a budget deficit of around $50 billion this year. El Pais reported in October that the Ukrainian government could run out of money by April. Speaking last month, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said that if approved, the EU loan would end up being stolen by corrupt Ukrainian officials.

Read more …

It’s about money.

Bill Gates Begins Apology Tour Over His Epstein Ties (ZH)

A week after Bill Gates abruptly pulled out as a keynote speaker at a high-profile global AI summit in India, the left-wing billionaire finally mustered enough nerve to “take responsibility for his actions” over his ties to late financier and sex offender Jeffrey Epstein during a town hall meeting with Gates Foundation employees.The Wall Street Journal reports that Gates told employees at a town hall event for the foundation on Tuesday that he never spent time with Epstein’s victims, and never visited Epstein’s island. He revealed that Epstein later learned about two affairs he had with Russian women, but said those relationships did not involve Epstein’s victims. Gates said photos in the Epstein files show him with redacted women were taken by Epstein’s assistants after meetings. Did Gates fall into a Russian honeypot?


“I did nothing illicit. I saw nothing illicit,” Gates emphasized, according to a recording reviewed by WSJ journalists. Gates continued, “To be clear, I never spent any time with victims, the women around him.” “It was a huge mistake to spend time with Epstein” and bring Gates Foundation executives into meetings with the sex offender, Gates said, adding, “I apologize to other people who are drawn into this because of the mistake that I made.” Last week, the $86 billion philanthropic body’s last-minute decision to yank Gates was a major embarrassment and came as the Epstein fallout worsened, with many high-profile people under fire.

“Knowing what I know now makes it, you know, a hundred times worse in terms of not only his crimes in the past, but now it’s clear there was ongoing bad behavior,” Gates said. He gave credit to his ex-wife, who “was always kind of skeptical about the Epstein thing.” Gates told staff he began meeting Epstein in 2011, despite the financier’s 2008 guilty plea for soliciting a minor for prostitution. He said he was aware of the “18-month thing” that had restricted Epstein’s travel, yet continued the relationship, even after his then-wife, Melinda French Gates, raised serious concerns in 2013. He said the relationship continued through 2014 and that he flew on a private jet with Epstein and spent time with him in Germany, France, New York, and Washington. “I never stayed overnight,” he said, or visited Epstein’s island.

He said Epstein “talked about the kind of intimate relationship he had with a lot of billionaires, particularly Wall Street billionaires,” and that he could help raise money for global health nonprofits. “It definitely is the opposite of the values of the Foundation and the goals of the Foundation,” he said. “And our work is very reputation-sensitive. I mean, people can choose to work with us or not work with us.” No matter what, the Gates Foundation has a dark cloud hanging over it because of Gates’ involvement amid the deepening Epstein fallout.

Gates is worth billions, so why would he need Epstein to raise money for global health nonprofits? Something doesn’t pass the sniff test in this damage-control town hall he held for his foundation’s employees.

Read more …

“Joe Biden waived Trump’s executive privilege ..”

Fani Willis Plotted Trump Case Closely With Biden DOJ, J6 Democrats (JTN)

Just the News and America First Legal win access to 8,000 pages of documents after extensive open records litigation. The memos include revelations on how Joe Biden waived Trump’s executive privilege specifically to aid Georgia prosecutors. Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis coordinated extensively with the Biden Justice Department and White House as well as Democrats on the House Jan. 6 investigative committee as she built a failed criminal case against President Donald Trump and his allies related to their challenge to Georgia’s 2020 election results, according to a trove of internal communications obtained by Just the News.


The memos show that President Joe Biden’s top White House lawyer personally opened the door for Willis’ prosecutors to interview Trump administration officials by waiving claims of executive privilege, that federal prosecutors waived certain rights to allow the interviews to proceed before a state grand jury and that Willis’s team spoke glowingly of the congressional efforts to expose Trump’s involvement in the disputed election. “Our initial review of the report confirms you all have accomplished amazing things in the past year,” F. Donald Wakeford, a top deputy to Willis, wrote in a December 2022 email to Tim Heaphy, chief investigative counsel for the Democrat-run Select Committee to Investigate the Jan. 6 Attack on the U.S. Capitol.

Just the News, alongside the nonprofit public interest law firm America First Legal (AFL), sued Willis for the records, under Georgia’s Open Records Law. Willis, a longtime Trump nemesis, sought to hide many of the records with claims of legal privilege during a prolonged legal fight. In a reaction to the lawsuit, Willis’ office this week dropped all privilege claims and released all the documents without any redactions, providing to Just the News — and the public — more information than it did to congressional Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee.

“These documents reveal that the Biden Administration and the January 6 Committee were much more involved in District Attorney Fani Willis’s prosecution of President Trump than was previously believed. AFL was happy to represent Just the News to get Americans this new information,” said Will Scolinos, an attorney at America First Legal. The documents show a cozy relationship between the Biden administration and Willis’ staff, one that included a meeting between her outside special prosecutor Nathan Wade and the Biden White House.Wade, who admitted to a “personal relationship” with Willis outside the office, billed Fulton County $2,000 for an “interview with DC/White House” on Nov. 18, 2022, just as Willis’ probe was accelerating, according to the new records Willis was forced to disclose.

There is no further explanation in the documents for that interaction, and Fulton County told Just the News and its lawyers at AFL that Wade did not keep any records of what happened at that meeting. Calls to Willis for comment were not returned by publication time.= The new memos show that the Biden White House counsel’s office gave Willis’ prosecution team a major gift, waiving Trump’s ability to claim executive privilege and to block former administration officials from testifying.

Executive privilege is the implied authority of the U.S. president to withhold information that the executive branch possesses from Congress or the Judiciary on the grounds that a president is entitled to confidential advice before making decisions. It is a long-standing American tradition and the secrecy of presidential communications was first referenced by Chief Justice John Marshall in the landmark case Marbury v. Madison.

Ironically, President Obama and his Attorney General Eric Holder asserted the same privilege during investigations of the botched “Fast and Furious” gunrunning scheme. The Reporter’s Committee for Freedom of the Press noted that “When a president invokes executive privilege, it may be among the most difficult walls to penetrate because the number of potential leakers with access to White House documents is limited and closely monitored.” In some instances, reporting has simply been prevented from reporting on an important issue because the blockade worked.

Biden, however, believed that the “extraordinary events” surrounding the “insurrection” on Jan. 6 in the U.S. Capitol, warranted waiving this historical understanding of the privacy of presidential communications, the new memos show.

Read more …

“He’s not a puppeteer. He’s simply a pervert.”

Oh no Scott Pinsker, he was the master puppeteer.

Comey’s Leaker Claims The Epstein Files Shouldn’t Have Been Released (Pinsker)

But the common thread of leveraging sex to monetize relationships is 100% applicable. It happens a lot. And that’s the biggest blessing of the Epstein Files: It took the repulsive practice of peddling flesh for financial favors out of the shadows. Today, the whole world knows the truth. Sunlight really is the best disinfectant. Which is also why the PR pushback of the Deep State is so fascinating: On Feb. 23, the New York Times ran a remarkable op-ed: “The Epstein Files Should Never Have Been Released.” A few excerpts: [W]e should recognize the release of millions of pages of the Epstein files as both a sign of institutional failure and a cause for concern. If our justice system were working properly, the public would never have such access.


[…]The release of the files is also cause for concern because so much of the raw investigative material in them — untold layers of hearsay, unverified accusations and vague circumstantial connections — ought not be released for the public to pick over. […] When materials collected in a criminal investigation get released in bulk for public consumption, the justification for the coercive and privacy-invading tools we give investigators gets a lot weaker. Institutions claiming to protect user or customer privacy might be more likely to resist valid uses of these tools. Witnesses who would otherwise speak to investigators about sensitive matters might start to rethink whether they want to provide grist for internet searches.

What’s especially fascinating is the author of the New York Times’ piece: Daniel Richman, whom the Times described as a “former federal prosecutor.” But that’s not why Richman is famous. Daniel Richman is the Columbia Law School professor who leaked anti-Trump news stories on behalf of disgraced FBI Director James Comey to trigger a special counsel investigation. From ABC News (June 13, 2017): Who Is James Comey’s Friend and Leaker Daniel Richman? “Daniel Richman is the Columbia Law School professor through whom former FBI Director James Comey shared details of his contemporaneous memos about meetings with President Donald Trump to the New York Times.

Speaking before the Senate Intelligence Committee on June 8, Comey said he wanted to get a record of his meetings with President Donald Trump “out into the public square” so he decided to ask a friend to share the content of his memo with a reporter. “Didn’t do it myself, for a variety of reasons. But I asked him to, because I thought that might prompt the appointment of a special counsel. And so I asked a close friend of mine to do it,” Comey told Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine). Collins asked who that was, and he responded, without providing a name, “A good friend of mine who’s a professor at Columbia Law School.” [emphasis added] Those “variety of reasons” began and ended with a list of one: It would’ve exposed Comey to criminal prosecution for leaking classified information.

PJ Media colleague and friend, Dave Manney, explored Richman’s twisted logic and elitist double-standard on secrecy: Daniel Richman wants the public to regret the files even as they read them, calling the dump a spectacle that highlights the Justice Department’s lack of confidence. I hate to tell him, but confidence died because the department slow-walked leads and cut sweetheart deals for decades. Americans didn’t ruin the system by demanding the truth. The people who protected Epstein and his ilk ruined it. He’s right — but the bigger story isn’t just Richman’s pretzel-shaped logic. It’s the intent behind it. Because Richman has proven himself to be a willing mouthpiece for the Deep State.

That’s how we all know his name. The New York Times might’ve described him as a “former federal prosecutor,” but that’s not why he’s famous. It’s his relationship with Comey that put him in the limelight. Based on precedent, it’s reasonable to assume he’s still speaking for James Comey. So why would the ex-FBI director — and hardline Trump critic — come out swinging AGAINST the release of the Epstein Files? After all, despite the hype and hoopla, none of the conspiracy theories about blackmail schemes, international espionage, and foreign governments were substantiated. If anything, the millions of Epstein documents and/or 300-plus gigabytes of data vindicated the government’s approach: It was less an elaborate cover-up and more a rich guy gaming the legal system on his own.[..]

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2026670599674663075?s=20

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Aug 192025
 


Edward Hopper Folly Beach, Charleston, South Carolina 1929

 

Russia Did NOT Invade Ukraine (Paul Craig Roberts)
The EU and Kiev Are Losing, and Trump Is My Witness (Romanenko)
Ukraine’s Army Should Face No Size Limits – Macron (RT)
The Old World Order Cracked In Alaska (Bordachev)
An Offer He Can’t Refuse (James Howard Kunstler)
Red Carpet For A New World Order: What Really Went Down In Alaska (Poletaev)
Ukraine Strikes Key Oil Pipeline To EU – Hungary (RT)
Attack on Hungary Pipeline Shows Ukraine Will Stop at Nothing- Zakharova (Sp.)
Zelensky’s Main Argument Against Peace Is a Lie (Romanenko)
5 Takeaways From Trump’s Meeting With Zelenskyy And European Leaders (NYT)
Ukraine Wants Europe To Pay $100bn For Weapons Deal With US – FT (RT)
Ed Martin: Russia Hoax to Blow Up, Schiff and Biden’s DOJ Next (Margolis)
Trump Is About to Go Nuclear Against Mail-in Voting (Margolis)
Mary McCord (Sundance)
British Army Colonel: CIVIL WAR Is Coming (MN)
How Trump Broke the Democratic Party (Margolis)
Trump Vows Social Security Will Thrive for Another ‘90 Years’ (RCW)

 

 

Dubinsky
https://twitter.com/Dubinsky_pro/status/1957103940979368025

 

 

 

 

$1 trillion
https://twitter.com/FFT1776/status/1957100979557396609

MoscowLondon

Speech

 

 

Macgregor – at 16 min he discusses “security guarantees“

 

 

 

 

One step up and two steps back.

On Friday, Trump was well on his way towards peace. On Monday, he walked all of it back. He seems to be trying to make everybody happy, which is hardly ever a good idea, but certainly not if they want diametrically opposed things. Putin genuinely wants peace, provided it comes under his conditions, but Zelensky and the EU leaders are the war party if ever there was one. They, too, want peace, but only after Russia has been thoroughly defeated. and since they have no army to do it with, they want Trump to do it for them. It’s all just one false flag away.

We can perhaps give him the befit of the doubt, but the clown car spectacle in the White House yesterday doesn’t promise much good. Under the nomer of ‘security guarantees’ for Ukraine, they were between ‘acts’, even discussing US troops in Ukraine, on top of a very large Ukrainian army. What they were not discussing is peace.

 

 

Pretty good history lesson from Paul Craig Roberts. Judging from how deeply the false story has been embedded in people’s minds, much needed.

“The restoration of Russian citizenship is completely legal under the international rules of self-determination. There is no effort on the part of Crimea, Donbas, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson to return to Ukraine.”

Russia Did NOT Invade Ukraine (Paul Craig Roberts)

A totally transparent blatant lie has been turned into a truth throughout the Western world. The lie is that Russia invaded Ukraine. I will provide the factual history which is easy to verify. When Washington overthrew the Ukrainian government in 2014 and installed a puppet, Washington relied on the Banderites to push the government into hostility with the Russian settled areas of Ukraine, areas such as Crimea and Donbas, that originally were part of Russia. Whether or not the Banderites, followers of Stepan Bandera are neo-Nazis, they are certainly hostile to Russians. The conflict in Ukraine began in 2014 with street assaults on Russians in Donbas and government attempts to ban the use of the Russian language and other prohibitions placed on the Russian areas. These street assaults soon grew into artillery attacks on Donbas towns and occupation of Donbas territory by Ukrainian militias sporting Nazi insignia.

To protect themselves, Donbas formed into two independent republics–Luhansk and Donetsk–and formed paramilitaries to defend themselves. In 2014 Donetsk and Luhansk voted overwhelmingly to be reabsorbed into Russia like Crimea, but Putin refused. Instead, Putin relied on the Minsk Agreement, which Ukraine and the independent republics signed, and which Germany and France were supposed to enforce. The agreement, sponsored by Russia, kept Donbas in Ukraine but provided some autonomy, such as independent police and courts to protect the rights of the Russian inhabitants. Putin naively relied on the Minsk Agreement, which the chancellor of Germany and president of France later said was used to deceive Putin while the US built and equipped a large Ukrainian army.

By late 2021 this army was prepared to invade Donbas, much of which was already under Ukrainian occupation, and forcibly reincorporate Donbas into Ukraine without any autonomy. Faced with the abuse and possible slaughter of Russian people, Putin and his foreign minister Lavrov tried during December 2021-February 2022 to obtain a mutual security agreement with the West that would exclude Ukraine from NATO membership and contribute to mutual security by normalizing relations between Russia and the West. The Biden regime, NATO, and the EU flatly refused. The conflict followed this refusal. Seeing the writing on the wall and unable to avoid it, Russia gave official recognization to the Donbas republics. This allowed Donetsk and Luhansk to request Russia to come to their aid, which Putin did at the last minute eight years too late. As Russia was invited into Donbas, Russia did not even invade Donbas, much less Ukraine.

Putin designated the Russian intervention a “special military operation” limited to clearing Ukrainian troops from Russian areas. Seven months into the military intervention on September 30, 2022, Russia reincorporated the Russian areas of Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson into Russia. The ground fighting has been limited to clearing Ukrainian troops from territory that is again part of Russia. Ask yourselves how and why did the truth get replaced by a lie? The answer is that those who profit from war provide the war propaganda. Now ask why does it matter? The answer is that propaganda is a barrier to understanding and to a peaceful diplomatic solution to a conflict that can easily spin out of control into a wider war.

The propaganda that the evil-dictator-war-criminal-Putin’s invasion of Ukraine is the first step in reconstruction [of] the Soviet Empire places restraints on Trump and Putin’s ability to put East-West relations on a less dangerous footing. Already the Western whore media is screaming that Trump is selling out Ukraine, that Trump is selling out Europe, that Trump is putty in Putin’s hands. These and other such ignorant slogans will be used by the Zionist neoconservatives and US military/security complex to drive wedges between Trump and his supporters. Americans have been indoctrinated to think of Russia as the enemy for 75 years. The belief is institutionalized.

Progress toward peaceful relations requires truthful reporting and correction of established beliefs that are false. Can this be achieved when the well-placed neoconservative supporters of US hegemony are defending their interest, and the military/security complex is determined to protect its power and profit? Trump can expect little help from the media. Naive Russians should not get carried away with their hopes for an accommodation with the West. Powerful barriers are in the way of Russian hopes, and Russians have no means of removing the barriers. It is doubtful that Trump does.

Now ask yourselves a final question? Why is it PCR who is making the case for common sense and for truth? Why isn’t it the US foreign policy community, the Kremlin, the Chinese, the Russian media, the Western media, the German government, the British government, the government of India? Why aren’t Trump’s supporters making the case? I am only one voice easily shouted down as a “Putin agent/dupe” by the Washington Post, CNN, Fox News, NPR, BBC, MSNBC, NY Times, Wall Street Journal, The Guardian, and the rest of the whore media and a plethora of internet sites sponsored by war-mongers. The normalization of relations between the West and Russia will take many voices. Where are those voices?

Note: The whores at the BBC and the rest of the presstitute media incorrectly report that Russia’s restoration of Crimea, Donbas, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson to Russian citizenship is illegal. The restoration of Russian citizenship is completely legal under the international rules of self-determination. There is no effort on the part of Crimea, Donbas, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson to return to Ukraine.

Read more …

“Kiev and the EU are pushing for a reinforced Ukrainian military, possible NATO deployment on Ukrainian soil or even eventual NATO accession.”

