Menu Icon

Debt Rattle November 8 2024

Nov 082024
 
 November 8, 2024  Posted by at 9:44 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,  75 Responses »


Berthe Morisot Julie and her boat1884

 

• Trump’s Got the Mandate: Now He’s Going to Have to Walk the Talk (Sp.)
• Trump’s First Day in Office (Paul Craig Roberts)
• Trump Win Signals ‘Historic Realignment’ (Wegmann)
• How The Trump Election Impacts the Supreme Court (Turley)
• Trumpquake (Pepe Escobar)
• Putin Congratulates ‘Courageous’ Trump (RT)
• Steve Bannon Goes Scorched Earth On Democrats On Election Night (ZH)
• The Guardian Offers Free Therapy To Journalists After Trump Win – Media (RT)
• Polymarket Vindicated After Trump Landslide (ZH)
• Why Trump Won The Election, And What He May Do Now (Amar)
• Trump Cabinet To Push For ‘Freezing’ Ukraine Conflict – WSJ (RT)
• Sturgess Post-Mortem: No Novichok Found Until Government Ordered It (Helmer)
• “Punitive Front” In Kursk Shows There Is No Future For Ukrainian Forces (SCF)
• German PM Scholz Blames Ukraine Aid For Government Collapse (RT)
• EU Could Face Gas Shortages – FT (RT)
• NATO Knows Ukraine Is Losing – Foreign Policy (RT)

 

 

 

 

JD

God voted three months ago

Rogan

RFK
https://twitter.com/i/status/1854115060001419617
https://twitter.com/i/status/1854262536046100731

Trump 2020

Baris

Susie

State Fair
https://twitter.com/i/status/1854335056363356177

Musk JD

Simpsons
https://twitter.com/i/status/1854714961630544213

Stone

 

 

 

 

“..Tulsi Gabbard was right, that there was no substance to Kamala Harris, who, depending on the day of the week and the face of the moon is either an Indian from South Asia or she is black or she’s something else entirely different..”

• Trump’s Got the Mandate: Now He’s Going to Have to Walk the Talk (Sp.)

Donald Trump defeated Kamala Harris on Tuesday, winning the popular vote and helping Republicans keep and solidify their control of Congress. When he returns to Washington in January, Trump will have to make good on his promises if he wants to be a positive force for change, a US diplomat-turned-whistleblower and political analyst told Sputnik. “The Republicans have the presidency. The Republicans have both houses of Congress. And the time for talk, the time for posturing is over. He’s got to take action from the start,” former US diplomat Michael Springmann told Sputnik, commenting on the Republicans’ surprise electoral sweep. “He’s got to stop the war against the Russian Federation using Ukraine as a pawn. He’s got to stop the crazed Zionists in occupied Palestine from their genocide and the destruction of Lebanon and Syria and Iraq,” Springmann, who famously blew the whistle on the State Department after refusing to issue visas to CIA-backed terrorists linked to Osama bin Laden in a Gulf country in the 1980s, said.

In his post-election victory speech after midnight Wednesday morning, Trump reiterated his campaign promises to “stop wars.” “We wanna have borders. We wanna have security. We wanna have things be good, safe,” the president-elect said. “We had no wars. Except we defeated ISIS*, we defeated ISIS in record time. But we had no wars. They said ‘he will start a war’. I’m not going to start a war. I’m going to stop wars,” Trump said, echoing sentiments expressed in his January 2021 farewell address, in which he said he was “especially proud to be the first president in decades who started no new wars.” At home, “the sooner he can take action and put an end to this Democratic Party’s decades long effort to engage in discrimination and press their buttons for diversity, equity and inclusivity, which translates into reality as being biased and prejudice and a thumb on the scales,” the better, the observer said.

“We have got to get together and take action to fix this country, which is terribly broken and is run by an oligarchy manifesting itself through the Deep State and which controls just about everything in the country, including the media machine, which essentially is brainwashing without soap,” he added. Replacing Biden with Harris proved a big mistake for Democrats, Springmann said. “She was a nonentity. She couldn’t win a single presidential primary four years ago. She was a vicious prosecutor, bringing the whole weight of the state in California down on the backs of small-time petty criminals. She postured, she cackled, she smirked. And she demonstrated conclusively that Tulsi Gabbard was right, that there was no substance to Kamala Harris, who, depending on the day of the week and the face of the moon is either an Indian from South Asia or she is black or she’s something else entirely different,” he summed up.

Read more …

“Trump is old in years but not in spirit and stressed by eight years of persecution. That stress is about to intensify.”

• Trump’s First Day in Office (Paul Craig Roberts)

Well, we finally have an American back in the White House. The night after Trump was declared the winner, I had a fantasy dream about his first day in office. Trump pardoned Julian Assange and Edward Snowden, and appointed Assange to head the FCC and Snowden to head the NSA. Derek Chauvin and the police officers who were falsely indicted and falsely convicted by a corrupt judge and prosecutor who withheld from the trial and jury evidence proving their innocence were pardoned and awarded $25 million each in compensation for their wrongful conviction in one of the worst failures of justice in history. The media monopolies were broken up for violating the Sherman Anti-Trust Act and for violating the fairness doctrine and weaponizing the air waves for political purposes. The NSA was cleaned up and stopped from warrantless spying on US citizens and violation of their privacy by storing their emails, credit card and internet activities.

All the attorneys who were falsely accused and some convicted of interfering with an election by reporting documented instances of Democrat election fraud were pardoned. All victims of the corrupt and politicized Biden Justice (sic) department, such as the Americans who were sent to prison by the corrupt Merrick Garland for exercising their First Amendment rights, were pardoned and awarded $10 million each in compensation. The entire Biden Justice (sic) Department was arrested and indicted for violating their oath of office to protect the Constitution of the United States. The corrupt Democrat judges and Democrat prosecutors were sanctioned and removed from office for weaponizing law to serve their political party. Former CIA director John Brennan was arrested and indicted, along with FBI director Christopher Wray for high treason for trying to frame the President of the United States.

Trump’s FDA director Robert F. Kennedy Jr. cleared Big Pharma’s operatives out of the FDA, CDC, and NIH and had criminal investigations launched of Big Pharma and Big Food’s poisoning of the American population and influence over university medical and nutritional curriculums. At the Office of Management and Budget Elon Musk cut $2.5 trillion out of the annual US budget. Hundreds of US overseas bases were closed, and entire federal agencies and departments disappeared. Tariffs were imposed on the offshored production of US corporations, forcing them to return American jobs to America. At the Pentagon recruitment and promotion were again merit-based. All race- and gender-based promotions ceased. The new Justice Department ruled that all “affirmative action” programs, all race and gender privileges are banned for being illegal under the 1964 Civil Rights Act and in violation of the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause.

State and local Democrat officials were compelled to stop their practice of imperiling public safety in the interest of preventing the stigmatization of non-white criminals. A ban was put on the ability of interest groups to purchase government with campaign contributions. A war was declared on lobbying in an effort to move public policies toward service to the public’s interest in place of profits to interest groups. The Department of Education and all federal aid to education was terminated.

As I began my second cup of coffee, an unsettling realization displaced remembrance of my delightful dream that truth and justice would be restored to America. Long before such a restoration project could get underway Trump and his effective appointees would be assassinated. The evil Democrats and ruling elite and their government and private institutions are still in place. So are their politicized federal judges who regard the Constitution as a barrier to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion. The school boards overseeing the teaching of white kids that they and their parents are racists are still there. The feminists are still in place turning white women against white men. The lie machine posing as a media is still in place. The corrupt and power-crazed federal agencies remain in place. A demoralized military officered by DEI incompetents is there to be called out against insurrectionist Trump.

The election of Trump is just the beginning of an insurrection against the anti-American forces that have been successfully assaulting our country for years. Trump without an army in place is confronted by evil with its army in place. As determined as Trump is, his chances are far from certain. If MAGA Americans think that the war is over with Trump’s election, they will be defeated by the institutionalized existing powers that be. Everything depends on Trump’s appointments. All it takes is a bad appointment of a weak man as Attorney General and the Trump insurrection is finished.

The insurrection that Trump is leading is an existential threat to the existing evil order. The ruling establishment will most certainly not fold up its tents. Already we can see the ruling elite moving to gain Trump’s confidence in George W. Bush’s congratulations to Trump on his victory. Many will be congratulatory and Trump carried away by his success can get the knife in the back. Trump actually thinks that Dick Cheney was for him but obliged his insane daughter by supporting Kamala. Other Trump opponents will start offensives against Trump on non-negotiable issues. The media will try to define the pressing problems and in that way derail Trump’s agenda. Trump is old in years but not in spirit and stressed by eight years of persecution. That stress is about to intensify.

Read more …

“He keeps going forward. He doesn’t quit. He’s the most resilient, hardworking man that I’ve ever met in my life.”

• Trump Win Signals ‘Historic Realignment’ (Wegmann)

Trump declared his candidacy immediately after the 2022 midterms, marched almost effortlessly through a crowded field of primary challengers, and secured a third consecutive presidential nomination. He did not regain his grasp on the GOP so much as he tightened his grip on that party. “I think that we just witnessed the greatest political comeback in the history of the United States of America,” Trump running mate J.D. Vance said after Tuesday’s election returns rolled in. There was no exaggeration in his words. The first time Trump won the White House, he did so as the leader of a white working-class coalition, promising those he would call in his inaugural address “the forgotten men and women” to reverse the “American carnage” brought on by deindustrialization, globalization, and unchecked immigration. The former, and now future, president did not moderate.

Opponents condemned his calls for mass deportations as “racist” and his vow to root out the ill-defined “enemy within” as “fascist.” Those denunciations ultimately had little effect. Not only did Trump maintain his support with the white working class, but he also made significant gains with both Hispanic and black voters according to early exit polls. A multi-class, multi-ethnic coalition returned him to power. One demographic at the center of that electorate: young men. Tuesday’s results amount to a repudiation, not only of Kamala Harris and Joe Biden, but also the old breed of Republicans who made common cause with corporations and harbored a neoconservative foreign policy. The most visible among them, former Wyoming Rep. Liz Cheney, threw her support behind the Democrat. Trump’s second victory heralds a shifting political landscape that will continue sorting itself out during the presidential transition and in the four-year term to follow.

Reflecting on the breadth of his support, Trump told a crowded victory party that his winning coalition was drawn “from all quarters – union, non-union, African American, Hispanic American, Asian American, Arab American.” Surrounded by his family and campaign staff on stage, he added, “We had everybody, and it was beautiful.” “It was,” Trump added, “a historic realignment.” The Harris campaign had already headed to bed at that point. “Let’s finish up what we have in front of us tonight, get some sleep,” campaign manager Jen O’Malley Dillon wrote to her team in an email obtained by RealClearPolitics, “and get ready to close out strong tomorrow.” The vice president had yet to concede by mid-morning Wednesday. Famous for chiding Republican men when they talked over her – “I’m speaking” – Harris sent her campaign chairman, Cedric Richmond, on stage to tell her supporters at Howard University late Tuesday that they would not hear from her. Many left in tears. Trump World was just beginning to party.

A crowd noticeably younger than the ones Trump attracted in his two previous elections had packed into the Palm Beach Convention Center hours earlier. As their champion monitored data from nearby Mar-a-Lago, they pulled up to any of the six cash bars in the main hall. The most popular beer for the thirsty America First voter: Modelo, a lager from Mexico. The MAGA faithful were prepared for a long night. News networks warned that the results might not be known on Election Day or even the morning after, a message amplified by Democrats. And there was good reason to believe the race might come down to the wire: Trump and Harris were locked in a dead heat for much of the contest as a divided nation evaluated its options. But just as he used social media to sidestep gatekeepers eight years ago, Trump targeted new, younger voters, with a new medium: the Bro Podcast.

He talked about everything from aliens to artificial intelligence with Joe Rogan, host of “The Joe Rogan Experience.” He chopped it up on the Barstool Sports podcast “Bussin’ With the Boys,” hosted by former NFL football players Will Compton and Taylor Lewan. He asked Theo Von if he still uses cocaine (the comedian told the teetotaling president that the white powder “will turn you into a damn owl, homie”). The conversations did not resemble anything like Frost v. Nixon. Podcasts are certainly much cheaper and less serious. They were instrumental, all the same, in turning out young men who are famously low-propensity voters. Harris sought to make the race a referendum on Trump. She described him as a threat to democracy generally and an opponent of abortion rights specifically. For his part, he called illegal immigration “the biggest issue” and an inflation-addled economy “the second.” A senior Trump advisor told RCP it was “more like ‘Issue 1A and 1B,’ but immigration is one of them.”

Either way, the economic frustrations and security fears were enough to deliver Trump a majority despite the criminal indictments and felony convictions that Democrats had hoped would throttle his candidacy. Those legal challenges made Trump the symbol of conservative martyrdom. It became visceral at the fairground in Butler, Pennsylvania, this summer when an assassin’s bullet clipped his ear. The photo of the bloody Republican pumping his fist in defiance instantly became an image for the ages. “This is what happens when the machine comes after you,” bellowed Ultimate Fight Championship president Dana White from the main stage here Tuesday night. “He keeps going forward. He doesn’t quit. He’s the most resilient, hardworking man that I’ve ever met in my life.” Referring to Trump’s victory in the face of the challenges, White said, “This is karma.”

Read more …

” It is not that Harvard does not resemble America, it does not even resemble Massachusetts in its virtual purging of conservative or Republican professors.”

• How The Trump Election Impacts the Supreme Court (Turley)

In 1937, it was said that a critical shift of one justice in a case ended the move to pack the Court by Franklin Delano Roosevelt. It was said that it was “a shift in time saves nine.” In 2024, a shift in the Senate may have had the same impact. Trump’s victory means that absent a renewal of the court-packing scheme and other extreme measures of the left, the Court will remain unchanged institutionally for at least a decade. The expectation is that Associate Justice Clarence Thomas could use this perfect time to retire and ensure that his seat will be filled with a fellow conservative jurist. Justice Samuel Alito may also consider this a good time for a safe harbor departure. They have a couple of years before they reach the redline for nominations before the next election.

The election means that court-packing schemes are now effectively scuttled despite the support of Democratic senators like Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D., R.I.). Given Kamala Harris’s reported support, the Supreme Court dodged one of the greatest threats to its integrity in its history. The impact on the law will also be pronounced. Returning the issue of abortion to the states will remain unchanged. A younger generation will grow up in a country where the voters of each state are allowed to determine what limits to place on abortions. Likewise, gun rights and religious rights will continue to be robustly protected. The checks on the administrative state are also likely to be strengthened. Pushes for wealth taxes and other measures will likely receive an even more skeptical court.

The possible appointment of two new justices would likely give Trump a total of five to six nominees on the court. Liberals previously insisted that it was time for Justice Sonia Sotomayor to leave the Court, a campaign that I opposed. The appointment of seven of the nine justices by a single president would be unprecedented. (I expect, as with the calls to “end the filibuster” as undemocratic, the liberal campaign to push Sotomayor to retire ended around 2:30 am on Tuesday night). Trump has shown commendable judgment in his prior nominations. All three—Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett—are extraordinary jurists who have already created considerable legacies. I testified at Neil Gorsuch’s Senate confirmation hearing and still consider him one of the most consequential and brilliant additions to the Court in decades.

These justices were subjected to appalling treatment during their confirmation process, including attacks on Barrett for her adopting Haitian children. New Trump nominees can expect the same scorched-earth campaign from the media and the left, but they will have a reliable Senate majority for confirmation. These justices have shown the intellect and integrity that bring credit to the Court, including each voting in key cases with their liberal colleagues when their principles demanded it. Trump can cement his legacy by continuing that legacy over the next four years with nominees of the same caliber. In this way, the election may prove the key moment in ending one of the most threatening periods of the Court’s existence. With the loss of the control of the Senate, the push for new limits on the Court and calls for investigations of conservative justices will subside for now. However, the rage in the media and academia will only likely increase.

Both media and academic commentators pushed for sweeping constitutional changes, including packing the Court or curtailing its jurisdiction. Many saw the Harris-Walz Administration as the vehicle for such extreme measures. Harris herself pledged to “reform” the Court. Some liberals figures even called for the dissolution of the Court and other radical changes. I recently debated a Harvard professor at Harvard Law School on the lack of free speech and intellectual diversity at the school. I noted that Harvard had more than 75 percent of the faculty self-identified as “liberal” or “very liberal.” Only 5 percent identified as “conservative,” and only 0.4% as “very conservative.” It is not that Harvard does not resemble America, it does not even resemble Massachusetts in its virtual purging of conservative or Republican professors.

We just had a country where the majority of voters chose Donald Trump. Among law school faculty who donated more than $200 to a political party, 91 percent of the Harvard faculty gave to Democrats. Yet, the professor rejected the idea that Harvard faculty or its students should look like America (only 7 percent of incoming students identified as conservative). So, while the Supreme Court has a strong majority of conservatives and roughly half of the federal judges are conservative, Harvard law students will continue to be taught by professors who overwhelmingly reject those values, and some even reject “constitutionalism.”

Read more …

“We will defeat the West in Ukraine – without resorting to ultimate means.”

• Trumpquake (Pepe Escobar)

On the political Richter scale, that was a killer – literally. What was supposed to be a Liberal Totalitarian Show was brutally, unceremoniously, swept out of the park – any park. Even before Election Day, critical thinking was aware of the stakes. With fraud, Kamala wins. With no fraud, Trump wins. There were, at best, (failed) attempts at fraud. The key question still remains: what does the U.S. Deep State really want? My inbox is infested with loads of weepy reports from U.S. Think Tankland wondering, in disbelief, why Kamala could possibly lose. It’s quite straightforward – apart from her sheer incompetence cum utter mediocrity literally cackling out loud. The legacy of the administration she was part of is ghastly – all the way from Crash Test Dummy to Little Butcher Blinkie.

Instead of bothering to care about the abysmal state of affairs, at every level, concerning that mythical entity, “the American people”, they chose to invest everything on a neocon-manufactured proxy war to inflict a “strategic defeat” on Russia – stealing Russian assets, unleashing a tsunami of sanctions, shipping an array of wunderwaffen. The weaponization of Ukraine led to countless Ukrainian dead and the inevitable, fast-approaching cosmic humiliation of NATO in the black soil of Novorossiya. They invested everything to support a genocide in Gaza conducted with a huge arsenal of American weapons: a lebensraum-coded ethnic cleansing cum extermination op directed by a bunch of Talmudic psychos – and marketed under the “rules-based international order” spewed out by Butcher Blinkie in every bilateral or multilateral gathering.

It’s no wonder that West Asia and the wider Global South soon got the message of what may happen to anyone daring to go against the Hegemon’s “interests”. Thus the counterpunch: the strengthening of BRICS and BRICS+, celebrated for all the world to see two weeks ago in Kazan. At least this administration had a merit, strengthening the bonds between all major “existential threats” to the Hegemon: three BRICS (Russia, China, Iran), plus the indomitable DPRK. All that in contrast with a meager tactical victory – which may not last long: the absolute vassalization of Europe. Of course, foreign policy does not win U.S. elections. Americans themselves will have to solve their dilemmas, or plunge into civil war. As for the bulk of the Global Majority, it harbors no illusions.

Trumpquake’s coded message is that the Zionist lobby wins – again. Perhaps not so unanimously when we consider all strands of neo-cons and Zio-cons. Wall Street wins again (BlackRock’s Larry Fink said so even before Election Day). And prominent silos across the Deep State also win again. That begs a modified question; what if Trump feels emboldened enough after January 25 to launch a Stalinist purge of the Deep State? Election Day proceeded nearly simultaneously with the Valdai Club annual meeting in Sochi, where the superstar, not surprisingly, was eminent geopolitician Sergey Karaganov. Of course he directly referred to the Empire’s Forever Wars: “We are living in biblical times.” And even before Trumpquake, Karaganov stressed, calmly, “We will defeat the West in Ukraine – without resorting to ultimate means.”

And that “will provide for a peaceful withdrawal of the U.S. – which will become a normal superpower.” Europe, meanwhile, “will move to the sidelines of History.” All of that spot on. But then Karaganov introduced a startling concept: “The war in Ukraine is a replacement of WWIII. Afterwards, we can agree on some kind of order in Eurasia.” That would be the “indivisibility of security” proposed by Putin to Washington – and rejected – on December 2021, part of the “Greater Eurasia Partnership” that was conceptualized by Karaganov himself. The problem though is his conclusion: “Let’s make the Ukrainian war the last major war in the 21st century.” Ay, there’s the rub: the real major war is actually Eretz Israel v. the Axis of Resistance in West Asia.

Read more …

“..when then-candidate Trump rose to his feet and raised his fist after a bullet grazed his ear. “I was impressed. He’s a courageous person..”

“..he is open to receiving a phone call from Trump, adding that “it wouldn’t be beneath me to call him myself.”

• Putin Congratulates ‘Courageous’ Trump (RT)

Russian President Vladimir Putin has congratulated Donald Trump on his electoral victory and confirmed that he is ready to talk with the US president-elect. Putin hailed Trump’s “courageous” response to the attempt to assassinate him in July. Speaking at a meeting of the Valdai International Discussion Club in the southern Russian city of Sochi on Thursday, Putin said that he wished to “offer my congratulations on [Trump’s] election as president of the United States.” Putin noted that Trump has expressed a desire to end the Ukraine conflict, and that such statements “deserve attention, at the very least.” The Russian president then paid tribute to Trump’s actions during an attempt on his life in Pennsylvania this summer, when then-candidate Trump rose to his feet and raised his fist after a bullet grazed his ear. “I was impressed. He’s a courageous person,” Putin said.

“A person shows their true color in these emergencies, and I think he acquitted himself admirably and in a valiant fashion as a man.” Hours earlier, the Kremlin denied reports that Putin had sent a private congratulatory message to Trump, with Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov telling reporters that the US is “an unfriendly country that is directly and indirectly involved in the war against us.” However, Putin said that he is open to receiving a phone call from Trump, adding that “it wouldn’t be beneath me to call him myself.” Trump has repeatedly promised to bring the Ukraine conflict to a swift end, although he has offered little explanation as to how he would achieve this. Vice President-elect J.D. Vance and unnamed aides quoted in American media have suggested that Kiev could abandon its territorial claims and hopes of NATO membership in exchange for peace, with the conflict frozen along the current line of contact.

Moscow maintains that any settlement must begin with Ukraine ceasing military operations and acknowledging the “territorial reality” that it will never regain control of the regions of Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson, and Zaporozhye, as well as Crimea. In addition, the Kremlin insists that the goals of its military operation – which include Ukrainian neutrality, demilitarization, and denazification – will be achieved. Should Trump push to freeze the conflict and deny NATO membership to Ukraine, and should Putin accept this plan, “the likelihood that [Ukrainian leader Vladimir] Zelensky will refuse is close to zero,” a source close to Zelensky told Ukrainian media earlier on Thursday. Ukraine “is not in a position to refuse its main partner, without whose support it will be almost impossible to continue the war,” the source said.

Read more …

He has a right to speak. He spent 4 months in prison for these clowns.

• Steve Bannon Goes Scorched Earth On Democrats On Election Night (ZH)

Steve Bannon took to his livestream on election day, just hours after leaving prison for contempt of congress charges, to offer up his take on the landslide victory President Trump was in the midst of at the time. Speaking about Democrats, Bannon exclaimed: “You stole the 2020 election. You’ve mocked and ridiculed and put people in prison and broken people’s lives because you said this thing was stolen. This entire phony thing is getting swept out. Biden’s getting swept out. Kamala Harris is getting swept out.” “MSNBC is getting swept out. The Justice Department [DOJ] is getting swept out. The FBI is getting swept out. You people suck, okay? And now you’re going to pay the price for trying to destroy this country.” “And we’re going to get to the bottom of where are the 600,000 votes. You manufactured them to steal this election from President Trump in 2020,” Bannon exclaimed.

“Think of where the country would be if we hadn’t gone through the last 4 years of your madness. You don’t deserve any respect, you don’t deserve any empathy and you don’t deserve any pity,” he said. “And if anybody gives it to you it’s Donald J. Trump because he’s got a big heart and he’s a good man. A good man you’re going to still try and put in prison on the 26th of this month, this is how much you people suck,” Bannon said. “You tried to destroy his business and he came back in the greatest show of political courage in world history,” Bannon exclaimed. “What he has done is a profile in courage.”

“No one speaks for the President but the president, and what the president said and as he said it last night on the stage is that he’s going to be a president for everybody, and we’ve got an opportunity right now to unify the country to bring this country back together,” Lewandowski, a senior adviser on Trump’s 2024 campaign, responded to The Hill. “Listen, there’s going to be a lot of hyperbole out there; there’s going to be a lot of people saying they know Donald Trump or speak for him,” he said. “Unless you hear it from Donald Trump, you don’t have to listen to what these other people say.”

Read more …

Not fit to be journalists, then.

• The Guardian Offers Free Therapy To Journalists After Trump Win – Media (RT)

The Guardian has offered its journalists free counseling and mental health support to help them process Donald Trump’s win in the US election, according to an internal email seen by Guido Fawkes, a British political gossip blog. Written by editor-in-chief Katharine Viner, the email was sent to the liberal paper’s employees on Wednesday, Guido Fawkes claimed. “I know the result has been very upsetting for many colleagues,” Viner wrote. “Our US teams in particular have covered the election with brilliant reporting…They will be most directly affected by the result. If you’re not in the US, do contact your American colleagues to offer your support.” “It’s upsetting for many others, too,” she continued.

“If you want to talk about it, your manager and members of the leadership team are all available, as the People team. There is also free access to free support services, which I’ve outlined at the end of this email.” The Guardian’s British staff were told that they can avail themselves of a 24/7 online general practitioner, mental health support, and “virtual wellbeing tools.” Staff in Australia were told that they can access “confidential, impartial professional counseling and support.” “Something tells Guido all the counseling in the world won’t cure them of Trump Derangement Syndrome,” the gossip site joked.