The EU and Kiev Are Losing, and Trump Is My Witness (Romanenko)

Monday’s White House summit featuring US President Donald Trump, Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky, and several senior EU figures ended without any grand announcements. Yet beneath the surface, a high-stakes diplomatic contest is unfolding over the Washington’s role in the Ukraine conflict. The lack of decisive outcomes suggests that the real work is happening behind the scenes. Trump’s behavior – in particular his decision not to echo Kiev’s or Brussels’s messaging in the post-meeting briefings – is a signal. He is asserting his control over the narrative, reflecting that he remains unpersuaded by EU and Ukrainian arguments for continued Western entanglement in the conflict.

A strategic tug-of-war
The summit and the diplomatic moves surrounding it are a tug-of-war, with Moscow’s goal being to remove Washington’s involvement in the conflict, while Brussel’s and Kiev’s is to keep it anchored in their corner. The absence of new sanctions or pressure on Russia following last Friday’s Putin-Trump summit in Alaska suggests Moscow is gaining momentum. Trump has even shifted from demanding a ceasefire to advocating direct peace talks – a position more congenial to Moscow. EU leaders and Zelensky came to Washington to reinforce Trump’s alignment. The want to persuade Trump: strengthen sanctions, maintain arms shipments, ensure Ukraine has a security architecture they want.

Thus far, though, their pull seems to be struggling. Trump, from the outset, appeared to put the EU and Ukraine on the defensive, signaling that their influence is limited. The backdrop is critical: just days before, Trump hosted Putin in Anchorage, and that summit paved the way for more flexible diplomacy that sidesteps EU-defined preconditions. European leaders arriving at the White House now are playing catch-up – trying to steer a conversation already impacted by Trump’s shift.

The security guarantees question
Everything hinges on security guarantees for Ukraine – a deeply contested issue. Moscow is adamant that any meaningful guarantee depends on Ukrainian neutrality and demilitarization. In contrast, Kiev and the EU are pushing for a reinforced Ukrainian military, possible NATO deployment on Ukrainian soil or even eventual NATO accession. These efforts by the Europeans appear desperate, even naïve – given that Russia is slowly but steadily winning the war on the ground. And as Russia makes military gains, Kiev’s and Brussels’ wiggle room in the negotiations shrinks. That said, their attempts shouldn’t be dismissed outright. The shape of the peace deal slow-cooked in Washington will determine Ukraine’s fate – and by extension, much of Europe’s future security structure.

Moscow, meanwhile, remains unperturbed. After the meeting with Zelensky and the Europeans, Trump held a 40-minute phone conversation with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Judging by the information released about the substance of the call, Trump made no demands and Putin offered no concessions. They talked about continuing direct Russia-Ukraine talks. They also discussed “elevating” the level of the talks, and according to German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, who was present at Monday’s meeting, direct talks between Putin and Zelensky could take place within two weeks. It is clear that the Kremlin remains steadfast and poised to consider setting the terms while it holds all the military cards.

In the end, the Washington summit may have lacked ceremony and a spectacular outcome, but it was loaded with geopolitical subtext: a contest over whether the US remains a supporter to Ukraine or begins to shift back toward a more transactional, realist posture. The EU, recognizing its diminishing leverage, is trying to reclaim the narrative as the battleground, at least for now, is clearly tilting against it.

Read more …

He knows exactly how Russia sees this. Calling for it regardless comes very close to a declaration of war.

Ukraine’s Army Should Face No Size Limits – Macron (RT)

A potential peace deal must not place limits on the size of Ukraine’s military, French President Emmanuel Macron has said, rejecting Russia’s demands. Earlier this year, Moscow reaffirmed that peace terms must include Ukraine’s neutrality and legally binding restrictions on the size of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. Kiev has dismissed the demand as unacceptable. Macron made his remarks following a meeting he attended in Washington on Monday with Vladimir Zelensky, several other European leaders and US President Donald Trump. He said European countries should take the lead in providing security guarantees for Ukraine and equipping its army.

“The first security guarantee is a robust Ukrainian army capable of repelling any attempted attack,” Macron told reporters following the negotiations. He added that the Ukrainian army should consist of “several hundred thousand men” and face “no limitations on its size,” according to Le Figaro. The Ukrainian army has struggled to replenish its ranks during the ongoing mobilization campaign, as Russia has steadily gained ground. Ukraine has long urged the West to provide guarantees similar to NATO’s collective defense, as an alternative to full membership in the alliance, which the US has rejected.

Trump said on Monday that Russian President Vladimir Putin had agreed to security guarantees for Kiev, without elaborating. The two leaders met in Alaska on Friday, with both sides describing the summit as an important step toward peace between Russia and Ukraine. Moscow has repeatedly said it would not tolerate any Western troops in Ukraine, even under the guise of peacekeepers, and insists that Kiev must abandon its plans to join NATO. Putin has also warned that Ukraine could use a potential ceasefire to regroup and rearm.

Read more …

“..after Anchorage, the Western refusal to acknowledge Russian interests is no longer an insurmountable barrier.”

The Old World Order Cracked In Alaska (Bordachev)

The meeting between Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump in Alaska may go down as one of Russia’s most significant diplomatic wins. It was secured through years of military sacrifice, political perseverance, and relentless effort. Yet it is also a transition – a step into a new stage of the struggle for sovereign states in a fractured world. The most consequential result of Anchorage was the quiet burial of the West’s old formula: isolating and “strategically defeating” Russia. For decades, any state refusing to fall in line risked ostracism. That system cracked in Alaska. Not because of American goodwill – there is no such thing in international politics – but because of pressure. Pressure from Russia, from the so-called “global majority,” and from the turmoil tearing at America itself. Trump’s administration has shifted its approach, and the summit proved it.

The outcome was clear: American capabilities diminished, Russian ones enhanced. This, in turn, frees space for other nations to act more independently, even if they will not admit their debt to Moscow.Some talk of a “renaissance” in relations between Moscow and Washington. But there is nothing to restore. The ties that existed before 2022 were shaped by the USSR’s defeat in the Cold War, and cannot be recreated. Instead, dialogue will stabilize on new terms. The core will be recognition that Russia cannot be excluded from the international system. This simple fact means disputes between Moscow and the West, however sharp, are solvable in principle. Competition will remain fierce, especially over Ukraine. But after Anchorage, the Western refusal to acknowledge Russian interests is no longer an insurmountable barrier.

For Trump, Alaska delivered something equally valuable: a domestic win. In the US, relations with Russia have become central to the internal political struggle. One camp insists on preserving an ideological monopoly at all costs. The other argues for flexibility. Trump belongs to the latter – and needed a visible success to show his critics. The face-to-face meeting with Putin provided it. He strengthened his position at home, showing that he can engage Washington directly while sidestepping Western Europe. Foreign policy has always mattered more in Russia, domestic politics more in America. Each man walked away with what he most needed.

Read more …

“The USA can only mediate and propose terms. Ukraine needs help formulating terms that are not preposterous.”

An Offer He Can’t Refuse (James Howard Kunstler)

Volodymyr Zelenskyy is dropping in at the White House today so that Mr. Trump can read him the riot act. It’s that simple. Somewhere to or from Alaska, Mr. Trump concluded that a ceasefire would not work, for the excellent reason that seven previous ceasefires in Ukraine failed, and only reinforced distrust and disappointment between the warring parties. Instead, the goal is a peace settlement, an end to the war. The USA and Russia cannot make peace in Ukraine because the war is between Ukraine and Russia. The USA can only mediate and propose terms. Ukraine needs help formulating terms that are not preposterous. Russia’s terms have been clear and precise for years, most particularly: no NATO for Ukraine. What part of that is hard to understand? The EU wants missile bases on Russia’s border. It wants to draw Ukraine into its sphere of influence. Ukraine has been in Russia’s sphere of influence since. . . forever.

The US helped start this conflict in 2014, when Mr. Obama was in charge. It was always a cynical operation, in concert with the cynics of the EU. To put it as plainly as possible, Mr. Trump has called it off, recognizing the foolish futility of the scheme. But the EU players persist maniacally, even though they don’t have the money or the armaments to keep it up, and are otherwise jointly committing slow suicide of their own societies. Anyway, Ukraine is exhausted. Ukraine has lost. Sheer intransigence could keep it going a while longer, but then Russia will sweep west with more pointless bloodshed. The argument is over. Territorial realities must be faced. Agreements must be made.

For the moment, Mr. Zelenskyy is the one who must be brought to agreement. His position as leader of Ukraine is, shall we say, squishy. His term as elected president of Ukraine ended in May 2024, and he only continues to occupy his position under martial law, self-declared. The Russians recognize his leadership as a contingency, because there is nobody else just now. Mr. Trump will be discussing Mr. Zelenskyy’s fate with him today in the White House. (It’s a little like a scene from an Ingmar Bergman movie, don’t you agree?)

There are many ways for this to go. Mr. Z can simply refuse a peace settlement, politely or otherwise. (War continues for no good reason.) He made noises to that effect on Sunday. Or, he can pretend to go along and then flip to some opposite stance, as he has done before. Mr. Z remains an actor of the prima donna variety. He can pretend to parlay in Washington, and then direct his return flight to some country other than Ukraine and seek asylum there, leaving his position vacant and inviting chaos in Kiev. Or. . . he can just play it straight and face the territorial realities.

Namely, that 1) Russia occupies most of the eastern frontier provinces at issue and intends to keep them, since they are inhabited by speakers of Russian who, remember, Mr. Z outlawed some years ago, and who were subject to relentless artillery and missile attacks prior to February, 2022, which prompted Russia’s Special Military Operation. . . that 2) Crimea belongs to Russia. . . that 3) Ukraine will not join NATO. . . that 4) Ukraine will hold new elections ASAP. . . and that 5) Ukraine will substantially disarm. . . . Surely, I left some lesser details out, but that’s most of the meat on the table.

Mr. Z is probably aware that he holds zip in the way of leverage. He is probably thinking (as is everyone else paying attention to this psychodrama) that he will be extremely lucky to stay alive in the aftermath of this fiasco, whatever shadowy corner of the world he might flee to, or how many billions of purloined US dollars he’s managed to stash in the usual places that permit cash-stashing. Staying in Ukraine must be out of the question, considering the damage he’s done to his own people, and the animus it has generated. Who knows, maybe Mr. Trump has reserved a nice little villa for Mr. Z in West Palm, where the president can keep tabs on him? He could learn golf and open a dinner theater.

Read more …

“Pressuring Putin would take effort. Pressuring Europe and Ukraine would take effort. Even walking away would take effort – and the US can’t manage that.”

Red Carpet For A New World Order: What Really Went Down In Alaska (Poletaev)

The meeting in Anchorage opened with a choreographed spectacle unlike anything the world had seen before. Two massive airships rolled onto the tarmac one after the other. Two presidents emerged at the exact same moment. They began walking toward each other. Donald Trump paused on the red carpet, waiting as Vladimir Putin covered his part of the distance. The world held its breath. It must have felt something like July 1969, when millions watched Neil Armstrong step onto the lunar surface. A few more seconds, one small step – and then, the historic handshake. A giant leap for mankind. The staging seemed to promise that history would be made that very day. Hundreds of journalists from around the globe had gathered at Elmendorf-Richardson Air Force Base, anticipating dramatic announcements.

Instead, the ending fell flat. After closed-door talks, Trump and Putin appeared before the cameras to declare there was “no deal yet” – only an agreement to keep talking. The expanded session and working lunch were scrapped. Putin laid flowers at a cemetery for Soviet World War II pilots and headed home. So, what exactly was that? For Trump, the peace process boils down to optics. He wants the same kind of photo-op he just staged with the leaders of Azerbaijan and Armenia: Putin and Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky shaking hands under his divine glow, the self-anointed peacemaker adding another jewel to his crown. The Kremlin sees it differently. Between the two largest nuclear powers, dialogue must be on an equal footing. A Putin-Zelensky meeting can only come as the result of terms worked out directly between Putin and Trump – terms Zelensky would have no choice but to implement.

That is the central landmine under today’s US-Russian dialogue. For Putin’s delegation, the task wasn’t to put on a show but to achieve some real movement beneath the surface. On the eve of Anchorage, I wrote: “What does Trump want? A ceasefire, and a meeting between Putin and Zelensky. What must Putin do? Ensure both happen on his conditions. Those conditions are clear: Ukrainian withdrawal from Donbass. The question is whether Trump signs on.” If the leaks are to be believed, the Russians at least nudged Trump closer to their position. He now seems willing to test whether he can pressure Ukraine and Europe into accepting Putin’s terms. That’s what the coming weeks will revolve around. By that measure, the Russian delegation achieved its goals – vital for the peace process, but impossible to sell to the public. No shiny photo.

So why doesn’t Trump simply bow out? The answer is simple: he can’t. He’s stuck in the groove he inherited from his predecessor, Joe Biden, and climbing out isn’t easy. Under Biden, Washington was the engine driving the war. Under Trump, America is just dead weight, lumbering forward on inertia. Pressuring Putin would take effort. Pressuring Europe and Ukraine would take effort. Even walking away would take effort – and the US can’t manage that. All America can do now is drift with the current: trickle in weapons and intelligence, without strategy or purpose, because that’s the path of least resistance. Trump hopes the war will somehow resolve itself without him having to deal with it. If we stick with analogies, America under Trump is a massive iron weight on a chain. Russia on one side, Europe and Ukraine on the other, all trying to swing it in their favor.

In Anchorage, Moscow won the round. Europe and Ukraine will bargain, but sooner or later they’ll have to swallow the loss of Donbass – just as they already swallowed the loss of the ’91 borders, the “no talks with Putin” stance, the Zelensky “peace plan,” and plenty more. Europe and Ukraine are prepared to give up much, as long as one thing remains: Western – above all, American – security guarantees to keep the Kiev regime alive. That’s the next big debate. But the reality hasn’t changed. Guarantees exist only if Putin agrees. And he will agree only if Kiev’s government is replaced with one loyal to Moscow. In official language: demilitarization and denazification. These conditions were written into the Istanbul agreements as far back as spring 2022

Read more …

“..the Ukraine conflict is “not our war” and that “as long as we [Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s government] are in charge, Hungary will stay out of it.”

Ukraine Strikes Key Oil Pipeline To EU – Hungary (RT)

Russian oil supply to Hungary has been halted after Ukraine targeted the key Druzhba pipeline system, Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto has said. Moscow has informed Budapest that Russian experts are working to restore an “essential” transformer station targeted by a Ukrainnian strike, Szijjarto said. Druzhba is one of the world’s longest networks, transporting crude some 4,000km from Russia and Kazakhstan to refineries in the Czech Republic, Germany, Hungary, Poland, and Slovakia. Szijjarto wrote in a post on X on Monday that “this latest strike against our energy security is outrageous and unacceptable.”

It is not yet clear when deliveries of oil through the pipeline could resume, he added. The diplomat reiterated that the Ukraine conflict is “not our war” and that “as long as we [Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s government] are in charge, Hungary will stay out of it.” Unlike most other EU capitals, which supported Kiev after the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022, Budapest took a neutral stance and refused to supply weapons to the government of Vladimir Zelensky. It also consistently called for peace and criticized Western sanctions against Russia as ineffective and more harmful to those who impose them.

Ukraine has repeatedly targeted Russian energy infrastructure throughout the conflict, including the Druzhba system and the TurkStream pipeline, which supplies natural gas to Turkish customers and several European countries, including Hungary, Serbia, Bulgaria, Slovakia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Greece. The previous attack on Druzhba occurred last Wednesday, with Kiev confirming that it had sent drones to strike a key distribution station in Bryansk Region, western Russia.Moscow has condemned Ukrainian attacks on civilian energy infrastructure many times as acts of terrorism.

Read more …

While Zelensky is doing”peace talks”, Ukraine planned attacks on the Crimean bridge (another one), energy infrastructure, nuclear plants, and pipelines to European countries. With friends like this…

Attack on Hungary Pipeline Shows Ukraine Will Stop at Nothing- Zakharova (Sp.)

The Russian Foreign Ministry said on Monday, commenting on the Ukrainian attack on an oil pipeline leading to Hungary, that Ukraine will stop at nothing. “For all these years, Russia has been warning the ideologues – those from the Obama-Maidan club – who’ve been fostering the Kiev regime, that this immoral and bloodthirsty monster will never stop and, like a filthy contagion, will spread throughout the world. In Africa, they have already committed terrorist attacks. They’ve popped up in the Middle East. They’ve sucked Central Asian citizens into terrorism.

They’ve taken control of the illegal arms trade in Europe. [And] they’ve perfected black market organ transplants for Western clients. Bankovaya will stop at nothing now,” Maria Zakharova wrote on Telegram. Earlier in the day, Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto said that oil supplies to Hungary had been suspended indefinitely due to another attack by Ukraine on an oil pipeline.

Read more …

“..the very Constitution that Zelensky has suddenly invoked as sacred… has long been on hold. And that’s not an accusation – it’s his own admission.”

“Ukraine’s democratic institutions haven’t just been “paused” – they’ve been systematically dismantled under the banner of wartime necessity.”

Zelensky’s Main Argument Against Peace Is a Lie (Romanenko)

Commenting on the outcome of the Trump-Putin summit in Alaska, Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky declared: “The Constitution of Ukraine does not allow the surrender of territories or the trading of land.” On paper, that sounds noble. The message is clear: Kiev won’t let others decide Ukraine’s fate behind its back. But take a closer look, and this principled stance starts to look less like constitutional fidelity – and more like political theater. Because the very Constitution that Zelensky has suddenly invoked as sacred… has long been on hold. And that’s not an accusation – it’s his own admission. Back in December 2022, while addressing Ukraine’s ambassadors, Zelensky quipped: “All the rights guaranteed by the Constitution – are on pause.”