Trump won a resounding victory against Kamala Harris on Tuesday, defeating the vice president in all seven battleground states and winning the popular vote – a feat not achieved by a Republican since George W. Bush beat John Kerry in 2004. Harris underperformed President Joe Biden’s 2020 result in all 3,144 US counties, while Trump dramatically increased his support from black, Latino, and young voters across the US, particularly males. The Guardian is not the only institution whose employees apparently need therapy after the election. Dow Constantine, the chief executive of King County in the US state of Washington, emailed county employees on Wednesday offering “emotional support” services, while Harvard University Dean Rakesh Khurana canceled classes to give students “space to process” the results.

Read more …

The polling firms became political actors. Until the last moment they kept saying it was a very close race. It never was.

• Polymarket Vindicated After Trump Landslide (ZH)

The 2024 election was truly a contest between traditional polling and betting markets; so-called nominative opinion polls cast through betting websites such as Peter Thiel-backed Polymarket. and Kalshi, where decentralized groups of individuals were able to wager on various contests in a hyper-efficient free market (notwithstanding regulators’ best efforts to limit access). The day before the election, Bloomberg wrote: “Election Gambling Markets Face Their Moment of Truth”. The prevailing wisdom on Wall Street is that prediction markets have an edge over polls because participants are economically motivated to incorporate every drip of new information faster. Between a single forecasting model and the wisdom of a crowd that has digested all that information, the latter might reasonably do better. After the election, the outlet noted that betting markets were thoroughly vindicated after the election – writing: “Trump Win Boosts Prediction Markets That Nailed Election Outcome”.

“These markets will run the world,” said Thomas Peterffy, the billionaire founder of Interactive Brokers. “People tend to say what they want, but in these markets, they will bet the way they think the outcome will occur, not what they want the outcome to be. It takes the emotion out of these questions.” Perhaps the most notable aspect of this year’s betting markets was a French trader who walked away with an estimated $85 million – betting on a Trump win using as 11 accounts on Polymarket. “Last night, Polymarket proved the wisdom of markets over the polls, the media, and the pundits,” Polymarket posted on X, after the platform “Polymarket consistently and accurately forecasted outcomes well ahead of all three, demonstrating the power of high volume, deeply liquid prediction markets like those pioneered by Polymarket.”

On Thursday, Polymarket CEO Shane Coplan appeared on CNBC, where he explained “I think the thing that people get wrong about Polymarket, the thing I wish people would understand better—and maybe now that they’re more open-minded to it—is that if someone takes a really big position on Trump, for example, there’s someone on the other side, a counterparty. It’s all peer-to-peer. “There’s a big position being taken on Harris. And because of that, when you see the odds on Polymarket, it’s not a function of how much money was put on either side. It’s a function of the market price at that moment. It’s the tightest spread for this market in the world. And I think when you think about it like that, a trade someone made two weeks ago doesn’t have bearing on what the market price is right now. So, all I can say is I understand that it’s a novel concept, and people were skeptical when it came around, but hopefully, people will be more embracing of market-based information.”

When host Joe Kernen asked if Polymarket could be manipulated, Coplan replied: “If there’s uninformed flow or price-insensitive flow, people will take that risk. Granted, it’s up to the market to interpret a lot of that flow. If there’s a large influx of flow—whether informed or uninformed—that’s a function of the markets working. “As we saw this time around, right, this was someone with an infinite bankroll and they didn’t push the market up that much. And they had done a lot of research and had non-consensus information.” “The thing that is undeniable was that on the night of the election, Polymarket was the first destination to basically convey that Trump had won. It was a good two, three hours ahead of the media,” Coplan added.

Read more …

“He is a textbook narcissist..” ? No, he’s not.

• Why Trump Won The Election, And What He May Do Now (Amar)

Donald Trump has won the US election. After serving as the 45th president between 2017 and 2021, he will now be the 47th. Trump has not merely defeated but trounced his opponent Kamala Harris. She was crushed so badly, she even failed to address her supporters at the traditional election party and instead – there’s really no nicer word for it – slunk away. Claiming his victory, meanwhile, Trump told his voters that they – and he, of course – had “made history.” He is very likely to be right about that. While rhetoric about “the most important election in our lifetime” has been badly overused for campaigning purposes, in this case, Trump’s second victory really is special. The fact that he is the first president since the 1880s to win a second term after being out of office is the least of it. Such trivia will make for good game-show questions. But what turns the return of the Donald – as he used to be called semi-affectionately when still generally mistaken for a buffoon – into a historic event is that it is occurring at a very peculiar moment.

We are witnessing the decline and fall of, at least, American supremacy, and, possibly, of the American polity as we know it. At the same time, a multipolar world order is emerging. It is against that background of historic change that we have to understand the Trump Phenomenon. And a capital-‘P’ Phenomenon it is. That much is beyond doubt. Full disclosure: I have almost no sympathy for Trump’s politics; and since I am a socialist, he would be very unlikely to have any for mine. But whoever is still in denial about the fact that the uncouth and stubborn real-estate billionaire and former reality TV star is a natural-born politician of outstanding savvy is a fool. That gift makes Trump neither good nor bad; it simply means that his impact will continue to be massive. Regarding the past, we may have gotten a little too used to Trump already and find it hard to recall just how sensational his trajectory has been.

As a reminder, a very brief summary: Since 2011, he has broken into the US political system from the margins, imposing himself on its traditional elites. He has catalyzed the transformation of that system and those elites, not only but especially of its (very) right-wing section, the Republican Party, into his personal domain. He has held one presidency for a full term – as many predicted he would not – against enormous media and deep-state resistance (including the mass idiocy of Russia Rage/”Russiagate”). And now “the twice-impeached semi-pariah” of 2021 has staged a formidable comeback against even more of the same, this time featuring a combination of assassination attempts and total lawfare, including felony convictions that turned out not to matter (except they helped him fire up his base and donors). You neither have to like nor admire the man to register the plain fact that the above is the imprint of very unusual political talent because no one is just that lucky.

And all the signs are that Trump is far from done. Because, make no mistake, he has not run for the presidency again merely to take his revenge for being defeated in 2020 and harassed ever after. He is a textbook narcissist, and the sheer pleasure of showing them all certainly matters to him. But, still, it is nothing more than the fun part. Beyond that lies an almost messianic will to principally change the US, politically and culturally (in the broadest sense of the word), including the way it relates to the rest of world. How far will Trump get with that agenda? Trumpism is certainly much more organized, as the hostile Economist grudgingly recognizes, this time around. Ultimately, though, time will tell. What is certain is that Trump will try because he is not one to rest on his laurels. Before we look at what he may do in more detail, a few words are in order about the causes of his triumph and the Democrats’ second, devastating humiliation at his hands. Some may even recall the rare predictions made in 2021 – one by this author, as it happens – that a Biden presidency could well turn into the perfect springboard for Trump’s revenge.

Others will stick to the obvious: the debilitating senescence of President Joe Biden and the shameless, as well as stupid, lying about it; the malodor exuded by the Bidens as an influence-peddling, power-hungry clan; the obstinate march of folly deep into the quagmire of a losing, wasteful proxy war against Russia via Ukraine; the clear and often brazen neglect of the interests and lives of ordinary Americans to go along with that waste; the sleazy last-minute promotion to the top of the ticket of Vice President Kamala Harris, a careerist who has never won a primary and offered a bizarre mix of what sometimes looked like somewhat substance-enhanced “joy” and embarrassingly empty rhetorical hogwash even by US standards; her transparent shortsighted and painfully desperate play to the right, roping in neocon liabilities such as the Cheneys and mistaking them for assets. And, overshadowing it all, abetting – really co-perpetrating – Israel’s crimes, including genocide and every war crime and crime against humanity ever codified, as part of the administration of “Genocide” Joe Biden.

Read more …

“..the US could help resolve the Ukraine conflict since it is the one fueling it..”

• Trump Cabinet To Push For ‘Freezing’ Ukraine Conflict – WSJ (RT)

Donald Trump’s team is considering several potential plans to end the Ukraine conflict, which would require Kiev to drop its plans to join NATO in the foreseeable future and freeze hostilities along the current front line, the Wall Street Journal reported on Wednesday, citing sources. Trump, who defeated his Democratic rival Kamala Harris in the presidential election, has repeatedly vowed to end hostilities between Moscow and Kiev within 24 hours, even before being sworn into office. According to officials and aides familiar with the situation, the Trump team does not yet have a detailed plan, with different factions “set to compete to influence the Republican’s foreign policy.” Such “traditionally minded” Trump allies as Mike Pompeo, who served as secretary of state and CIA director during the president-elect’s first term, are reportedly pushing for a deal that “doesn’t appear to give a major win to Moscow.”

Other figures, such as Richard Grenell, who could become Trump’s national security adviser, may advocate for ending the conflict as soon as possible, even if Kiev has to make significant concessions, the article said. However, according to the WSJ, peace proposals “uniformly recommend freezing the war in place… and forcing Ukraine to temporarily suspend its quest to join” NATO. Three unnamed officials inside Trump’s transition office told the paper that one idea is to have Ukraine pledge not to join NATO “for at least 20 years,” while in exchange, the US would provide Kiev with ample weapons deliveries to keep Russia at bay. The reported plan would also establish a demilitarized zone along the current front line, with one Trump adviser ruling out the possibility that peace there would be maintained by American troops or US-funded international organizations such as the UN.

Under this proposal, the US would seek to delegate this task to its European allies, according to the WSJ. “We can do training and other support but the barrel of the gun is going to be European,” the paper’s source said. “We are not sending American men and women to uphold peace in Ukraine. And we are not paying for it. Get the Poles, Germans, British and French to do it.” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said that the US could help resolve the Ukraine conflict since it is the one fueling it, insisting that Moscow is “open to contacts and dialogue.” Meanwhile, Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky has ruled out “bargaining” over the country’s sovereignty or “trading” the territories Kiev claims as its own.

Read more …

Some messes are incredible.

• Sturgess Post-Mortem: No Novichok Found Until Government Ordered It (Helmer)

The single most important witness in six years of investigations into the cause of Dawn Sturgess’s death, the pathologist appointed by the government to conduct her post-mortem, has testified that he failed to discover Novichok in his eleven-hour long autopsy. Instead, his official reports from 2018 reveal that he was told to find Novichok by the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (DSTL), the UK chemical warfare centre at Porton Down. But he didn’t sign his name to that for more than four months after the autopsy, until November 29, 2018. The witness is Guy Rutty. He appeared in a state-censored format at the Sturgess Inquiry hearing on November 5, chaired by retired Appeal Court judge, Anthony Hughes (titled Lord Hughes of Ombersley).

In the official document releasing Sturgess’s body to her family, Rutty wrote: “The provisional cause of death following the autopsy examination is: 1a Awaiting further tests.” Rutty signed that two days after the autopsy on July 19, 2018. Sturgess’s body was then kept at Porton Down for another eleven days; evidence from the undertaker, Chris White Funeral Directors, reveals it was collected for the funeral ceremony and cremation on July 30. In Rutty’s report dated November 29, 2018, he revealed that blood testing of Sturgess on July 2, 2018, identified that she had taken a combination of illicit, potentially lethal drugs before her collapse. Rutty says these included cocaine and fentanyl. Rutty avoided disclosing the precise reports of the toxicology testing so that the dosage Sturgess had consumed of cocaine and fentanyl has been concealed.

In his official reporting Rutty used circumlocutions to conclude he couldn’t tell what drugs may have been the cause of her death. The toxicology, he said, “identified a number of therapeutic and non-therapeutic drugs to be present. Although I have not been provided [sic] with the levels of the drugs identified, I am not aware [sic] that there is any indication [sic] to suggest that the deceased’s collapse was a direct [sic] result of the action of either a therapeutic or illicit drug.”. Sic marks the evasions. In the Anglo-American law and court practice for suspicious death cases, this is the point at which evidence is either inadmissible for the prosecution’s case or short of the required standard of beyond reasonable doubt for the judge and jury.

Rutty also qualified his conclusion on the cause of Sturgess’s death by saying: “I am of the opinion that these observations, although reported organophosphate toxicity, are not necessarily specific in their own right to organophosphate toxicity.” — line 901. In his testimony this week Rutty referred to what he had been told by the DSTL Porton Down, claiming it was “independent”. Independent of Hughes’s proceeding, Porton Down is. Independent of the UK Ministry of Defence (MOD), it is not.

“I understand,” testified Rutty, “that there is independent [sic] laboratory evidence that the deceased was exposed to Novichok and that it is considered [sic] that this was through a dermal route. Thus, I am of the opinion that the clinical presentation in terms of the signs and symptoms, as well as the in-lift laboratory tests and the tests and reports received following the autopsy examination all support that Dawn Sturgess did not collapse or die from a natural medical event, an assault or the result of a therapeutic or illicit drug overdose but rather due to the complications resulting from a cardiac arrest caused by Novichok toxicity. Having been exposed to the nerve agent Novichok…appears from the information 1 have been provided [sic] to have occurred through a dermal exposure…”

Apart from this hearsay, the only evidence made public of what Rutty was told by the DSTL Porton Down is a 2-page, partly censored summary report from Porton Down attached as an appendix to Rutty’s report. According to Porton Down, its testing of blood samples taken from Sturgess on July 2, 2018, found no specific Novichok evidence. Instead, the summary claims the finding was of “a characteristic marker for exposure to a particular nerve agent of the Novichok class”. The state laboratory kept repeating the blood testing for two days until on July 4, 2018, when the report claims “these analytical results confirmed that Dawn STURGESS was poisoned with a specific Novichok agent”. The specificity of the identification – that’s to say, reliable biochemical evidence — has been omitted from the report.

Read more …

“It is possible to say that Russia has already won the current conflict for a very simple reason: Ukrainians do not want to fight anymore.”

• “Punitive Front” In Kursk Shows There Is No Future For Ukrainian Forces (SCF)

There is ample evidence that Ukraine’s armed forces are close to complete collapse. After nearly three years of intense fighting against Russia, the Kiev regime no longer appears to have enough strength to sustain its war efforts in the manner it has done previously. Despite the almost endless supply of Western money, weapons, and mercenaries on the battlefield, a number of material and psychological conditions are making it impossible for Ukraine to continue its operational and strategic capabilities. Since 2022, one of the main internal issues of the Kiev regime has been how to keep ordinary soldiers active on the battlefield, despite their family, ethnic and cultural ties with Russia – as well as their disbelief in any possibility of real victory on the battlefield.

There have been many reports since the beginning of the operation of Ukrainian soldiers who somehow refused to follow orders or revolted against their officers, being punished by the neo-Nazi battalions – who are the real defenders of the Maidan regime. Now, apparently, Ukraine has found the “perfect” destination for its “rebel soldiers” – the Kursk front. It is no longer a secret for anyone that the Ukrainian suicidal invasion of the southern region of Russia has no clear military objective. Initially, it was intended to divert Russian attention from Donbass, as well as to provoke nuclear terror, possibly by capturing the local power plant. Neither of these objectives was achieved and the Kursk trenches are now a mere “meat grinder” for Ukrainian troops.

In a rational government, the correct decision would be to stop the operation, retreat the troops and think about a new strategic plan. However, rationality and strategy are not part of the Ukrainian decision-making process. The regime decided to take advantage of the critical situation of the troops to create a kind of “punishment camp” for disobedient soldiers. In the current situation, servicemen who are considered “rebels”, deserters and “traitors” are sent to Kursk, from where they are unlikely to return.

Recently, the Russian security service published reports explaining how the enemy is using Kursk to punish its own soldiers. This was later confirmed by a Ukrainian soldier identified as “Alexandr”. In an interview with Western media, he reported that there had been a mutiny in Kurakhovo, Donetsk People’s Republic, by the 116th brigade of the army. Exhausted and unable to continue fighting, the soldiers went on a kind of “strike”, demanding rotation in their service. The reaction of the commanders was simply brutal, arresting the mutineers and sending them on a suicide mission to Kursk.

In fact, the practice of the “punitive front” is not new. Several armies have used this method throughout history, trying to punish their own soldiers by sending them on suicide missions from which they would be unlikely to return. The main problem with this type of attitude is that there are hardly any good expectations for the side that started implementing it. The most vital thing for an army to continue fighting during a conflict situation is the desire to defend the country, believing in national values and in the need to protect the people and the homeland. If this moral and psychological aspect is removed, nothing is able to stop the soldier from prioritizing his own personal interests and his natural quest for survival, ignoring national purposes.

It is possible to say that Russia has already won the current conflict for a very simple reason: Ukrainians do not want to fight anymore. For the regime’s soldiers, the war is a burden. All they want is to get away from the front. Kiev makes this situation even worse by making it clear that fighting in the most difficult missions of the conflict is a “punishment” – something to be avoided. Meanwhile, most of the Russian military personnel in the operation are volunteers who deliberately want to defend the country against the Western enemy. Morally and psychologically, Ukraine is already defeated. The experience in Kursk makes it clear that for Moscow, victory is only a matter of time.

Read more …

“..the refusal of Finance Minister Christian Lindner to support a budgetary plan that would increase aid to Ukraine..”

• German PM Scholz Blames Ukraine Aid For Government Collapse (RT)

The key reason for the collapse of Germany’s ruling coalition was the refusal of Finance Minister Christian Lindner to support a budgetary plan that would increase aid to Ukraine, Chancellor Olaf Scholz has said. On Wednesday, Scholz fired Lindner, the leader of the pro-business Free Democratic Party (FDP), which is one of three parties comprising Germany’s so-called ‘Traffic Light’ coalition government alongside the Social Democrats and the Greens. The rift between Scholz and Lindner reportedly came to a head after a meeting in which the coalition partners failed to find common ground on how to plug a multibillion-euro hole in next year’s budget and revive the struggling economy. At a press conference the same day, Scholz said that, by dismissing Lindner – who walked out along with other FDP ministers, he had sought to “turn away damage from our country.”

He noted that he had made a comprehensive offer to Lindner in a bid to close a budgetary gap in a way that would not “plunge our country into chaos.” According to the German leader, his proposal had four key points, including a push to ensure affordable energy costs, a package to secure jobs in the automotive industry, and a plan to introduce an investment premium to attract capital to Germany. Scholz also insisted on “increasing our support for Ukraine, which is heading towards a severe winter,” adding that Germany had to send a signal to the world that it can be relied upon, especially after Donald Trump’s victory. “The finance minister shows no willingness to implement this offer in the federal government for the benefit of our country. I do not want to subject our country to such behavior any longer,” he added.

Following the coalition’s collapse, Scholz found himself at the helm of a minority government and announced a vote of confidence in mid-January, which could potentially pave the way for snap election in March. Previous media reports claimed that Lindner had asked the Defense Ministry to limit military assistance to Kiev, citing budgetary difficulties. Berlin has already almost halved its assistance to the embattled country from €7.5 billion ($8 billion) in 2024 and to just €4 billion ($4.3 billion) in 2025. Russia has repeatedly denounced Western arms shipments to Ukraine, warning that they are only prolonging the conflict and imposing a burden on taxpayers without altering the outcome.

Read more …

They volunteered.

• EU Could Face Gas Shortages – FT (RT)

The European Union’s gas supplies could be at risk this winter due to increasing reliance on liquefied natural gas (LNG) as a replacement for Russian pipeline gas, the Financial Times wrote on Thursday. The bloc increased LNG purchases two years ago following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict and sanctions on Russia. The supply and pricing of globally traded super-chilled fuel are volatile and can be affected by regional crises. This is the EU’s “fundamental problem,” the publication explained. ”As it stands, Europe’s gas storages are full and the winter gas balance looks OK,” one trader told the FT. “But anything can happen. You just need a few supply disruptions and things could go horribly wrong.” The EU still gets around 5% of its gas imports from Russia via Ukraine’s gas transit network, according to Brussels-based economic think tank Bruegel.

The transit agreement between Moscow and Kiev is set to expire on December 31. The Ukrainian leadership has insisted that this will not be extended. Russian President Vladimir Putin said last month that Moscow can continue to supply piped gas to the EU via Ukraine, but Kiev must extend the contract. ”If we suddenly get a very cold winter at the same time as we lose the Russian gas flows, that will just be very bullish for gas prices,” energy strategist Florence Schmit told the FT. “And I don’t think there’s going to be any big alternative supplies via [other] pipelines. I think most of it will need to be replaced by LNG.”

Another source of concern is a possible escalation of the Middle East conflict, the FT noted. A closure of the Strait of Hormuz, the only sea passage from the Persian Gulf to the open ocean and an area sensitive to tensions between Israel and Iran, would jeopardize 20% of the global LNG supply, according to energy analytics firm Kpler.”The risk is we don’t run out of gas this winter, but it gets a lot more difficult to fill to a comfortable level ahead of next winter,” another gas trader told the FT. “You’ll always have gas. The question is what price you get that gas in.” In late October, European gas prices climbed to their highest level of the year, close to €44 ($47.50) per megawatt hour, as a production outage in key supplier Norway added to market concerns over the situation in the Middle East.

Read more …

“..the Kremlin sees a leadership “vacuum” during this period and is “testing for soft tissue” in the West.”

• NATO Knows Ukraine Is Losing – Foreign Policy (RT)

NATO is fully aware that Ukraine is slowly losing its conflict with Russia, with an especially difficult winter predicted to worsen the situation, the influential US publication Foreign Policy has reported. Amid increasing infrastructure damage and pressure on Kiev’s key resources, Western officials are warning that a victory for Moscow would solidify its influence in Europe, the magazine claims in an article, published on Wednesday. Foreign Policy sources believe Russian President Vladimir Putin is taking advantage of uncertainty in Washington. Michael Bociurkiw – a lobbyist at NATO’s Atlantic Council adjunct – speaking from Ukraine, stated that the Kremlin sees a leadership “vacuum” during this period and is “testing for soft tissue” in the West.

The strategy has reportedly been effective, he says, as missile strikes across Ukrainian cities have increased the possibility of winter power and heating shortages. Moscow’s attacks on Ukrainian ports, according to officials, have also hurt Kiev’s logistics. The report indicates that Ukraine’s losses are reshaping the strategic outlook in the US and Western Europe. It highlights that a Russian victory would be a major setback for Washington and NATO. Western experts argue that Russia retaining its new territories could lead to a strengthened military presence near NATO’s borders, potentially igniting further conflict. Moscow highlighted Kiev’s aspirations to join NATO as among the main reasons for launching its military operation against Ukraine in February 2022.

Ruth Deyermond, of King’s College London, said a cease-fire would cause the Americans to lose face. “Ukraine losing would look to the rest of the world as if the US was losing to Russia… any scaling back of US support would also look as if the US had been forced to retreat by Russia,” she said. Political shifts in the US could mean a reassessment of Washington’s aid to Ukraine, Foreign Policy added. Observers warn this may signal a weakened American footprint on the global stage. Russia has intensified its strikes on Ukrainian military and energy facilities in recent months. In April, the Defense Ministry said they were a response to Kiev’s attempts to target Russian oil infrastructure, stressing that the targeted facilities support the Ukrainian defense industry, and that the strikes do not target civilians.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

RFK Gates

 

 

Optimus

 

 

Dots

 

 

Stoat
https://twitter.com/i/status/1854773870705709192

 

 

Rabbit

 

 

Puppy

 

 

SSB

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle November 3 2024

Nov 032024
 
 November 3, 2024  Posted by at 9:25 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , ,  86 Responses »


Vincent van Gogh Field with Flowers near Arles 1888

 

• “The American System” Made America Great (Rickards)
• Elon Musk Asks Ron Paul To Join Department Of Gov’t Efficiency (ZH)
• House Speaker ‘Really Bullish’ Washington Will Be All-GOP Town In January (JTN)
• House Speaker Plan: Moving Bureaucrats From DC To Reshape Government (JTN)
• Candidates’ Final Tours: A Flustered Harris, And A Joyful Trump (Whedon)
• People Aren’t Garbage. Partisan Politics Is (Matt Taibbi)
• Trump, Vance Take Aim At Renewable Energy, Many Communities Already Did (JTN)
• Polymarket’s Trump-Bullish Whale: “Absolutely No Political Agenda” (ZH)
• Leftists Predict Hysterical Dystopian Future (ZH)
• Kiev Officials ‘Ready’ For Potential Trump Presidency – WaPo (RT)
• West’s Rules-Based Order To Collapse Soon – Medvedev
• West Sees Red Over Failed Second Color Revolution In Georgia (SCF)
• Novichok: UK Government Sedated The Skripals To Stop Them Talking (Helmer)
• Brutally Murdered 13 Years Ago, Gaddafi Is Only Growing More Beloved (Fetouri)

 

 

 

 

Maher
https://twitter.com/i/status/1852565201515630859

In the bag

Tucker

Fulton County

RFK

Dec. 5?
https://twitter.com/i/status/1852539432395845815

Tulsi
https://twitter.com/i/status/1852686204921426042

Baris

Jesse

 

 

Tucker Grand Finale With President Donald Trump in Glendale, AZ (start at 1.12?!, Trump at 1.38)

 

 

 

 

 

 

“Donald Trump recently did an interview with John Micklethwait, Bloomberg’s top editor and a former editor of The Economist. Micklethwait made the tired point that Trump’s tariffs would raise prices and be bad for Americans.”

• “The American System” Made America Great (Rickards)

Most of us have been taught that free trade is good and that tariffs are bad. And on the surface it certainly seems true. The theory of free trade based on comparative advantage was advocated by British economist David Ricardo in the early 19th century. Ricardo’s theory said that trading nations are endowed with attributes that give them a relative advantage in producing certain goods versus others. These attributes could consist of natural resources, climate, population, river systems, education, ports, financial capacity or any other factor of production. Nations should produce those goods as to which they have a natural advantage and trade with other nations for goods where the advantage was not so great. Countries should specialize in what they do best, and let others also specialize in what they do best. Then countries could simply trade the goods they make for the goods made by others.

All sides would be better off because prices would be lower as a result of specialization in those goods where you have a natural advantage. It’s a nice theory often summed up in the idea that Tom Brady shouldn’t mow his own lawn because it makes more sense to pay a landscaper while he practices football. For example, if the U.K. had an advantage in textile production and Portugal had an advantage in wine production, then the U.K. and Portugal should trade wool for wine. But if the theory of comparative advantage were true, Japan would still be exporting tuna fish instead of cars, computers, TVs, steel and much more. The same can be said of the globalists’ view that capital should flow freely across borders. That might be advantageous in theory but market manipulation by central banks and rogue actors like Goldman Sachs and big hedge funds make it a treacherous proposition.