The context? He was joking about how diplomats don’t get holidays. But the phrase stuck. Because it turned out to be more than a joke – it became official policy. Since then, Ukraine’s democratic institutions haven’t just been “paused” – they’ve been systematically dismantled under the banner of wartime necessity. National elections? Canceled indefinitely. Not just presidential or parliamentary – even local races were suspended, eliminating the public’s ability to hold any level of government accountable. Zelensky’s current term, once set to expire, has been extended without a vote – and without a clear end date. Opposition media? Silenced or outlawed. Dozens of TV channels and online outlets critical of the government were shut down or merged into a state-approved broadcasting platform. Independent journalism in Ukraine now walks a legal tightrope – with one foot over prison.

Religious freedom? Eroded beyond recognition. The Ukrainian Orthodox Church, seen as too closely linked to Moscow, has been harassed, evicted from centuries-old monasteries, and branded a security threat. Worshippers face criminal charges for sermons, symbols, or even prayers deemed “unpatriotic.” Military conscription? Brutal and indiscriminate. Young men are pulled off the streets by recruiters, sometimes beaten or coerced into enlisting. Videos of forced mobilizations circulate regularly – and are met with silence or spin from the authorities. Political dissent? Treated as treason. Opposition politicians have been arrested, exiled, or sanctioned without trial. Entire parties have been banned. Ukraine’s Security Council now acts as judge and jury – blacklisting citizens, freezing assets, and deciding guilt without a courtroom.

Rights didn’t just get paused. They were overwritten. To be fair, this erosion didn’t start with Zelensky. It began back in 2014 when President Yanukovich was ousted in a manner that skipped any constitutional procedure. The army was then deployed – for the first time in post-Soviet history – against a domestic protest. The rule of law quickly gave way to rule by necessity. Courts rubber-stamped sanctions lists. Parliament became a formality. The Constitution was increasingly treated as a suggestion, not a boundary. Zelensky merely completed what others started. Under his watch, Ukraine is no longer governed by its Constitution – it’s governed by presidential decree. The Constitution hasn’t been a check on executive power for years. Instead, it’s become a stage prop: Shelved when inconvenient. Quoted when useful.

That’s precisely what happened after the Trump–Putin summit. As it became clear that the fate of the conflict was being discussed without Kiev at the table, Zelensky rushed to invoke constitutional law – not to restore legality, but to cling to legitimacy.

Read more …

Whaddaya know? New York Times (through a Greek paper).

5 Takeaways From Trump’s Meeting With Zelenskyy And European Leaders (NYT)

President Donald Trump met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and European leaders at the White House on Monday, in a cordial but inconclusive push to end Russia’s war in Ukraine. Much of the meeting focused on what security guarantees the European nations and the United States would provide Ukraine if Zelenskyy agreed to a deal to end the fighting. Trump also spoke to Russian President Vladimir Putin to begin setting up a possible direct meeting between Zelenskyy and the Russian leader, though it was not clear when or even whether such a session would come about. Here are five takeaways from the meeting.

The leaders presented a relatively united front
Three days after Trump gave Putin a literal red carpet welcome at their meeting in Alaska and abandoned several key positions he had staked out beforehand, he presided over a discussion with America’s traditional allies in which the participants largely emphasized common ground. Some differences broke through. Chancellor Friedrich Merz of Germany argued for a ceasefire to be put in place before further negotiations with Russia, but was gently rebuffed by Trump. And President Emmanuel Macron of France suggested he was skeptical that Putin was dealing in good faith. “I am not convinced that President Putin also wants peace,” he told reporters at a news conference. But there were no blowups of the sort that ended a previous visit by Zelenskyy to the White House. All the participants appeared to agree with a plan to arrange direct talks between Zelenskyy and Putin even while other issues are worked out, such as the precise nature of the security guarantees for Ukraine and what if any territory Ukraine might be willing to cede.

Trump spoke only in vague terms about security guarantees for Ukraine
Trump said on social media that the meetings were fruitful and that the leaders discussed “security guarantees for Ukraine, which Guarantees would be provided by the various European countries, with a coordination with the United States.” Earlier, addressing reporters in the Oval Office, Trump was asked whether the United States would send U.S. troops to Ukraine as part of any peacekeeping effort. Trump did not answer the question directly, but said that the United States would “help them out.” “We’ll be involved,” Trump said. The European leaders pressed Trump on providing a security guarantee similar to NATO’s Article 5, meaning that an attack on Ukraine would be considered an attack on all NATO countries. “We will give them very good protection and very good security,” Trump said. When asked what kind of security guarantees he wanted, Zelenskyy said: “Everything.”

Trump engaged in some shuttle diplomacy with Putin
President Joe Biden once referred to Putin as a “murderous dictator,” but Trump has long held a more positive view of the Russian president. On Monday, Trump continued to portray Putin as genuinely interested in finding a way to end the war he had started. At one point, Trump broke off his session with the European leaders in the East Room of the White House to call the Russian leader. Afterward, Trump brought Zelenskyy and the European leaders into the Oval Office to describe his discussion with Putin, according to President Alexander Stubb of Finland.

Russia and Ukraine will work on a possible Putin-Zelenskyy meeting
Trump said in a social media post that he had called Putin to begin arranging a meeting between Zelenskyy and Putin. He said he would then seek to meet with both leaders in a trilateral session. But it was unclear if all the parties were on board. Yuri Ushakov, Putin’s foreign policy aide, said in a statement that Putin and Trump had a “frank and very constructive” phone conversation about the meeting with Zelenskyy and the European leaders at the White House. In diplomatic shorthand, “frank” often signals that the two sides did not fully agree. The statement said the Russian and American leaders had agreed to appoint more senior negotiators for direct talks between Russia and Ukraine, but did not mention whether Putin would participate. While Putin has not refused outright to meet with Zelenskyy, he has made it clear that he does not consider the Ukrainian president either legitimate or his equal.

Zelenskyy said Ukraine would buy $90 billion of American arms
Trump has said he does not want to provide more aid to Ukraine, but is willing to sell arms to help the Ukrainians fend off the Russian assault. Zelenskyy expressed particular interest Monday in acquiring more Patriot air-defense systems to help minimize the damage from relentless Russian missile attacks. Zelenskyy told reporters Monday that as part of any security guarantees, Ukraine would buy $90 billion in American weapons through Europe, and that the United States would buy drones from Ukraine. He said that a formal agreement still had to be arranged. But a deal of that scale would be a substantial step toward assuring that Ukrainian forces continue fighting against Russia and have a robust defense in place should a peace deal be reached.

Read more …

And they’ll pay it, with money they and their citizens don’t have.

Ukraine Wants Europe To Pay $100bn For Weapons Deal With US – FT (RT)

Ukraine has proposed that its European backers spend $100 billion providing it with American weapons, the Financial Times reported. Kiev continues to seek security guarantees from Washington. Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky and the heads of several Western European states held talks with US President Donald Trump in Washington on Monday to discuss the ongoing conflict and diplomatic attempts to resolve it. Trump, who has repeatedly questioned the previous administration’s unconditional aid to Kiev, announced last month that Washington’s NATO allies would effectively pay for the US-made weapons being sent to Ukraine. In addition to the weapons procurement proposal, Ukraine is preparing a $50 billion deal to produce drones domestically, FT reported, citing four people familiar with the matter and a document Kiev reportedly shared with the US.

Although the document contains limited details, FT said Ukraine intends to purchase at least 10 Patriot air defense missile systems. Ukraine’s European supporters have struggled to ramp up production to meet Kiev’s needs, as Ukrainian forces have steadily been losing ground to the Russian army. After a one-on-one meeting in Alaska on Friday, Trump claimed that Russian President Vladimir Putin was ready to agree to security guarantees for Ukraine, though he did not provide specifics. Ukraine has previously urged the West to provide security guarantees equivalent to NATO’s collective defense, while several European states have offered to deploy peacekeepers. Russia, however, has stressed that it will not tolerate any Western troops in Ukraine.

Read more …

“..director of the Department of Justice Weaponization Working Group..”

Ed Martin: Russia Hoax to Blow Up, Schiff and Biden’s DOJ Next (Margolis)

Ed Martin, the director of the Department of Justice Weaponization Working Group, joined Maria Bartiromo on Fox News’ “Sunday Morning Futures” for an explosive interview about ongoing investigations into government abuse of power. Martin confirmed that his office is reviewing criminal referrals involving Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), New York Attorney General Letitia James, and matters tied to the Russia hoax and January 6 investigations. Bartiromo opened by asking Martin to assess “a decade of dirty tricks” against Donald Trump. Martin agreed, saying the DOJ’s Weaponization Working Group, launched under Attorney General Pam Bondi, is tasked with uncovering the truth. “We’ve got more stuff going on, a lot of it we can’t talk about because of the nature of it, but it’s going like crazy,” he revealed.

He credited Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard with declassifying materials tied to the Russia hoax and forwarding them as a criminal referral. “What we have in the Department of Justice now is a Weaponization Working Group and the backing of our leadership to go and find this stuff,” Martin explained. He said his team can trace the origins of the hoax precisely. “We know now the birthday of the Russia hoax. It’s Dec. 8, 2016 where the Obama administration, including Obama, said, ‘Don’t put the truth out; lie, and ask the media to help us,’ and The Washington Post and others jumped right in.” Martin confirmed allegations go beyond Schiff’s role in pushing false collusion claims. “There’s a referral from Bill Pulte about a mortgage fraud, about Adam Schiff. That’s publicly discussed. His own lawyers have been out there. Now there’s more on Adam Schiff, and all we’re gonna do again is get to the facts of this and use all the tools that we have in our system.”

Martin stressed that if wrongdoing is uncovered, Schiff would face accountability. Martin drew a stark picture of Biden’s Justice Department targeting everyday Americans. “Joe Biden’s Justice Department actively targeted American citizens, Catholics who went to Mass, parents who went to school boards,” he said. “Carter Page was destroyed by the Russia hoax, and we’re sitting around and pretending it’s okay.” Martin added that those involved in orchestrating the hoax, including Obama officials in a December 2016 Situation Room meeting, must face consequences: “It wasn’t really bad. It needs to be held accountable in every way we can.” Martin confirmed he had personally visited James’ Brooklyn property after a referral raised questions. “One of the referrals is about that property that she has. It’s a very prominent neighborhood in Brooklyn, and I wanted to lay eyes on it,” he said. “If you’re prosecuting something, you’re careful.”

Martin declined to give specifics but hinted at grand jury activity: “When you get a criminal referral, one of the tools you have is a grand jury, and I’ll leave it to you to infer what I mean.” The conversation then turned to January 6, where Martin said the DOJ’s investigation revealed widespread government overreach. “They basically turned government on to make the hoax work,” Martin told Bartiromo. “The FBI and others were putting American citizens on terrorism watch lists, they were auditing their IRS tax returns, they were targeting the American people. They didn’t do this to the terrorists after 9/11, and they were doing it to American citizens.” Martin also alleged misconduct by the January 6 Committee itself: “Of course [they destroyed evidence]. We’re all in that too, and trust me, a lot of people did not get a pardon that were involved in the select committee,You w and they ought to be keeping an eye on their mailbox, because there’s a lot to be asked about.”

Read more …

High time.

Trump Is About to Go Nuclear Against Mail-in Voting (Margolis)

President Donald Trump has been warning for years that mail-in ballots and voting machines are riddled with vulnerabilities that invite fraud and undermine trust in elections. We’ve discussed these vulnerabilities here at PJ Media extensively, and now Trump is taking action on them. On Monday morning, President Trump announced on Truth Social that he will issue an executive order to put an end to mail-in ballots before the 2026 midterms and restore “honesty and integrity” to America’s elections. In a lengthy post on Truth Social, Trump announced, “I am going to lead a movement to get rid of MAIL-IN BALLOTS, and also, while we’re at it, Highly ‘Inaccurate,’ Very Expensive, and Seriously Controversial VOTING MACHINES.”

He argued that such machines cost “Ten Times more than accurate and sophisticated Watermark Paper, which is faster, and leaves NO DOUBT, at the end of the evening, as to who WON, and who LOST, the Election.” Trump said the United States stands alone in continuing to use widespread mail-in voting. “We are now the only Country in the World that uses Mail-In Voting. All others gave it up because of the MASSIVE VOTER FRAUD ENCOUNTERED,” he wrote. The president made clear that he intends to act quickly, pledging to use executive authority to move the plan forward. “WE WILL BEGIN THIS EFFORT, WHICH WILL BE STRONGLY OPPOSED BY THE DEMOCRATS BECAUSE THEY CHEAT AT LEVELS NEVER SEEN BEFORE, by signing an EXECUTIVE ORDER to help bring HONESTY to the 2026 Midterm Elections,” Trump said.

He also challenged the notion that states hold full control over election administration. “Remember, the States are merely an ‘agent’ for the Federal Government in counting and tabulating the votes. They must do what the Federal Government, as represented by the President of the United States, tells them, FOR THE GOOD OF OUR COUNTRY, to do,” Trump wrote.President Donald Trump has been warning for years that mail-in ballots and voting machines are riddled with vulnerabilities that invite fraud and undermine trust in elections. We’ve discussed these vulnerabilities here at PJ Media extensively, and now Trump is taking action on them. On Monday morning, President Trump announced on Truth Social that he will issue an executive order to put an end to mail-in ballots before the 2026 midterms and restore “honesty and integrity” to America’s elections.

In a lengthy post on Truth Social, Trump announced, “I am going to lead a movement to get rid of MAIL-IN BALLOTS, and also, while we’re at it, Highly ‘Inaccurate,’ Very Expensive, and Seriously Controversial VOTING MACHINES.” He argued that such machines cost “Ten Times more than accurate and sophisticated Watermark Paper, which is faster, and leaves NO DOUBT, at the end of the evening, as to who WON, and who LOST, the Election.” Trump said the United States stands alone in continuing to use widespread mail-in voting. “We are now the only Country in the World that uses Mail-In Voting. All others gave it up because of the MASSIVE VOTER FRAUD ENCOUNTERED,” he wrote. The president made clear that he intends to act quickly, pledging to use executive authority to move the plan forward.

“WE WILL BEGIN THIS EFFORT, WHICH WILL BE STRONGLY OPPOSED BY THE DEMOCRATS BECAUSE THEY CHEAT AT LEVELS NEVER SEEN BEFORE, by signing an EXECUTIVE ORDER to help bring HONESTY to the 2026 Midterm Elections,” Trump said. He also challenged the notion that states hold full control over election administration. “Remember, the States are merely an ‘agent’ for the Federal Government in counting and tabulating the votes. They must do what the Federal Government, as represented by the President of the United States, tells them, FOR THE GOOD OF OUR COUNTRY, to do,” Trump wrote. Trump reiterated that elections cannot be trusted under the current system. “ELECTIONS CAN NEVER BE HONEST WITH MAIL IN BALLOTS/VOTING, and everybody, IN PARTICULAR THE DEMOCRATS, KNOWS THIS,” he declared.

He then vowed that he would not back down. “I, AND THE REPUBLICAN PARTY, WILL FIGHT LIKE HELL TO BRING HONESTY AND INTEGRITY BACK TO OUR ELECTIONS,” he said, calling mail-in voting a “HOAX” and voting machines “a complete and total disaster.” He ended his post with an urgent warning about the stakes. “THE MAIL-IN BALLOT HOAX, USING VOTING MACHINES THAT ARE A COMPLETE AND TOTAL DISASTER, MUST END, NOW!!! REMEMBER, WITHOUT FAIR AND HONEST ELECTIONS, AND STRONG AND POWERFUL BORDERS, YOU DON’T HAVE EVEN A SEMBLANCE OF A COUNTRY. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER!!!” Trump concluded, signing off as “DONALD J. TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.”

Read more …

X thread.

Mary McCord (Sundance)

1/ To give you an idea of the scope of influence of Mary McCord as a key corrupt and unlawful DC functionary, consider what we can document.

• McCord submitted the fraudulent FISA application to spy on Trump campaign. Oct. ’16

• McCord created the Logan Act claim used against Michael Flynn and then went with Sally Yates to confront the White House. Feb ’17

• McCord then left the DOJ and went to work for Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler on Impeachment Committee. ’18

• McCord organized the CIA rule changes with Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson. ’18

• McCord led and organized the impeachment effort, in the background, using the evidence she helped create. ’19

• McCord joined the FISA Court to protect against DOJ IG Michael Horowitz newly gained NSD oversight and FISA review. ’19

• McCord joined the J6 Committee helping to create all the lawfare angles they deployed. ’21

• McCord then coordinated with DA Fani Willis in Georgia. ’21

• McCord was working with Special Counsel Jack Smith to prosecute Trump. ’22

• McCord is now coordinating a Lawfare attack process against Donald Trump in term #2.

• McCord testified that AG Pam Bondi must recuse herself from investigating McCord. ’25

• Joe Biden pardoned Mary McCord. ’25

Read more …

“..almost every plausible way forward from here involves some kind of violence in my view.”

British Army Colonel: CIVIL WAR Is Coming (MN)

A retired British Army Colonel is warning that he believes a civil war in the country is now inevitable because politicians are unwilling to take meaningful actions to fix societal collapse. Colonel Richard Kemp, who has served on the Joint Intelligence Committee and the Cabinet Office crisis centre COBRA, urges that an alliance “of the hard left and Islamist extremists” will clash with broadly conservative British people and that it will lead to widespread prolonged unrest. Kemp suggests that “together with other causes,” these Islamist leftists will “come together to threaten the cohesion and the culture, the entire culture and political existence of the West.” Kemp, who fought counter insurgency in Northern Ireland, served in the Gulf war, Bosnia, and commanded in Afghanistan, asserts that the agitators are “fostered by,” and “funded to a large extent, by our international enemies like Russia, China, Iran, and other countries as well.”

In an interview with podcaster Conor Tomlinson, Kemp remarks that politicians in the UK are “in a state of bewilderment, they’re like rabbits in headlights,” and that while they understand how the unrest is being fomented, they are unable or unwilling to put a stop to it. Kemp says of political leaders that their “horizon is four years,” and “They want to keep a state of equilibrium for that time, they want to do what they can to make sure they win the next election.” “They don’t want to take the radical sort of action that might be necessary to address these sorts of problems,” the Colonel stresses, highlighting mass migration as one major issue. “There’s only so much that I think people can take of that, and they’ve been very quiet up until now, the people in the UK have not really raised their voices against this, or in a very limited way only. But the more it develops, and it is going to develop more and more, the more unrest we are going to see,” Kemp emphasises.

He adds, “they have no option. I’m not encouraging or supporting this, but I think the people will feel they have no option than to take action into their own hands rather than rely on political leaders who are doing nothing, in their eyes.” “I think there is every likelihood, I don’t know what the timeframe is, but I would go so far as to not just predict civil unrest, but civil war in the UK in the coming years if this situation continues which I believe it will,” he urges. “I’d hate to be right on this, but I believe that I know there is no political solution to the situation Britain faces today,” Kemp further declares, adding “When I say there is no solution, I don’t mean there actually isn’t a solution, but there is no solution that any of our politicians are willing to take… because they are afraid of doing anything significant.”

As we’ve previously highlighted, these views are shared by London King’s College war professor Dr David Betz, who believes the UK is already “past the tipping point,” for near future civil war. Betz stated earlier this year, “There isn’t anything they can do, it’s baked in. We’re already past the tipping point, is my estimation… we are past the point at which there is a political offramp. We are past the point at which normal politics is able to solve the problem… almost every plausible way forward from here involves some kind of violence in my view.” Kemp’s interviewer Conor Tomlinson notes that Colonel Kemp has never even heard of Professor Betz and arrived at the same conclusion completely independently, Which “makes his well-informed warnings all the more alarming.”

Read more …

They broke themselves. No help needed.

How Trump Broke the Democratic Party (Margolis)

President Trump has had a very productive second term, but according to Victor Davis Hanson, Trump’s biggest accomplishment isn’t legislation; it’s that he shattered the Democratic Party’s façade—and left it flailing. “Donald Trump’s greatest legacy, he broke the Democratic Party and he turned it. … He exposed it for what it was,” Hanson explained in an interview. “It was a bicoastal elite party with a bunch of billionaires who spend lavishly, and a bunch of subsidized poor, and a professional class that feels frustrated.” Hanson described the party’s urban base as young, well-paid professionals struggling in sky-high-cost blue cities. “That’s what the Mamdani constituency is. Frustrated, young prof—white professionals,” he said. Meanwhile, he argued, Democrats have abandoned the working class, along with what he called “muscular classes”—Hispanic and black males, and working-class white voters.

Trump, Hanson pointed out, didn’t just survive this shift—he thrived. “If you look at 2016, ’20, and ‘24, Donald Trump’s white vote is pretty constant,” he said. Despite losing the popular vote in 2016 and 2020, Trump won both the popular vote and the Electoral College in 2024 with the same base. Hanson credited this to Trump picking up women, young voters, and 55% of Hispanic males, along with roughly 25% of black males and 10–15% of Asian males. “So how could that be if he was supposed to be a racist according to the Democrats?” Hanson asked. He explained it’s the Democrats’ condescending approach to voters. “Basically, this is a caricature, but the Democratic attitude toward a black truck driver or a Mexican American electrician was something like this: ‘Now, you don’t know what’s good for you… They’re going to be good for you. I don’t care what you say about your schools being swamps, crime going up. Remember that.’”

He highlighted how the party lectures Americans on everything from gender policies to energy prices. “‘Men have a right to transition, and they are now women, and they’re gonna compete in your daughter’s sports.’ And ‘You don’t know what’s good for you because you’re too ignorant, but I will represent you.’ ‘I’m a black, uh, woman with a PhD.’ ‘I’m a Hispanic woman’ that’s, uh, your congresswoman.’ ‘I am your white liberal Chuck Schumer or Nancy Pel— and I will tell you what is good for you. Got it?’” Hanson called out Barack Obama’s infamous talk with black Democratic activists as a perfect example of this elitism. “‘You think Donald Trump’s good or something.’ ‘You’ve gotta get out there and support Harris.’ ‘You’re suffering basically from Marxist false consciousness. And I, and as an elite, know what’s good for you and I will tell you. Now, go do it,’” Hanson paraphrased.

He reserved particular scorn for former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, whose policies he described as symbolic rather than practical. “Everything about him represents what I just said. Sanctimonious, self-righteous, talk down. I don’t think California is suffering from not enough freeways or it’s too crowded. It’s suffering from racist legacies of clover leaves, and I’m going to make non-racist clover,” Hanson said. Hanson summed up the party’s attitude with a single biting phrase: “It’s a Karen scold.” By treating voters like children and lecturing them on everything from energy prices to social norms, Hanson argued, the Democrats have made themselves easy prey for Trump—a truth the left can’t seem to accept.

Read more …

“..one of the most significant pieces of legislation ever signed into law,”

Trump Vows Social Security Will Thrive for Another ‘90 Years’ (RCW)

Nearly a century removed, the Republican president heralded his Democratic predecessor for “one of the most significant pieces of legislation ever signed into law,” the bill that created Social Security. The program turned 90 this month. Without reform, its 100th anniversary is not guaranteed. President Trump still heralded FDR for the program, created at the height of the Great Depression, and vowed in the Oval Office to preserve and improve it “for 90 years and beyond.” The president said this was his “sacred pledge to our seniors.” Had he not returned to the White House, Trump boasted, “Social Security was going to be destroyed.”

And true to his word, Trump has not meddled with senior benefits. His marquee legislation has, in fact, reduced their tax burden by making Social Security benefits tax-free. But the actuarial tables are less rosy than the president put on in front of the cameras. According to new estimates from the program’s chief actuary, Karen Glenn, Social Security will not make it to its 100th birthday as things stand. Instead, the trust fund will be insolvent in just seven years. Money was expected to run out by the first quarter of 2033, but after the One Big Beautiful Bill became law and made benefits tax-free, that forecast was moved up slightly to the fourth quarter of 2032.

At that point, according to analysis by the Congressional Research Service, the federal government would have three options at the point: increase taxes, decrease benefits, or a combination of the two. Trump, who will have joined the ranks of former presidents by then, seemed unconcerned with those predictions. “You keep hearing stories that ‘in six years, seven years, Social Security will be gone,’” he told reporters, “and it will be if the Democrats ever get involved because they don’t know what they’re doing.” So long as his party is in control, he promised, “it’s going to be around a long time with us.”

Read more …

 

 

 

 

RFK

Climate

Rosita

Bloom

Life

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Jul 172025
 


Pablo Picasso Portrait of Dora Maar 1943

 

Trump Arms Ukraine. Russia Doesn’t Care (Kornev)
Trump’s Tariff Revenues Reach Record Highs (Salgado)
Federal Judge Takes Control of US Government (Spivak)
Zelensky Not A Dependable Partner For US – Former Trump Adviser (RT)
EU Is Funding The ‘Death’ Of Ukraine – Zakharova (RT)
The Conflict in Ukraine Is Widening out of Control (Paul Craig Roberts)
Kremlin Urges Trump To Pressure Kiev (RT)
Zelensky Urges Trump To Revisit Ukrainian Missile Proposal (RT)
Trump Sprang Ukraine Surprise On NATO States – Reuters (RT)
The Battle For The Middle East Is Going Global (Sadygzade)
MTG Tries to Stop US Funding of Israeli Aggression (Paul Craig Roberts)
India, China, Brazil Facing ‘Consequences’ For Russia Trade Ties – Rutte (RT)
EU Plan To Move Frozen Russian Money Would Be ‘Expropriation’ – Euroclear (RT)
Adam Schiff Faces Federal Criminal Referral Over ‘Mortgage Fraud’ (Margolis)
EU General Court Orders Le Pen Family To Give EU €300k (RT)

 

 

euro

GMO

Beck

 

 

 

 

“Russia’s layered air defense network, including the S-300, S-400, and S-500 systems, was designed with threats like ATACMS in mind. While a 100% interception rate is unrealistic, operational experience shows a high level of effectiveness..”

Trump Arms Ukraine. Russia Doesn’t Care (Kornev)

On Monday, July 14, US President Donald Trump announced that he had decided to supply Patriot missile systems to Kiev, with the first deliveries expected in the coming days. The key element of this move lies not just in the type of weapons, but in the logistics behind them. While the deliveries will be formally carried out by Washington, the funding will come from NATO allies. The first batteries will be transferred from Germany, which will later be compensated by new shipments from the United States. In essence, a new mechanism is taking shape: American weapons, paid for with European money. But what does this actually mean in practical terms? Is this a major escalation, a political gesture, or simply a reshuffling of existing commitments? And more importantly, how will this affect the battlefield itself?

According to Trump, Ukraine will receive 17 Patriot systems – a statement that immediately raises questions. Most importantly, it’s unclear exactly what the administration considers a “system.” If he meant 17 launchers, that would translate into just three or four full batteries, since each battery includes a radar, command post, and between four and eight launchers. This would not represent a dramatic escalation, but rather allow the Ukrainian Armed Forces to replenish and rotate previously supplied batteries.A more ambitious interpretation would assume that Trump meant 17 full batteries. That would be the single largest delivery of air defense systems to Ukraine to date – several times more than what the country currently fields. While the US has the industrial capacity and inventory to provide this quantity, such a generous transfer would be uncharacteristic of Trump’s approach.

His goal is to make a visible impact, not to set records. The more plausible scenario is that this is a European-funded replacement for earlier systems that have been damaged or expended. In parallel with the Patriot announcement, details began to emerge about long-range missiles. According to The Washington Post, the Trump administration is considering removing all restrictions on Ukraine’s use of ATACMS missiles to strike targets deep inside Russian territory. It’s worth clarifying that Ukraine already possesses such missiles. Since 2023, its forces have deployed ATACMS variants with a range of up to 190 km, and since spring of 2024, longer-range versions capable of reaching 300 km. The change lies not in the hardware itself, but in the potential shift in how it can be used.

Up until now, Washington has forbidden Kiev from using these weapons to strike internationally recognized Russian territory. According to American press reports, those limits may now be dropped. While this move would entail risks, it doesn’t represent a strategic game-changer. Russia’s layered air defense network, including the S-300, S-400, and S-500 systems, was designed with threats like ATACMS in mind. While a 100% interception rate is unrealistic, operational experience shows a high level of effectiveness. The threat is real, but hardly decisive.

Read more …

“Tariff revenues reached a record level of $113 billion, representing a significant financial boost and hitting a new high for this year..”

“Compared to last June, this year’s figures are up 301%..”

Trump’s Tariff Revenues Reach Record Highs (Salgado)

Revenues from Donald Trump’s tariffs have hit record highs as of the start of this month, as the president announced more tariffs, especially on hostile countries. Tariff revenues reached a record level of $113 billion, representing a significant financial boost and hitting a new high for this year, Fox Business reported. Democrats, who prefer taxing Americans to tariffing foreigners, have bewailed the tariffs nonstop, but Trump’s optimism about the revenues seems to be justified so far. We need fewer taxes on Americans and more tariffs on belligerent nations that hate the USA. And companies that dislike the tariffs should bring operations back to America.

A June 30 press release from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) previously boasted that the majority of the tariff revenues collected this year are due to Trump‘s tariffs, with which he is leveling the international trade playing field and penalizing hostile countries. Fox News added more details on the newest numbers: The U.S. received more than $27 billion in customs duties in June, the highest figure so far this year, according to the Treasury Department’s “Customs and Certain Excise Taxes” data. Compared to last June, this year’s figures are up 301%. In January, tariff revenues hovered around $7.9 billion and more than doubled in April to $16.3 billion. Meanwhile, July is on track to continue as a revenue contributor for the federal government.

Even before the newest revenue numbers were announced, DHS was celebrating the tariffs’ success. “We are proud to help President Trump make America richer and reverse a broken trade system that resulted in millions of jobs shipped overseas and made us dependent on foreign adversaries for essential goods,” said an unnamed senior official. “This administration will always put the American first.” The U.S. slapped all the European Union countries and Mexico with 27% tariffs this month, Fox stated, and Trump imposed a particularly hefty 50% tariff on Brazil for attacking freedom of speech and undermining free elections. “Goods transshipped to evade this 50% Tariff will be subject to that higher Tariff,” Trump wrote the Brazilian president Lula before warning, “If for any reason you decide to raise your Tariffs, then, whatever number you choose to raise them by, will be added onto the 50% that we charge.”

Many countries around the world have long imposed significant tariffs on American goods while demanding no reciprocal tariffs on their goods. Trump was determined to change that rigged and unjust system. That naturally infuriated the countries that had become accustomed to taking advantage of us, and Democrats always take part in those criticizing in America, but the change was actually long overdue. Trump also aims to bring manufacturing back to America and encourage both companies and customers to prefer goods made in America. As Trump’s Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick reminded anti-tariff gripers, “Remember, there’s a ZERO percent tariff on all goods made in the USA!”

Read more …

Lawfare squared and cubed. Congress may not approve, nor may the Supreme court, but this judge is determined to find a way.

Federal Judge Takes Control of US Government (Spivak)

Just days after the Supreme Court again made it clear that the separation of powers is sacrosanct, Indira Talwani, an Obama appointed federal judge in Massachusetts, has taken the unprecedented step of ordering the government to fund Planned Parenthood, purporting to enjoin implementation of a portion of the Big Beautiful Bill (BBB) passed by Congress. The BBB imposed a one-year ban on state Medicaid payments to health care nonprofits that offer abortions and also received more than $800,000 in federal funding in 2023. Three days after the president signed the BBB into law, Planned Parenthood sought a temporary restraining order (TRO). Without hearing from the government, complying with federal rules, or even providing an explanation, within hours after the filing, Talwani issued a TRO for at least 14 days that requires the government to spend money Congress declined to appropriate.

Four days later, the administration asked Talwani to dissolve the TRO because of its obvious infirmities. Instead, she doubled down, issuing an amended TRO that satisfied the technical requirements she had previously ignored. I work with Planned Parenthood’s very capable lead lawyers. Without the facts or the law on their side, they did the right thing. They found a far-left federal judge who has repeatedly ruled against the Trump administration and is willing to create a constitutional crisis to advance a political cause. Numerous Supreme Court decisions explain that merely because something is legal does not mean that Congress must fund it, or continue to do so. Just a few weeks ago, in Medina v. Planned Parenthood, the Supreme Court rejected Planned Parenthood’s challenge to South Carolina’s right to exclude Planned Parenthood from its Medicaid program.

For more than 40 years, the Hyde Amendment has generally prohibited federal funding for abortion, and the court has repeatedly held that the government is under no contrary obligations (e.g., Maher v. Roe and Harris v. McRae). Talwani’s order violates Article I of the Constitution, which could not be more clear: “No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law.” Article I vests the power to authorize spending exclusively in Congress. In OPM v. Richmond (1989), the Supreme Court confirmed that the Appropriations Clause conveys a “straightforward and explicit command” that no money “can be paid out of the Treasury unless it has been appropriated by an act of Congress.”

There is no basis in the Constitution or any Supreme Court decision to support the right of a court – any court – to interfere in congressional decisions to fund, or cease funding, a private organization. To the contrary, in Rust v. Sullivan (1991), the Supreme Court held that “the Government has no constitutional duty to subsidize an activity merely because the activity is constitutionally protected.”Planned Parenthood’s main argument is the equivalent of jury nullification. Because it is the dominant provider of abortion services in the United States, limiting its ability to carry out its mission would deprive women of access to such services. Even if true, that is a political argument unsuccessfully made during the last election and during the debate over the BBB.

Planned Parenthood asserts that the BBB is an unconstitutional bill of attainder because the criteria for defunding effectively single it out. That absurd argument flies in the face of an unbroken line of cases that apply the Article I prohibition on bills of attainder only to criminal or quasi-criminal punishment. Congress often funds, or defunds, individuals and organizations. In Nixon v. Administrator of General Services (1971), the Supreme Court rejected the proposition that an individual or defined group is subject to a bill of attainder merely because Congress singles them out. Talwani did not mention bills of attainder in her amended TRO. Planned Parenthood also claims that defunding its efforts constitutes viewpoint retaliation under the First Amendment, and a violation of the equal protection clause of the Fifth Amendment.

In Rust, the Supreme Court rejected similar claims. In its papers, Planned Parenthood cites no Supreme Court case compelling Congress to appropriate spending on these grounds. Nonetheless, in her amended TRO, Talwani relied on the First and Fifth Amendments to justify issuance of the TRO. She also rejected the government’s concern that it would be harmed if it paid money to Planned Parenthood, because, she averred, the government likely would instead use the funds to pay another provider. By that logic, a mugger is only taking money that his victim would probably spend on something else. The first hearing is on Friday. If Talwani does not relent, she can expect an unpleasant rebuke from appellate courts.

Read more …

“..in order for the US-Ukraine partnership to work, Kiev “must become transparent and corruption-free.”

Zelensky Not A Dependable Partner For US – Former Trump Adviser (RT)

Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky and his chief of staff Andrey Yermak are not “dependable” partners for the US, former Trump adviser Steve Cortes has said, pointing to transparency and corruption issues in Kiev. Cortes made the statement in a reply on X to Ukrainian journalist Diana Panchenko, who had stressed the importance of knowing “the difference between helping Ukraine and helping Zelensky.” She claimed that “Ukrainians want peace” while “Zelensky wants money and to stay in power.” “Exactly,” Cortes responded, stating that in order for the US-Ukraine partnership to work, Kiev “must become transparent and corruption-free.” “Yermak and Zelensky are not dependable, believable partners for the United States,” he said.