The problem with this theory of comparative advantage is that the factors of production are not permanent and they are not immobile. If labor moves from the countryside to the city in China, then suddenly China has a comparative advantage in cheap labor. If finance capital moves from New York banks to direct foreign investment in Chinese factories, then China has the comparative advantage in capital also. Trump understands this, Micklethwait doesn’t. Trump didn’t just make polite conversation in the interview. He called out Micklethwait by saying, “It must be hard for you to spend 25 years talking about tariffs as being negative and then have somebody explain to you that you’re totally wrong.” Ouch! Micklethwait certainly isn’t alone. Listening to hysterical commentary from the mainstream media about Trump’s tariffs, one would think his policies were in violation of the U.S. Constitution.

Nothing could be further from the truth. By advocating tariffs, Trump actually wants to return to what made America great in the first place. In fact, tariffs are as American as apple pie. From 1790–1962, the United States pursued high tariff policies under a program known as the American System. It was created by George Washington’s secretary of the Treasury, Alexander Hamilton, who drafted a report to Congress called the Report on Manufactures presented in 1791. Hamilton proposed that in order to have a strong country, America needed a strong manufacturing base with jobs that taught skills and offered income security. To achieve this, Hamilton proposed subsidies to U.S. businesses so they could compete successfully against more established U.K. and European businesses. These subsidies might include grants of government land or rights of way, purchase orders from the government itself or outright payments. This was a mercantilist system that encouraged a trade surplus and the accumulation of gold reserves.

Hamilton’s plan was later proposed on a broader scale by Kentucky Sen. Henry Clay. This new plan began with the Tariff of 1816. Later on, Abraham Lincoln adopted the American System as his platform in the election of 1860, and it became a bedrock principle of the new Republican Party. It was affirmed by William McKinley at the end of the 19th century and by Dwight Eisenhower in the 1950s. The 19th and early 20th centuries were a heyday of the American System. This period was characterized by enormous economic growth and population expansion by the U.S. The American System was also accompanied mostly by low inflation or even deflation (which increases the purchasing power of everyday citizens) despite occasional financial panics and some inflation during the Civil War. The key takeaway is that America grew rich and powerful from 1787–1962, a period of 175 years, using tariffs, subsidies and other barriers to trade to nurture domestic industry and protect high-paying manufacturing jobs.

Read more …

Ron Paul was made for this.

• Elon Musk Asks Ron Paul To Join Department Of Gov’t Efficiency (ZH)

With just two days left before the presidential election, Libertarians are waking up Saturday to a bunch of buzz on X about a potential “Ron Paul Revolution” in the White House—only possible if Donald Trump wins next week. On Friday evening, AFpost wrote on X, “Ron Paul says he wants to join Elon Musk to cut government waste in second Trump administration.” Musk chimed in on X: “It would be great to have Ron Paul as part of the Department of Government Efficiency!” Ron Paul responded: “I’d be happy to talk with you about it, Elon.” X users instantly went bananas on the prospect that Musk would give Ron Paul a role in the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, only if Trump wins. For months, Musk and Trump have been discussing DOGE, which the billionaire would serve as “Secretary of Cost-Cutting” – a government agency that doesn’t exist yet…

Musk would basically take his skills as a successful manager – in which he slashed 80% of the Twitter workforce a few years ago to make the ‘free speech’ social media platform operate more efficiently. In August, Musk said the goal of DOGE was to cut wasteful spending by the federal government and roll back massive regulations that stifle the economy. Musk recently said DOGE could identify “at least $2 trillion in cuts” as part of a formal review of federal agencies. This would also mean tens of thousands of job cuts—if not more—across the federal government. Just imagine if Trump wins, Musk and Ron Paul would wind down unneeded federal agencies like a scene from Argentina’s Javier Milei.

You hear that, Libertarian… Deal of a lifetime. And Libertarians, even Trump’s VP JD Vance, is coming around to Ron Paul’s argument on the Federal Reserve. Ron Paul had fun on X in the overnight hours. Delayed over the years … but now entirely possible. For decades, Ron Paul has proposed a smaller government by eliminating several wasteful federal agencies, ending foreign wars, eliminating taxes on capital gains and dividends, eliminating the estate tax, and—everyone’s favorite—abolishing the Federal Reserve. This has become true over the years. The only problem is when federal government spending accounts for 22.7% of the US GDP (in fiscal year 2023), reducing this spending could spark a recession. However, if Trump wins, DOGE could be messaged to the American people as a way to curb sky-high inflation sparked by disastrous ‘Bidenomics.’

Read more …

“..Hispanics are no longer a Democrat bloc, that they have become free agent voters..”

• House Speaker ‘Really Bullish’ Washington Will Be All-GOP Town In January (JTN)

House Speaker Mike Johnson told Just the News on Thursday he is increasingly confident that Republicans will sweep control of Congress and the White House in next Tuesday’s election, saying Hispanics, Blacks, Jews, union workers and other Democrat-leaning constituencies are switching parties over frustration the country is moving in the wrong direction. “I feel really bullish,” Johnson said in a wide-ranging interview with the John Solomon Reports podcast when asked about the GOP’s chances for a clean sweep of Washington D.C. “….I believe we’re going to win unified government with Republicans back in the White House and controlling the Senate, and we grow the House majority.” Johnson said the election between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris presented a rare moment in U.S. history where voters could choose between two White House holders – a former president and a current vice president – based on their records and not just their promises.

“I genuinely believe we’re going to have an historic demographic shift in this election,” he said. “I think when all the analysis is done on the other side of this, they will see that we had a record number of Hispanic and Latino voters, for example, coming into the Republican Party, a record number of Black and African-American voters, Jewish voters, union workers. I mean, people who have not traditionally been in our camp are coming now. “And the reason is because they’re desperate for change, and they know the unique thing about this presidential contest is that both of these persons have had an administration. This isn’t theoretical…. They know what life is like under Harris and Biden, and they know what it was like under Trump, and I think that has a big effect across the board and all the way down the ballot,” he said.

Johnson’s comments follow several recent polls noting demographic shifts toward Trump by several Democratic constituencies even as Harris holds a commanding leading with female voters. The Speaker also reacted to comments the new CEO of the Spanish-language TV network Univision, Daniel Alegre, made on the John Solomon Reports podcast on Wednesday that Hispanics are no longer a Democrat bloc, that they have become free agent voters driven by issues and are shifting this election toward Trump and the GOP.

“Hispanic and Latino voters are just like everybody else, and they they’re so fed up and fired up about the cost of living and rising crime rates in all their communities.,” Johnson said, adding that border security has become another compelling concern for Latino voters. “And then also, on top of that, remember that Hispanic and Latino voters are very family oriented,” he added. “Many of them have deep religious traditions and beliefs, and they see the Democratic Party abandoning all of these sort of foundational principles. And they’ve had enough, and I think they have the same frustration everybody else does. I think that’s why they’re coming into our camp.”

Read more …

” I just think there’s almost unlimited potential in front of us, and we’ve got to seize that moment..”

• House Speaker Plan: Moving Bureaucrats From DC To Reshape Government (JTN)

House Speaker Mike Johnson says Republicans have an ambitious plan to reshape and shrink federal government if they win the election. That vision includes a plan to deport tens of thousands of federal bureaucrats from Washington and relocate them to middle America. In a wide-ranging interview this week with Just the News, Johnson said he and other GOP leaders wants to move federal agency offices, personnel and assets from the nation’s capital to bring them closer to the people they serve and farther from the monied special interests that often hijack policy and spending. “There’s a lot of talk about uprooting, you know, these entrenched bureaucracies and putting them out elsewhere around the country,” Johnson told the John Solomon Reports podcast.

He explained such a re-invention of the monstrous federal bureaucracy with more than 2 million federal workers and contractors would integrate with former President Donald Trump’s plan to name billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk to lead a government efficiency office and also tie to fiscal conservatives’ vision to eliminate federal bureaucracies and send monies to the states in the form of block grants. The Louisiana Republican said the deportation of Washington bureaucrats would also create a natural shrinkage in the size and cost of government, “That accomplishes a lot of important goals but the first would be that you don’t have all these career civil service law protected bureaucrats,” he said. “Some of them have been camped out of these agencies for decades. They’re nameless, faceless. We don’t know who to hold accountable,” he said.

Johnson continued, saying “The idea is, if you move the agency to, you know, northern Kansas or southwest New Mexico, or wherever it is around the country, then some of the swamp dwellers they will not desire to follow the job to the new, less desirable location,” he added. “They love the swamp. You know they want to stay. They’ll turn them into lobbyist or something to stay in D.C.” The mass transfer and departure of bureaucrats then leads to a “business reorganization proposition” for federal government, he said. “You’ve got agencies that you can scale down because you have empty cubicles and … almost all the agencies are bloated and inefficient,” he said. “So you can scale that down. And then in the cubicles that you do need to fill, we’ve had America First Policy Institute and some of our other think tanks that have been working to develop a notebook full of highly qualified, previously vetted, limited government conservatives who have expertise in these areas.”

Johnson’s comments were the most sweeping he’s made about a congressional vision for shrinking the budget and reshaping the budget. He said the process would take a “blowtorch” to the regulatory state and align government agencies in the aftermath of a historic Supreme Court ruling this summer that reversed a decades old “Chevron doctrine.” Under the new ruling, federal bureaucrats can’t make up or interpret their own regulations and simply must enforce those authorized by Congress. “We have a once in a lifetime, yeah, once in a lifetime opportunity to really claw back article one authority to the legislative branch under the Constitution and have an administration that is in tune with that whole agenda. So look, I just think there’s almost unlimited potential in front of us, and we’ve got to seize that moment,” Johnson said.

Read more …

“We’ve done something that’s unprecedented, and we’ve had fun, but now we have to get, hopefully, to work.”

• Candidates’ Final Tours: A Flustered Harris, And A Joyful Trump (Whedon)

With the election just days away, both former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris are in the final stretch of their campaign tours, but the tones of each couldn’t contrast more, with Trump on offense and on message and Harris playing defense against the political far-left at her own rallies. Though Harris initially attempted to portray her campaign as one of “joy”, Trump has taken on an almost jovial tone as polling and betting odds increasingly paint him as the favorite. His recent Madison Square Garden rally, moreover, was an offensive play in the heart of Democratic territory and saw tens of thousands of people gather in the Big Apple for what he later deemed a “love fest.” Polling data shows a tight contest, with Trump holding a 0.3% lead in the RealClearPolitics average. That outlet currently projects Trump to win 287 electoral votes to Harris’s 251. Polymarket betting odds also favor Trump to win with a 61.1% chance to Harris’s 39.0%.

Though the race remains in tossup territory, the Trump campaign is quite optimistic. Campaign pollster Tony Fabrizio, this week, released a memo highlighting the difference in polling between this election and 2020. The key point was that, in every swing state, Trump is polling better than in 2020 by a significant margin. “I point this out NOT to stoke overconfidence or complacency, but to illustrate just how close this election is and that victory is within our reach,” he wrote. “It is crucial we do not get distracted by the media noise and remain focused on our closing message, persuading the few remaining undecided voters and turning out our base.” The Trump campaign appears to have taken his words to heart. Kicking off the week with his blowout rally at Madison Square Garden, Trump proceeded to hold event after event all across all the key battlegrounds, often doing two rallies per day.

Election weekend will see him go beyond that and hold three rallies each on Saturday and Sunday, with four more scheduled for Monday. While two are set for North Carolina, Trump plans to appear in Salem, Va., as the Old Dominion appears competitive. His Saturday events come off of Friday rallies in Michigan and Wisconsin. His Sunday will feature rallies in Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and Georgia while his Monday will see him hold four more, two in Pennsylvania and one each in North Carolina and Michigan. Trump opened his Michigan rally, by applauding the crowd sizes and positive energy of his events, including stunts such as driving a garbage truck after President Biden called his supporters “garbage.” “They’ll never be anything like what we’ve done,” he said of Democratic rallies. “We’ve done something that’s unprecedented, and we’ve had fun, but now we have to get, hopefully, to work.”

Read more …

“It’s the people who define us by votes who are garbage, not the other way around.”

• People Aren’t Garbage. Partisan Politics Is (Matt Taibbi)

The cycle was the usual nonsense. At a Donald Trump rally in Manhattan a comic called Puerto Rico a “floating island of garbage.” Joe Biden emerged from his crypt to croak, “The only garbage I see floating out there is his supporters.” The Internet exploded. Reporters were dispatched around the country to gauge how much more pissed off everyone was now. ABC’s take interviewing Harris supporters in Pennsylvania was, “Voters view one another across partisan divide with increasing animosity.” They quoted humans-in-the-street, who all felt strongly. “I would say that some of them are garbage,” said Samantha Leister, 32, while Shawn Vanderheyden, 44, opined, “I just think they are uneducated, and they believe all the lies.” ABC summed up the cultural divide: “Interviews with voters in battleground states reveal that it’s only growing deeper and more insurmountable.”

Surely people know it, but this is all a trick. First, campaign writers only talk to people at campaign events, so the pool of quotes is automatically pared to holders of Very Strong Political Opinions. Second, the odd “Who cares?” answer is instinctively culled by campaign writers as commercially/politically unhelpful. Non-voters or even just people who care more about other things than Harris/Trump — UFOs, knitting, the girl in biology class — ruin the suspension of disbelief. You end up reading copy that hugely over-represents that strange subset of people who define themselves by their votes. When I was first sent to cover campaigns in 2004, a year in which 40% of eligible voters didn’t bother, I was troubled by the absence of non-voters in coverage.

A Rolling Stone editor with whom I rarely worked rolled eyes and said, “We don’t cover them because they’re not part of the fucking story,” which I instantly knew wasn’t true, but I was new and to my shame I didn’t say anything. The numbers of non-voters exposed how inconsequential presidential politics was for most people. It measured the number of people left behind or out, and leaving the non-enthused out of the shot was journalism’s way of covering the holes in the charade. Two years later I was embedded with a group of Oklahoma reservists sent to work as MPs in Iraq. Sgt. Stephen Wilkerson was the team commander. He wore a tattoo on his foot with an arrow pointing to his big toe that read, TAG GOES HERE. His nickname was “Stretch-Nuts” because it was said he could balance a Heineken bottle on his ball-skin. On my first day he asked what I do. I cover presidential elections, I said. He made a jerk-off gesture. That was the last mention of politics on the trip.

In the roughly twenty years since the act of not voting, or even just not really really caring about presidential politics, has been villainized. Now the emotionally healthy person, the one who has a life and isn’t consumed with fears about the Next Hitler, is assumed to harbor secret sympathies, as bad as the worst MAGAT. This is different from the old scam. Now the person who shrugs and says “Who cares?” is called a liar. Everyone must care the way they do, and if you don’t care in that right way — every waking minute, with chewed nails and a carefully weeded social circle to match the correct vote and attitude set — you’re garbage. Many of us have seen in recent years what this hounding has done even to friends or relatives, turning them to Flatland characters, two-dimensional nerve cases scanning everyone for signs of unsuitability. Whatever happens next week, I don’t ever want to be that. It’s the people who define us by votes who are garbage, not the other way around.

Read more …

“In 2014, one wind project was canceled. Since then, the total number has grown to 464 wind projects shot down, as well as 281 solar projects.”

• Trump, Vance Take Aim At Renewable Energy, Many Communities Already Did (JTN)

While it’s been difficult for voters to determine exactly where Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris truly stands on energy, former President Donald Trump and his running mate, Sen. JD Vance, R-Ohio, each discussed their views at length on “The Joe Rogan Experience” podcast. Vance, who appeared on the podcast Thursday, spent several minutes discussing energy with host Joe Rogan. Vance said he and his wife took a road trip through Iowa, Nebraska and Kansas and for miles all they could see were wind farms. “This is beautiful American countryside that used to be green rolling hills, and now you have these disgusting, dystopian wind turbines. I’m sorry. They are ugly. I will die on this hill. They’re ugly. I don’t want them in American society,” Vance said. The wind energy industry is running up against more and more opposition. Much of it comes from grassroots efforts at the local level.

Energy watchdog Robert Bryce maintains a database of renewable energy projects that have been scrapped, most often because of community opposition. In 2014, one wind project was canceled. Since then, the total number has grown to 464 wind projects shot down, as well as 281 solar projects. The wind industry doesn’t appear to believe these community concerns are valid. The Associated Press reported on comments wind energy lobbyists made at a conference in Atlantic City, New Jersey Tuesday, claiming that concerns about wind projects are driven by “misinformation.” The industry is vowing to fight against it. Paulina O’Connor, executive director of the New Jersey Offshore Wind Alliance, told the Associated Press that she has trouble predicting “what crazy thing they’re [wind energy opponents] going to come next.” Bryce told Just the News that, while lobbyists the Associated Press quoted are dismissive of communities’ concerns, developers are going to find it harder and harder to get a welcoming response.

“The public acceptance of wind energy is exhausted. People don’t want to live near these massive turbines, and they are expressing that in many [places] across the country, from Maine to Hawaii,” Bryce said. Among the concerns that wind lobbyists described as “misinformation” was the claims that offshore wind is killing whales. During his appearance on the Rogan podcast, Trump commented on these concerns. “I wanna be a whale psychiatrist. It drives the whales fricking crazy. And something happens with them, but for whatever reason, they’re getting washed up onshore and you know, they’re ignored by these environmentalists. But they don’t talk about it.” Trump said. The Associated Press, which has received millions of dollars from political advocacy groups that promote the wind and solar industry, reported that these claims are “unsubstantiated” based on the fact that federal agencies tasked with carrying out the Biden-Harris goal of building 30 gigawatts of offshore wind have denied any connections between offshore wind and whale deaths.

While it’s true that wind turbines aren’t directly killing whales, whale advocates argue that the noise of the construction causes harm that results in the animals swimming into vessel traffic. Robert Rand, founder of the acoustics consultancy company Rand Acoustics, has surveyed noise levels from pile driving and sonar survey vessels. Both studies found that the incidental harassment authorizations — permits that offshore wind developers are required to obtain to conduct activities that may adversely affect marine animals — don’t impose sufficient mitigation requirements to protect marine animals. Rutgers professor Apostolos Gerasoulis performed a statistical analysis and found a strong correlation between where whales are dying and offshore wind development.

Besides growing opposition to offshore wind, especially after a blade broke off a wind turbine near Nantucket and scattered debris across multiple beaches, the offshore wind industry is struggling financially. An offshore lease sale in the Gulf of Maine netted only 4 bidders on 439,096 acres that were offered, and the bids came in at $50 per acre. A 2022 auction for a lease area off the coast of New York and New Jersey sold 6 leases on 488,000 acres for $8,955 per acre. The sale may be the last for at least a year, as a provision in the Inflation Reduction Act prohibits offshore wind lease sales without offering up oil and gas lease sales. The Department of Interior’s five-year offshore oil and gas lease shale program offers the fewest leases in the program’s history.

Read more …

“..leftist major media outlets are setting America up for post-election social unrest by perpetuating a fiction that the race is a close one.”

Be that as it may, there have been some major shifts at Polymarket. Overnight, Trump has fallen from 67% to 55%. Wisconsin and Michigan are now Harris. The House has gone Democrat.

• Polymarket’s Trump-Bullish Whale: “Absolutely No Political Agenda” (ZH)

While still guarding his anonymity, the mysterious man who’s bet more than $30 million on a Trump election victory via the Polymarket prediction marketplace has come forward to assert that his wagers aren’t intended to sway the election, but simply to profit from an outcome he’s highly confident in. “My intent is just making money,” said the man who describes himself as a Frenchman and former US resident who was a trader for American banks. In an exclusive interview with the Wall Street Journal via Zoom, he used the pseudonym “Théo,” saying he wanted to remain anonymous out of a desire to conceal the extent of his assets from his children and friends. The Journal said he was “sport[ing] a short, neatly trimmed beard” and spoke English with a small accent. Here’s how the Journal described the precipitation of the interview, and the paper’s process to ensure it wasn’t talking to an imposter:

“Théo emailed the Journal after the publication of an Oct. 18 article about his wagers. To prove that he was behind the Polymarket wagers, the Journal asked him to place a bet on whether Taylor Swift would announce that she is pregnant in 2024—one of the many small, nonpolitical wagers available on the platform. Minutes later, Polymarket’s website showed that one of the four accounts, Theo4, had placed a small bet on Swift’s pregnancy. ” In that original Oct. 18 article, the Journal gave some credit to the idea that the concentrated bets may represent some form of intentional narrative-control scheme meant to benefit Trump. Théo emailed the Journal to refute that theory, writing, “I have absolutely no political agenda.” In his subsequent interview, Théo told the Journal he’s a veteran trader with a history of risking tens of millions of dollars when he discovers a high-confidence trade — and said that’s what he sees in the chance to wager on a Trump victory.

When news broke of the whale’s huge wagers on Trump, Polymarket engaged outside experts to scrutinize transactions in presidential election betting, an unnamed source told the Journal at the time. Last week, Polymarket said it had contacted the whale and confirmed it was a French citizen with an extensive financial services and trading background. “Based on the investigation, we understand that this individual is taking a directional position based on personal views of the election,” the firm said. Théo said his conviction on a Trump victory rests on pollsters’ failure to capture the full extent of Trump’s support in both the 2016 and 2020 elections, and his belief that the “shy Trump voter effect” still endures in 2024. “I know a lot of Americans who would vote for Trump without telling you that,” he said, while also scoffing at the possibility that pollsters have improved their methodologies this time around. Having been previously accused of trying to shape the election, Théo dished out an accusation of his own, saying leftist major media outlets are setting America up for post-election social unrest by perpetuating a fiction that the race is a close one.

Théo thinks Trump is poised to rout Harris, which is why he has more than $30 million on Trump reaching 270 electoral votes, with the potential to receive $80 million if he’s right. He says his $30 million on Trump represents most of his liquid assets. Théo also has bets on a Trump popular-vote victory, along with bets on various swing-state wins. He also gave some insights into how he’s been trading: He started quietly in August by betting several million dollars on Trump, using an account with the username Fredi9999. At the time, Trump and Harris had roughly even chances on Polymarket. Théo spread out his wagers over multiple days and weeks to avoid causing a price spike. Still, as his bets grew, Théo noticed other traders were backing away from quoting prices when Fredi9999 was buying. That made it harder for Théo to get attractive prices. He created the other three accounts in September and October to obscure his purchasing, Théo said.

Single-handedly accounting for 25% of the contracts on a Trump electoral college win and 40% of the bids on a popular vote victory, Théo would have a hard time pulling money off the table without pushing the value of his contracts down. Speaking of which, the electoral college version of a Trump win peaked on Wednesday at 76 cents (with a dollar payoff if Trump wins). However they’ve taken a big dive since — plunging to 57.5 cents as this is written in the wee hours of Saturday morning. [..] If you’re itching to buy the dip, note that Americans are officially barred from Polymarket. You can thank your all-powerful, all-knowing, Constitution-violating federal government for protecting you from yourself: The Commodity Futures Trading Commission fined the platform in 2022 for allegedly providing illegal trading services, prompting Polymarket to bar Americans going forward.

Read more …

“JD Vance as dictator for life? Conservatives banning contraception? Elon Musk as an immortal techno god who spies on the masses using X and AI?”

• Leftists Predict Hysterical Dystopian Future (ZH)

The secret to understanding the average progressive mind is to first realize that everything they do revolves around a deeply ingrained fantasy world in which they are rebels; righteous underdogs fighting against “the system” or “the patriarchy.” Leftists cannot function within their collectivist ideology without first creating a fascist bogeyman to revolt against. If they were to ever realize that they are, in fact, the establishment and the authoritarians, their entire world view would collapse. This is why you will continue to see content like the election propaganda video below, no matter how ridiculous the premise might be. Leftist activists create these narratives, not because they are necessarily convincing to most people, but because they need to convince themselves that they are still the good guys.

JD Vance as dictator for life? Conservatives banning contraception? Elon Musk as an immortal techno god who spies on the masses using X and AI? Global warming destroying the planet and creating a Mad Max future in which the homeless are forced into concentration camps? The only thing missing is the forced birthing ceremonies from The Handmaid’s Tale. The video credits cite a handful of progressive NGOs as references for donations (including Vote.org) but little on who specifically made it. The relevant issue is the insight this gives into the insanity of left activists. They cling to so many assumptions they have been proven wrong about time after time (global warming), and they also imagine a world in which conservatives are the elites searching for immortality. They seem to be projecting the habits and hobbies of the very globalists that fund leftist groups today.

One could argue that perhaps this is gaslighting – They’re accusing conservatives of scheming to rule the world when they are the people that actually want control. That could be, but the conspiracy theories surrounding “Project 2025” suggest a Q-Anon level of delusion going on that feeds directly into bizarre narratives like those in the video. Leftists have to believe they’re fighting the good fight, even though they’re actually useful idiots for the establishment. This desperate need to take on the role of “freedom fighter” doesn’t mesh very well with reality. Keep in mind, for nearly two decades progressives have enjoyed expanding political and social power, with nearly every western government, every major NGO, every corporation, every legacy media outlet and every Big Tech platform dominated by woke ideology. From ESG to DEI to LGBTQ+ and beyond, Americans and much of the west have been endlessly bombarded from every angle by leftist propaganda.

Their war on conservative principles and individual freedom nearly came to a crescendo during the covid pandemic when they claimed the power to take away people’s access to the economy if they refused to accept an experimental vaccine and follow the mandates to the letter. Surveys showed a disturbing number of Democrats supported the outright destruction of constitutional freedoms in the name of forcing people to adhere to medical mandates based entirely on lies. Leftists also supported the widespread censorship of conservative voices on everything from the covid vaccine, to the lockdowns, to climate change, to Hunter Biden’s laptop. This censorship was spearheaded by the Biden Administration acting in violation of the constitution as they worked closely with Big Tech companies to shut down dissent. They aren’t fighting “the man”, they are the man. Ridiculous AI generated political videos like the one above are not going to change that.

Read more …

“There is optimism in Zelensky’s office that he could forge a personal bond with Trump..”