Cortes, who previously served as a senior adviser to President Donald Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance, has long been critical of the Ukrainian government’s internal practices. Earlier this month, he published a commentary warning of waning trust in Kiev’s leadership, singling out Yermak as a central figure in what he described as systemic corruption, calling him Ukraine’s “co-president” and accusing him of shielding officials under criminal investigation. Cortes argued that Yermak has become a nuisance in UK-Ukraine relations, noting bipartisan frustration with the aide. He specifically cited Yermak’s role in the dismissal of General Valeriy Zaluzhnyi, a popular and respected military leader, while officials like Deputy Prime Minister Aleksey Chernyshov—who has faced corruption allegations—remained in office. Chernyshov, however, was ultimately sacked earlier this week amid an ongoing cabinet reshuffle.

The former adviser’s remarks echo longstanding concerns expressed by Donald Trump, who has also described Zelensky as the “primary obstacle” to peace and has repeatedly criticized the scale of US support for Ukraine and the lack of accountability for the billions of dollars sent to Kiev. In March, Trump adviser David Sacks also called for a full audit of US aid to Ukraine, claiming there had been “tons of stories” about corruption and the misuse of American weapons. He said the only remaining question was “how much” had been stolen, calling Kiev’s leadership massively corrupt.

Read more …

“.. it’s a bit like being told to foot the bill for a meal someone else enjoys, only for them to end up dead afterward. Am I correct?”

EU Is Funding The ‘Death’ Of Ukraine – Zakharova (RT)

The European Union is funding the “death” of Ukraine by paying for weapons sent to Kiev, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has said. On Monday, US President Donald Trump unveiled a proposal to continue delivering American weapons to Ukraine at the expense of EU taxpayers. Kaja Kallas, the EU’s top diplomat, said that the proposal was welcome, but that Trump should not take credit for aid unless the US is willing to “share the burden.” “Was Kaja starting to figure things out?” Zakharova wrote on social media on Wednesday. “Let’s help her: it’s a bit like being told to foot the bill for a meal someone else enjoys, only for them to end up dead afterward. Am I correct?”

Moscow has consistently argued that no amount of Western military aid will make it change its core goals in the conflict. The Kremlin has described the EU’s approach as an attempt to prolong the war “to the last Ukrainian” and harm Russia, using Ukraine as a proxy. Trump has emphasized that arms sales to Ukraine are a business opportunity for the US. His administration maintains the proposal is naturally shifting responsibility for Ukraine’s future to the EU, which it says has the most to gain or lose.

”Europe wants to take the traditional defense of Europe. They should,” US Ambassador to NATO Matt Whitaker told Fox News. “The reality right now in Europe is they cannot manufacture the armaments required on the battlefield of Ukraine, or on the battlefield if there is a potential war in Europe.” Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said on Tuesday that the EU was placing “improper pressure” on Trump to adopt a more pro-Ukrainian stance. He warned that escalating sanctions on Moscow – something Trump also threatened – would ultimately harm EU member states more than Russia.

Read more …

“The dilemma is that the US weapons industry is too powerful for peace.”

The Conflict in Ukraine Is Widening out of Control (Paul Craig Roberts)

Since early 2022, more than three years ago, my theme has been that Russian President Putin’s unwillingness or inability to bring the conflict with Ukraine to a quick end will result in an ever-widening war culminating in a major conflagration far beyond Donbas and Ukraine. It was obvious to me, but not to Putin and to my critics, that by refusing to use sufficient force to end the conflict Putin was guaranteeing the increased participation of Washington and NATO in the conflict. Over the years of the conflict I have provided numerous updates on “The Ever-widening War.”

The war has widened into an attack on Russian strategic forces and recent talk of providing Ukraine with missiles to attack Moscow. According to news reports, Europe is preparing for war with Russia. The conflict has already gone far beyond Donbas. The point of a major conflagration cannot be far off. One Russian commentator says “World War III has already begun.” Putin, and as far as I can tell, few in Russia understand the Zionist neoconservatives doctrine of American hegemony. It seems that Putin has never heard of the three decades old Wolfowitz doctrine. Putin himself admits that he has only now understood the situation that confronts Russia. As John Helmer reports:

“Putin has just admitted this in a television interview on July 14. “I thought that the contradictions with the West were primarily ideological,” he said. “It seemed logical at the time – Cold War inertia, different views of the world, values, the organization of society. But even when the ideology disappeared, when the Soviet Union ceased to exist, the same, almost routine deviation from Russia’s interests continued. And it was not because of ideas [ideology], but because of the pursuit of advantages – geopolitical, economic, strategic. The world respects only those who can protect themselves. Until we show that we are an independent and sovereign power that stands behind our interests, there will be no room for anyone to treat us as equals.”

President Trump, stopped by the Ruling Establishment from his domestic agenda, has turned to foreign affairs where he can remain in the limelight by bullying other countries to conform to his edicts. He has now given Putin 50 days to comply. To comply with what? With Zelensky’s demands? What is the agreement for which Trump demands Putin’s consent? As the conflict is between Washington and Russia, the agreement has to be made by Trump and Putin. Putin has made it clear that the agreement must deal with “the root cause” of the conflict, which is the absence of a mutual security agreement. But if Washington is set on hegemony, there can be no mutual security agreement.

Here is the real situation: Two heavily nuclear armed governments are both in denial of reality. Putin and Lavrov are governed by their illusion that the difference between Russia and the West can be resolved through words. Washington is dangerous because the Zionist neoconservative doctrine of American hegemony is institutionalized. To avoid the brewing conflagration, all Washington and the EU need to do is to agree with Russia to a mutual security treaty. Russia only wants threats off its borders. Russia has no territorial ambitions unless Russia is driven to them by security threats. Trump wants America to make money. How does America make money when US aggression cuts the West off from the majority of the world? The only reason for BRICS is Washington’s hostility to Russia, China, and Iran. The dilemma is that the US weapons industry is too powerful for peace.

Read more …

“..sanctions would be imposed on Russia and its trade partners unless hostilities are halted within 50 days. No similar deadline was issued for Ukraine.”

Kremlin Urges Trump To Pressure Kiev (RT)

The Kremlin urges all nations to push Kiev to reach a negotiated settlement in the Ukraine conflict and hopes US President Donald Trump is privately doing so, spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Monday.Earlier in the week, Trump unveiled a proposal under which NATO member states supporting Kiev would purchase American-made weapons for Ukraine’s fight against Russia. He also warned that sanctions would be imposed on Russia and its trade partners unless hostilities are halted within 50 days. No similar deadline was issued for Ukraine. ”There were a lot of remarks about [Trump’s] disappointment [with Russian President Vladimir Putin], but we want to hope that in parallel to that, pressure is being applied to the Ukrainian side,” Peskov told journalists. “It appears that the Ukrainian side takes all statements of support as signals to continue war, not as signals for peace.”

In public comments, Trump has alternated between assigning blame to Moscow and Kiev for the lack of progress toward his desired outcome in the conflict. His latest statements have focused on criticizing Russia. In May, Ukraine agreed to resume direct negotiations with Russia after the Trump administration indicated it expected such a step. However, talks stalled after the early June meeting, with Kiev declaring the process “exhausted” and indicating it had only participated to avoid appearing dismissive of Trump’s diplomatic agenda. Moscow has said it remains committed to achieving its core objectives in Ukraine but prefers a diplomatic solution if possible.

Trump’s threats were welcomed by hardliners in the US and Europe. Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina issued a veiled threat of military action, writing on X that “if Putin and others are wondering what happens on day 51, I would suggest they call the Ayatollah.” Graham referenced Iran’s supreme leader, whose country was targeted last month by US and Israeli airstrikes. Officials claimed the attacks were necessary to dismantle Tehran’s nuclear infrastructure and prevent the development of a nuclear weapon, a goal that Iran denies pursuing.

Read more …

“..Kiev asked the US to station nuclear-capable Tomahawk cruise missiles in Ukraine..”

Great idea. Nazis with nukes.

Zelensky Urges Trump To Revisit Ukrainian Missile Proposal (RT)

Vladimir Zelensky has called on US President Donald Trump to reconsider Ukraine’s proposal to host long-range American missiles. The appeal comes in the wake of Trump’s pledge this week to provide advanced weapons systems to Kiev, with the caveat that the costs will be covered by other nations. In an interview with Newsmax on Tuesday, Zelensky appealed for even more military aid, referencing part of his “victory plan,” which he had previously presented to both President Joe Biden and Trump in the lead-up to the 2024 US presidential election. ”I remember that we had a powerful deterrence package before President Trump became president. I wanted America to sell us such a package. But it was not done,” Zelensky said.

Previous media reports have suggested that Trump may deliver additional long-range weaponry to Ukraine as part of his new initiatives. Some outlets claimed he had encouraged Zelensky to target Moscow and St. Petersburg, though the White House has refuted them. Publicly, the US president has advised against attacks on the Russian capital. Zelensky first presented his “victory plan” to the US in September 2024. According to leaked classified details of the proposal’s “deterrence package,” Kiev asked the US to station nuclear-capable Tomahawk cruise missiles in Ukraine. The Biden administration reportedly rejected the request outright. Ukrainian lobbying efforts during the 2024 US election cycle drew scrutiny, particularly following Zelensky’s visit to an arms manufacturing facility in the swing state of Pennsylvania.

He was accompanied by prominent Democrats during the trip, including Governor Josh Shapiro and Senator Bob Casey, prompting Republican officials to take aim, accusing him of implicitly supporting the rival party. Zelensky’s subsequent interactions with Trump were also marked by tensions. The planned signing of a minerals deal during his February visit to the White House – an offer of broad US access to Ukrainian natural resources that originally was part of the “victory plan” – erupted into a public dispute in the Oval Office. The agreement was ultimately signed in late April. Moscow has accused Zelensky of prolonging hostilities with Russia despite mounting Ukrainian casualties in a bid to preserve his power through martial law despite his presidential term officially ending last year.

Read more …

“And I also suspect that internally in the administration they are only now beginning to sort out what it means in practice.”

Trump Sprang Ukraine Surprise On NATO States – Reuters (RT)

Several NATO member states were not notified in advance that they would be asked to fund new arms deliveries to Ukraine under US President Donald Trump’s latest proposal, Reuters has reported, citing European officials. On Monday, Trump pledged to provide more US-made weapons to Kiev through a new scheme funded by European NATO members. “We’re not buying it,” Trump said during an Oval Office meeting with the bloc’s secretary-general, Mark Rutte. “We will manufacture it, and they’re going to be paying for it.” Trump noted that the plan is seen by Washington as a business opportunity. Rutte said six countries – Finland, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, the Netherlands, and Canada – were willing to take part in the arms procurement scheme.

However, high-ranking sources at the embassies of two of those countries told Reuters they only learned of their supposed participation when the announcement was made. “It is my clear sense that nobody has been briefed about the exact details in advance,” one European ambassador told Reuters. “And I also suspect that internally in the administration they are only now beginning to sort out what it means in practice.” Several countries have already distanced themselves from Trump’s plan. According to Politico and La Stampa, France and Italy will not be financially supporting the effort. Hungary and the Czech Republic have also declined to participate, with Czech Prime Minister Petr Fiala saying Prague is focusing on other projects.

EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas, on the other hand, has welcomed the proposal but emphasized that Washington should “share the burden,” stating that if European countries pay for the weapons, it should be considered as “European support.” Since taking office in January, Trump has renewed pressure on NATO members to increase defense spending and warned that the US may not defend allies who do not meet their obligations. Russia has repeatedly condemned Western arms supplies to Ukraine, arguing that it only prolongs the bloodshed and does not change the course of the conflict. The Kremlin maintains that foreign military aid is being used to escalate the hostilities rather than seek a diplomatic resolution.

Read more …

“..the Middle East, where the actions of the US and Israel are seen as manifestations of Western hegemony, while BRICS nations and their partners are increasingly positioning themselves as defenders of multipolarity, sovereignty, and a just international order.”

The Battle For The Middle East Is Going Global (Sadygzade)

Global events increasingly reflect the growing confrontation between the Western bloc, led by the United States and its allies, and the countries of the so-called “World Majority,” coalescing around BRICS. This geopolitical tension is particularly evident against the backdrop of escalating conflicts in the Middle East, where the actions of the US and Israel are seen as manifestations of Western hegemony, while BRICS nations and their partners are increasingly positioning themselves as defenders of multipolarity, sovereignty, and a just international order.

On July 7, US President Donald Trump hosted Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House. The two leaders discussed two major issues: the upcoming negotiations with Iran and the controversial initiative to relocate Palestinians from Gaza. These topics underscored Washington and West Jerusalem’s efforts to reshape the Middle East’s security architecture – framed under the banner of offering a “better future,” yet unfolding amid growing accusations of violations of international law.= During a working dinner, Netanyahu stated that Israel and the US had been consulting with several countries allegedly willing to accept Palestinians wishing to leave Gaza. He emphasized that the proposed relocation would be “voluntary,” offering a better future to those who seek it. According to him, agreements with a number of countries were already nearing completion.

Initially, Trump refrained from making a clear statement on the matter, but later remarked that “neighboring countries have been extremely cooperative,” expressing confidence that “something good will happen.” This ambiguity may reflect either an attempt to soften the political sensitivity of the issue or a reluctance to prematurely reveal the details of a plan that has drawn considerable criticism. Previously, Trump had proposed transforming Gaza into the “Riviera of the Middle East” and relocating its population – an idea harshly rejected both by the residents of the enclave and by international human rights organizations, which characterized it as a form of ethnic cleansing. Behind the scenes of the dinner, indirect negotiations between Israel and Hamas were ongoing, focused on securing a ceasefire and a hostage exchange.

The meeting marked the third in-person encounter between Trump and Netanyahu since the Republican leader’s return to the White House in January. Just two weeks earlier, the US had carried out strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities in support of Israeli military action. Days later, Trump helped broker a short-term ceasefire in the 12-day war between Israel and Iran – an achievement likely intended to bolster his own diplomatic credentials. During the meeting, Trump announced that his administration had scheduled formal talks with Iran. He said that Tehran had shown a willingness to negotiate following substantial military and economic pressure. US Special Envoy for the Middle East Steve Witkoff confirmed that the meeting was expected to take place “within the next week.”

Trump also indicated he was open to lifting sanctions on Iran under the right circumstances. Meanwhile, Iran’s newly elected president, Masoud Pezeshkian, expressed hope that tensions with the United States could be resolved through diplomacy. These statements suggested a potential, albeit limited, window for resetting US-Iranian relations, though both sides appeared driven primarily by tactical considerations. The political significance of the Trump-Netanyahu meeting was further underscored by protests outside the White House. Hundreds of demonstrators, waving Palestinian flags, demanded an end to US military support for Israel and called for Netanyahu’s arrest in light of the International Criminal Court’s warrant against him for alleged war crimes in Gaza.

Read more …

“..it is impossible not to be thankful for Trump. But Trump’s subservience to Israel is dispiriting and shameful..”

MTG Tries to Stop US Funding of Israeli Aggression (Paul Craig Roberts)

US Rep. Greene has introduced legislation to remove military aid for Israel from the US budget. Marjorie Greene has done several things that members of the US House and Senate are trained not to do. She acknowledged Israel’s possession of nuclear weapons. Members of the US government are not supposed to acknowledge Israel’s nuclear weapons, because the Symington Amendment forbids aid to governments that enrich weapons grade uranium and produce nuclear weapons outside of International Atomic Energy Agency controls. The Israeli controlled US government avoids the Symington law by refusing to acknowledge the fact that Israel has acquired, with Washington’s assistance, nuclear weapons totally outside the IAEA controls

US Rep. Greene also points out the incongruity of Israel armed with nuclear weapons needing American military aid. This is especially the case when American men and women were killed and wounded fighting Israel’s wars against Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Syria, Hezbollah the protector of Lebanon, and then were abandoned by Washington and are living on the streets. The US military is now being urged to die for Israel in Iran. Americans have been so successfully brainwashed by the Israel Lobby that they see no difference between the interest of America and Israel. This is Netanyahu’s constant message. Israel and America are the same country.

President Trump has done a good thing for Americans by closing the border to immigrant-invaders. The Biden regime used American tax dollars to pay for the inflow of millions of non-ethnic Americans across an undefended border to transform the country into a Tower of Babel. President Trump did another good thing in eliminating the intentional discrimination against white ethnic Americans by the Biden regime’s DEI policy which refused to promote white heterosexuals until there was a specified percentage of homosexuals, lesbians, pedophiles, transgendered, and peoples of color. This Democrat liberal/leftwing policy was called “Diversity, Equity, Inclusion,” but white people were not included. So, it is impossible not to be thankful for Trump. But Trump’s subservience to Israel is dispiriting and shameful.

Read more …

Yeah, threatening China is a real slick move if you’re located in the North Atlantic.

India, China, Brazil Facing ‘Consequences’ For Russia Trade Ties – Rutte (RT)

NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte has warned India, China and Brazil of “consequences” if they continue to do business with Russia. Rutte’s comment came after a meeting with US Senators on Tuesday, following President Donald Trump’s announcement on providing new military aid for Ukraine and a threat to impose 100% secondary tariffs on purchasers of Russian exports, unless a peace agreement is reached within 50 days. “My encouragement to these three countries, particularly is, if you live now in Beijing, or in Delhi, or you are the President of Brazil, you might want to take a look into this, because this might hit you very hard,” Rutte told reporters.

“So I urge you to make a phone call to Vladimir Putin and convey to him that he needs to get serious about peace talks, because if not, the consequences will have a massive impact on Brazil, India, and China,” he added. Since 2022, India and China have significantly increased their oil purchases from Russia. In May, New Delhi emerged as the second-largest buyer of Russian fossil fuels, with estimated purchases totaling $4.9 billion, of which crude constituted about 72% of the total value, according to the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air. The US and India are engaged in negotiations for a trade agreement and are racing to meet an August 1 deadline set by Trump, in order to avoid reciprocal tariffs.