• Kiev Officials ‘Ready’ For Potential Trump Presidency – WaPo (RT)

Officials in Kiev reject the notion that an election victory for Donald Trump would spell disaster for Ukraine, despite his criticisms of US aid to Kiev and pledges to quickly end the conflict with Moscow, the Washington Post reported on Friday. Two unnamed members of Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky’s team told the paper that the Republican presidential candidate’s “negative” messaging on Ukraine was “just campaign rhetoric” that will not necessarily correlate with his actions if he wins the election on November 5. There is a belief in the Kiev government that Trump would not want to look weak on the global stage by turning his back on Ukraine and, as a result, might make more decisive moves to support Kiev, WaPo said.

“With Russia advancing on the battlefield for the past year,” the Ukrainian officials believe that the status quo, which is likely to be maintained if Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris prevails in the race for the White House, is “not working,” the report read. Because of this, they suggested that “a drastic change” in US policy towards Ukraine could actually “be good” for Kiev. There is optimism in Zelensky’s office that he could forge a personal bond with Trump and eventually turn him into a supporter of Kiev, WaPo said. However, some Ukrainian officials, who talked to the paper, acknowledged that there is a “higher potential for a downside” if Trump wins a second term, and expressed concern that he would pressure Ukraine to make territorial concessions to Russia in exchange for peace.

Last month, Trump said on the PBD Podcast that the conflict between Russia and Ukraine was “a loser” and that Zelensky “should never have let that war start.” He described the Ukrainian leader as “one of the greatest salesmen I have ever seen,” referring to his ability to persuade the Biden administration to provide him with more military aid every time he comes to Washington. The Republican presidential candidate also reiterated his claim that he “will settle the Russia-Ukraine [conflict], while I am president-elect,” but did not reveal how he might achieve this. Back in June, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov commented on media reports of that Trump’s team was developing a roadmap for settling the Ukraine conflict, and stressed that “the value of any plan lies in the details and whether it takes into account the situation on the battlefield.” Peskov reiterated that Moscow remains ready for negotiations, but only if Ukraine recognises the realities on the ground.

Read more …

“.. the rules-based order is actually what that the West believes “is right”, adding that “once you are out of this order, you’re a perpetrator.”

• West’s Rules-Based Order To Collapse Soon – Medvedev

The so-called rules-based order imposed by the US and its allies on the global scene is an unstable structure, which is about to fall apart, former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has said in an exclusive interview with RT. Creating crises such as the conflict between Russia and Ukraine in various places is how the US is trying to rule the world, Medvedev, who now serves as the deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council, told the broadcaster on Saturday. “So, the more crises they create, the better, they think, the situation is for America… It makes money from weapons, supplies, and by allocating money to its defense industry,” he said. “The Americans are getting what they want at the price of more blood and casualties. This is why the Americans are engaging in feeding the war. But that system is coming to an end,” the former president warned.

The authorities in Washington “feel the world is falling out from under their feet and they are resisting it in every way possible,” he said.This is why the Americans see BRICS and other unions currently being created around the globe, in which the US has no say, as “hostile,” Medvedev explained. Washington and its allies accuse the members of those groups of “violating the rules-based order,” but, at same time, cannot explain what this order is,” he said. “I have carefully picked through the legal text and studied it: it is incomprehensible. It is not clear what the order is and who approved it. It is really just an idea of the US and its allies, while mostly in NATO, of how best to do business in the world,” the former president stressed. According to Medvedev, the rules-based order is actually what that the West believes “is right”, adding that “once you are out of this order, you’re a perpetrator.”

Read more …

“Western media reported that “Western pollsters” claimed that there were voting irregularities. What were Western pollsters doing in Georgia in the first place?”

• West Sees Red Over Failed Second Color Revolution In Georgia (SCF)

The United States and European Union are threatening consequences for Georgia after its citizens voted “the wrong way” – for peaceful relations with Russia and traditional moral values. Farcically, this is while the U.S. heads into presidential elections that are mired in chaos and recriminations over vote rigging and buying of votes by oligarchs and big businesses. Welcome to Western-style democracy where if you vote the way the powers-that-be want, it’s a fair election. If you vote the wrong way, it’s a rigged, flawed result that should be ignored or, worse, overturned. Such was the heated reaction from Western states to the electoral victory of the ruling Georgian Dream (GD) party last weekend in the South Caucasus nation. The party campaigned on a strong, clear platform for pursuing peaceful neighborly relations with Russia.

GD also declared support for traditional social and moral values, rejecting the Western pseudo-liberal agenda of promoting gender-bender LGBTQ+ identities, which was espoused by the Western-backed Georgian opposition parties. At the end of the day, Georgian Dream won a stunning victory, taking nearly 54 percent of the vote, translating into obtaining 90 out of a total of 150 parliamentary seats. Four opposition parties, which touted closer integration ties with NATO and the EU and acclaiming LGBTQ+ rights, won less than 38 percent of the vote. The Georgian people are to be commended for asserting their democratic rights in the face of massive Western interference in the election. Western money and NGOs amplified the opposition parties. If they had won, the new pro-Western administration would have turned Georgia into a second war front against Russia in conjunction with the NATO-backed Ukrainian regime.

Georgian and Ukraine have been at the center of the Western policy of expanding NATO around Russia’s borders. Both countries were declared future members of the military bloc as far back as 2008, although NATO membership is a red line for Russia. Fortunately, Georgian voters were aware of the geopolitical stakes and rallied to the cause of prioritizing peaceful regional relations and rejecting the notional security privileges of NATO. Western recriminations were fast and furious after the result. Western media reported that “Western pollsters” claimed that there were voting irregularities. What were Western pollsters doing in Georgia in the first place? Such entities sound more like a plant to stir post-election trouble.

As it turns out, there were indeed incidents of vote buying, ballot stuffing, and intimidation at polling stations. But videos showed that the incidents were agitprops organized by the Western-sponsored opposition parties. However, thankfully, such malfeasance was relatively minor and did not invalidate the overall final result. Georgia’s Central Election Committee declared the process to be free and fair. The authorized election invigilating body has given its verdict, and that should be the end of it.

Read more …

“As a result of having communicated with Yulia Skripal I was interviewed by the police and my statement recorded.”

• Novichok: UK Government Sedated The Skripals To Stop Them Talking (Helmer)

The British Government was exposed in the Dawn Sturgess Inquiry this week as keeping Sergei and Yulia Skripal unconscious to silence them. That was six years ago, when they were in Salisbury District Hospital in March 2018. Now, prevented from testifying in public at the public inquiry under way in London, they are still incommunicado, either in prison or dead. The evidence revealed in the published witness statements and transcript of testimony in four days of hearings at the Sturgess Inquiry October 28-31 shows that British Government officials have lied in public and lied on oath in the courts to conceal what they have been doing to accuse Russia of Novichok poisonings in the Salisbury area in 2018. The Inquiry records show that the chairman and judge, Anthony Hughes (titled Lord Hughes of Ombersley), and the lawyers working for him are actively working to protect the lies and prevent contradicting evidence from becoming public. .

Surprise testimony by Dr Stephen Cockroft, the doctor who cared for Sergei and Yulia Skripal on their admission to Salisbury District Hospital (SDH) on March 4, 2018, has revealed that the British Government kept them heavily sedated in order to tell the courts and media that they were unconscious and unresponsive when they had revived. Government officials ordered the hospital to punish Cockroft from talking directly to Yulia Skripal when she came out of her coma on March 8, 2018. Cockroft’s evidence of March 8, 2018, directly contradicts the evidence given on oath in the High Court in London on March 20-22, 2018, by state officials and an SDH “treating consultant” – the name was kept secret in the published court report — that “Mr Skripal is heavily sedated following injury by a nerve agent. Ms Skripal is heavily sedated following injury by a nerve agent. Mr Skripal is unable to communicate in any way. Ms Skripal is unable to communicate in any meaningful way.”

Cockroft’s disclosures also contradict the script which Yulia Skripal read out at a MI6-supervised and Reuters-filmed appearance for two minutes at a US bomber base in the UK in May of 2018. Skripal claimed then “after 20 days in a coma I woke to the news that we had both been poisoned.” In fact, Yulia woke from her coma after four (4) days. On July 18, 2024, Cockroft told the Inquiry which questioned him for a second witness statement: “An untoward event took place on Thursday 8 March 2018. A colleague (Dr James Haslam) had ordered all sedation to be discontinued temporarily to Yulia Skripal. This is quite a common practice on Intensive Care Units (ICU) and we refer to it as a ‘sedation hold’ and would normally be planned and discussed with the team. Unfortunately, having ordered the sedation hold, Dr Haslam left the ICU without advising me. I was present on the ICU treating another patient. As a consequence, Yulia Skripal regained consciousness very quickly and was confused, frightened, trying to get out of bed and was pulling at her various vascular access lines and breathing tube.

Cockroft then revealed that because the sedation had been stopped and Yulia was no longer comatose, Cockroft was punished by Blanshard, the hospital’s chief doctor. “I tried to feedback my concerns to Dr Haslam, but he was of the opinion that nothing untoward had occurred, but when these events were reported back to the Medical Director (Christine Blanshard) she had a very different opinion and I was summoned to a meeting with her on Monday 12 March to discuss my management of the incident. There is no formal record of that meeting [sic], however I was suspended from working on the ICU with immediate effect until Yulia and Sergei had either been discharged or died. Apparently by having had a conversation with Yulia Skripal I had been unprofessional and should have left such a conversation to the security services. I was warned by Dr Blanshard that I should not discuss any aspect of the poisonings with colleagues or other individuals and advised that any such discussion would be treated as serious misconduct. As a result of having communicated with Yulia Skripal I was interviewed by the police and my statement recorded.”

The Salisbury hospital official who collaborated with government officials and police to conceal the condition of the Skripals in hospital; to threaten and sanction the medical staff; and to intervene in the treatment of the Skripals, was the SDH medical director, Dr Christine Blanshard. By enforcing sedation on the two patients for the government’s political purpose, without their consent when they were conscious, out of coma, and capable of communicating, Blanshard violated her Hippocratic Oath.

Read more …

“..the strongest military alliance in human history had just launched its first war in North Africa since France was defeated in Algeria in 1962..”

• Brutally Murdered 13 Years Ago, Gaddafi Is Only Growing More Beloved (Fetouri)

October marked 13 years since Colonel Muammar Gaddafi was brutally murdered by a NATO-supported mob of rebels in circumstances still buried under a barrage of deliberate disinformation. Yet 13 years on, Gaddafi is probably the most popular figure in the North African country. Is it just nostalgia that makes the general public yearn for a man who has long been dead, or is there something else that goes beyond mere nostalgia as a human emotion? On September 23, 2009, in his first and only speech before the United Nations General Assembly, Muammar Gaddafi described the UN Security Council as council of “horror.” He explained that the council, by the UN charter, is responsible for peace in the world but has only brought “more wars and sanctions.” What he did not know at the time was that the same UN organ would, less than two years later, authorize his removal and ultimately his murder by adopting resolution 1973, which gave the green light to all UN member states to interfere in Libya as long they notified the UN Secretary General of their intention to do so.

Resolution 1973, adopted on March 17, 2011, was the UNSC response to public demonstrations that engulfed parts of Libya in the previous month, in which people demanded better living conditions, housing, and jobs. By the time the issue was deliberated at the UN, what had been peaceful and legitimate public demonstrations had turned into an armed revolt led by various stakeholders, including Islamists and former terrorists, against the legitimate government. The wave of public discontent in Libya was part of wider public awakenings that began in neighboring Tunisia before moving to Egypt. In both countries, the West attempted to save President Ben Ali in Tunisia and later his Egyptian counterpart, Hosni Mubarak, but failed. There were no calls for military intervention to “protect” civilians in either country. With Libya, it was a completely different matter.

Faced with armed groups seeking to destabilize the country, the Gaddafi government responded, just like any other respected government would do, by using force against the armed rebellion. Under Gaddafi, Libya had seen similar events in the previous four decades, where Western-supported attempts were made not only to kill Gaddafi but also to bring about regime change by force. The government used force to contain the demonstration, but specifically targeting the armed groups that had sprung up among the peaceful demonstrators. In this chaos, many innocent people were killed and wounded, but nowhere near the inflated figures reported in Western media and publically talked about by Western politicians in their quest to widen the rift between the Libyan authorities and its citizens and to sow discord among the Libyans who were divided between supporters of Gaddafi and supporters of what became known as the February 17 Revolution.

William Hague, the UK’s foreign minister at the time, for example, told the world’s media that Gaddafi had already fled the country and was on his way to Venezuela, when in fact Gaddafi never left Tripoli – so Hague misled public opinion, which further inflamed the situation. Under pressure from veto-wielding permanent superpower members, the UNSC passed resolution 1973 under the pretext of the ‘Right to Protect’ (R2P) doctrine that, controversially, allows the UN to use military force to protect civilians when their government fails to do so. Paragraph 4 of the resolution called on all world countries to “take all necessary measures” to protect civilians in Libya, impose a no fly zone, and urged all UN member states to tighten the embargo already imposed on the country by UNSC resolution 1970, passed on February 26, 2011, referring the situation in Libya to the International Criminal Court (ICC), to investigate the alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity allegedly being committed on a large scale in Libya on the orders of Gaddafi himself, who was one of three officials indicated by the court.

Resolution 1970 was not passed based on concrete independent investigative reports of facts but, mainly, based on biased media reports. Neither the UN nor any of its relevant institutions investigated events on the ground to be able to lay blame, and the first official UN mission arrived in Libya in March and reported to the UNSC in April 2011. This means the UNSC adopted its two resolutions, 1970 and 1973, based on unverified media reports, unreliable witness statements and biased civil organizations accounts. By the time the UNSC adopted resolution 1973, Libya was already in a full-swing civil war between the armed rebels and government forces that, in being dehumanized by biased Western media, were called “Gaddafi brigades.” The rebels were actually a mix of terror organizations and locals who chose to fight the government.

They included groups such as Al-Qaeda, Ansar Al-Sharia, Al-Qa’ida in the Lands of the Islamic Maghreb, Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, and remnants of other groups and Afghan war veterans who infiltrated the country. By mid-March 2011, Libya was consumed by internal violent strife, its government boycotted by most countries, its voice drowned under the barrage of media lies and fake news, its officials banned from travel, and its leader being hunted day and night. The rebels fighting the government were being supplied, financed, armed, trained, and directed by the West and several Arab countries such as Qatar, Jordan, and United Arab Emirates. The stage was set for NATO to take over the military intervention. In fact, France, the US, and UK had already started bombing Libya by launching the first wave of missile strikes on Libyan air defense sites and radars in order to prepare the ground for imposing a no-fly zone. Even civil security forces, manning checkpoints around Tripoli, were bombed.

By the end of March 2011, Libya has become a “theatre of operations” and NATO launched “Operation Unified Protector” with an around-the-clock bombardment. That meant that the strongest military alliance in human history had just launched its first war in North Africa since France was defeated in Algeria in 1962. By the end of its operation, NATO had killed hundreds of Libyan women and children, destroyed private properties and infrastructure, all in the name of reinforcing international law and protecting civilian while the real agenda was far more sinister. The scenes of chaos, destruction, displacements, and killings continued from March to October, in which the Libyan army managed to hold back the rebels on the ground while facing NATO air bombardments. On October 20, 2011, Gaddafi was murdered in gruesome scenes and his body, alongside the bodies of his son and his defense minister, displayed for the horrified public to see.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Rogan Fetterman

 

 

Eva
https://twitter.com/i/status/1852419256232636518

 

 

Dog fight

 

 

Dog kitten
https://twitter.com/i/status/1852392683748372979

 

 

Awesome

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle October 24 2024

Oct 242024
 
 October 24, 2024  Posted by at 8:45 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  61 Responses »


René Magritte Popular panorama 1926

 

• Trump Likely to Win in All Swing States – Election Betting Odds (Sp.)
• Nate Silver Predicts Trump Will Win Presidential Election Next Month (JTN)
• Polymarket Is Scanning For US Users As Election Odds Skew Toward Trump (CT)
• GOP Early-Voting Turnout In Nevada Amazes Veteran Observer, Alarms Dems (ZH)
• Tulsi Gabbard Joins Republican Party (RT)
• Bill Gates Funds Harris With $50 Million Donation (Sp.)
• Harris To Deliver ‘Closing Argument Speech’ On The Ellipse Next Week (JTN)
• LA Times Owner Blocks Harris Endorsement (RT)
• World ‘Tired’ of US-led West – RT Editor-in-Chief (RT)
• BRICS Summit: Marching Towards A New World Order (Bordachev)
• Kremlin Orders Delay In New Electric War Attacks (Helmer)
• Ukraine War Ending Scenarios (Barton)
• THAAD Idea Is Like All Of Biden’s So Far With Israel. A Miscalculation (Jay)
• Musk Mania (Jonathan Turley)
• Meteorite That Caused Earth’s Oceans to Boil Helped Early Life Thrive (Sp.)

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/i/status/1849067926940492006
https://twitter.com/i/status/1849111488847548516

Rasmussen
https://twitter.com/i/status/1848812774593356219

CNN Poll

Amish
https://twitter.com/i/status/1848920948721795350

Check your ballot

531,000+

Sex slavery

Ackman

Kamala: Donald Trump is Hitler.

Liz Cheney
https://twitter.com/i/status/1848757362816921610

Rogan SNL

Tucker

RFK

BBC

Dana

 

 

 

 

After declaring Hillary a sure win in 2016, pollsters are no longer trusted. It’s betting firms now.

• Trump Likely to Win in All Swing States – Election Betting Odds (Sp.)

Former US President and Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump is likely to win in all swing states and get reelected as a result, according to the data released by Election Betting Odds on Tuesday. The betting firm put Trump’s odds of winning Arizona at 72.1%, Georgia at 70.5%, North Carolina at 66.5%, Pennsylvania at 61.5%, Nevada at 60.7%, Michigan at 59.5% and Wisconsin at 57.5%, while Trump’s Democratic rival Kamala Harris is projected to lose them all. Trump’s odds of winning the election stand at 60.3%, while Harris’ chances are estimated at only 39.1%. The analysis predicts that Trump will secure 312 electoral votes, versus Harris’ 226. The service sums up data provided by Betfair, Smarkets, PredictIt, Polymarket and Kalshi, and updates the information every 20 minutes.

According to a poll conducted by The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Trump is leading Harris by four percentage points in the swing state of Georgia. The Republican candidate got 47% support, while the Democratic nominee was supported by 43% of those polled. However, the daily noted that 8% of likely voters said they were still undecided, which could change the outcome. The poll was conducted on October 7-16 among 1,000 likely voters in Georgia, with a 3.1 percentage point margin of error. A separate Reuters/Ipsos poll showed Harris leading Trump by three percentage points nationally, 46% to 43%.

When asked about their approach to immigration and economic challenges, respondents favored Trump, who led 46% to 38% on the economy and 48% to 35% on immigration. Over 4,100 US adults took part in the Reuters/Ipsos poll, which was conducted online nationwide on October 15-21. Trump and Harris have been running neck-and-neck in the seven swing states ahead of the November 5 presidential election. These states, also referred to as battleground states, are seen as pivotal for either candidate to secure victory.

Read more …

You expect some kind of scientific method, but you get: ‘C’mon, Nate, what’s your gut say?’

• Nate Silver Predicts Trump Will Win Presidential Election Next Month (JTN)

Veteran pollster Nate Silver on Tuesday said his “gut feeling” is that former President Donald Trump will win the presidential election next month, but that the race is still up in the air. The prediction, which was published in a New York Times op-ed, comes as an aggregate of polls on RealClearPolling shows Trump winning the electoral college, while Vice President Kamala Harris leads in the popular vote. But Trump’s lead in the swing states are within the margin of error in most polls. Silver has been tracking presidential elections since former President Barack Obama’s victory in 2008. “In an election where the seven battleground states are all polling within a percentage point or two, 50-50 is the only responsible forecast,” Silver wrote.

“Yet when I deliver this unsatisfying news, I inevitably get a question: ‘C’mon, Nate, what’s your gut say?’ So OK, I’ll tell you. My gut says Donald Trump. And my guess is that it is true for many anxious Democrats.” The pollster defended the gut feeling by observing that polls have underestimated Trump in the past two presidential elections. Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was the clear favorite in 2016, but lost to Trump, and Trump fared better than expected against President Joe Biden in 2020. Silver also noted that if Trump does win, one clear sign could be that Democrats no longer have the “clear edge” when it comes to party identification, because many more people now identify as Republicans.

The FiveThirtyEight founder also warned that polls could be wrong about Harris, since the pollsters are too focused on measuring support for Trump. One way these polls could be wrong is by weighing people based on who they believe they voted for in 2020. “People often misremember or misstate whom they voted for and are more likely to say they voted for the winner,” Silver wrote. “That could plausibly bias the polls against Harris because people who say they voted for Biden but actually voted for Trump will get flagged as new Trump voters when they aren’t.”

Read more …

“Almost $2.3 billion in bets have been placed in Polymarket’s “Presidential Election Winner 2024” market..”

• Polymarket Is Scanning For US Users As Election Odds Skew Toward Trump (CT)

Crypto predictions platform Polymarket is reportedly checking to ensure whales placing big bets on the United States presidential election are based overseas, as US users are banned from the platform. “Polymarket is in the process of re-checking the details of users of its platform, particularly those making large wagers, to ensure compliance with its rules,” a report from Bloomberg said on Oct. 22, citing a person familiar with the matter. While Polymarket has systems in place to block US users from its website, concerns have been raised that US residents may be circumventing the blockage via virtual private networks — prompting Polymarket to do more due diligence. It follows speculation that a handful of large whales are skewing the odds for the November US presidential election in favor of Republican candidate and former President Donald Trump.

Almost $2.3 billion in bets have been placed in Polymarket’s “Presidential Election Winner 2024” market, which currently favors Trump (63.7%) over Vice President Kamala Harris (36.2%). The whereabouts of Polymarket whale “Fredi9999” have attracted considerable attention, as more than $20 million has been placed on Republican outcomes so far. Trump also leads Harris on competitor prediction platform Kalshi at 60%. Still, Trump’s lead in the crypto prediction markets isn’t currently reflected in most voter polls, including a Reuters poll with Harris in front at 46% to 43%. In response to Polymarket media scrutiny, Kalshi founder Tarek Mansour said Polymarket’s results are accurate and not caused by inorganic manipulation. “The median bet size on Harris is larger than the median bet size on Donald Trump, with the median bet for Harris coming in at $85 compared with Trump’s $58.”

Billionaire and Polymarket investor Mark Cuban said most of the bets placed on Polymarket’s US election market are coming from overseas – and as a result, are not a true reflection of eligible voter sentiment. “From all indications, most of the money coming into Polymarket is foreign money, so I don’t think it’s an indication of anything,” Cuban said in an interview with CNBC Squawk Box on Oct. 21. Polymarket reached a $1.4 million settlement with the United States commodities regulator back in January 2022 for offering more than 900 event-based binary options event markets without obtaining registration. In a different case, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission partially lost a lawsuit it filed against Kalshi in September. The court ruled that the commodities regulator had “exceeded its statutory authority” by ordering the US-based entity to suspend its election markets.

Read more …

“Statewide, Republicans account for 52% of in-person early voting, Democrats are just 28%, and “other” is 20%.”

• GOP Early-Voting Turnout In Nevada Amazes Veteran Observer, Alarms Dems (ZH)

Warning lights have been flashing all over the Democrats’ 2024 dashboard, and now a new one is pointing to big trouble for Kamala Harris in the battleground state of Nevada, where early voting results show that GOP voters are actually outnumbering Democrats. Across the country, Democrats typically account for a majority of early votes, and Nevada has been no exception — until now. “The numbers look pretty GOP so far, and that never happens in a presidential year,” wrote veteran Nevada political reporter Jon Ralston in a Tuesday afternoon blog post at the Nevada Independent. Democrats lead statewide mail-in voting by 17,298, but Republicans lead in-person voting by a whopping 25,173 — even beating Dems in Clark County and Washoe County, homes of Las Vegas and Reno, respectively.

Statewide, Republicans account for 52% of in-person early voting, Democrats are just 28%, and “other” is 20%. “Those in-person numbers are startling,” wrote Ralston, who’s been covering Silver State politics for three decades. “A few more days like this…and the Democratic bedwetting will reach epic proportions.” Another dynamic of Americans politics is the big distinction between urban and rural voting patterns, with cities reliably delivering large volumes of Democratic votes. In Nevada, the dynamic is perhaps even more pronounced, with Democrats’ statewide fortunes largely tied to the so-called “Clark firewall.” However, so far in 2024, that barrier is looking mighty short. “The Clark firewall is only 6,500, about a seventh of what it was in 2020,” wrote Ralston.

The bigger picture is even worse for the Democrats: “The [Republican voter-turnout] lead in rural Nevada is more than double the [Democrat] lead in urban Nevada,” he wrote. The sea change prompted Ralston to declare that we’re witnessing a new dynamic in the 2024 cycle: “The [GOP] rural firewall. It’s a thing.” The departure from norms could also have implications for what we see on Election Day: “It’s clear there are more Republicans voting early and by mail, which raises the possibility that Election Day may not be as robust for the GOP.” Extrapolating the results, Ralston concludes that “it means Kamala Harris has to win indies by close to double digits if this turnout scenario holds.” He cautioned that we’ve only three days into 14 days of early voting, and that results could shift.

However, he continued, “If this becomes a trend and not an anomaly, it will be over.” There’s also a Senate race in Nevada this year, pitting Republican challenger Sam Brown against incumbent Democrat Jacky Rosen. The Cook Political Report rates the race as “Lean D,” while Polymarket bettors collectively have Democrat Rosen at an 80% chance of winning. That’s a big variance from the presidential race, where Polymarket gives Trump a 65% chance of taking the state’s six electoral votes. No Republican presidential candidate has won the state since George W. Bush beat John Kerry by a 50.5% to 47.9% margin in 2004… but it looks like the table is being set for an end to that decades-long losing streak.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1848438746728862027

Read more …

“..anti-freedom, pro-censorship, pro-open borders, and pro-war..”

• Tulsi Gabbard Joins Republican Party (RT)

Former Democratic presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard has endorsed Donald Trump in the race for the White House, announcing that she has joined the Republican Party. Gabbard, 43, served as a Democratic congresswoman from Hawaii and ran for the party’s presidential nomination in 2020. Previously deployed to Iraq and Kuwait, she became a fierce critic of US military interventions abroad. Gabbard left the Democrats in 2022, accusing the party of being “under the complete control of an elitist cabal of warmongers driven by cowardly wokeness.” The firebrand made a surprise appearance at Trump’s rally in the battleground state of North Carolina on Tuesday, where the Republican candidate introduced her as someone with “so much common sense.”

After taking the floor and embracing Trump, Gabbard lashed out at the Democratic Party, which she said has become “unrecognizable” in recent years.The Democrats, whose election candidate is Vice President Kamala Harris, are now “anti-freedom, pro-censorship, pro-open borders, and pro-war,” Gabbard claimed, adding that Trump “pledged to end wars, not start them.” Gabbard argued that Trump’s leadership has helped “transform the Republican Party and bring it back to the party of the people and the party of peace.” “I’m proud to stand here with you today, President Trump, and announce that I’m joining the Republican Party. I am joining the party of the people… It is the party of common sense and the party that is led by a president who has the courage and strength to fight for peace.”

The former Democrat has been a vocal critic of Harris’ career as a prosecutor and her foreign policy, particularly on the Ukraine conflict. Gabbard blasted the Democratic nominee as the “main instigator” of hostilities, suggesting that she crossed Russia’s red line by advocating for Kiev’s eventual accession to NATO. “For any objective-minded person, you can see why they wouldn’t want NATO missiles sitting in Ukraine… Kamala Harris has put us, the American people, in this position, where we are closer to the brink of World War III and nuclear war than we ever have been before,” she said. Gabbard’s position is in line with that of Trump, who has repeatedly called for a ceasefire while pledging to end hostilities between Moscow and Kiev within 24 hours if elected.

Read more …

“Gates has expressed concerns about the potential impact of a second Donald Trump presidency on global health and family planning programs..”

• Bill Gates Funds Harris With $50 Million Donation (Sp.)

US billionaire Bill Gates has quietly donated $50 million to a nonprofit supporting Vice President Kamala Harris’s presidential run, The New York Times reported, citing three sources. While Gates hasn’t publicly endorsed Harris, his sizable donation was made to Future Forward, a “dark money” group backing her campaign. The funds were intended to remain anonymous, the report said. “Mr. Gates’s donation went specifically to Future Forward’s nonprofit arm, Future Forward USA Action, which as a 501(c)(4) ‘dark money’ organization does not disclose its donors, according to the people briefed. So any contribution by Mr. Gates will never appear on any public filing,” the media clarified. According to The New York Times, in private conversations this year with friends and others, Gates has expressed concerns about the potential impact of a second Donald Trump presidency on global health and family planning programs, The New York Times cited sources familiar with Gates’s thinking as saying.

Read more …

Where she will scream and screech that Trump is Hitler.

• Harris To Deliver ‘Closing Argument Speech’ On The Ellipse Next Week (JTN)

Vice President Kamala Harris will deliver a “closing argument” speech on the Ellipse in Washington, D.C., next week, exactly one week before the presidential election, senior campaign officials said. The location is the same place former President Donald Trump gave his infamous speech on January 6, 2021, before a crowd of his supporters descended on the Capitol. The Ellipse is a 52-acre park outside the South Lawn of the White House. The vice president’s advisors said the speech will contrast Trump’s January 6 speech, which a campaign official described as Trump’s worst moment in office, with Harris’s “optimistic vision” for the future, the campaign officials told NBC News. She will also encourage the nation to “turn the page on Trump.” The speech is expected to draw a crowd of approximately 7,750 people, according to a permit application that was filed with the National Park Service. The program will also include four to five speakers, and elected officials, according to CNN.

Harris’s advisers said the vice president will approach the address as a prosecutor, who is giving her closing statement to a jury of voters. The announcement comes after Harris delivered remarks at the Naval Observatory, the vice president’s home, in Washington on Wednesday, where she said Trump would “invoke” Adolf Hitler if elected back to the White House. Her remarks at that location have triggered debate over whether the vice president has violated the Hatch Act, which forbids federal government employees from engaging in political activity while on duty or in their official capacity as a federal employee, or try to sway an election. But vice presidents and presidents are usually exempt from the federal act to a degree, because of the dual nature of their roles as leaders and political figures.

Read more …

“..the LA Times is the most prominent newspaper in her home state of California..”

• LA Times Owner Blocks Harris Endorsement (RT)

The owner of the Los Angeles Times has forbidden the paper’s editorial board from backing Kamala Harris in this year’s US presidential election, bucking two decades of Democratic endorsements, Semafor has reported. The editorial board was preparing to endorse Harris for the presidency, until Executive Editor Terry Tang intervened earlier this month and ordered them not to endorse anyone, Semafor reported on Tuesday, citing two anonymous sources. According to these sources, the order came directly from the paper’s owner, Patrick Soon-Shiong. A South African-born medical doctor and billionaire entrepreneur, Soon-Shiong bought the ailing LA Times in 2018. While he managed to reverse decades of losses and headcount reductions, the newspaper’s advertising revenue plummeted during the Covid-19 pandemic, and more than 100 employees were sacked earlier this year.

Soon-Shiong’s decision to block the endorsement of Harris will be seen as a major blow to the vice president, as the LA Times is the most prominent newspaper in her home state of California. The LA Times endorsed Republican candidates in every election from the 1880s until 1972, when it backed Richard Nixon against South Dakota Senator George McGovern. This decision, which came months after the Watergate scandal emerged, angered some of the newspaper’s reporters, and the LA Times did not endorse a presidential candidate again until it sided with Barack Obama in 2008. The LA Times has endorsed Democrats in every subsequent election. In a list of endorsements published last week, the editorial board noted that “this may be the most consequential election in a generation.” However, it made no further mention of the presidential race, instead endorsing more than two dozen mostly Democratic candidates for positions ranging from school boards to the US Senate.

Read more …

“It shows our fatigue – with them, with their hypocrisy, with their dictates. With their attempts to turn us into something different, with their attempts to chop off pieces from us..”

• World ‘Tired’ of US-led West – RT Editor-in-Chief (RT)

The BRICS Summit in the Russian city of Kazan signals that the world is “tired” of the dictates of the US-led collective West, RT Editor-in-Chief Margarita Simonyan has said. The gathering also exposes the West’s failed attempts to isolate Russia, she added. Speaking on Tuesday at an event marking the anniversary of diplomatic relations between Russia and China, the RT editor-in-chief recalled the words of Chinese President Xi Jinping, who once said that his country does not need foreign “masters” who attempt to interfere in internal affairs on the pretense of human rights concerns. The same can be heard in Russia from President Vladimir Putin, Simonyan stated. “We know the price of their [the West’s] hypocrisy when they talk about human rights, and this is being said by the same people who used drug trafficking and the most brutal, most disgusting ways to enslave a nation in an effort to force China not to be China – which they did during the Opium Wars,” Simonyan said.

She emphasized that the ongoing BRICS Summit in Kazan demonstrates the clear friendship between the countries attending the event, but also provides evidence of the West’s failed attempts to isolate Russia from the rest of the world. “It shows our fatigue – with them, with their hypocrisy, with their dictates. With their attempts to turn us into something different, with their attempts to chop off pieces from us,” Simonyan said. “We are all tired. Thank you for the fact that we are tired together and will eventually rest together when the truth prevails and this unipolar world, which is already in tatters, ceases to exist.” Leaders from around the world have gathered in Kazan for the 16th BRICS Summit on October 22-24.

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, who is also attending, noted the significance of the summit for his organization, as the economic grouping represents nearly half of the global population. Guterres’ presence at the BRICS Summit has sparked criticism from Kiev, especially after he skipped this year’s Swiss-Ukraine ‘peace conference’. The BRICS Summit is set to host high-level bilateral talks and diplomatic discussions focused on multilateralism, with dozens of nations expressing interest in joining or working with the group. BRICS currently comprises Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, Iran, Egypt, Ethiopia, and the United Arab Emirates. The group represents approximately 46% of the world’s population and over 36% of global GDP, according to estimates from leading financial institutions.

Read more …

“In the case of BRICS, for the first time, Western countries did not initiate or lead the process.”

• BRICS Summit: Marching Towards A New World Order (Bordachev)

International politics seems to be losing its ability to develop in a linear fashion. From a layman’s point of view, this is of course extremely sad. But if we look at what’s happening in the broader context, it can even inspire a certain optimism. This is mainly because, given the current balance of power, any unswerving development is guaranteed to lead us to a much greater, possibly global, tragedy. In other words, the extraordinarily tragic events that fill today’s news agenda are likely to conceal a gradual movement towards a more stable world, for which the constant revision of what we call the international order will be a matter of routine. But at the same time, the likelihood of a revolutionary scenario, to which the near monopoly of a small group of states would inevitably lead us, will be minimized.

In this context, the international community, and in particular its leading states, is constantly faced with the challenge of choosing between two forms of engagement with the outgoing world order: destruction and creation. Both are in dialectical interaction, and it would be strange to think that there is a clear and simple path to a new, more just world order. All the more so because the opponents of the international community, represented by a small group of countries led by the United States, are not only conducting vigorous defensive operations, but are themselves trying to create the conditions for preserving their current privileges in the future. And they have very solid resources and influence to mobilize – which are not limited to punitive instruments against dissidents.

Therefore, the path of revision of the international order that most of the world’s countries are now embarking on is certainly much more difficult than any attempt at revolutionary revision. Although – and this is encouraging – it leaves more opportunities for what is happening now to be studied in the future. Of all the efforts and initiatives that are rightly seen as driving the new world order, BRICS, the now nine-nation bloc – originally formed by Brazil, Russia, India and China – is arguably the most important. From the outset, it included states that had the potential to embody, in theory and in practice, fundamental changes in the balance of power. Therefore, the BRICS were not inherently inapplicable to the criteria of effectiveness developed by Western political science to assess the success of international organizations.

The creation of such an association was in itself a major achievement. Firstly, because it included countries with very different foreign policy interests. That is, their desire to act together was underpinned by sufficiently reliable objective circumstances to make cooperation between such different powers meaningful. Secondly, because the emergence of BRICS signaled from the outset the West’s inability to control the evolution of international governance. The last major achievement of the US and Europe in this area was the creation of the G20 in 2009, a group of countries chosen by the West to share responsibility with Washington for the damage caused to the global economy by the US financial crisis of 2008. But as none of the other G20 countries wanted to do so, the impact of the group’s activities was rather insignificant. At the same time, even though the G20 has almost completely lost its relevance, it is still used by large developing countries as a way to increase their international presence. In the case of BRICS, for the first time, Western countries did not initiate or lead the process.

Read more …

“Zelensky’s word isn’t worth the gas it takes to utter it.”

• Kremlin Orders Delay In New Electric War Attacks (Helmer)

A two-month delay in Russian missile strikes against Ukrainian electricity infrastructure west of the Dnieper River and secret talks on end-of-war terms by the Kremlin go-between Vladimir Medinsky produced two signals from Kiev on Monday – one an offer by Vladimir Zelensky to reciprocate with a limit on Ukrainian missile and drone attacks on Russian territory. The second signal was a “consolation prize” from US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin who was in Kiev to meet Zelensky, his defence minister Rustem Umerov, and Ukrainian Armed Forces commander Alexander Syrsky. From Zelensky’s press conference in Kiev, a Financial Times reporter wrote: “Russia putting an end to aerial attacks on Ukrainian energy targets and cargo ships could pave the way for negotiations to end the war, the Ukrainian president has said.

Volodymyr Zelenskyy told journalists in Kyiv on Monday that ‘when it comes to energy and freedom of navigation, getting a result on these points would be a signal that Russia may be ready to end the war’…If Moscow and Kyiv agreed to end strikes on their respective energy infrastructures, it would be a significant step towards de-escalating the conflict, Zelenskyy said in reference to Ukrainian drone attacks on Russian oil refineries. ‘We saw during the first [peace] summit that there could be a decision on energy security. In other words: we do not attack their energy infrastructures, they don’t attack ours. Could this lead to the end of the war’s hot phase? I think so,’ he said.” Unusually, there has been no Pentagon readout after Austin’s meetings in Kiev.

Instead, there was a “statement” in advance that “during his engagements, the Secretary will meet with Ukrainian leadership and underscore the U.S. commitment to providing Ukraine with the security assistance it needs to defend itself from Russian aggression on the battlefield.” The geographic phrase, “on the battlefield”, is interpreted in Moscow to be the key. The Pentagon followed with a list of new military supplies tagged for “Ukraine’s urgently needed battlefield requirements.” CNN was briefed by Austin’s staff to emphasize the limited geography of the current US commitment. “A US defense official said that during their meeting, Austin emphasized to Zelensky the importance of Ukraine defending the territory it has taken inside Russia’s Kursk region and capitalizing on those gains, as well as fending off the Russians in the eastern Ukrainian city of Pokrovsk…

Much of Austin’s later meeting with Umerov and Ukrainian Armed Forces commander Oleksandr Syrskyi was also focused on Kursk, the defense official said, and the officials drilled down on military planning there for the next several months.” The New York Times was told to report: “The United States has agreed to give Ukraine $800 million in military aid that will go toward manufacturing long-range drones to use against Russian troops, Ukraine’s leader said on Monday…A Pentagon official, speaking anonymously because of the sensitivity of the issue, confirmed the move, which comes as the United States shifts its policy and moves toward shoring up Ukraine’s ability to fight the war with its own weapons and on its own terms…The decision to support long-range drone production in Ukraine may be a kind of consolation prize for Mr. Zelensky, who — despite repeated pleas — has so far failed to persuade Western partners to lift restrictions on using their long-range missiles to strike deep inside Russia.”

The US newspaper also quoted Umerov, standing beside Austin, as saying Ukraine would decide on its own what deep Russian territory targets to strike with the new drones the US is paying for it to produce on Ukrainian territory. “Ukraine’s defense minister, Rustem Umerov, said on Monday that Ukraine had invested more than $4 billion in its defence industry. Appearing alongside the U.S. defense secretary, Lloyd J. Austin III, in Kyiv, he said that long-range drones could hit targets more than 1,000 miles away and that they had already destroyed more than 200 military facilities in Russia…The decision also shows a change in tactics for the West.” Sources in Moscow acknowledge the sequence of statements in time; they are uncertain of their meaning for the Russian General Staff and its chief, Valery Gerasimov. “It appears that they are husbanding the missiles”, said one. “I wonder if there is going to be a November surprise.” “It’s a fool’s bargain,” said another. “Noone except the Russian military can guarantee the Nazis won’t continue to attack. Zelensky’s word isn’t worth the gas it takes to utter it.”

Read more …

“Russia has its updated military doctrine to fall back on. The question of losing the war is completely discounted, as winning is considered a matter of “life and death.”

• Ukraine War Ending Scenarios (Barton)

Scenario 1. Russia defeats Ukraine.
The unquestionable facts are that Russian troops keep steadily moving westward along the whole frontline in Ukraine. Just most recently, on 3 October 2024 they after heavy fighting, captured strategic town Vuhledar. Within the past two months the Russian army captured over 800 square km in Ukraine. Even the newly appointed, pushy NATO secretary general Mark Rutte has no doubts that it is so. The way he briefly described the military situation in Ukraine in his first press conference was as follows: Russian President Vladimir Putin’s forces are making advances in eastern Ukraine. Ukraine’s army has a shaky hold on part of the Kursk region in Russia, which has provided a temporary morale boost, but as casualties mount it remains outmanned and outgunned.

Should such a relentless military push continue, and one can hardly see how it could be stopped or reversed, it is moving toward victory. Even according to the least optimistic forecast, Russia is slowly but firmly moving to take over Ukrainian territory. Slowly, but surely. Will the use of long-range missiles deep inside Russian territory significantly alter the military situation? On September 6 this year, at Ramstein Air Base in Germany, U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin was clear in stating that “The use of donated U.S. weapons for long-range strikes on Russia would not turn the tide of the war for Ukraine.” In the unlikely event of a slowdown in Russian military advance in Ukraine, Russia has its updated military doctrine to fall back on. The question of losing the war is completely discounted, as winning is considered a matter of “life and death.”

Scenario 2. Facing nuclear Armageddon
It is essential to recall that, back in June 2024, the future Secretary General of NATO, Mark Rutte, advocated for all NATO member states to commit to participating in military operations outside of the alliance’s territory. This commitment went against the Hungarian president’s perception of his national interests, and he sought assurances from Mr. Rutte that Hungarian troops would not be sent to Ukraine. As we know, Hungary is normally obliged to defend each of the remaining 32 members if any of them is attacked by a non-member state, in line with Article 5 of the 1949 North Atlantic Treaty, which forms the foundation of the alliance. Hungary also has obligations under the European Union’s (TEU) mutual defense clause. Interestingly, as requested by the U.S., NATO’s Article 5 formulation does not imply automatic U.S. involvement in any armed conflict. Secretary Rutte gave written assurances to Mr. Orban as he requested. However, this does not imply that NATO troops will not be sent to Ukraine.

If that were the case, Mr. Rutte would have dismissed Orban’s fears by saying that no NATO troops would be sent to Ukraine. But he didn’t say that. Instead, he simply stated that Hungarian troops would not be sent there. Puzzlingly, after taking over from Stoltenberg, he spoke about strengthening partnerships that NATO has established with other countries around the world, notably in Asia and the Middle East, and insisted on Ukraine’s place in the ranks of NATO. Is he then already planning to send NATO troops to Ukraine and other countries? He portrayed the authorization of the use of long-range missiles by Ukraine as legitimate and proposed to leave it to individual countries. Are there any other indications of future NATO intervention in Ukraine? Perhaps the most compelling piece of evidence comes from a Polish judge, Tomasz Schmidt, who defected to Belarus on 31 May 2024. During a press conference, he revealed that the Polish government had promised Biden to send Polish troops to fight against Russia in Ukraine if the U.S. wished so.

Read more …

“The truth is though that Iran does not want a war with Israel..”

• THAAD Idea Is Like All Of Biden’s So Far With Israel. A Miscalculation (Jay)

The decision of Joe Biden to send THAAD missile system to Israel seemed like a tactical move, a strategic ace, some might argue. Biden has made it clear that Israel must not strike Iran’s military or its nuclear power infrastructure and that any such retaliation won’t be supported by the U.S. And so, in many ways, Israel is restricted now to reach out for low hanging fruit by bombing weapon sites in Syria and hitting Beirut. Netanyahu is like a shark at the bottom of the ocean. He has to keep a momentum going with war as the moment he stops, he sinks to the bottom and perishes. Hitting Iran is not as easy as it sounds. Israel cannot send fighter jets as the U.S. would have to offer refuelling facilities; and it can’t even fly over most countries surrounding Iran as they have all discounted this possibility.

There is only the option of long-range missiles but no one knows for sure if Israel’s missiles would get past Iran’s own missile defence systems which analysts assume are probably very good. And imagine the humiliation and loss of political capital if Netanyahu sent missiles there and discovered that Iran intercepted all of them. He would be finished. Yet the same can be said about the THAAD batteries. Many experts argue they probably won’t be effective against hypersonic missiles. They’ve never been tested so we don’t know. In reality the basis of Netanyahu’s political longevity is keeping such things a mystery. The more we don’t know about Iran’s military capabilities, the more that can be exploited. Same goes for the THAADs. Clarity really is the enemy here.

Israel has already had one moment of lucidity which has shocked both its elite and its people. The so-called impenetrable ‘Iron Dome’ missile defence system which intercepted most of Hezbollah’s medium-range ballistic missiles is pretty useless for hypersonic, high-altitude missiles which both Iran and Hezbollah have in their arsenal. Israel is now more vulnerable than ever against a massive attack of such missiles and the recent strike on a military base south of Haifa has shown both sides the extent of this susceptibility. Iran’s hypersonic missiles could wipe out all of Israel’s infrastructure if Tehran wishes. The truth is though that Iran does not want a war with Israel and is hoping that once the Israeli public notice just how many IDF soldiers are being killed in the south of Lebanon along its border, the exit of Netanyahu will be swift. His days are numbered.

And yet, despite all of the rhetoric we hear from the Biden camp, it would seem America does want a war. Or at least it’s happy to take Israel to the brink with the same foolhardy, delusional mentality that we see in Ukraine. Even today the U.S. mindset still believes it can threaten and other countries will back down, simply due to the size of America’s military capability. The escalate to de-escalate game. It might just work with the THAAD initiative. But for all the wrong reasons. The problem with the THAAD move by Biden is that the installation of such a system is too little, too late and may well blow up in the faces of the next U.S. administration creating a war with Iran when even Washington has been avoiding one all along. It all comes down to personalities. How will the next U.S. president react when the U.S. soldiers operating it are killed? Does he throw the lever, or stay cool? And doesn’t the mere presence of one of these vehicles present Iran with a sitting duck target?

Read more …

“..what is illegal offline should also be seen and dealt with as illegal online. Now it is a real thing. Democracy’s back.’”

• Musk Mania (Jonathan Turley)

I have previously written about the European Union’s (EU) effort to use its infamous Digital Services Act (DSA) to force companies like X to censor Americans, including on postings related to our presidential election. This is a direct assault on our free speech values, and yet the Biden-Harris Administration has not raised a peep of objection. Now, the EU is threatening to set these confiscatory fines with reference to revenue from companies other than X, including Space X. The EU has warned Musk that it is allowed to hit online platforms with fines of as much as 6% of their yearly global revenue for refusing to censor content, including “disinformation.” The inclusion of companies like Space X is ridiculous but perfectly consistent with the effort of the EU to use the DSA to regulate speech in the United States and around the world. The EU is arguing that as a “provider” Musk’s entire business portfolio can be included in the fine calculation. It is ridiculous and chilling.

Musk’s other companies have nothing to do with the platform policies of X. It is simply an unhinged coercive measure designed to break Musk. X has objected: “X Holdings Corp. submits that the combined market value of the Musk Group does not accurately reflect X’s monetization potential in the Union or its financial capacity, In particular, it argues that X and SpaceX provide entirely different services to entirely different users, so that there is no gateway effect, and that the undertakings controlled by Mr. Elon Musk ‘do not form one financial front, as the DMA presumes.’” However, the abusive calculation is precisely the point. The EU censors are making an example of Musk. If they break us, no company or executive could hope to defy them. They are being cheered on in this effort by an anti-free speech movement that includes America politicians and pundits.

One of the lowest moments came after Elon Musk bought Twitter on a pledge to restore free speech protections, Clinton called upon European officials to force Elon Musk to censor American citizens under the DSA. This is a former democratic presidential nominee calling upon Europeans to force the censorship of Americans. She was joined recently by another former democratic presidential nominee, John Kerry, who called for government crackdowns on free speech. In my new book on free speech and various columns, I write about the DSA as one of the greatest assaults on free speech in history. As I wrote in the book: “Under the DSA, users are ’empowered to report illegal content online and online platforms will have to act quickly.’ This includes speech that is viewed not only as ‘disinformation’ but also ‘incitement.’ European Commission Executive Vice President Margrethe Vestager has been one of the most prominent voices seeking international censorship. At the passage of the DSA, Vestager was ecstatic in declaring that it is ‘not a slogan anymore, that what is illegal offline should also be seen and dealt with as illegal online. Now it is a real thing. Democracy’s back.’”

The pressure on Musk’s other companies has also been ramping up in the United States. Recently, the California Coastal Commission rejected a request from the Air Force for additional launches from Vandenberg Air Force Base. It is not because the military agency did not need the launches. It was not because the nation and the community would not benefit from them. Rather, it was reportedly because, according to one commissioner, Musk has “aggressively injected himself into the presidential race.” It is all part of Musk mania and the need for the anti-free speech movement to break the only executive who has defied the pressure from this alliance of media, academic, corporate, and government officials. As I have discussed previously, there is a crushing irony in all of this. The left has made “foreign interference” with elections a mantra of claiming to be defending democracy. Yet, it applauds EU censors threatening companies that carry an interview with a targeted American politician. It also supports importing such censorship and blacklisting systems to the United States. When you agree with the censorship, it is not viewed as interference, but an intervention.

Read more …

The power of life.

• Meteorite That Caused Earth’s Oceans to Boil Helped Early Life Thrive (Sp.)

A meteorite that pummeled Earth about 3.26 billion years ago has shed light on fascinating secrets about our planet’s distant past. Heat from the impact of the S2 meteorite that struck Earth billions of years ago caused the topmost layer of the ocean to boil off, a new study published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences has discovered. S2 also triggered a tsunami bigger than any in known human history, revealed the team of scientists led by Nadja Drabon, Assistant Professor of Earth and Planetary Sciences at Harvard University. They studied rock samples retrieved from the impact site in the Barberton Greenstone belt of South Africa to better understand the consequences of that massive asteroid strike for our planet. S2, first discovered in 2014, is estimated to have been 40-60km wide, with a mass much greater than the space rock linked with the extinction of the dinosaurs 66 million years ago.