Rutte’s warning echoes US Senator Lindsey Graham, who in June said that he was working on a sanctions bill that he called an “economic bunker buster,” aimed at the three countries. Indian diplomats and officials have spoken with the Republican senator who sponsored the bill, which has Trump’s backing. Since he began his second term in January, Trump has issued direct threats to BRICS and imposed new duties on countries perceived to be aligned with the bloc.

https://twitter.com/MyLordBebo/status/1945194167396892930

Read more …

Euroclear issues warnings, but at the same time it transfers money to Ukraine.

EU Plan To Move Frozen Russian Money Would Be ‘Expropriation’ – Euroclear (RT)

European Union plans to move frozen Russian sovereign assets into riskier investments would amount to expropriation, the Belgium-based settlement house Euroclear has warned.In an interview with the Financial Times published Wednesday, Euroclear Chief Executive Valerie Urbain said such a move could expose the EU’s financial system to both legal and systemic risks. Since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022, the US and EU have frozen more than $300 billion in Russian state assets. In May, the EU approved a plan to channel profits from those assets to support Ukraine, while some member states have pushed for outright confiscation.

Some $213 billion of the assets are held by Euroclear. The securities depository is currently reinvesting proceeds from Russia’s maturing assets – such as coupon payments and redemptions – primarily through central banks. The G7 is using those returns to support a $50 billion loan to Ukraine. However, as profits have declined following interest rate cuts by the European Central Bank, the European Commission is reportedly considering moving the funds into higher-yield investments to boost Kiev’s funding. Urbain has warned that seeking higher returns could lead to retaliation from Moscow and compromise Euroclear’s central role in the global financial system. “If you increase the revenues, you increase the risks.” Last year, Euroclear transferred €4 billion ($4.3 billion) to Ukraine, and so far this year it has paid €1.8 billion ($1.9 billion), according to Urbain.

She said the EU may try to raise those amounts by creating a “special purpose vehicle” to channel Russian assets into higher-risk investments that could bring “more revenues.” She cautioned that such a structure would involve “a lot of risks for Euroclear and for the European markets globally.” Legally, she said, the move would constitute “expropriation of the cash from Euroclear” without relieving the institution of its liability to the Russian central bank, “a position that we cannot bear.” Moscow has repeatedly warned that seizing its funds would violate international law. Legal and political concerns – particularly over sovereign immunity and property rights – have so far prevented the EU from endorsing full confiscation.

Read more …

The facts do seem obvious.

Adam Schiff Faces Federal Criminal Referral Over ‘Mortgage Fraud’ (Margolis)

President Donald Trump demanded on Tuesday that California Democrat Sen. Adam Schiff be “brought to justice” following allegations of mortgage fraud tied to his Maryland property. The statement came after a federal housing agency reportedly referred the matter to the Justice Department for a criminal investigation into Schiff’s real estate dealings. “I have always suspected Shifty Adam Schiff was a scam artist,” he wrote. “And now I learn that Fannie Mae’s Financial Crimes Division have concluded that Adam Schiff has engaged in a sustained pattern of possible Mortgage Fraud.” “I always knew Adam Schiff was a Crook,” Trump continued. “Mortgage Fraud is very serious, and CROOKED Adam Schiff (now a Senator) needs to be brought to justice.” Schiff, of course, denies the allegations.

These aren’t wild allegations plucked from thin air; the evidence is pretty clear. According to records, Schiff claimed his main residence was a spacious 3,420 square foot home in Maryland, a move that conveniently secured him better mortgage rates — rates designed for people who actually reside in those homes as their principal dwelling. Simultaneously, he grabbed a homeowner’s exemption on a much smaller 650 square foot condo in Burbank, Calif., handing himself a tidy cut of about $7,000 off his tax bill by also insisting that the property was his “primary residence.” Two homes, both allegedly his principal residence, in two different states, reaping benefits from both ends. Is that some kind of bureaucratic miracle? Or a calculated abuse of the system he’s sworn to oversee?

Schiff’s own paperwork — mortgage forms, exemption claims, and that curious personal check he used to pay California property taxes (listing his Maryland address, no less) — tells a story of someone playing the system with both hands. Adding insult to injury, Schiff only made that personal check payment once, in 2017. The evidence is serious enough that a senior administration official confirmed to The New York Post that the Federal Housing Finance Agency, responsible for overseeing Fannie Mae, has submitted a criminal referral to the Justice Department, calling for a full investigation.

“It is extremely serious and [Schiff] is not taking it seriously,” the official told the Post. The source added that Schiff had a criminal count for each time he paid his monthly mortgage. The Federal Housing Finance Agency, under the leadership of Bill Pulte, has remained tight-lipped, declining to comment on the referral involving Schiff. But it was Pulte who, just a few months ago, referred another high-profile Trump adversary, New York Attorney General Letitia James, to the Justice Department over alleged mortgage fraud tied to properties in Brooklyn and Virginia.

Read more …

Whatever Macron says. What kind of court is that?

EU General Court Orders Le Pen Family To Give EU €300k (RT)

The EU General Court in Luxembourg has ordered Marine Le Pen and her two sisters to repay more than €300,000 (over $350,000) to the EU. The funds were “considered to have been wrongly received” by their father, the late opposition leader Jean-Marie Le Pen, during his time as a member of the European Parliament, the court said in a statement on Wednesday. The legislative body claimed in 2024 that Le Pen “had improperly invoiced personal expenses” and demanded repayment. The latter, however, sought to appeal. Following Le Pen’s death in January, his daughters pursued the proceedings as his legal heirs.

Jean-Marie Le Pen was founder of the right-wing National Front and a longtime critic of EU integration. He served as an MEP from 1984 to 2019. His outspoken positions on national sovereignty and immigration challenged the French political establishment for decades. What were once dismissed as fringe positions have since become major issues in European politics. The ruling comes just months after his daughter, Marine Le Pen, former leader of the right-wing National Rally (RN) and three-time presidential candidate, was convicted of embezzling EU funds. Although she denied any wrongdoing, she received a prison sentence, was fined €100,000 ($116,000), and barred from holding public office for five years, a decision widely seen as eliminating a leading contender from the 2027 presidential race.

Le Pen has appealed the conviction. A verdict is expected in the summer of 2026 and will prove decisive in her bid for the presidency. The previous election in 2022 resulted in a run-off between Le Pen, who won over 42% of votes, and Emmanuel Macron, who secured 58%. Le Pen’s conviction triggered a wave of protests, with her supporters condemning the ruling as politically motivated and aimed at silencing dissent. US President Donald Trump accused the French political establishment of employing lawfare against the right-wing figure, urging Paris to “free” her.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/mickitiki/status/1945216878474912079

Oil

Damascus
https://twitter.com/DD_Geopolitics/status/1945464255148638586

No idea

Honda Rube

Don’t miss

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Jul 022025
 


Pablo Picasso Woman with blue collar (Portrait d’Inez) 1941

 

Senate Passes the ‘One Big, Beautiful Bill’-With 3 GOP Defections (Margolis)
Trump Says DOGE Should Investigate Musk (RT)
Trump Vs. Musk: “Big, Beautiful Bill” Feud Sparks Overnight Firestorm (ZH)
Media Forced To Admit Trump’s Tariffs Are Working As Revenues Spike (ZH)
Pentagon Halts Weapons Supplies To Kiev Over Depleting Stockpiles (RT)
‘Catastrophic’ Budget Increase Will Destroy NATO – Lavrov (RT)
Putin and Macron Talk For First Time In Three Years – Kremlin (RT)
Italy Could Classify $13.5 Billion Bridge As NATO Spending – Poltico (RT)
1 in 5 Illegal Migrants Now Simply Flying Into Germany (RMX)
Poland Reintroduces Immigration Controls (RT)
President Trump’s Plan for the Middle East (Paul Craig Roberts)
Trump Says Israel Agrees To 60-Day Gaza Ceasefire, Urges Hamas To Accept (ZH)
Syria Could Drop Demand That Israel Return The Golan Heights (RT)
AI Is The Only Thing Keeping The World From Total Stagnation – Peter Thiel (Flor)
Kennedy Labels US Democrats ‘War Party’ (RT)
RFK Jr. Unloads Disturbing Vaccine Secrets On Tucker (VF)

 

 

https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1940120314744070596

Miller census
https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/1939702115515191304

RFK

j6

https://twitter.com/TheGabriel72/status/1939831962224529910

Candace

Fraud

 

 

Ritter’s Rant 017: The Blame Game

 

 

 

 

“We’re just extending current tax policy,” he said. “We are preventing a $4 trillion tax increase on the American people. When you vote against this, that’s who you’d be voting for.”

Senate Passes the ‘One Big, Beautiful Bill’-With 3 GOP Defections (Margolis)

After days of gridlock and backroom wrangling, the Senate today passed the “One Big, Beautiful Bill,’ the legislative linchpin of President Trump’s second-term agenda. The tally was 51 yeas and 50 nays, with Vice President JD Vance casting the tiebreaking vote. The Senate was locked in a “vote-a-rama”—a procedural endurance test where senators burn the midnight oil, lobbing amendment after amendment in a desperate bid to tweak, torpedo, or salvage the bill. With a razor-thin majority, Republicans could not afford more than three defections, which is why Vice President JD Vance was summoned to the Capitol to cast the tie-breaking vote. Vance has already played this role before, and it’s clear the White House was counting on him to drag this bill across the finish line.

The real drama, however, wasn’t coming from Democrats—they were united in opposition, as always—but from within the GOP ranks. Senators like Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins became the focal points of intense lobbying, their votes courted with a mix of sweeteners and veiled threats. In the end, Murkowski voted for the bill; Collins voted against it, along with Sens. Thom Tillis and Rand Paul. Naturally, Democrats were panicking, posting apocalyptic predictions on social media. On Monday, Senate Majority Leader John Thune blasted Democrats for what he called a “mind-blowing” display of hypocrisy over the national debt, accusing them of pretending to care about fiscal responsibility now that Republicans are in charge.

“It is rich to hear Democrats all of a sudden concerned about debt and deficits,” Thune said on the Senate floor, as lawmakers debated President Trump’s “One Big, Beautiful Bill.” “Really? I mean, I’ve been here a long time, and I’ve not been involved in a single spending debate in which Republicans [weren’t] trying to spend less and Democrats [weren’t] trying to spend more—except when it comes to national security. Democrats are always willing to cut defense, but never want to cut anywhere else.” Thune reminded the chamber that Democrats had full control of Congress and the White House just a few years ago and used reconciliation not to cut deficits, but to push through massive spending packages.

“One of the bills cost $2 trillion. The other cost $1 trillion. And it was all spending,” he said. “That’s the fundamental difference between us. Democrats like government—and when you send money to Washington, money is power.” Thune contrasted that with the GOP’s effort to stop a looming tax hike. “We’re just extending current tax policy,” he said. “We are preventing a $4 trillion tax increase on the American people. When you vote against this, that’s who you’d be voting for.” The bill now heads to the House.

Massie

Read more …

Has he offered to repay the $400 million Musk paid into his campaign?

Trump Says DOGE Should Investigate Musk (RT)

US President Donald Trump has suggested that Elon Musk should be investigated by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which the tech billionaire formerly headed, for allegedly benefiting excessively from government subsidies. Musk, a former ally of Trump, stepped down as the head of DOGE last month amid disagreements with the president over his so-called “big, beautiful” budget bill, which includes a $5 trillion debt ceiling increase. The Tesla and SpaceX CEO has repeatedly criticized the legislation, saying it undermined his work with DOGE to cut federal spending. The tech billionaire attacked the bill and its supporters again on Tuesday as the US Senate began voting on the amendments to Trump’s 940-page proposal.

“Every member of Congress who campaigned on reducing government spending and then immediately voted for the biggest debt increase in history should hang their head in shame,” Musk wrote on X. “And they will lose their primary next year if it is the last thing I do on this Earth,” he warned. The entrepreneur also reiterated his call for a new “America Party” to be formed to serve as “an alternative to the Democrat-Republican uniparty so that the people actually have a VOICE.” Trump, who claims that the actual reason for Musk’s anger was not the “big, beautiful bill,” but his plans to roll back the government’s electric vehicle (EV) subsidies, fired back at the Tesla and SpaceX CEO shortly afterwards in a post on his Truth Social platform.

“Elon may get more subsidy than any human being in history, by far, and without subsidies, Elon would probably have to close up shop and head back home to South Africa,” he wrote. Without the assistance from the government to Musk’s companies, there would be “no more Rocket launches, Satellites, or Electric Car Production, and our Country would save a FORTUNE. Perhaps we should have DOGE take a good, hard, look at this? BIG MONEY TO BE SAVED!!!” Trump insisted. “Elon Musk knew, long before he so strongly Endorsed me for President, that I was strongly against the EV Mandate. It is ridiculous, and was always a major part of my campaign. Electric cars are fine, but not everyone should be forced to own one,” Trump added.

Read more …

“As for Trump’s threat about “no more rocket launches, satellites” — referring to Musk’s company SpaceX — good luck following through on that. SpaceX is the reason the U.S. is leading the global space race..”

Trump Vs. Musk: “Big, Beautiful Bill” Feud Sparks Overnight Firestorm (ZH)

Update (0800 ET):President Trump on Elon Musk this morning:
TRUMP: MUSK IS UPSET HE LOST THE EV MANDATE BUT ‘HE COULD LOSE A LOT MORE THAN THAT’
TRUMP, ASKED ABOUT DEPORTING MUSK, SAYS HAVE TO TAKE A LOOK

* * *
Tesla shares slid in premarket trading in New York following a late-night clash between CEO Elon Musk and President Donald Trump. The feud played out across their respective social media platforms. “Elon Musk knew, long before he so strongly Endorsed me for president, that I was strongly against the EV Mandate. It is ridiculous, and was always a major part of my campaign. Electric cars are fine, but not everyone should be forced to own one. Elon may get more subsidy than any human being in history, by far, and without subsidies, Elon would probably have to close up shop and head back home to South Africa,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

The president continued, “No more Rocket launches, Satellites, or Electric Car Production, and our Country would save a FORTUNE. Perhaps we should have DOGE take a good, hard, look at this? BIG MONEY TO BE SAVED!!!” The Truth Social post came after Musk slammed Trump’s “Big, Beautiful Bill” on X ahead of the final vote, vowing to launch a new political party, claiming that Republicans and Democrats are merely a ‘uniparty’ operating with a limitless taxpayer-funded credit card.

Tesla has long benefited from the $7,500 EV tax credit, which the BBB plan aims to eliminate. While this move has been widely anticipated, it could ultimately work in Tesla’s favor, hitting rivals like Rivian, Lucid, and legacy automakers far harder, as many still rely heavily on such subsidies to stay afloat. Tesla shares are down 4% in premarket trading, currently hovering around $303 per share. On the year, shares are down 21%, as of Monday’s close. As for Trump’s threat about “no more rocket launches, satellites” — referring to Musk’s company SpaceX — good luck following through on that. SpaceX is the reason the U.S. is leading the global space race.

Read more …

“If they buy more from US sources or countries not on the list, then their costs will remain low. If they don’t, then they must shift the costs in other ways.”

Media Forced To Admit Trump’s Tariffs Are Working As Revenues Spike (ZH)

The debate is raging this week over increased government spending and the potential raising of the debt ceiling by $5 trillion, with many fiscal conservatives splitting with the GOP and the Trump Administration over what they feel is a betrayal of their campaign promises to reduce government waste. Trump argues that all the elements included in his “big beautiful bill” are necessary in order to revitalize the US economy and break from the interdependency of the current globalist model. Can the dollar continue to absorb the pressure of ever increasing debt obligations? Is there a way to cut the debt without cutting spending? At least one aspect of Trump’s fiscal plan is showing success in this area despite the warnings of critics; the establishment media has been forced to admit that the administration’s tariff efforts are actually working.

The US has collected over $121 billion in revenues from tariffs on imported goods, and despite claims that tariffs are a “tax on the consumer”, prices on the shelf have not risen so far. Opponents of the policy are struggling to explain the data. Some still argue that disaster is right around the corner while others are acknowledging that there is a potential to pay off US debt over time if the import duties remain in place for the long term. Misconceptions about tariffs lead the public to believe that they are a tax on foreign producers or governments, but tariffs are in fact taxes on companies sourcing products internationally from nations on the duties list. The taxes place the responsibility of adaptation on corporations – If they buy more from US sources or countries not on the list, then their costs will remain low. If they don’t, then they must shift the costs in other ways.

Raising prices is the last thing any company not producing necessities wants to do. Consumers can easily cut back on peripheral goods. In other words, the assertion that tariffs are a hidden tax on the public is rooted in a lack of understanding on import duties and how they affect markets. Consumers will buy from producers that keep prices down by adapting to the tariffs, and there are many ways to adapt. It’s that simple. Democrats and some conservatives argued that prices would rise exponentially as international corporations immediately deferred costs on consumers in order to offset the added expenses on imported raw materials and manufactured goods. They were wrong.

The personal consumption expenditures price index, the Federal Reserve’s preferred inflation gauge, rose 2.3% in May, modestly above the central bank’s 2% annual target. The May Consumer Price Index rose at an annual rate of 2.4%, cooler than economists expected. Some blame the “front loading” of imports (increased orders of goods before the tariffs went into effect). However, front loading was estimated to act as a stop-gap for only two months (possibly three by some predictions). Tariffs were initiated in February and though there have been fluctuations it’s been five months waiting for the tariff asteroid to explode American wallets and nothing has happened.