It is believed that this space rock gouged out a 500km-wide crater. Analysis of the sedimentology, geochemistry, and carbon isotope compositions left behind by the meteorite revealed that the impact 3.26 billion years ago also heated up the atmosphere by up to 100C, while the cloud of dust shut down all photosynthetic activity. However, besides the destruction, the impact also helped early microbes thrive. Nutrients like phosphorus and iron that fed simple organisms were churned up by the tsunami from the depths to the surface. “We know that after Earth first formed there was still a lot of debris flying around space that would be smashing into Earth… But now we have found that life was really resilient in the wake of some of these giant impacts, and that it actually bloomed and thrived,” Drabon said in a media statement.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Life is short

 

 

Dowd/Bret

 

 

Repair

 

 

Oranges

 

 

Guard dogs
https://twitter.com/i/status/1848982236235809076

 

 

Order in chaos

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle October 23 2024

Oct 232024
 
 October 23, 2024  Posted by at 8:34 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , ,  87 Responses »


René Magritte After the water, the clouds 1926

 

• Biden Wants Trump ‘Locked Up’ (RT)
• “This Is War”: Musk Responds To Bombshell “Kill Twitter” Plot (ZH)
• Musk’s Trump Support Follows Wave Of Government Probes Into His Companies (JTN)
• Polymarket Is Singlehandedly Moving The Entire US Bond Market (ZH)
• Biden Admin Under Fire Over Virginia Non-Citizen Voter Removals (Turley)
• Two Weeks Before the Meltdown Begins (Miele)
• Questions Are All “Pre Determined” At Kamala’s FAKE Town Hall (MN)
• Trump-Rogan Interview Set For Friday: Politico (ZH)
• Texas AG Demands FEC Action Over ‘Suspicious Donations’ To Democrats (ZH)
• Ukrainian Troops Increasingly Refusing Orders – El Pais (RT)
• Dumping US Dollar ‘Keeps Politics Out Of Economic Development’ – Putin (RT)
• Dollar’s Diktat Will Prove Its Downfall Once Emerging Powers Unite (Sp.)
• EU Bracing For Trade War With Trump – Politico (RT)
• Sharp Rise In Russia’s Share Of EU LNG Market (RT)
• Harris Denies Israel Is Committing Genocide in Gaza – Campaign (Antiwar)
• Biblical Cruelty Took Power In Israel: “Mein Kampf In Reverse” (José Goulão)

 

 

 

 


Elon Musk: “It must reach 69%, as foretold in the prophecy”

 

 

 

 

Vivek

High speed

Election day
https://twitter.com/i/status/1848572247650537955

Count

Lara

Convicted felon

RFK

Dana White

IRS

Tulsi

 

 

 

 

 

 

Scripted clickbait. “I know this sounds bizarre. If I had said this five years ago, you’d lock me up, but we’ve got to lock him up..”

• Biden Wants Trump ‘Locked Up’ (RT)

US President Joe Biden has claimed that Republican contender Donald Trump wants presidential immunity and powers to kill his opposition, and therefore should be locked up, as he spoke to a Democratic crowd with the election just half a month away. Biden, who stepped aside earlier this year to allow Vice President Kamala Harris to become the Democratic nominee, made the statement at a campaign office in New Hampshire on Tuesday. “He thinks he has a version of the Supreme Court ruling on immunity that allows him, if necessary, to physically eliminate someone he believes is a threat to him,” he said, referring to former President Trump. “I know this sounds bizarre. If I had said this five years ago, you’d lock me up, but we’ve got to lock him up,” Biden stated, drawing applause from the audience.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1848854784054571349

“Politically lock him up,” he clarified amid the crowd noise, seemingly backtracking on his statement. “Lock him out. That’s what we have to do.” Biden has faced scrutiny in the media over numerous gaffes, often misspeaking at similar events. He stepped aside as his party’s contender earlier this year amid concerns about his mental state following a disastrous televised debate against Trump. Last week, Biden suggested that Trump is running for president again “to stay out of jail,” referencing the Republican’s legal troubles.

Earlier this year, a Manhattan jury found Trump guilty on 34 charges related to falsifying business documents to cover up hush money paid to porn star Stormy Daniels. Trump also faces charges related to the January 6, 2021, Capitol riots. He denies any wrongdoing and insists that all of his legal troubles are a political witch hunt by his opponents. After Biden endorsed Harris as his party’s nominee, the Democrats initially enjoyed a honeymoon period with voters, rising in the polls. However, recent averages from the RCP polling data aggregator indicate that Trump is leading in all swing states.

Read more …

“..British advisors from Labour Together rescuing the distressed political damsel that is the Harris/Walz campaign..”

• “This Is War”: Musk Responds To Bombshell “Kill Twitter” Plot (ZH)

Elon Musk has responded to a bombshell report by journalists Paul Thacker and Matt Taibbi which reveals that a the UK’s Center for Countering Digital Hate – which is advising the Kamala Harris campaign, aims to “kill Musk’s Twitter”. [..] The British are coming, to meddle in our elections! In an explosive leak with ramifications for the upcoming U.S. presidential election, internal documents from the Center for Countering Digital Hate—whose founder is British political operative Morgan McSweeney, now advising the Kamala Harris campaign—show the group plans in writing to “kill Musk’s Twitter” while strengthening ties with the Biden/Harris administration and Democrats like Senator Amy Klobuchar, who has introduced multiple bills to regulate online “misinformation.”

[..] The documents obtained by The DisInformation Chronicle and Racket show CCDH’s hyperfocus on Musk — “Kill Musk’s Twitter” is the first item in the template of its monthly agenda notes dating back to the early months of this year. KILL, KILL, KILL: No matter what else the CCDH talks about, “Kill Musk’s Twitter” is its first item of business. The Center for Countering Digital Hate is the anti-disinformation activist ally of Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s Labour Party, and a messaging vehicle for Labour’s neoliberal think tank, Labour Together. Both the CCDH and Labour Together were founded by Morgan McSweeney, a Svengali credited with piloting Starmer’s rise to Downing Street, much as Karl Rove is credited with guiding George W. Bush to the White House.

The CCDH documents carry particular importance because McSweeney’s Labour Together political operatives have been teaching election strategy to Kamala Harris and Tim Walz, leading Politico to call Labour and the Democrats “sister parties.” CCDH’s focus on “Kill Musk’s Twitter” also adds to legal questions about the nonprofit’s tax-exempt status as a 501(c)(3) organization. According to the IRS, CCDH could lose its special tax status if “a substantial part of its activities is attempting to influence legislation.” Yet, CCDH’s third item on its annual priority list is “Trigger EU and UK regulatory action” and the group previously employed the firm Lot Sixteen to lobby congressional offices on “misinformation” in Washington. Both The DisInformation Chronicle and Racket have sent multiple, extensive questions to CCDH’s current CEO Imran Ahmed, another British political operative tied to McSweeney’s Labour Together. [..]

In the last two months, the Washington Post and Politico, among others, have run a series of features about British advisors from Labour Together rescuing the distressed political damsel that is the Harris/Walz campaign. Politico casts McSweeney as the “election mastermind” who first helped Keir Starmer defeat leftist Jeremy Corbyn to become the head of Labour, all the way to Starmer’s “landslide” win over Conservatives to become Prime Minister this past July, implying that McSweeney and his team can perform a similar miracle for Harris.

Read more …

“Take the red pill..”

• Musk’s Trump Support Follows Wave Of Government Probes Into His Companies (JTN)

As Elon Musk ramps up his $1 million-a-day support for Donald Trump, what appears to be a record of progressive harassment of his many companies may explain how the world’s richest man went all-in for Republicans. Musk’s transformation from a politically unengaged tech billionaire to mega-donor and avid campaigner has earned him the ire of Democrats who have derided “disinformation” on his X platform and suggest he is violating the law in his support for Trump. Undeterred, Musk, touting his most recent effort over the weekend, announced that his Trump-supporting Save America PAC would give away $1 million a day to people who sign an online petition pledging support for the First and Second Amendments. To date, the multibillionaire has reportedly dumped $75 million of his own cash into the political action committee to support Trump’s third bid for the presidency.

He has also joined the candidate on the campaign trail and is holding events in swing state Pennsylvania, becoming a de facto surrogate for the former president. “Take the red pill,” Elon Musk posted to X, alluding to the famous choice in the cult-classic movie “The Matrix” which has now come to represent a choice between the Red (Republican) and Blue (Democratic) political parties. Musk’s evolution into a fervent Trump supporter comes after years increasingly aggressive probes into his four companies by various agencies of the Biden administration for seemingly frivolous and potentially serious concerns alike. It is likely no accident that Musk now wants to see the government reduced in size and scope after burdensome lawsuits and regulatory actions against his companies, previously saying publicly that bureaucracy is “smothering” large projects in the United States.

Most recently, a California body responsible for managing the coastlines blocked a proposal for the Defense Department on behalf of SpaceX for increasing launches from Vandenberg Space Force Base in the state. Musk’s SpaceX has raked in billions from contracts primarily with DOD and NASA. The California Coastal Commission drew scrutiny after its members voiced criticisms of Musk’s political leanings during a meeting about whether to approve more frequent launches by the company in addition to other concerns, like the environment. “We’re dealing with a company, the head of which has aggressively injected himself into the presidential race and he’s managed a company in a way … that I find to be very disturbing,” said agency chair Caryl Hart. “The Coastal Commission has one job — take care of the California coast,” Musk shot back on X Tuesday before SpaceX filed a lawsuit against the commission.

“It is illegal for them to make decisions based on what they (mostly wrongly) think are my politics.” “Rarely has a government agency made so clear that it was exceeding its authorized mandate to punish a company for the political views and statements of its largest shareholder and CEO,” SpaceX alleged in the 45-page lawsuit. This is not the first time Musk’s SpaceX has been the target of government action. Last August, the Department of Justice announced a high profile lawsuit against the space exploration company for allegedly discriminating against asylum claimants and refugees in its hiring process. The suit alleged Musk’s company “routinely discouraged asylees and refugees from applying and refused to hire or consider them, because of their citizenship status,” according to the DOJ press release.

“SpaceX was told repeatedly that hiring anyone who was not a permanent resident of the United States would violate international arms trafficking law, which would be a criminal offense,” Musk said in post to X, which he acquired in a $44 billion deal in 2022. “We couldn’t even hire Canadian citizens, despite Canada being part of NORAD! This is yet another case of weaponization of the DOJ for political purposes.” Several months later, a federal judge in Texas blocked the administrative case against the company from proceeding while it challenged the specific internal adjudication process. In a preliminary ruling earlier this year, a Texas judge ruled that the internal DOJ administrative panel process was unconstitutional, though the decision is not binding on the federal government.

Read more …

“..both Treasuries and the Mexican peso appear to be pricing in a rising probability of Donald Trump winning..”

• Polymarket Is Singlehandedly Moving The Entire US Bond Market (ZH)

Online betting exchange Polymarket has not only taken the attention space by storm, rapidly becoming one of the most downloaded Apple apps… it is also quickly becoming a key driver behind the world’s largest and most liquid bond market. According to Bloomberg’s Masaki Kondo writes, Polymarket has become instrumental in setting at least the near-term price signals not only for the $28 trillion marketable US Treasury markets, but also for FX markets: that’s because both Treasuries and the Mexican peso appear to be pricing in a rising probability of Donald Trump winning the US presidential election, as indicated by Polymarket, while ignoring traditional polls which for the most part still show Kamala in the lead.

As this Bloomberg chart shows, the benchmark 10Y yield has been closely tracking the spread in the perceived odds of a vote victory between Trump and Kamala Harris. This difference has reached almost 30% points, according to data from Polymarket, with Trump seen leading the race, and where competitors such as Kalshi and PredictIt now show the same odds with a notable delay behind Polymarket which has emerged as the undisputed leader in the online betting space. Even such Bloomberg luminaries as John Authers admit Polymarket’s role in setting bond prices: “In the last few months, it’s striking that the 10-year yield has traced the Trump odds according to Polymarket — an offshore market that may be over-influenced by a few large bettors, but which seems to be driving opinion on Wall Street.”

Of course, Polymarket is just the starting signal: the actual driver behind the blowout move in yields, which as we noted earlier have surged by a whopping 50bps since the Fed’s very unironic 50bps rate cut one month ago…is because memory is still be fresh among bond traders that the 10-year yield soared almost 80bps in about a month after Trump’s last victory in November 2016. Granted, one can argue this time may be different, as the jump in yields back then was in part driven by the start of the Federal Reserve’s tightening cycle while the direction of Fed policy is the opposite now, but the kneejerk reaction to a market that is now is now aggressively pricing in a Trump presidency is there.

Read more …

“Motor Voter Law..”

• Biden Admin Under Fire Over Virginia Non-Citizen Voter Removals (Turley)

Call it the Mark of Kaine. The heated dispute between the Biden Administration and the State of Virginia just took a curious turn after Virginia lawyers released support for the effort to remove alleged noncitizens from the voting rolls ahead of the presidential election. The main witness against the Biden Administration may prove to be Sen. Tim Kaine (D., Va.) who is on the ballot this election. The Biden Administration sued to stop the removal of 6,303 alleged noncitizens from Virginia’s voter rolls before the election, which is expected to be close in the state. It relies on the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA), or the “Motor Voter Law,” which bars “systemic” removals for voters from the rolls less than 90 days before an election. Youngkin ordered compliance with existing laws, citing Virginia code 24.2-439, requiring the removal of noncitizens whose names were added under false pretenses. It also cited Virginia Code 24.2-1019, requiring registrars to immediately notify their county or city prosecutor of such situations.

The NVRA has exceptions for removals within what the Justice Department calls the “quiet” period before an election, including the removal of individuals who are “ineligible to vote because of a criminal conviction or mental incapacity, or for “correction of registration records pursuant to this chapter.” However, the state argues as a threshold matter that these are not systemic removals. The state argues that these are individual actions triggered automatically by citizens identifying themselves as noncitizens but then joining the voting rolls. It is a crime for a noncitizen to vote in the election. The state notes that the voter is notified of the problem and allowed to correct any errors to remain on the rolls. If they do not correct the problem, they are removed from the rolls. However, they can still vote on election day with a “provisional” ballot to challenge any removal.

Virginia is not targeting any group and does not know how these voters might vote. It is responding to a notice coming from the Department of Motor Vehicle of a possible ineligibility and potential criminal act if they person actually votes, which is admittedly rare for noncitizens. While the Justice Department insists that some of these individuals are actually citizens, the system allows for those citizens to remain on the rolls by simply correcting the DMV record. I understand concerns over changes close to the election, but there seemed to be a host of options for the Justice Department short of this lawsuit, including working with the state to be sure that this relatively small number of voters are given ample opportunity to correct their records. This weekend, Virginia added a new wrinkle in the litigation. The Virginia law has been on the books since 2006.

The bipartisan legislation was signed into law by then Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine. It has been used without any objection for all those years. However, it now appears that Kaine’s administration specifically asked the Justice Department to determine if the law was compliant with federal laws, including an express inquiry about the NVRA. On December 16, 2006, the Justice Department completed its review and found no objections to the Virginia law though it added that it reserves the right to object in the future to any such laws. Gov. Glenn Youngkin further told Fox News that past governors continued to use the law within the 90 days period without a peep of objection from the Justice Department. These facts distinguish the Virginia case from the Alabama case where a court enjoined removal of names of suspected non-citizens.

Read more …

“..a red, white and blue cap inscribed with “TUSA,” short for “Told U So America!”

• Two Weeks Before the Meltdown Begins (Miele)

I wouldn’t be much of a political pundit if I weren’t willing to share my prediction for what will happen in 15 days when one of the most important presidential elections in history is decided. So here goes: Donald Trump will win, and he will win convincingly. But that doesn’t mean the progressive left won’t have a meltdown. Just as in 2016, when Trump was first elected president, the media will be dismayed, the Democrats will be shocked, and there will be protests in the streets, possibly violent. Congressional Democrats such as Jamie Raskin will try to prevent Trump from being sworn in by declaring him an insurrectionist. Seven so-called battleground states are supposed to decide the election: Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, North Carolina, Georgia, Nevada, and Arizona. But even more important will be the experience of the American people, who in large measure have come to regret the election that put Joe Biden in the White House four years ago.

That is the underlying story that the media will never acknowledge. Polling within the last year shows that less than one-third of Republicans believe Biden is the legitimate president, and 36% of all Americans have doubts about the 2020 election. That is only a feeling, not a fact, but feelings decide presidential elections, and the almost gleeful anti-American thrust of Biden’s presidency has given more than 60% of potential voters a feeling that we are on the wrong track as a nation. Five days before the 2020 election, I published a spoof that proved modestly prophetic as a warning about the pitfalls of a Democratic victory. Called “The Short Happy Presidency of Joe Biden,” it predicted that Kamala Harris would invoke the 25th Amendment immediately after Biden’s inauguration in order to seize power in a bureaucratic coup. It didn’t quite happen that way, of course, but 3 1/2 disastrous years later, Kamala along with Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi seemingly used the specter of the 25th Amendment to force Biden to end his reelection bid. Life imitating art.

In my pastiche, President Trump had appeared close to sealing his victory in the 2020 election, thanks to late mail-in votes in Pennsylvania. But “in an emergency session, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court convenes and reverses its earlier ruling that late votes could be counted for up to three days. The new ruling asserts that late voting amounts to election interference ‘on account of Trump winning,’ thus handing the state and the Electoral College victory to Biden.” Exaggerated, yes, but prescient in regard to how courts across the country would eventually rule in Biden’s favor on almost every issue, refusing to look at the evidence of fraud or unconstitutional irregularities. Perhaps the most prophetic aspect of my column four years ago was how I depicted the reaction of Trump to losing a disputed election. Just two days after the inauguration of first Biden and then Harris:

“Former President Donald Trump announces that he is running for re-election in 2024 after taking a four-year rest to catch up on his golf and make a few billion dollars. Trump says his new role model will be Grover Cleveland, the only president to serve non-consecutive terms. “If it’s good enough for Grover, it’s good enough for me!” Trump also tries out a new campaign slogan, as he takes a swing at Biden voters with a red, white and blue cap inscribed with “TUSA,” short for “Told U So America!” When you think about it, that really is the underlying message that Trump has been sharing for the past four years. And Americans got the message – because it matched their lived experience. They saw with their own eyes that the wide-open Biden border was being called secure by Biden, Harris, and Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. They saw that Biden’s Supreme Court nominee couldn’t say for sure what makes a woman a woman, and then they watched as boys began to dominate girls’ sports. They watched prices on the rise and safety in decline.

Worst of all, they stood helpless as the world seemed to be rushing headlong toward World War III, first in Ukraine, then the Middle East, all the while as China has been threatening to cripple the world economy by attacking Taiwan. So, yes, Trump will be elected as the 47th president of the United States, and the liberal talking heads will melt down just as they did in 2016. But what matters most is what happens after the election, and whether the experience of Americans will reflect renewed prosperity, a safer world, and respect for tradition and common sense. Many will try to prevent that, but making America great again should be a unifying goal. “Ask not what your country can do for you – ask what you can do for your country.” And if I am wrong and Kamala Harris becomes the 47th president, I pray that divine providence takes hold of her and guides her to protect, defend, and strengthen these United States and their Constitution. Seems like a long shot, but without Trump, prayer is all we got.

Read more …

“..hopefully I will be able to ask some questions that will be in your head..”

• Questions Are All “Pre Determined” At Kamala’s FAKE Town Hall (MN)

Kamala Harris held a “town hall” meeting Monday, giving those in attendance a chance to ask questions and testing her mettle when it comes to being put on the spot. Not really. It was all fake and scripted. The reality of the situation was unintentionally exposed by Maria Shriver, the moderator of the event in Royal Oak, Michigan. Shriver had to inform an audience member that they couldn’t actually ask any real questions at Kamala’s town hall because they were all scripted and handed to Harris beforehand. “We have some pre-determined questions and hopefully I will be able to ask some questions that will be in your head,” Shriver told the person. The thing was full of her own supporters and an anchor who was never going to challenge her on anything.

Why did it still have to be fake? What does this tell you about her if she were to become president? Even the press conference for the event was fake with Harris’ handler directing pre selected reporters with pre screened questions. The rest of the fake event was just word salads and empty platitudes as usual. It’s so hard to watch without grinding one’s teeth to pulp from cringing. Enough already. To top it all off they sat war obsessed RINO Liz Cheney next to her. Why can’t she do the fake Q&A on her own?

Read more …

“..the two have had a complicated relationship..”

• Trump-Rogan Interview Set For Friday: Politico (ZH)

Former President Donald Trump is set to record an interview with podcasting king Joe Rogan on Friday at Rogan’s studio in Austin, Texas. According to Politico, Rogan – who has over 14 million followers on Spotify, continues to dominate national podcast ratings. Trump’s appearance is expected to help Trump win young male voters – after appearing on such podcasts as “This Week w/ Theo Vaughn” and “Full Send.” Trump has never appeared on Rogan’s podcast and the two have had a complicated relationship. In August, Trump called out Rogan after the podcaster claimed that politicians on both sides are manipulative except for Robert Kennedy Jr., who at the time was running for president. -Politico

Reactions have been mixed – with some suggesting this is “incredible news,” and others suggesting this might not go well for the former president. Meanwhile, after rumors first emerged of a Trump appearance on Rogan, Reuters reported that Vice President Kamala Harris ‘could’ also sit down for an interview. (lol)

Read more …

ActBlue.

• Texas AG Demands FEC Action Over ‘Suspicious Donations’ To Democrats (ZH)

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton says he has evidence that the Democrat fundraising platform ActBlue is interfering in the 2024 US election by allowing straw donors to mask “bad actors” donating to candidates “Our investigation into ActBlue has uncovered facts indicating that bad actors can illegally interfere in American elections by disguising political donations,” Paxton said in a statement on X. “It is imperative that the FEC close off the avenues we have identified by which foreign contributions or contributions in excess of legal limits could be unlawfully funneled to political campaigns, bypassing campaign finance regulations and compromising our electoral system.”

In a Monday press release, Paxton says he sent a Petition for Rulemaking to the Federal Election Commission (FEC) detailing how “suspicious actors appear to be using ActBlue’s political fundraising platform to make a large number of straw political donations.” “Our investigation into ActBlue has uncovered facts indicating that bad actors can illegally interfere in American elections by disguising political donations.” Last December, Paxton launched an investigation into ActBlue. In August, of this year he said that “straw donations” were systematically being made using false identities through untraceable payment methods. “I am calling on the FEC to immediately begin rulemaking to secure our elections from any criminal actors exploiting these vulnerabilities,” said Paxton. As Fox News reports further;

“ActBlue targets small-dollar donations, the Hill first reported, and has been an integral part of the Democratic fundraising structure, collecting an estimated $1.5 billion from about 7 million donors. While that influx of cash was split among nearly 19,000 campaigns, an excessive amount has gone to the highest profile races. In just the first few days of the Harris campaign, for example, donors gave her $200 million through the platform, per ActBlue’s account on the social platform X, the Hill reported. In September, Rep. Bryan Steil (R-Wis.) introduced a bill that would require political committees to collect CVVs — the three- or four-digit “card verification value” on the back of a credit card — along with political donations.

Steil, who chairs the Committee on House Administration, sent a letter to top FEC officials urging them to “immediately initiate an emergency rulemaking to require political campaigns to verify the card verification value (‘CVV’) of donors who contribute online using a credit or debit card, and to prohibit political campaigns from accepting online contributions from a gift card or other prepaid credit cards.” The Aug. 5 request came in response to accusations that ActBlue is skirting campaign donation laws that allow for rampant fraud on the site. Paxton’s office has said previously that “secure elections are the cornerstone of our republic.”

Read more …

“He fought the entire war on the front line, in Robotino, Soledar, Kherson… He was exhausted, he couldn’t take it anymore and the commanders didn’t give him a break. A few days ago he left, just like that..”

• Ukrainian Troops Increasingly Refusing Orders – El Pais (RT)

Ukrainian servicemen are increasingly refusing to follow orders and fleeing their positions, accusing their leadership of assigning them suicide missions, the Spanish newspaper El Pais reported on Monday, citing several Ukrainian officers. The outlet claimed that soldiers from four brigades fighting near the besieged settlement of Kurakhovo in Russia’s Donetsk People’s Republic have claimed that “the future of the war is bleak for their interests because there are not enough replacements.” “Why are we retreating? Because we have no rotations, we don’t rest, we are demoralized,” one officer told the outlet, adding that there is a growing problem of Ukrainian soldiers fleeing their positions. “I had a friend, we called him England. He fought the entire war on the front line, in Robotino, Soledar, Kherson… He was exhausted, he couldn’t take it anymore and the commanders didn’t give him a break. A few days ago he left, just like that,” the officer said.

A Ukrainian sergeant who goes by Churbanov also told the Spanish outlet that the shortage of soldiers had become the biggest problem facing the Ukrainian military, noting that servicemen often have to spend three months in their positions without rest or rotation. Another serviceman, identified as Alexander, who serves in the Territorial Defense Forces (TRO), also told El Pais that at one point the 116th TRO brigade near Kurakhovo staged a mass rebellion and refused to follow orders. After that, the whole brigade was supposedly transferred to Sumy Region, from where Kiev launched its incursion into Russia’s Kursk Region, according to the officer. A source within Russia’s security services has also confirmed to the TASS news agency that Ukraine’s 116th TRO brigade had indeed been transferred to participate in the Kursk incursion as punishment for its mutiny.

According to a source cited by the outlet, Kiev was trying to “somehow correct the situation in Kursk Region at the expense of the already demoralized Ukrainian Armed Forces soldiers.” Alexander also told El Pais that there had been a high-profile case earlier this month where 100 soldiers of the 123rd TRO Brigade abandoned their positions near Ugledar several days before the city was captured by Russian forces. The officer explained that they did this to “announce that without sufficient training and weapons they were being assigned to a suicidal defense,” according to El Pais. Moscow has long characterized the hostilities in Ukraine as a US-initiated proxy war against Russia in which Ukrainian soldiers were being expended as “cannon fodder” with the complicity of their government.

Read more …

“..helps to keep economic development free from politics as far as possible in the context of today’s world.”

• Dumping US Dollar ‘Keeps Politics Out Of Economic Development’ – Putin (RT)

Boosting trade settlements in national currencies between members of the BRICS group is a strategic necessity, Russian President Vladimir Putin has said, adding that a shift from the US dollar would strengthen financial independence and reduce geopolitical risks. Russia is currently hosting the 16th annual BRICS Summit in the city of Kazan. The group comprises Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, as well as new members Iran, Egypt, Ethiopia, and the UAE, which joined in January. Speaking on Tuesday with the president of the BRICS New Development Bank, Dilma Rousseff, Putin emphasized that the use of local currencies instead of the dollar or euro “helps to keep economic development free from politics as far as possible in the context of today’s world.”

The unprecedented US-led sanctions campaign against Moscow due to the Ukraine conflict has forced Russia and other BRICS members to seek alternative ways to pursue trade. Russia’s leading banks were banned outright from the SWIFT international payment system back in 2022 as part of the restrictions. Last month, Putin said that Russia was already actively switching to the use of national currencies in cross-border trade with its BRICS partners, and that the group’s members were jointly developing a payment and settlement framework to be used in trading. In August, Russian Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin said that over 95% of mutual settlements between Russia and its biggest trading partner, China, are carried out using the ruble or yuan. Earlier this month, Indian Foreign Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar said New Delhi was looking to secure its interests and find “workarounds” in settlements with global partners, including Russia.

Read more …

“Other economies have to improve to a point where the relative US domination declines further, and in that case the alternative system will easily emerge.”

• Dollar’s Diktat Will Prove Its Downfall Once Emerging Powers Unite (Sp.)

The annual meetings of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank kicked off in Washington, DC on Monday, with the gatherings, set to run through Saturday, expected to focus on the global debt crisis and ways to save the US-led international financial order. Here’s what will need to happen for the dollar’s dominance to fade into history. The US accounts for over a third of the skyrocketing $100 trillion in global public debt, with the country’s $35.75 trillion in borrowing (and climbing) gradually putting the economic behemoth in jeopardy as its share of global GDP by PPP sinks to below 15% – its lowest showing since the Great Depression of the 1930s, and down from a historic high of as much as 50% (in nominal terms) in the mid-1940s and the creation of the Bretton Woods System of international exchange.

“Countries are seeking ways and means of conducting trade and business outside the US-dominated financial architecture, because they are fed up with the US dictating terms to multiple countries, especially by preventing countries from doing business with countries under US sanctions,” Chintamani Mahapatra, founder and chairman of the Kalinga Institute of Indo-Pacific Studies, told Sputnik, commenting on the US’s relative decline against the backdrop of this week’s IMF/World Bank Group meetings. There is essentially no other option for many countries at the moment “to conduct business with countries under US sanctions, even if they do not support US sanctions,” Mahapatra stressed, pointing out that the rising Chinese yuan has a way to go before it can “emerge as a credible international currency,” and that US-led institutions like the IMF, World Bank and WTO will be certain to do their best to “ensure that the US and its allies maintain their dominance in the global financial ecosystem.”

“The combined West will try not to allow an alternative system from rising. And the non-West is hardly united. Countries have complex interdependence,” the observer said. “Thus, one cannot write the obituary of the dollar-dominated system at the moment. Other economies have to improve to a point where the relative US domination declines further, and in that case the alternative system will easily emerge.” “The first step should be to attempt to create an alternative financial system for global trade, so that the payment system can be other than the current financial architecture dominated by the United States. However, de-dollarization is not easy. The emerging economies will have to resolve their bilateral political and security differences before seeking to create a de-dollarized order based on non-discrimination, equity and justness,” Mahapatra emphasized.

For now, “the US, and not many other countries, are benefiting a great deal from the current war in Europe and the West Asian region. Thus, expecting other economies to perform better now is not appropriate,” Mahapatra added. As far as the IMF/World Bank agenda’s focus on debt is concerned, the observer stressed that so long as the dollar’s hegemony is maintained, growing debt in the US will create major risks for the global economy. “Although the US, the largest global economy, is facing huge public debt, the US economy is unlikely to suffer much. After all, the US Federal Reserve prints dollars and not any other country. But decline or turbulence in the US economy due to huge and unsustainable debt will have global ramifications and thus countries are trying to avoid shocks as a natural reaction,” Mahapatra said.

Read more …

“Our allies have taken advantage of us. More so than our enemies..”

“To me, the most beautiful word in the dictionary is ‘tariffs’..”

• EU Bracing For Trade War With Trump – Politico (RT)

The EU is bracing for a massive trade war with Donald Trump if he wins the US presidential race in November and erects new barriers to commerce with Europe, Politico reported on Monday, citing senior diplomats and EU officials. Concerns are mounting in EU capitals since the former US president has pledged to target the bloc with a slew of new punitive trade measures in a bid to address what he says are serious imbalances in imports and exports, the outlet said. Washington and Brussels have been at odds over the issue since Trump imposed 25% tariffs on imports of European steel and 10% on aluminum in 2018 in his first term as president, arguing EU competition was endangering US national security. The EU retaliated, imposing duties on companies including motorcycles produced by Harley-Davidson Inc. and Levi Strauss & Co jeans.

Trump went even further however, and threatened to impose tariffs on EU car exports. Although the threatened duties never took effect, Brussels “was shocked” by Trump’s willingness to overhaul supply chains. “Last time we didn’t believe how far Trump would actually go,” one of the diplomats told Politico. “This time we’ve had time to prepare. Europe has changed a lot, and we will be ready to act.” Trump has previously said that as president, he may also introduce counter-measures against EU digital services taxes that implicitly target US technology leaders. “Our allies have taken advantage of us. More so than our enemies,” Trump said last week in an interview with Bloomberg News Editor-in-Chief John Micklethwait. “Our allies are the European Union. We have a trade deficit of $300 billion with the European Union.”

The EU is preparing a coordinated impact assessment of a potential Trump victory with the European Commission overseeing the process, and is determined to retaliate and “hit back hard,” one diplomat told Politico. According a second diplomat, the bloc is confident it can “win this trade war.” The EU should aggressively retaliate given that Trump uses trade and tariffs as a negotiating tactic to force countries to act in the interest of the US, the report said. At his rallies, Trump has vowed to impose a 10% baseline duty on imports from other countries. “To me, the most beautiful word in the dictionary is ‘tariffs’,” he said. “It’s my favorite word.” He also took aim at German car producers last week, pledging to slap high levies on imported cars. According to Trump, such duties targeting EU industry would force producers in the bloc to move their factories to the US, boosting its long-term global manufacturing position.

Read more …

”There is no growth in Germany, there is growth in other countries, and the tax situation is not particularly good either..”

• Sharp Rise In Russia’s Share Of EU LNG Market (RT)

The share of Russian liquified natural gas (LNG) in the EU market has reached 20% this year, the bloc’s energy watchdog reported in a quarterly review released on Tuesday. In 2023, the share of Russian-sourced tanker-movable fuel was 14%, according to statistics cited by the Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (ACER). The shift came as supplies from Qatar, Nigeria, and minor suppliers declined. The US remains the biggest source of LNG, accounting for 45% of EU imports. The total flow as well as the EU’s share in the global LNG market have both shrunk this year. The bloc now accounts for 18% of all imports, down from 24% last year, the ACER report estimated. Roughly a third of all EU gas imports come in the form of LNG, with the rest being delivered via pipelines, according to the report.

Russian pipeline supplies grew from 7.9 billion cubic meters in Q3 of 2023 to 8.6 billion cubic meters this year. Commenting on the findings, Bloomberg said it highlighted challenges in implementing the EU’s policy of reducing reliance on Russian supplies. This summer, Brussels banned investment in LNG projects in Russia and targeted the transshipment of Russian gas by third nations with a port access ban. Qatar, a major natural gas producer, has been diverting shipments to Asian markets, in part due to the worsening security situation in the route through the Red Sea, Bloomberg said, explaining why its presence in the EU market has declined. The Yemeni-based Houthi rebels have been targeting commercial ships which they believe to be linked to Israel, in a campaign to pressure West Jerusalem to end its military action in Gaza.

The EU declared the intention wean itself off Russian supplies in its economy, particularly in the energy sector, following the outbreak of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022. Supplies of expensive US fuel have replaced much of the cheap pipeline gas that was previously delivered by Russia. The change contributed to a drop in the competitiveness of Western Europe, which was highlighted last week by an executive from German industrial giant Siemens. Speaking at a public hearing of the Bundestag’s Financial Committee, Christian Kaeser, the company’s head of global taxation, said it no longer invests at home due to the poor business climate. ”There is no growth in Germany, there is growth in other countries, and the tax situation is not particularly good either,” he stated.

Read more …

“..each one of them “treated pre-teen children who were shot in the head or chest on a regular or even a daily basis.”

• Harris Denies Israel Is Committing Genocide in Gaza – Campaign (Antiwar)

Vice President Kamala Harris’s presidential campaign has clarified that she does not believe Israel is committing genocide in Gaza after an incident at a rally suggested that she did. At a campaign event at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, a protester interrupted Harris and said she invested “billions of dollars in genocide” and pressed her about the massive child casualties in Gaza, repeatedly describing the Israeli onslaught as a genocide. Addressing the students, Harris said, “What he’s talking about, it’s real. That’s not the subject that I came to discuss today, but it’s real, and I respect his voice.”

A spokesperson for Harris’s campaign said Sunday that the comments made by the protester “don’t reflect the position of the Biden-Harris administration or the vice president’s stance.” The spokesperson added that Harris “didn’t agree with defining the war as a genocide, and she has not expressed such a stance in the past, as this is not her position.” The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has ruled that its “plausible” Israel is committing genocide against the Palestinian population of Gaza. There have been massive civilian casualties in the onslaught, and Israeli forces have purposely targeted children.

A group of 99 American healthcare workers who volunteered in Gaza said in an open letter to Harris and President Biden that each one of them “treated pre-teen children who were shot in the head or chest on a regular or even a daily basis.” The American healthcare workers also estimated that over 118,000 Palestinians had been killed in Gaza, or about 5% of the population. Despite the mass slaughter, the Biden administration maintains Israel is not committing genocide since that would mean US officials are supporting genocide. Harris also angered pro-Palestine groups over the weekend when discussing the situation in Gaza by labeling the October 7 Hamas attack on southern Israel the “most tragic” part of the conflict.

Read more …

This is good. And long.

• Biblical Cruelty Took Power In Israel: “Mein Kampf In Reverse” (José Goulão)

The founding fallacy of Zionism has survived many decades since the establishment of the State while the continued colonization of Arab territories was developing, an illegal process only possible thanks to the tolerance and complicity of the UN, the United States and the countries involved in European integration: first in the territories allocated to the Arab population through the sharing agreement approved in 1948 by the United Nations; from 1967 and the so-called Six-Day War, in the Palestinian regions of Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem occupied at that time, allowing the installation of settlements in vast areas stolen by the Zionist regime from the original population. They are now home to almost 700,000 fanatical fundamentalist Jews from all over the world, the overwhelming majority without any ethnic roots in Palestine.

This brutal and massive demographic violence, always with the character of ethnic cleansing, as it was written, mortally wounded the fallacy of secular Zionism. Real, fascist, fiercely racist and segregationist Zionism, which has the expulsion of all Palestinians on the horizon, has taken power over the most recent decades and intends to remain there eternally “by the will of God”, respected and fulfilled through “prophets ” self-taught and terrorists who consider themselves mandated by him to guarantee their vigilante role on Earth by applying the terrifying mythology of the Old Testament to the letter. Netanyahu is just another leader in this process of transforming the character of the State, even though the role of head of government played almost exclusively over the last 30 years has given him a natural prominence, although overestimated in relation to his real weight in the fundamentalist environment.

He inherited the mission from his father, Benzion Netanyahu, in turn personal secretary and one of the main ideological disciples of Volodymir Jabotinsky, the Ukrainian who was a collaborator of Mussolini and in 1925 had caused the great schism between the secular Zionism opportunistically proclaimed at birth and that designated “ revisionist Zionism” founded by him. This variant of extremist colonialism under “Hebrew” cover inspires the political-religious fanaticism that prevails in the current government and aims to create a theocracy – the primacy of the “Law of God”. Maintaining, of course, the mission of defending Western civilization in the Middle East. It is no small matter that this fanatical tendency has enormous representation within the World Jewish Congress and is supported without practical restrictions by the United States regime and the non-democratic bodies that define European Union policies.

Ehud Barak, one of the most experienced Israeli politicians, prime minister of a government at the beginning of the century that practiced a savage repression of the so-called Second Palestinian Intifada and was the last head of the Labor Party as an influential political organization, has a relevant opinion about the ongoing events. “Under the cover of war,” he says, “a governmental and constitutional coup is taking place without a shot being fired; If the coup is not stopped it will turn Israel into a dictatorship within weeks – Netanyahu and his government are murdering democracy.” The path proposed by the now “centrist” leader is to “close the country through large-scale civil disobedience 24 hours a day, seven days a week”.

A much more incisive and advanced opinion, and also alarming, comes from General Moshe Yalon, former Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces and former Minister of Defense: “An angry, eschatological cult is laying down the law in Tel Aviv, the headquarters of the genocidal and colonial construction of the settler community; This process is completed with a huge vigilante militia, or interconnected militias of hundreds of thousands of colonists armed to the teeth, uncontrollable and prepared for anything, even attacking the military and the State.” A “former Mossad director” quoted by the newspaper “Haaretz” even questions the future of the so-called “Jewish State” saying that if it takes the form of “a racist and violent State it will not be able to survive; and it’s probably already too late.”

When following the globalist media network, it will be said that the current Israeli government is made up only of Prime Minister Netanyahu and the Minister of Finance, Bezalel Smotrich, and the Minister of Security, Itamar Ben-Gvir, these two benevolently considered as “ far-right” when, in practice, they are nothing more than Nazi terrorists. Smotrich is a settler head of the National Religious Party who denies the existence of the Palestinian people, “composed of sub-humans”. On his record he has several accusations of terrorist attacks, including against Zionist authorities.

Itamar Ben-Gvir is the son of an Iraqi Kurdish Jew who was part of the terrorist group Irgun, a founding branch of the Israeli army born in the ranks of Mussolini and historically led by former prime minister Menahem Begin. He heads the Otzmar Yehdiut organization, equally “extreme right” and heir to the banned Kach movement of the fascist icon Meir Kahane, an American terrorist born in New York, where he committed several attacks for which he was sentenced to one year in prison, which he served in a hotel. He then settled in Israel to fight for the expulsion of all Palestinians from Palestine, was arrested at least 60 times for terrorist attacks and was elected a member of the Knesset (Parliament).

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Bike lock
https://twitter.com/i/status/1848688384392171691

 

 

Baby dog

 

 

Kiss
https://twitter.com/i/status/1848765037688557721

 

 

Pineapple
https://twitter.com/i/status/1848612938208215460

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle October 20 2024

Oct 202024
 
 October 20, 2024  Posted by at 8:50 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,  36 Responses »


René Magritte The endearing truth 1966

 

• Media Still Tries To Suggest Trump Is ‘Exhausted’ (JTN)
• Trump’s Polymarket Surge Powered By $30 Million Bet By Just 4 Accounts (ZH)
• Is Kamala Harris a Plagiarist? (Turley)
• House Democrats Say Trump Overcharged Secret Service at His DC Hotel (Sp.)
• Zelensky’s Only “Victory Plan” Is NATO Boots On The Ground (ZH)
• France Backs Zelensky’s ‘Victory Plan’ (RT)
• Orban Blasts Zelensky’s “More Than Frightening” Victory Plan (ZH)
• Moscow Warns of Direct NATO-Russia Conflict if Ukraine Joins Alliance (Sp.)
• Ukraine Peace ‘Must Be Lasting’ – Putin (RT)
• Russia Has “Unlimited” Energy Resources – Putin (RT)
• US To Pay $20 Billion Into Loan For Ukraine – FT (RT)
• Secret US Intelligence Files On Israel Leaked – CNN (RT)
• Assassinations Continue, But Israel Will Not Win The War (SCF)
• Police Escalate Britain’s War on Independent Journalism (Cook)
• The Geoeconomic Drivers of SCO-BRICS Synergy (Pepe Escobar)

 

 

 

 

Tyrus

College degree

Moonshot

Old man

Seal
https://twitter.com/i/status/1847392365977227537

Californicated
https://twitter.com/i/status/1847427727630180417

RFK

 

 

 

 

Elon EU

Elon Covid

?!
https://twitter.com/i/status/1847403452126687462

Garland
https://twitter.com/i/status/1847645637417771209

Elon sharks

 

 

 

 

 

 

Smells like desperation?! “Politico ran a headline on Friday reading “An ‘exhausted’ Trump says no to another interview”..”

• Media Still Tries To Suggest Trump Is ‘Exhausted’ (JTN)

Former President Donald Trump is beating back rumors and reports of exhaustion in the final stretch of his reelection campaign with a rigorous schedule of in-person rallies and interviews that has far outpaced his much younger Democratic opponent. Politico ran a headline on Friday reading “An ‘exhausted’ Trump says no to another interview”. The article pointed to Trump’s backing out of an interview with The Shade Room and cited anonymous “people familiar with the conversations” in reporting that a “Trump advisor” had said Trump was “exhausted” and “refusing [some] interviews.” The story further pointed to Trump’s cancellation of other interviews this week, including with CNBC’s “Squawk Box,” which the campaign attributed to a scheduling conflict. A Trump campaign official confirmed to Just the News that it never set or discussed a date to appear on The Shade Room and that it also had a scheduling conflict that precluded a separate NBC appearance.

Three times as many interviews
Concerns over age and ability to handle the rigors of office proved fatal to the political career of President Joe Biden, 81, whose performance in a debate against Trump this year reignited scrutiny over his age and mental competence and ultimately pushed him to step aside. At 78, Trump has also faced some questions over his age and mental acuity, albeit not to a comparable extent. Last month, Axios ran an article highlighting that Trump had held fewer rallies per month compared to his 2016 cycle. One of the contributing factors, the outlet asserted, was that “he’s older.” The Trump campaign adamantly denies such claims. “This is unequivocally false,” Trump Campaign National Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told Just the News of the Politico article. “President Trump has been running laps around Kamala Harris on the campaign trail and has sat down for nearly three times as many interviews as she has, including a contentious interview with Bloomberg this past week which Kamala declined. President Trump has more energy, and a harder work ethic, than anyone in politics.” Indeed, there is plenty in Trump’s active campaign schedule to contrast with that of Vice President Harris, 59.

Rally frequency
Since becoming the Republican Party nominee in mid-July, Trump has held at least 41 conventional rallies — one in which he narrowly missed being felled by an assassin’s bullet — across every battleground state, including multiple weeks in which he has headlined two or more events. That figure includes joint appearances such as his rallies with Turning Point, but does not include media hits. Harris, by contrast, became the Democratic nominee in early August and has since held at least 14 conventional rallies. Trump held five rallies between his confirmation as the GOP candidate and Harris’s ascent to the top of the Democratic ticket. To compare the same period, Trump has held at least 36 rallies to Harris’s 16 since she became the Democratic nominee. Both figures include weekend appearances by either candidate. Trump held rallies in Detroit, Mich.; and Latrobe and Lancaster, Pa.; while Harris appeared in Detroit, Mich.; and Atlanta, Ga.

83 interviews as opposed to 44
Apart from standard rallies, both campaigns have of course made numerous appearances on legacy media, as well as podcasts, video platforms, and in other media. A Wall Street Journal breakdown of their respective appearances, moreover, showed Trump again outpacing Harris in virtually all mediums. As of July 15, Trump has made 28 appearances on what the outlet deemed “Legacy TV” compared to Harris’s 12 since Aug. 6. In those intervals, Trump made 10 radio appearances to Harris’s seven. Trump further made 10 print appearances to her two, seven podcast hits to her two, and appeared in an X space. Both made three video appearances. A running tally of interviews from Fox News, moreover, tracks the combined interviews for both the major candidates and their running mates. Since the formation of the Harris-Walz ticket in August, the outlet states, Harris and Gov. Tim Walz, D-Minn., have sat for a combined minimum of 44 non-scripted interviews. Trump and Sen. JD Vance, R-Ohio, meanwhile, have conducted at least 83.

Press conferences: Harris not held one yet
Trump has held at least six press conferences since early August in which he fielded media questions, while Harris has not held a single formal news conference in her capacity as a candidate, according to Fox News. Though she has delivered remarks in an official capacity as the vice president, offering updates on hurricane relief efforts and other issues, she has kept questions limited in those instances. Despite her recent “media blitz” in which she appeared on a string of friendly podcasts and programs, some media insiders don’t expect Harris to include a formal press conference before the end of the election cycle. Speaking to Fox News, conservative Radio Libre host Jorge Bonilla said Harris was “highly unlikely” to hold such an event “because the media have enabled and encouraged her ‘plexiglass basement’ strategy.”

Exhausted

Read more …

“Elon Musk [..] describing betting markets as “more accurate than polls, as actual money is on the line.”

• Trump’s Polymarket Surge Powered By $30 Million Bet By Just 4 Accounts (ZH)

Few recent developments in the 2024 White House race have been as swift and seemingly prophetical as a huge October swing toward Donald Trump in the crypto-based Polymarket online betting marketplace. From even odds at the start of the month, the odds of a Trump victory have surged to 60%, while the odds of Kamala Harris win have fallen to 40%. Now, the Wall Street Journal is reporting the move is largely the work of just four accounts that have together plowed $30 million into bets on the former president. What’s more, the timing of the four accounts’ moves suggests they could be controlled by a single owner. Polymarket has engaged outside experts to scrutinize transactions in presidential election betting, an unnamed source told the Journal. The four accounts have concentrated on bets that Trump will come out atop the electoral college count, but have also dabbled in side-wagers on individual state contests, as well as taking some flyers on Trump winning the popular vote.

That’s a long shot indeed, as Polymarket currently gives Trump only a 32% chance of doing that. “There’s strong reason to believe they are the same entity,” Arkham Intelligence CEO Miguel Morel tells the Journal: The accounts betting big on Trump—Fredi9999, Theo4, PrincessCaro and Michie—were all funded by deposits from Kraken, a U.S.-based crypto exchange, according to Arkham. They behave in a similar fashion, systematically placing frequent bets on Trump and stepping up the size of their bets at the same time, Arkham found. The oldest of the accounts was created in June, while the newest was created this month. In its report, the Journal worked to substantiate the notion that the concentrated bets represent some form of intentional narrative-control scheme, saying “[Trump’s] surge might be a mirage manufactured by a group of four Polymarket accounts,” a view embraced by crypto investor Adam Cochran, a self-described right-of-center Harris-backer.

To its credit, however, the Journal also tapped Rutgers University stats professor Harry Crane, who noted that other betting markets also have Trump in the lead, and that big bettors routinely nudge all manner of market odds. “Purchasing a large number of shares on one outcome does not require any ulterior motive or effort to manipulate the market,” he said. Americans are officially barred from Polymarket, and a source “familiar with the matter” has assured Reuters that the four accounts behind the $30 million wave of bets are not owned by an American, a conclusion that rests on the firm’s practice of certifying large traders to verify they aren’t using VPNs to hide their origins.

As the Polymarket surge began in early October, Trump-backer Elon Musk publicized Trump’s then-3% lead in the odds, describing betting markets as “more accurate than polls, as actual money is on the line.” In addition to the 60% chance of a Trump victory, Polymarket now has the GOP with an 81% chance of taking over the Senate, but gives Democrats a 51% chance of controlling the House of Representatives.


The highest it got, on Oct. 18

Read more …

“..an opponent of Trump could probably copy “War and Peace” word-for-word and would still be showered with literary awards..”

• Is Kamala Harris a Plagiarist? (Turley)

Kamala Harris this week faced accusations of plagiarism over multiple sections of her book, “Smart on Crime: A Career Prosecutor’s Plan to Make Us Safer.” This is not the first such accusation, Harris was accused of lifting a story from Martin Luther King. In 1965, King described “a moment in Birmingham when a white policeman accosted a little Negro girl, seven or eight years old, who was walking in a demonstration with her mother.” King recounted how the policeman asked the little girl “‘What do you want?’ and the little girl looked at him straight in the eye and answered, ‘Fee-dom’.” Harris would later tell the story of how her mother asked her “Kamala, what’s wrong? What do you want?” and I wailed back, “Fweedom.”

As found by various media outlets, the new allegations from her book would qualify as plagiarism despite the denial of the campaign. It is doubtful it will matter to many voters in the hardened political silos of this election. However, it could prompt a long-needed discussion about how we handle plagiarism in academia. “I wrote my own book, unlike Kamala Harris, who copied hers from Wikipedia.” That criticism, from vice presidential candidate Sen. JD Vance, was only the latest salvo in what has become known as the “the Plagiarism War.” Like virtually every aspect of our lives, plagiarism has become politics by another means. It is hardly new. President Joe Biden admitted to plagiarism long ago. The seriousness of the allegation often depends on how sympathetic the media is toward the author.

Vice President Kamala Harris was accused of plagiarizing her 2009 book, “Smart on Crime: A Career Prosecutor’s Plan to Make Us Safer.” Immediately, the New York Times ran a column citing a “plagiarism consultant” named Jonathan Bailey who suggested that, while Harris plagiarized from sources like Wikipedia, it was nothing to “make a big deal of it.” Bailey took to social media Monday to confirm he had not done a full analysis of the book and that his “quotes were based on information provided to me by the reporters and spoke only about those passages.” The response set off conservative media, which argued that the mainstream media would have had a very different response if the allegations were made against Trump’s book “The Art of the Deal.” The fact is, an opponent of Trump could probably copy “War and Peace” word-for-word and would still be showered with literary awards in this political environment.

Read more …

A ridiculous “report” 4-5 years later.

• House Democrats Say Trump Overcharged Secret Service at His DC Hotel (Sp.)

Donald Trump during his presidency overcharged Secret Service agents to stay at his DC hotel, treating the agency “as an ATM,” a new report by Democrats on the House Oversight Committee alleges. “One source of payments discussed in this report is the U.S. Secret Service, which Donald Trump treated as his own personal government ATM, extracting from it exorbitant rates his hotel imposed while Secret Service agents protected him, his children, and even foreign leaders whose own payments received by Trump violated the Constitution’s Foreign Emoluments Clause,” the report said. According to the Democratic report, Trump’s hotel often did not just charge the Secret Service as much as 300% or more above the authorized federal government rates, but also charged it “far more than hundreds of other patrons, including members of a foreign royal family and a Chinese business interest.”

The report stated that it wants to ensure that taxpayer funds appropriated to the Secret Service are expended to fulfill its protective missions and “not to violate the Constitution by lining the president’s pockets.” The report also focuses on payments made by federal and state officials staying at the hotel, as well as individuals who allegedly sought and often obtained federal jobs in the Trump administration and presidential pardons. The Secret Service has recently been in the spotlight due to failures that led to the attempted assassination of the former president during a rally in Butler, Pennsylvania on July 13. One of the bullets fired by the shooter grazed Trump’s right ear, leaving him wounded. The gunman also killed an audience member at the rally and wounded two others. In a report published on Thursday, an independent panel reviewing the assassination attempt revealed “deep flaws” in the Secret Service. The panel warned that “another Butler can and will happen again” unless the agency is reformed.