Will companies eventually shift the tariff burden on American consumers over the next year? A better question would be can they shift the burden in a weaker retail market? Would they take the risk of plunging sales? Or will they do what they should have been doing all along: Buy a larger percentage of their goods from US producers and bring manufacturing back home? At the current rate, tariffs could generate around $300 billion by the end of this year and $1.2 trillion over the next four years. It’s not enough to offset increased debt spending, but it does offer an alternative to hiking taxes on the general public (which is what Democrats would do). And if inflation concerns continue to prove over-hyped, then the tariff model could remain in place for many years to come.

Read more …

All they needed was a credible excuse.

Pentagon Halts Weapons Supplies To Kiev Over Depleting Stockpiles (RT)

The Pentagon has suspended shipments of several categories of US-made weapons to Ukraine, according to Politico and NBC News. The decision reportedly followed an internal review of American weapons reserves ordered by US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, amid rising concerns about the rate at which munitions are being depleted. The move reportedly affects dozens of Patriot missile interceptors, Stinger and AIM air-to-air missiles, hundreds of Hellfire and GMLRS systems, as well as thousands of 155mm artillery shells that Washington had previously pledged to Kiev. Some of the weapons were already positioned in Europe have now been withheld before handover to Ukrainian forces, NBC reported. The weapons in question had been funded under the Biden administration through two mechanisms: direct drawdowns from existing US military stockpiles and the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative (USAI), which contracts new production from defense contractors.

The Trump administration has not requested any additional Ukraine aid, and existing resources are expected to last only “several more months,” according to Politico. White House Deputy Press Secretary Anna Kelly defended the move as a necessary step to prioritize American defense needs. “This decision was made to put America’s interests first following a DOD review of our nation’s military support and assistance to other countries across the globe. The strength of the United States Armed Forces remains unquestioned – just ask Iran,” she said, without confirming any details. The decision to freeze or slow-walk the remaining aid without formal notice to Congress may raise legal concerns similar to the 2019 withholding of some Ukraine assistance under Trump’s first administration –a move the Government Accountability Office ruled unlawful at the time, Politico noted.

Kiev has repeatedly voiced frustration over what it sees as dwindling support from Washington. Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky met with President Donald Trump at the NATO summit in The Hague last week but received no firm promises. Trump said Patriots were “very hard to get” and that the US needed them for its own defense and for Israel. Trump has stated he intends to negotiate a ceasefire with Moscow and bring the conflict to an end. Hegseth said last month that the White House is reducing military funding for Kiev as part of its “America First” strategy and in hopes of achieving a diplomatic settlement.

Earlier this year, the Trump administration signed a deal giving the US priority access to Ukraine’s mineral wealth –a step the White House said would allow America to “get back” some of the hundreds of billions spent under Biden. The Pentagon’s policy shift appears to reflect a broader realignment under Trump, who has publicly questioned the rationale behind endless aid to Ukraine. Russian presidential envoy and head of the Direct Investment Fund, Kirill Dmitriev, noted that the move “highlights the real limits of Western capacity and the shifting priorities of the US military.”

Read more …

“Perhaps he foresees – being such a prophet – that this catastrophic, in my view, increase in NATO countries’ budgets will also lead to the organization’s collapse.”

‘Catastrophic’ Budget Increase Will Destroy NATO – Lavrov (RT)

The results of NATO countries hiking military budgets will be “catastrophic” and lead to the bloc’s collapse, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said on Monday. His remarks mirrored Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski’s earlier suggestion that a boost in Moscow’s defense spending could trigger the fall of the government. At NATO’s most recent summit last month in the Hague, member states committed to spending 5% of GDP on the military – a significant rise from the previous 2% target. Poland backed the hike, arguing that failing to achieve the new benchmark “as soon as possible” would pose a ‘‘threat’‘ to the bloc considering the ongoing Ukraine conflict.

In an interview with Polish media, Sikorski drew a parallel between modern Russia and the late USSR. Referring to President Vladimir Putin, he stated that “he himself once said that the Soviet Union fell because it spent too much on armament, and now he is doing exactly the same thing.” Meanwhile, speaking to the press at the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) Foreign Ministers Council in Kyrgyzstan, Sergey Lavrov took issue with Sikorski’s characterization, countering: “Perhaps he foresees – being such a prophet – that this catastrophic, in my view, increase in NATO countries’ budgets will also lead to the organization’s collapse.”

Lavrov also said that Russia “plans to reduce its military spending,” which now accounts for 6.3% of GDP, and “be guided by common sense, but not made-up threats like NATO member states, including Sikorsky.” The 5% GDP target faced opposition from some NATO members. Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico said his country could not allocate one-fifth of its state budget to defense, while Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez called the goal “not only unreasonable but also counterproductive.”

Read more …

Makes the ‘war on Russia’ narrative much harder to maintain.

Putin and Macron Talk For First Time In Three Years – Kremlin (RT)

Russian President Vladimir Putin has spoken with his French counterpart Emmanuel Macron by telephone, the Kremlin press service said on Tuesday. It is the first phone contact between the leaders since September 2022. The conversation revolved around the situation in the Middle East, as well as the Ukraine conflict. During the call, Putin told Macron that the Ukraine conflict was “a direct consequence of the policies pursued by Western states, which for many years ignored Russia’s security interests,” and had established an “anti-Russian bridgehead” in the country, the press service stated. The Russian leader reiterated Moscow’s approach to any settlement, stating that it must “be comprehensive and long-term, address the root causes of the Ukrainian crisis and be based on new territorial realities.”

Putin and Macron also discussed the situation in the Middle East, namely the recent escalation between Israel and Iran. The two leaders agreed that diplomacy was the way forward, the Kremlin press service noted, adding that they agreed to maintain contact for the sake of “possible coordination of the positions.” Both countries share a “special responsibility” to maintain “peace and security,” as well as to preserve the “global nuclear non-proliferation regime,” the two men agreed, according to Moscow. “In this regard, the importance of respecting Tehran’s legitimate right to develop peaceful nuclear energy and continuing to fulfill its obligations under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, including cooperation with the IAEA, was emphasized,” the Kremlin press service said.

France has long asserted itself as one of Kiev’s key backers in the conflict with Moscow. Paris has committed more than €3.7 billion ($4.1 billion) in military assistance to Ukraine since the escalation of the conflict in February 2022, according to the Kiel Institute’s aid tracker. Macron has also repeatedly floated the idea of deploying French soldiers to Ukraine. While the deployment never materialized, Paris repeatedly signaled that troops could be sent after the end of hostilities to act as a deterrent against Russia. Moscow has firmly opposed Western forces in Ukraine in any role, warning the it could trigger an all-out war between Russia and NATO.

In recent months, however, Macron has softened his stance, admitting back in May that the French have done “the maximum we could” to help and could no longer supply Ukraine with weapons. Last week, the French president said that NATO’s European members have no wish to “endlessly” arm themselves and should “think about” restoring dialogue with Russia “right now” in order to negotiate broader European security as part of a potential Ukraine peace deal.

Read more …

“..the new designation of the project would make raising money for it easier and would also “override bureaucratic obstacles..”

Italy Could Classify $13.5 Billion Bridge As NATO Spending – Poltico (RT)

Italian authorities are looking to classify a long-term project to construct a bridge connecting the mainland to the island of Sicily as a NATO expenditure amid their struggle to meet the bloc’s spending goals, according to Politico. The idea of creating an overpass to the largest island in the Mediterranean had been discussed in Italy for many decades, but its realization has been hampered by high costs, the difficulty of operating in a seismic zone and other issues. If built by the current government of Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, the 3.6-km-long suspension bridge across the Strait of Messina will become the longest in the world. In its article on Monday, Politico described Italy as “one of NATO’s lowest military spenders,” with Rome investing only 1.49% of its GDP in defense last year, a far cry from the 5% goal approved at the bloc’s summit in The Hague in June.

Marking the $13.5 billion bridge as a NATO spending could help Meloni meet the bloc’s 5% target and, at the same time, “convince a war-wary public of the need for major defense outlays at a time when Italy is already inching toward austerity,” the article read. An unnamed Italian government official told the outlet that no formal decision has yet been made by Rome on classifying the bridge as a security project, but further talks would likely be held soon to “see how feasible this feels.” According to another official from the Italian Treasury, who also talked to Politico, the new designation of the project would make raising money for it easier and would also “override bureaucratic obstacles, litigation with local authorities that could challenge the government in court claiming that the bridge will disproportionately damage their land.”

The problem for Rome is that the Strait of Messina lies outside of Italy’s only designated NATO military mobility corridor, the article pointed out. However, the Italian case is backed by the fact that only 3.5% from the NATO spending target must be allocated for core military needs, while the remaining 1.5% could be steered toward broader strategic resilience projects, including infrastructure. “Whether NATO — and more importantly, US President Donald Trump, who loves a big building project — will buy into that logic is another matter,” Politico noted.

Read more …

They do it on purpose?

1 in 5 Illegal Migrants Now Simply Flying Into Germany (RMX)

In the past 12 months, the German Federal Police have identified 12,858 illegal migrants who entered Germany by air, a significant number that is on the rise. Now, migrants are increasingly choosing simply to fly into Germany instead of dealing with the long ordeal of crossing multiple borders in dangerous conditions. This increase in migrants flying into Germany jumped after Germany tightened border controls.In May of this year alone, at least 977 illegal entries were recorded using air travel to enter Germany, accounting for over 20 percent of all identified illegal border crossings.However, the true number of such crossings is likely much higher, as foreign nationals traveling within the Schengen area are not required to show identification. As a result, they are often only discovered long after they have left the airport, making it impossible to turn them back.

“It would be consistent to also notify the Schengen air borders,” said Heiko Teggatz, a board member of the German Police Union (DPolG).“If the smugglers aren’t completely stupid, they’ll simply bring their people from other Schengen states to Germany by plane. Today, you can easily book a plane ticket within the Schengen area, and you generally don’t have to show your ID anywhere.”All of this information came from a government response from Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt (CSU) after Alternative for Germany (AfD) MP Gottfried Curio, the party’s domestic policy spokesperson, launched an inquiry.Dobrindt was forced to acknowledge that the tightened controls “refer exclusively to the land borders,” meaning no illegal migrants were turned back at airports.

This trend of illegal entry by plane has intensified since the new federal government instructed officials to begin rejecting asylum seekers at internal borders. Teggatz confirmed this “increase in secondary migration via airports,” noting that “Medium-sized commercial airports like Hanover are particularly affected.” Despite hundreds of officers being deployed at German airports, checks are almost exclusively conducted on flights from outside the Schengen area. That means if a migrant makes it to Greece and manages to get on a plane to Germany, there is little chance he will be checked.= Dobrindt, like his predecessor, Nancy Faeser (SPD), has reported rejections of migrants coming into Germany, but only from land borders. It remains unclear why airports were not included in tightened border measures.

Read more …

People don’t go to Poland to stay there; they’re on their way to Germany.

Poland Reintroduces Immigration Controls (RT)

Poland has decided to temporarily reintroduce border controls along its frontiers with Germany and Lithuania to stop the flow of illegal migrants. All three nations are part of the Schengen Area, which allows free travel across most of the bloc. The EU has been grappling with a refugee crisis since at least 2015, largely caused by upheavals in the Middle East and Africa, and later by the Ukraine conflict. Warsaw has previously accused German police of “dumping” thousands of migrants back across the Polish border. Some activists have organized self-styled ‘citizen border patrols’ along the German frontier. “We remain advocates for freedom of movement in Europe, but only on condition that there is the shared will of all neighbors… to minimize the uncontrolled flow of migrants across our borders,” Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said during a cabinet meeting on Tuesday.

He stated that temporary border controls would similarly be implemented on Poland’s border with Lithuania.In 2023, neighboring Germany, the EU’s top destination for asylum seekers, introduced temporary controls on its borders with Poland and the Czech Republic to stem the flow. Most of the people entering Poland travel on to western Europe, where benefits for asylum seekers are more generous. Berlin has since repeatedly renewed the controls. Under the Schengen agreement, participant nations are allowed to temporarily reintroduce border controls in emergency situations, with the Covid-19 outbreak having been one recent instance. Tighter national migration and border control policies could lead to the destruction of the EU, former German Chancellor Angela Merkel warned in May.

Commenting on the restoration of control on the Polish-Lithuanian border, Tusk accused the Baltic state, as well as neighboring Latvia, of having lax border controls. The lapses have supposedly allowed illegal migrants to cross over from non-EU Belarus, and subsequently to enter Poland. Since 2021, Warsaw has accused Minsk and Moscow of deliberately orchestrating the flow of illegal migrants into EU states. Russia and Belarus have denied the allegations.

Read more …

“If Netanyahu has any sense, he will let Trump rescue the Israeli people.”

President Trump’s Plan for the Middle East (Paul Craig Roberts)

In discussion yesterday with Nima on Dialogue Works about the Israeli-Iranian-Trump-Netanyahu ongoings, I suggested a bold and innovative plan for the Middle East that Trump should present to the world in a speech to the UN General Assembly. I even offered to write the speech. https://www.youtube.com/live/L-8j_NSxC14 I formed the plan from mulling over insights into Trump’s attitude toward the Middle East from Gilbert Doctorow, Michel Chossudovsky, and from Trump’s news conference with Netanyahu when Trump stated Washington’s claim to Gaza as an American possession. Doctorow pointed out that it was irrelevant whether Trump had destroyed the three underground Iranian nuclear sites. What mattered is that Trump’s assertion, true or false, had destroyed Netanyahu’s excuse for war with Iran. Is Netanyahu going to risk Washington’s protection by contradicting President Trump?

Chossudovsky pointed out that in the press conference at which Trump stated Washington’s claim to Gaza, Trump expressed the idea of a Gaza resort as the anchor for an American Middle East colony in place of Greater Israel. In front of Netanyahu Trump unveiled a vision of a Middle East made rich by American management. It would be a different kind of colonial management from the British/French approach that extracted assets and sent them home to Britain and France. Trump envisioned a partnership in which the “colonies” would be shareholders sharing in the profits from economic development. This would be good for Israel as well. When a presstitute asked Netanyahu his opinion, Netanyahu did not disavow it.

I was surprised that Trump’s claim to Gaza and its reconstruction and his idea of a reconstruction of the Middle Eastern countries that previous US regimes had destroyed for Israel did not get a big news play. But Chossudovsky saw it, and he helped me to see it. Ask yourselves, Is there any better solution to the Israeli-Muslim problem in the Middle East? Israel is smaller in area than New Jersey. Iran is 2.5 times larger than Texas. Israel has fewer than 10 million people. Iran has more than 90 million people. Iran can produce modern missiles in greater quantities than Israel can be supplied from the US. In a recent news conference in a demonstration of Israeli insanity, Netanyahu added the territory of Pakistan to Greater Israel. Pakistan has nuclear weapons and a population of 250 million.

Israel has zero chance of winning a war with Iran and the same for Pakistan. Israel knows this but is confident that the power that the Israel Lobby can exert over dumbshit American’s lives and money guarantees that Americans will fight more wars for Israel. The Israeli-subsidized Christian Zionists–a contradiction of terms–are all for it. Amazing, isn’t it, Israel has even corrupted Christian evangelicals, paying their preachers to send Americans to war for Israel. What might be reducing Israel’s control over America is the weakened position of Netanyahu, under two Israeli court indictments for crimes, and by the destruction inflicted on Israel by its irresponsible attack on Iran, culminating in Netanyahu’s plea to Trump to stop the war before Israel had to sue for peace.

This leaves Trump with the upper hand. Israel now understands that it cannot exist without Washington’s protection. Thus Trump can force Netanyahu to give up the unrealistic Zionist goal of Greater Israel and comply with Trump’s vision of a colony under America’s redevelopment of the Middle East. If Trump would take this plan to the UN, it would silence Israel and the American neoconservative zionists and save us from war that could turn nuclear. If Trump establishes peace and cooperation in the Middle East, he can do the same with the West and Russia. Russia was the ally of Britain and France in both WW I and WW II. It is not difficult to come to terms with a former ally. There is no ideological reason and no territorial reason for conflict between the West and Russia.

Think about America’s waste of resources and prestige during the first quarter of the 21st century. Trillions of dollars spend destroying Iraq, Libya, Syria, and Somalia with zero gain. No one except military/security war profits got anything from these wars. There was no terrorist threat. Washington brought no one democracy, only destruction. Think about the destruction Washington brought to entire countries for no purpose than Israel’s absurd idea of a Greater Israel. The millions of dead, permanently maimed, and dislocated people, many of whom have located in Europe and the US burdening those taxpayers with their upkeep. WHO BENEFITTED??

Let’s give Trump a chance. An American partnership in the Middle East is far better than the conflicts inherent in Greater Israel. If Israel refuses to go along, Trump should just run over them. Israel is of no consequence in the world. Israel since its existence has never been anything except a cause of conflict, death, and destruction. Why a people like this has been tolerated, I do not know. Can Sunni and Shia be brought together and Muslims brought together with Jews? Seems fantastic. But perhaps they will see it as preferable to the continuation of endless bloodshed. If Netanyahu has any sense, he will let Trump rescue the Israeli people.

Read more …

Too many dead Gazans for a real ceasefire.

Trump Says Israel Agrees To 60-Day Gaza Ceasefire, Urges Hamas To Accept (ZH)

President Trump said Tuesday that Israel has agreed on terms for a 60-day ceasefire in Gaza and warned Hamas to accept the deal before conditions worsen. Trump announced the development as he prepares to host Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for talks at the White House on Monday. The US leader has been increasing pressure on the Israeli government and Hamas to broker a ceasefire and hostage agreement and bring about an end to the war in Gaza. “My Representatives had a long and productive meeting with the Israelis today on Gaza. Israel has agreed to the necessary conditions to finalize the 60 Day CEASEFIRE, during which time we will work with all parties to end the War,” Trump wrote, saying the Qataris and Egyptians would deliver the final proposal.