Read more …

“..if one examines Zelensky’s victory plan it’s as if someone somewhere must have promised him a fresh supply of NATO troops..”

• Zelensky’s Only “Victory Plan” Is NATO Boots On The Ground (ZH)

Ukraine’s “victory plan”, presented this week to NATO officials and both candidates (Trump and Harris) for the 2024 US presidential election, has been widely criticized as a non-starter specifically because it does not address the key obstacle facing their ability to stop Russia’s steady strategic advance. That key obstacle is manpower, which Ukraine does not have. The problem is not blatantly admitted, but implied by numerous officials with inside knowledge of the war. US politicians (Democrats and Neocons) have been pressuring Ukraine to lower the conscription age to 18-24 year old men, a move which the nation has tried to avoid. Why? Because the Ukrainians worry that if they do there will be no viable men left to start families and replenish the population after the war is over. That’s not a very optimistic appraisal of the situation on the front lines.

The height of Ukraine’s successful push-back against Russian forces in 2022 just happened to coincide with the height of the foreign mercenary presence in the region, with tens-of-thousands of highly experienced contract soldiers from the US and Europe helping the Ukrainians counter the maneuver warfare tactics of the Russians. However, when the Russian tactics changed to attrition, the mercenary pipeline suddenly slowed to a trickle. The mainstream media suggests that the reason the foreign fighters stopped showing up was because the “romance of the war” was gone. It is more likely that it’s because western soldiers are rarely trained to fight under attrition warfare conditions, making death a far greater possibility. The point is, Ukraine no longer has a pool of foreign fighters to fall back on and their recruitment efforts a bearing little fruit.

Young men are conscripted or in some cases kidnapped by military police, thrown into vans, dropped off at training centers and then dumped on the front lines within a few weeks. Manpower is the key to war, and it’s the one thing Ukraine has not received from NATO governments. But if one examines Zelensky’s victory plan it’s as if someone somewhere must have promised him a fresh supply of NATO troops. In fact, Zelensky’s only plan seems to be immediate NATO membership which would then, under NATO treaty, requires the deployment of NATO troops to Ukraine for mutual defense. In other words, the Ukrainian plan would facilitate WWIII. Key elements of the plan include a formal invitation to join NATO, the lifting by allies of bans on long-range strikes with Western-supplied weapons deep into Russia, a refusal to trade Ukraine’s territories and sovereignty, and the continuation of the incursion into Russia’s western Kursk region.

The Kremlin dismissed the plan with a spokesman saying Kyiv needed to “sober up”. Indeed. Russia is never going to willingly give up their territorial gains in the Donbas, especially when their troop levels are higher than ever and they are taking towns at the fastest pace since the beginning of the war. The refusal to negotiate on territory makes peace impossible and requires a vast surge in troop strength for Kyiv to have any chance of a new offensive. Ukraine is reportedly losing their gains in the Kursk region with rumors of a full retreat now swirling. This claim seems to be supported by Ukraine’s evacuation of civilians from the Sumy region just across the border from Kursk.

Once again, the manpower simply doesn’t exist to make any of Zelensky’s goals possible. The real question is, is Ukraine worth it? According to surveys in the US and Europe the majority of the public says “no.” They will not support troops on the ground in Ukraine, nor do they want to risk WWIII with Russia. Because of this fact, it behooves Zelensky and his NATO backers to set aside any notions of a victory plan and start considering the wisdom of a peace plan.

Read more …

France wants war.

• France Backs Zelensky’s ‘Victory Plan’ (RT)

France would work to rally Western countries behind Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky’s “victory plan,” French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot said during his visit to Kiev on Saturday. “A Russian victory would be a consecration for the law of the strongest and would push the international order towards chaos,” Barrot told reporters during a press conference with his Ukrainian counterpart, Andrey Sibiga. “That is why our exchanges must enable us to make progress on President Zelensky’s victory plan, and to rally as many countries as possible around it.” The diplomat reiterated that Paris would “support, again and again, Ukraine’s resistance against Russian aggression.” Barrot said that France was “open” to the idea of inviting Ukraine into NATO. “It is a discussion that we are having today with our NATO partners,” he said.

Zelensky unveiled his five-point plan in a speech to Ukrainian lawmakers this week, which includes demands that were previously rejected by Kiev’s Western backers, such [as] an immediate invitation for Ukraine to join NATO and the lifting of restrictions on the use of foreign longer-range weapons for strikes deep inside Russia. NATO has maintained that it would be impossible to admit Ukraine into the alliance until the conflict is resolved, while US President Joe Biden said on Friday that there was “no consensus” on whether to greenlight the use of ATACMS missiles and other weapons for strikes on Russian territory.

During his trip to Kiev, Barrot also announced that France would deliver the first batch of Mirage 2000 fighter planes in early 2025. The French Air Force is currently training Ukrainian pilots and aircraft technicians. Kiev has long argued that Western jets, such as the Mirage 2000s and the US-made F-16s, would be crucial to reverse the tide on the battlefield as the Russian troops have been steadily gaining ground in the Donbass in recent months.Moscow has repeatedly said that no amount of foreign military aid would stop Russian troops in Ukraine. Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova described Zelensky’s plan as “a set of incoherent slogans.”

Read more …

“Zelensky’s ‘victory plan’ is the shortest path to unleashing World War III, so Hungary does not support it.”

• Orban Blasts Zelensky’s “More Than Frightening” Victory Plan (ZH)

Hungarian prime minister Viktor Orbán’s office has issue a strong negative response to Ukrainian Presdient Volodymyr Zelensky’s “victory plan” – which was presented before European Union leaders this week. Zelensky’s plan, if implemented, would be the shortest path to World War III, a statement by the political director of the Hungarian prime minister’s office said. The response further stressed that the EU must be willing to embark on a path of negotiations, de-escalation, and ultimately peace. Orban had posted his initial reaction to the plan on social media on Thursday, which began, “Today President Zelenskyy will present his plan for victory. What he outlined yesterday in the Ukrainian parliament was more than frightening.” It continued, “Zelensky’s ‘victory plan’ is the shortest path to unleashing World War III, so Hungary does not support it.”

And referencing Ursula von der Leyen, he wrote further, “I am one of those who urge the European Union to change its current strategy. The European Union went into this war with a badly organized, badly executed, badly calculated strategy, for which the president of the Commission bears the main responsibility.” “We are losing this war, so the strategy is not working. But this does not mean that we need more war, more dangerous and long-range weapons — it means that we need to change from a war strategy to a peace strategy. We need a cease-fire and peace talks!” he stressed in apparent reference to Europe and the NATO alliance.

Orbán pledged that he will lobby German Chancellor Olaf Scholz and French President Emmanuel Macron to start negotiations with Moscow “on behalf of the entire EU” as soon as possible in order “to find a way out of this situation.” [..] The Hungarian PM has recently made it clear that he doesn’t share the same enthusiasm for Ukraine’s risky Kursk offensive (which started in August) as other European leaders, having expressed the desire for a ceasefire in the southern Russian oblast, and expressing the need to safeguard European energy supplies ahead of winter.

Read more …

“Kiev’s possible accession to NATO in the current conditions will eliminate the possibilities of a political and diplomatic settlement of the Ukraine conflict..”

• Moscow Warns of Direct NATO-Russia Conflict if Ukraine Joins Alliance (Sp.)

A Russian diplomat expressed hope that there are reasonable politicians in the leadership of the alliance who are aware of the destructive consequences that inviting Ukraine into NATO could bring. Kiev’s possible accession to NATO in the current conditions will eliminate the possibilities of a political and diplomatic settlement of the Ukraine conflict and make the alliance’s direct involvement in military operations against Russia inevitable, Aleksey Polishchuk, the head of the Russian Foreign Ministry’s second department for the Commonwealth of Independent States’ countries, told Sputnik. “We constantly warn about the threat of Ukraine’s NATO accession,” Polishchuk said, when asked to comment on Szijjarto’s statement about the possibility of direct Russia-NATO confrontation.

Ukraine’s potential accession to the alliance “will put an end to the possibilities of a political and diplomatic settlement, making it inevitable that the alliance will engage directly in hostilities against Russia, and lead to an uncontrolled escalation,” the official said. Earlier this week, Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto told RIA Novosti that Ukraine’s accession to NATO would mean a direct confrontation between the alliance and Russia, and lead to World War III.
In early October, NATO’s new Secretary General, Mark Rutte, visited Kiev. He stated that Ukraine will eventually become a full member of the military bloc, and Russia has no veto power on this matter. However, he did not specify any timeline. President Vladimir Putin has pointed out that Ukraine’s potential NATO membership poses a threat to Russia’s security, which was one of the reasons for the start of the special military operation.

Read more …

“Moscow is looking to achieve “conditions for long-term, sustainable and lasting peace that provide equal security for all participants in this difficult process..”

• Ukraine Peace ‘Must Be Lasting’ – Putin (RT)

Moscow is interested in a lasting peace with Kiev, but not a short-lived truce, Russian President Vladimir Putin has said. Russia’s goal is to ensure its long-term security interests, Putin stressed during a meeting on Friday with the heads of leading BRICS media agencies at the presidential residence in Novo-Ogaryovo outside Moscow. “If we are talking about some kind of peace processes, then these should not be processes related to a ceasefire for a week, two weeks, or a year, so that NATO countries [which support Ukraine] could rearm and stock up on new ammunition,” he said. Moscow is looking to achieve “conditions for long-term, sustainable and lasting peace that provide equal security for all participants in this difficult process,” the Russian leader explained.

Putin stressed that the Russian authorities “respect and understand” the determination of their “friends” in BRICS and elsewhere to see the Ukrainian crisis resolved “as quickly as possible and by peaceful means.” Moscow realizes that the conflict is “an irritating element in international affairs, in European affairs, in the economy, and so on. We, like no one else, are interested in ending it as quickly as possible and, of course, by peaceful means,” he said. Russia is ready to return to talks with Ukraine, but only on the basis of the document drawn up in Istanbul in late March 2022, when the sides last sat at the negotiating table, the head of state insisted. Putin said last month that during the talks in Türkiye, Kiev was willing to declare military neutrality, limit its armed forces, and stop discriminating against ethnic Russians. In return, Moscow would have joined other leading world powers in offering Ukraine security guarantees.

“The document did not come into force only because the Ukrainians were ordered not to do this. The elites in the US and some European countries felt the desire to seek Russia’s strategic defeat,” the Russian president said at the time. On Wednesday, Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky finally made public his so-called ‘victory plan’ for the conflict between Kiev and Moscow, in a speech to the national parliament. According to Zelensky, the scheme does not include negotiations with Russia, but calls on the West “to strengthen Ukraine” in order to reach a diplomatic solution. “This plan can be implemented. It depends on our partners. I emphasize: on partners. It definitely does not depend on Russia,” he claimed. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has suggested that Zelensky’s plan is merely a roadmap for continuing the hostilities. Peace can only be achieved if the government in Kiev “sobers up” and acknowledges the roots of the problems that led to the fighting, he insisted.

Read more …

“..beneficial cooperation between Moscow and Beijing is helped by the fact that they are neighbors and do not need to transport fuel and other goods by water..”

• Russia Has “Unlimited” Energy Resources – Putin (RT)

Russia has an unlimited amount of energy resources, President Vladimir Putin said during a BRICS media gathering on Friday. He noted the importance of commodity exports to China, and described Russia as the most reliable supplier. Putin said mutually beneficial cooperation between Moscow and Beijing is helped by the fact that they are neighbors and do not need to transport fuel and other goods by water. “The entire border is shared, and the energy resources in Russia are simply unlimited,” Putin stated. Chinese representatives are happy to buy Russian energy resources, the president noted, adding that Russia ranks fourth in its share of China’s trade. Russia’s trade with China topped $65 billion in the first half of this year, with levels of natural-resource exports hitting new highs, Vedomosti reported in July, citing Chinese customs data.

Exports of Russian goods to China jumped 4% year-on-year, surging to a record $65.2 billion between January and June of this year, with oil and gas supplies accounting for nearly 90% of shipments, according to the latest figures. During that period, China purchased mineral oil and other petroleum products worth $50 billion, compared to $47 billion in the same period of last year. Russia has the world’s largest natural gas reserves and is the second-largest producer of natural gas. It is the third-largest producer of oil, accounting for over 12% of global production, and its share of the enriched uranium market is estimated at 40%. The country is also among the ten largest producers of nickel, and the world’s third largest producer of titanium.

Read more …

“The contribution will be repaid using profits generated by Moscow’s frozen assets, the paper reports.”

• US To Pay $20 Billion Into Loan For Ukraine – FT (RT)

The US is set to provide up to $20 billion to Ukraine as part of a G7 loan, which will then be repaid using proceeds generated by the Russian assets immobilized by the West as part of Ukraine-related sanctions, Financial Times has reported, citing sources. Kiev’s backers have been trying to accelerate negotiations over the loan in an effort to secure funding to Ukraine before the end of the year, due to mounting concern that Washington’s aid to the country could be cut off if Donald Trump wins the upcoming US election, FT noted, in an article posted on Friday. The former US president has repeatedly threatened to scale back assistance to Kiev if he were elected. The US and its allies have frozen an estimated $300 billion in assets belonging to the Russian state after the Ukraine conflict broke out in 2022. The bulk of the money, nearly €197 billion ($214 billion) is being held by Brussels-based clearinghouse Euroclear.

The immobilized funds have generated €3.4 billion ($3.7 billion) in interest as of mid-July, according to the depository. Moscow has denounced the freeze as “theft” and said that any seizure of its funds would be against the law and would further undermine global trust in the Western financial system. In June, G7 members agreed to grant Kiev a $50 billion loan to be financed by interest from the frozen Russian assets. The US and the EU were initially expected to provide $20 billion each as Canada, Japan and the UK were set to jointly lend the rest of the massive loan. Later, to reassure allies that the bloc’s sanctions regime on the funds is not lifted, Brussels proposed a three-year extension of the EU’s mandate to freeze Russian assets. EU lawmakers have been renewing their sanctions every six months by unanimous decision, meaning that each vote may bring about a break in restrictions. Hungary opposed the proposal, and announced plans to postpone the decision until the US presidential elections on November 5.

Last week, the EU approved its own contribution of up to €35 billion to the G7 loan, but the bloc would need to contribute less if Washington provided the full $20 billion, Reuters reported last week. The funds, which will be managed by the World Bank, will be used for several purposes, including defense or humanitarian needs. US senior officials, however, told FT that Washington would provide the full agreed $20 billion, even if the EU failed to convince Hungary’s premier Viktor Orban to drop his veto on extending EU sanctions, which had previously been voiced among the US demands. According to two sources cited by the paper, G7 finance ministers will make a statement on the distribution and structure of the loan on the sidelines of the IMF and World Bank meetings on October 25.

Read more …

“An unnamed US official confirmed the authenticity of the documents to CNN, describing the leak as “deeply concerning.”

• Secret US Intelligence Files On Israel Leaked – CNN (RT)

The US has launched an investigation after its highly classified intelligence reports about Israel’s preparations for possible strikes on Iran were leaked online, CNN reported on Saturday, citing three people familiar with the matter. The apparent security breach occurred amid unprecedented tensions between Israel and Iran as the Jewish state had vowed to respond to a barrage of missiles fired by Tehran in the beginning this month. On Friday, two documents were posted to the anonymous Telegram channel Middle East Spectator, which covers events in the region and is critical of Israel. The first document, apparently prepared by the Pentagon’s National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, says that the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) had “continued key munitions preparations and covert UAV activity on October 16 almost certainly for a strike on Iran.”

The second document contains a detailed report about a “large-force employment exercise” conducted by the Israeli Air Force on October 15-16. An unnamed US official confirmed the authenticity of the documents to CNN, describing the leak as “deeply concerning.” The official told the network that the ongoing probe is aimed at determining who had access to the top secret files that eventually made their way to social media. The Telegram channel, which published the documents, released a statement on Saturday, claiming that it had received the files from “an anonymous source on Telegram who refused to identify himself.” The channel further claimed that it had “no connection to the original leaker.”

On October 1, Iran fired nearly 200 ballistic missiles at Israel in response to the war in Gaza and the assassinations of top members of pro-Palestinian militant groups Hamas and Hezbollah. According to the IDF, the majority of the projectiles were intercepted. The only direct casualty by the attack was a Palestinian man from the West Bank who was killed by a falling missile fragment. Israel did not specify how and when it would retaliate, with some reports saying that the IDF were planning to strike military targets in Iran, rather than nuclear or oil facilities. Israel would make “final decisions based on our national interest,” Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office said on Thursday.

Read more …

“As much as intelligence can generate strategic benefits for one side, it is the military itself that decides the outcome of a conflict by fighting on the battlefield – where Tel Aviv has so far failed..”

• Assassinations Continue, But Israel Will Not Win The War (SCF)

Israel continues its strategy of carrying out as many targeted killings as possible. After killing Ismail Hanyeh, Tel Aviv managed to eliminate the then “new” Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar during a joint artillery, drone and sniper attack on the city of Rafah. It is possible that Sinwar’s exact location was obtained through Israeli intelligence sources in conversation with the IDF, which shows that Tel Aviv does indeed have an efficient system of control and surveillance. Israel has been known worldwide in recent decades for maintaining an efficient intelligence system and controlling the internal and external activities of its citizens. However, since October 7, 2023, Israeli intelligence has undergone a gradual process of discrediting, mainly due to the fact that it was not efficient in predicting Operation Storm Al Aqsa.

Many analysts began to doubt Israel’s capabilities after these events, while others began to spread conspiracy theories about alleged Israeli deliberate inaction to provoke a war. All of these narratives seem similarly unfounded. On the one hand, they exaggerate Israel’s power, while on the other, they downplay the seriousness of the Zionist regime’s capabilities. Israel does indeed have a very efficient intelligence system, capable of monitoring the internal and external activities of its citizens. However, this system is not infallible and can make serious mistakes – such as the October 7th, which appears to have been the result of Israeli intelligence neglecting Gaza due to the strategic priority of monitoring Iran. The failure of Israeli intelligence resulted in the current war, which has been the greatest historical humiliation for Israel since its founding.

However, the capabilities of Israeli intelligence cannot be diminished. Local agencies have a great capacity to obtain sensitive information and are willing to use any method to assassinate people identified as “legitimate targets.” This is how Israel has managed to kill several Palestinian, Lebanese and possibly Iranian leaders in recent months. Information is obtained from reliable sources, passed to military or intelligence-linked professional assassins, and then ambushes and sabotages are successfully carried out. Having failed militarily, Israel will certainly escalate its actions in the intelligence arena, betting on the tactic of targeted assassinations to try to demobilize the enemy, affecting the morale of the Resistance troops. The main problem with this type of strategy is that it has already proven ineffective several times, especially against cohesive groups united by strong ties of ideology, religion and political agenda – as is precisely the case with Hamas and all the other militias of the Axis of the Resistance.

Sinwar was assassinated because he was the leader of Hamas – and he became the leader of Hamas because Hanyeh was assassinated before him. This line of assassinated leaders is likely to continue, as this is the expected fate of almost all major leaders of the Resistance’s organizations. In the end, a war is not won by intelligence alone. As much as intelligence can generate strategic benefits for one side, it is the military itself that decides the outcome of a conflict by fighting on the battlefield – where Tel Aviv has so far failed. It is possible that more Resistance leaders will die in the future, but that does not change the fact that Israel is unlikely to win this war, with the policy of targeted assassinations being just a way to disguise the military incompetence of the Zionist regime.

Read more …

“This isn’t about terrorism at all. It is about frightening those opposing Israel’s genocide in Gaza, and the West’s collusion in it, into silence.”

• Police Escalate Britain’s War on Independent Journalism (Cook)

The U.K. government and police — the British state — made clear Thursday they are waging a war of intimidation against the country’s independent journalists in a desperate attempt to silence them. Ten Metropolitan police officers made a dawn raid on the home of investigative journalist Asa Winstanley and seized his electronic devices under the U.K.’s draconian Terrorism Act. A letter from the Met indicates that the associate editor of The Electronic Intifada is being investigated by the force for “encouraging terrorism.” Winstanley is the latest — and most high profile – independent journalist to be targeted by counter-terrorism police in recent weeks. Earlier, Richard Medhurst was arrested at Heathrow airport on returning to the U.K. Then Sarah Wilkinson was arrested and her home ransacked.

Winstanley has repeatedly embarrassed the British establishment by exposing its covert and deep ties to Israel and its collusion with the Israeli lobby. In his book Weaponising Anti-Semitism: How the Israel Lobby Brought Down Jeremy Corbyn, Winstanley exposed in shocking detail how anti-Semitism was weaponised against the former Labour leader. The book would have made uncomfortable reading for his successor, Sir Keir Starmer, now Britain’s prime minister, because it documents his role in the smear campaign. While in opposition, Starmer’s Labour Party threatened to expel Winstanley as a member – he resigned in protest instead – and have made legal threats against him.

As The Electronic Intifada website notes: “Now that Labour is the UK’s ruling party, it has the potential to use the apparatus of the state against those it views as its own – or Israel’s – political enemies.” There is precisely no reason for police to raid Winstanley’s home or seize his electronic devices. The preposterous accusation of “encouraging terrorism” clearly relates to his online work, which is fully in the public domain. The British state wants to insinuate through the dawn raid and confiscation of his devices that he is somehow harbouring secret or classified information, or in illicit contact with terror groups, and that incriminating evidence will be forthcoming from searches of those devices. It won’t. If there were any real suspicion that Winstanley had such information, the police would have arrested him rather making a public show of a 6 a.m. raid and search they knew beforehand would turn up nothing.

This isn’t about terrorism at all. It is about frightening those opposing Israel’s genocide in Gaza, and the West’s collusion in it, into silence. If the British state is going after someone like Winstanley, you are supposed to conclude, they will surely soon come for me too. Even the name of the “counter-terrorism” raid is performative: “Operation Incessantness.” The message the state wants to send is that it will not rest till it has us all behind bars. Don’t believe this nonsense. The police have nothing on Winstanley. Exposing information about Israel and its genocide, and the British government’s culpability, is not a crime. At least not yet. They want you to think it is, of course. They want you scared and mute. Because every time you go out and protest, you remind the world that the British government, and their bully-boys in blue, are the real criminals – for enabling genocide.

Read more …

Mongolia.

• The Geoeconomic Drivers of SCO-BRICS Synergy (Pepe Escobar)

One week before the absolutely crucial BRICS summit in Kazan, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) held a summit in Islamabad. This convergence is important in more ways than one. The summit in Pakistan involved the Council of the Heads of Government of SCO member-states. Out of it came a joint communique stressing the need to implement decisions taken at the SCO annual summit last July in Astana: that’s where the heads of state actually gathered, including new SCO full member Iran. China, following the rotating SCO chairmanship of close ally Pakistan – now under a dodgy administration fully endorsed by the military goons who keep ultra-popular former Prime Minister Imran Khan in jail – has officially taken over the SCO presidency for 2024 to 2025. And the name of game, predictably, is business.

The motto of the Chinese presidency is – what else – “action”. So Beijing took no time to start promoting further, faster synergy between the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and the Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU), whose predominant power is Russia. Cue to the Russia-China strategic partnership fast advancing trans-Eurasia economic corridors. And that brings us to a couple of key connectivity subplots featured prominently at the Islamabad summit. Let’s start with the fascinating Steppe Road – which is a Mongolian idea crystalizing as an upgraded economic corridor. Mongolia is an observer at the SCO, not a full member: reasons for it are quite complex. Still, Russian Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin raved about the Steppe Road with his SCO interlocutors. The Mongolians came up with the idea of a Taliin Zam (“Steppe Road” in Mongolian) back in 2014, containing no less than “Five Great Passages”: a maze of transport and energy infrastructure to be built with investments totaling at least $50 billion.

These include a 997 km-long transnational expressway linking Russia-China; 1,100 km of electrified railway infrastructure; the expansion of the – already running – Trans-Mongolian Railway from Sukhbaatar in the north to Zamyn-Uud in the south; and Pipelineistan of course, as in new oil and gas pipelines linking Altanbulag in the north to Zamyn-Uud. Mongolian Prime Minister Oyun-Erdene Luvsannamsrai was as enthusiastic as Mishustin, announcing that Mongolia has already finalized 33 Steppe Road projects. These projects happen to neatly align with Russia’s own Trans-Eurasian Corridor – a connectivity maze which includes the Trans-Siberian Railway, the Trans-Manchurian Railway, the Trans-Mongolian Railway and the Baikal Amur Mainline (BAM).

Back in July at the SCO summit, Putin and Mongolian President Ukhnaagiin Khurelsukh spent quite some time discussing the finer strategic points of Eurasian logistics. Then Putin visited Mongolia in early September for the 85th anniversary of the joint Soviet-Mongolian victory over the Japanese at the Khalkhin Gol River. Putin was received as a rock star. All that makes perfect strategic sense. The Russia-Mongolia border is 3,485 km-long. The USSR and the Mongolian People’s Republic established diplomatic relations over a century ago, in 1921. They have been working together on key projects such as the Trans-Mongolian gas pipeline – yet another Russia-China connection; modernization of the Ulaanbaatar Railway joint venture; Russia supplying fuel to the new Chinggis Khaan International Airport; and Rosatom building a nuclear power plant.

Mongolia harbors the proverbial wealth of natural resources, from rare earth minerals (reserves may reach an astonishing 31 million tons) to uranium (prospective reserves of 1.3 million tons). Even as it applies what is called the Third Neighbor approach, Mongolia needs to maintain a careful balancing act, as it is on the radar non-stop of the US and the EU, with the collective West pressing for less Eurasia cooperation with Russia-China. Naturally Russia holds a major strategic advantage over the West, as Moscow not only treats Mongolia as an equal partner but can provide its neighbor’s needs when it comes to energy security. What makes it all even more enticing is that Beijing envisions the Steppe Road as “highly consistent” with BRI, complete with the proverbial enthusiasm hailing the synergy and “win-win cooperation” between both projects.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

One day

 

 

He tried
https://twitter.com/i/status/1847560247075897399

 

 

Brown bear

 

 

Dog bear
https://twitter.com/i/status/1847677256442777706

 

 

Artwork
https://twitter.com/i/status/1847337882119524482

 

 

Beethoven

 

 

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