“I hope, for the good of the Middle East, that Hamas takes this Deal, because it will not get better – IT WILL ONLY GET WORSE,” he said. Trump’s promise that it was his best and final offer may find a sceptical audience with Hamas. Even before the expiration of the war’s longest ceasefire in March, Trump has repeatedly issued dramatic ultimatums to pressure Hamas to agree to longer pauses in the fighting that would see the release of more hostages and a return of more aid to Gaza’s civilian populace. Israeli Minister for Strategic Affairs Ron Dermer was in Washington on Tuesday for talks with senior administration officials to discuss a potential Gaza ceasefire, Iran and other matters. Dermer was expected to meet with US Vice-President J.D. Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and special envoy Steve Witkoff.

Earlier on Tuesday, Trump repeated his hope for forging an Israel-Hamas ceasefire deal next week. Asked if it was time to put pressure on Netanyahu to get a ceasefire deal done, Trump said the Israeli prime minister was ready to come to an agreement. “He wants to,” Trump said of Netanyahu in an exchange with reporters while visiting a new immigration detention facility in Florida. “I think we’ll have a deal next week.” Talks between Israel and Hamas have repeatedly faltered over a major sticking point – whether the war should end as part of any ceasefire agreement. About 50 hostages remain captive in Gaza, with less than half believed to be alive.

The development came as over 150 international charities and humanitarian groups called on Tuesday for disbanding a controversial Israeli- and US-backed system to distribute aid in Gaza because of chaos and deadly violence against Palestinians seeking food at its sites. The joint statement by groups including Oxfam, Save the Children and Amnesty International followed the killings of at least 10 Palestinians who were seeking desperately needed food, witnesses and health officials said. Meanwhile, Israeli air strikes killed at least 37 in southern Gaza’s Khan Younis, according to Nasser Hospital. “Tents, tents they are hitting with two missiles?” asked Um Seif Abu Leda, whose son was killed in the strikes. Mourners threw flowers on the body bags.

Read more …

“On Monday, President Donald Trump lifted most US sanctions on Syria in order to facilitate the flow of foreign aid for the country’s reconstruction.”

Syria Could Drop Demand That Israel Return The Golan Heights (RT)

Former warlord Ahmad al-Sharaa, who seized power in Syria last year, may abandon the country’s claim to sovereignty over the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights in exchange for normalized ties with West Jerusalem, according to a report by Lebanese media. Israel captured a large portion of the 1,800 square kilometer region of Syria’s Quneitra Governorate during the 1967 war and effectively annexed it in 1981. Amid the turmoil during al-Sharaa’s rise to power, the IDF seized additional territory. The IDF has also carried out multiple airstrikes against Syrian troops loyal to the current government, which West Jerusalem said were intended to protect the local Druze population, an ethnoreligious minority community which inhabits the contested region.

Lebanese broadcaster LBCI reported Monday that the two countries could normalize relations as part of a broad agreement. Under the proposed deal, Israel would recognize al-Sharaa’s legitimacy, withdraw troops from areas seized since his December takeover, and agree to Syria’s military presence near its borders with Israel and Jordan, with certain restrictions. In exchange, “Israel is expected to secure full sovereignty” over the Golan Heights, LBCI said, citing sources familiar with Syrian affairs. The report added that internal hardliner opposition, including from Hayat Tahrir al-Sham – the jihadist group formerly led by al-Sharaa – could derail the effort.

Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar said Monday that Israel will maintain control of the Golan Heights under any future peace arrangement with Syria. Al-Sharaa has sought international recognition since ousting President Bashar Assad. Under former President Barack Obama, the United States aimed to remove Assad through a combination of sanctions and covert support for anti-government armed groups labeled “moderate rebels.” On Monday, President Donald Trump lifted most US sanctions on Syria in order to facilitate the flow of foreign aid for the country’s reconstruction.

Read more …

“..if Trump didn’t win, he’d leave the country. Elon replied: “There’s nowhere to go.” That moment stuck with Thiel. Mars, once a symbol of civilizational escape and ambition, no longer felt like a real option—even to Musk..”

AI Is The Only Thing Keeping The World From Total Stagnation – Peter Thiel (Flor)

Peter Thiel just did the most mind-exploding, crazy interview I’ve ever listened to. It’s so drastic, I still don’t know what to think – other than everyone should listen to it. So I dissected it piece by piece and organized it to draw some conclusions.nThis is what you cannot miss:

1. We are stuck. Thiel still believes in his “stagnation thesis.” His point? We’ve exited a 200-year period of accelerating change—1750 to 1970 was all about breakthroughs in physical reality: faster ships, railroads, cars, planes. It culminated in the Concorde and Apollo. But since then? Nothing. We’ve made marginal progress in “the world of bits” (internet, mobile, AI), but that’s not the same as reshaping the physical world. In biotech or cancer research, for example, progress is either negligible or cloaked in over-specialization that makes it impossible to track. As Thiel puts it: “The fact that it’s so hard to answer [whether we’re progressing] is itself cause for skepticism.”

2. Our future has been stolen—and it looks nothing like Back to the Future. Back to the Future II imagined 2015 as a world of flying cars, skateboards and radical transformation. What we got instead was smartphones and cars that look the same. Thiel’s kids watching 1985 on screen couldn’t tell it apart from today. “The world seems fairly similar.” That’s the cultural proof of stagnation: if a time traveler from 1985 landed in 2025, they’d be confused by the phone, but everything else would feel familiar. And the economic metric? Ask millennials: How are you doing compared to your parents? For most, the answer is worse.

3. We need to take more risks. Biotech is stuck. “We’ve made zero progress on dementia or Alzheimer’s in 40–50 years,” Thiel says. Scientists are trapped in a dead-end “beta-amyloid” theory that doesn’t work but keeps getting funded. We need to radically increase the risks we’re willing to take in medicine, aging, and beyond. Thiel wants a cultural return to the ambition of early modernity—Francis Bacon, Condorcet—when science promised immortality, not regulation. He tells the story of taking his PayPal team to a “freezing party” in 1999, where people bought cryonics insurance. “That was the last generation who still believed they could live forever.”

4. The moment Peter Thiel realized Elon lost faith in going to Mars. In 2024, Thiel joked to Elon Musk that if Trump didn’t win, he’d leave the country. Elon replied: “There’s nowhere to go.” That moment stuck with Thiel. Mars, once a symbol of civilizational escape and ambition, no longer felt like a real option—even to Musk. Why? Because “the woke AI and the socialist government would follow you to Mars.” The dream of Mars as a frontier for freedom had died. It was no longer a science project—it had become a political one. Thiel calls 2024 “the year Elon stopped believing in Mars.”

5. Will AI become stagnationist? AI is the only real exception to our stagnation—but Thiel worries it might reinforce it. He calls AI “more than a nothingburger, less than a total transformation.” Like the internet in the 1990s, it might boost GDP by 1% a year—but won’t restart the engines of human progress. And worse: it could become conformist intelligence. Like a Netflix algorithm that generates infinite okay-ish content, AI might flood the world with blandness, not breakthroughs. “If you don’t have AI, there’s nothing going on,” Thiel says. But he also warns: if AI becomes too “woke” or compliant, it will deepen the very stagnation it claims to solve.

6. Is AI hype—or is it transhumanism? Thiel sees modern transhumanism as not ambitious enough. It’s not that changing your body is weird—it’s that it’s pathetic compared to what early modern thinkers (and even Christianity) aimed for. “Transhumanism is just changing your body. But you also need to transform your soul.” He notes: the word nature never appears in the Old Testament. The Judeo-Christian story is about transcending nature—with God’s help. The critique of today’s “trans” ideas, he argues, isn’t that they go too far. It’s that they don’t go far enough.

7. The risk of the one-world totalitarian state: how the Antichrist would take over the world. Thiel introduces his most apocalyptic idea: that existential risk (AI, nukes, bioweapons) is being used to justify global governance. This leads to the ultimate form of stagnation: “a one-world state of the Antichrist.” The logic is seductive: to avoid destruction, centralize control. Nuclear weapons? A global authority must manage them. Dangerous AI? Global compute regulation. Thiel’s framing: The atheist slogan = “One world or none.” The Christian framing = “Antichrist or Armageddon.” The twist? The Antichrist doesn’t come with innovation. He comes with regulation. He offers “peace and safety”—and people submit.

8. Is Peter Thiel building the tools for the Antichrist? Thiel’s critics could argue: if anyone’s enabling global surveillance and control, isn’t it Thiel himself—via Palantir and military tech investments? He acknowledges the irony. He doesn’t believe he’s doing that, but concedes that many of the tools he’s helped build could be used that way. He warns that we’re already ruled—softly—by global regulators. The FDA doesn’t just control drugs in the U.S., but worldwide. Same with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. “Nuclear power was supposed to be the technology of the 21st century,” he says. “And it somehow has gotten off-ramped all over the world.”

9. Are we already living under a moderate rule of the Antichrist? Thiel floats a chilling thought: what if the Antichrist isn’t a coming tyrant—but the mild technocracy we already live in? 50 years of “peace and safety” have come at the cost of progress. He cites 1 Thessalonians 5:3: “While people are saying, ‘Peace and safety,’ destruction will come on them suddenly…” Still, he insists we have agency. He rejects Calvinism and determinism. “There’s a huge scope for human freedom. Don’t wait for the lion to eat you.”

Read more …

“They were the party of free speech,” he continued. “When President Trump started advocating for free speech… the Democrats became openly for censorship.”

Kennedy Labels US Democrats ‘War Party’ (RT)

US Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has accused the Democratic Party of abandoning its traditional values and transforming into a pro-war, pro-censorship force defined largely by opposition to President Donald Trump. In a wide-ranging interview with conservative talk show host Tucker Carlson published Monday, Kennedy said the Democratic Party now instinctively reverses positions as soon as Trump adopts them. “The Democrats were the anti-war party,” Kennedy said. “But as soon as [Trump] expressed his opposition to the Ukraine war, they became the war party.” “They were the party of free speech,” he continued. “When President Trump started advocating for free speech… the Democrats became openly for censorship.”

Kennedy, a longtime Democrat who briefly ran as an independent candidate in 2024 before supporting Trump and joining his cabinet in early 2025, said he continues to champion the same principles but now faces opposition from former allies. “These were people I was friends with my whole life and I have not changed… but the party has just a knee-jerk reaction against anything that is Trump,” he told Carlson. Kennedy added that Democrats, once critical of the CIA and trade deals like the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), shifted to support both once Trump voiced criticism. He also accused the party of undermining women’s sports, noting that his uncle, Senator Edward Kennedy, had helped write Title IX, a US federal civil rights law that prohibits sex-based discrimination.

“You can go on and on with those examples, but President Trump is literally dictating the platform of the Democratic Party. Anything that he says, they’re going to be against,” he said, noting that this pattern reflects a deeper problem in American politics. “You know that partisanship by its nature is dishonest and it is the enemy of democracy,” RFK Jr. warned. “And in George Washington’s farewell speech, he said that he was very frightened about the rise of the political party because they would become self-interested rather than patriotic.”Kennedy, the founder of the anti-vaccine group Children’s Health Defense, has gained prominence in the US for questioning the safety and effectiveness of childhood inoculations and promoting the claim that they are linked to autism –a theory widely rejected by the scientific community.

He was also a vocal critic of the World Health Organization’s Covid-19 response measures, including lockdowns and the rapid rollout of experimental vaccines. Despite his controversial reputation, Kennedy denies being opposed to immunization, noting that his own children have been vaccinated. He has repeatedly stated that he advocates for stricter safety testing and more rigorous studies. After Kennedy endorsed Trump, the president vowed to give him broad authority over healthcare policy, saying he would let Kennedy “go wild.” Kennedy said most opposition to his policies as Health Secretary comes not from industry experts but from media and political operatives. “I get opposition from proxies to the industry. Yes. And I think the major opposition that I feel is from the mainstream media and from Democrats,” he said.

Read more …

“And the Democrats have him pegged as a guy who’s sort of sitting in the Cabinet meeting talking about how can we make billionaires richer. He’s the opposite of that. He’s a genuine populist,” Kennedy said.

RFK Jr. Unloads Disturbing Vaccine Secrets On Tucker (VF)

It’s not every day an active HHS Secretary sits down for 90 minutes straight with Tucker Carlson. But that’s exactly what happened, and Kennedy instantly seized Carlson’s attention with a chilling story of CDC corruption. He revealed that the health agency buried a 1999 internal study led by researcher Thomas Verstraten, which showed an alarming 1135% increase in autism risk from the hepatitis B vaccine. Kennedy said the researchers were “shocked” by the findings. So what did they do? They covered it up, according to Kennedy. “They got rid of all the older children essentially and just had younger children who are too young to be diagnosed [with autism].” RFK Jr. then explained the real reason why your pediatrician will kick you out of their practice for refusing vaccines.

“There’s a published article out there now that says that 50% of revenues to most pediatricians come from vaccines.” It’s all about the money. The higher the vaccination rate, the bigger the bonus. “And that’s why your pediatrician, if you say I want to go slow on the vaccines… will throw you out of his practice because you’re now jeopardizing that bonus structure.” To the claim that the vaccine–autism link has been “debunked,” Kennedy had a message for Anderson Cooper, Jake Tapper, and everyone who smugly insists on it. “None of the vaccines given to children in the first six months of life have ever been studied for autism.” Let that sink in. He went further, revealing that the CDC actually did find a link when they studied the DTaP vaccine.

But they dismissed it. Kennedy said they claimed it “didn’t count” because the data came from VAERS—the very system they use to track vaccine injuries. So when the evidence pointed to harm, they simply claimed their own system wasn’t reliable enough and took no steps to fix it. The vaccine corruption didn’t end there. Kennedy attested that the CDC killed off a vaccine injury reporting system that actually worked—because it worked too well. It showed that 1 in 37 vaccines caused an injury. Tucker was stunned. “Of all vaccines?” he asked. “Yeah,” Kennedy confirmed. RFK Jr. explained that the CDC funded a study led by researcher Ross Lazarus. It compared a sophisticated machine-counting system to VAERS. What did they find? VAERS was failing to catch over 99% of vaccine injuries.

The new system also revealed that 2.6% of all vaccinations resulted in an injury. So what did the CDC do? They shut it down in 2010. And they’re still using VAERS today—even though it’s a completely inadequate system. But Kennedy didn’t stop at old vaccine scandals. He also broke down Pfizer’s own COVID vaccine trial data. That trial showed a 23% higher death rate in the vaccinated group. Pfizer gave 21,720 people the vaccine and 21,728 the placebo. One vaccinated person died of COVID. Two placebo recipients died. They used this tiny difference to claim “100% effective” based on relative risk reduction. But in absolute terms, it took 22,000 vaccinations to save one life. Over six months, 21 vaccinated participants died of all causes, compared to 17 in the placebo group—a 23.5% higher death rate.

And then there’s vaccine spokesperson Paul Offit, often seen on CNN and other mainstream networks. Kennedy shared an infuriating story about how he literally “voted himself rich” on the rotavirus vaccine. While serving on the CDC’s ACIP committee, Offit voted to add rotavirus vaccination to the childhood schedule—even as he was developing his own competing vaccine. He guaranteed demand for his product. The first approved rotavirus vaccine, RotaShield, was yanked from the market for causing dangerous intussusception. Offit’s vaccine, RotaTeq, eventually replaced it. He and his partners later sold their rights to Merck for $186 million. As RFK Jr. said, Offit literally “voted himself rich.” When Carlson mentioned Fauci, Kennedy revealed how Fauci funded research that helped scientists hide evidence of lab-made viruses. The technique, called “seamless ligation,” allowed researchers to engineer viruses in a lab without leaving telltale genetic fingerprints.

RFK Jr. explained: “One of his fundees, Ralph Baric, from the University of North Carolina, developed a technique called the seamless ligation technique, which is a technique for hiding the laboratory origins of a manipulated virus.” “… normally if there’s a virus manipulated, researchers can look at the DNA sequences and they can say this thing was created in a lab. Ralph Baric had developed a technique that he called the no-see technique and its technical name was seamless ligation, and it was a way of hiding evidence of human tampering.” He called it the exact opposite of what real public health work should be. Carlson cut in, saying, “That’s what you would do if you’re creating viruses for biological warfare.”

The conversation shifted to Trump, leading to one of the biggest highlights of the entire interview. First, Kennedy explained that Trump chose his cabinet in an unorthodox way: he wanted to see three clips of each candidate performing on TV before considering them for the job. “One of the things with President Trump is that he really knows how to pick talent… For every one of the positions that he picked, he wanted to see three clips of them performing on TV. He’s very conscious of the fact that these people are going to be out selling his program to the public,” Kennedy said. That’s when Kennedy ended the interview with a bang, sharing his genuine thoughts about Trump for three straight minutes. It was one of the standout moments of the entire conversation.

If you’re on the fence about Trump, listen to Kennedy here. It might just change how you see him. “I had him pegged as a narcissist, when narcissists are incapable of empathy. And he’s one of the most empathetic people that I’ve met,” Kennedy said. “He’s immensely curious, inquisitive, and immensely knowledgeable. He’s encyclopedic in certain areas that you wouldn’t expect,” he continued. Kennedy added that Trump genuinely cares about soldiers who go to war, citing how Trump “always talks about the casualties on both sides” of the Russia–Ukraine conflict. “Whether it’s vaccines or Medicaid or Medicare, he’s always thinking about how this impacts the little guy. And the Democrats have him pegged as a guy who’s sort of sitting in the Cabinet meeting talking about how can we make billionaires richer. He’s the opposite of that. He’s a genuine populist,” Kennedy said.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Rogan

Hep B

99%

Sun
https://twitter.com/FredsFarm247/status/1939983704379592749

PIANO
https://twitter.com/Ducnghia16/status/1939746838510543130

Cupcakes
https://twitter.com/gunsnrosesgirl3/status/1939990438389092561

Firefly

 

 

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