Menu Icon

Debt Rattle February 24 2026

Feb 242026
 
 February 24, 2026  Posted by at 10:34 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,  61 Responses »


Piet Mondriaan The red cloud 1907


• TRUMP Declares WAR On Euro CENSORSHIP (MN)
• EU Says Trump’s Tariff Workaround Violates Trade Deal (ZH)
• The Supreme Court has Ruled on Tariffs, but Who Will Ultimately Pay? (Turley)
• Bessent Signals No Retreat After SCOTUS Tariff Ruling (David Manney)
• AOC Has Instagram Meltdown. It’s a Sight to Behold. (Matt Margolis)
• AOC’s Ignorance Is No Laughing Matter (Stephen Soukup)
• Trump is Losing His Base – Mark Taylor (USAW)
• Obama’s ‘Gift’ Sticks Taxpayers With $200M+ Bill (ZH)
• CNN Finally Admits the Truth About Democrat-Run Cities (Matt Margolis))
• Trump is Netanyahu’s Puppet (Paul Craig Roberts)
• Judge Says Jack Smith’s Final Report on Trump Can Never Be Released (ET)
• British Police Take Former Ambassador Mandelson into Custody (Manney)
• The Putin Plan for Cuba and The Castro Family (Helmer)

 


 

https://twitter.com/RpsAgainstTrump/status/2025573014155227301?s=20 https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2025580547527856295?s=20

 


 

 


 


Europe’s last hope before the curtain closes. These guys want to operate in darkness. Because they all, Starmer, Macron, Merz, have one thing in common: they’re painfully unpopular back home.

US State does what I’ve been doing (trying to do) for many years:: give people a peek behind the curtains.

• TRUMP Declares WAR On Euro CENSORSHIP (MN)

As European governments ramp up their assault on online freedom, the Trump administration is striking back hard with Freedom.Gov—a portal designed to equip European and British citizens with tools to shatter digital barriers imposed by overreaching bureaucrats. The move exposes the hypocrisy of so called “safety” laws that geofence truth, forcing websites to block users or demand ID, all while claiming to protect the public from their own thoughts. A growing number of websites have chosen to simply block users rather than comply with arduous censorship demands in response to Europe’s Digital Services Act and the UK’s Online Safety Act, with many more hidden behind government-mandated age-verification making linking a real-life identity to internet use a prerequisite for access.


The U.S. government is launching a ‘Freedom.Gov’ website that will give British and European visitors the tools to access censorship-free parts of the internet they have been geofenced out of by their own governments in the name of public safety. The new initiative is the work of the U.S. State Department and led by Undersecretary for Public Diplomacy Sarah Rogers, who has been a key figure in bringing President Trump’s message of freedom to Europeans in recent months. Government insiders say the Freedom.Gov portal may feature a Virtual Private Network (VPN) tool to allow European users to bypass domestic controls and claims its use won’t be tracked.

A State Department spokesman is quoted as saying: “Digital freedom is a priority for the State Department, however, and that includes the proliferation of privacy and censorship-circumvention technologies like VPNs.” A placeholder website for the planned anti-censorship service is already active. The Freedom.Gov site first became active in January and was blank apart from the text “fly, eagle, fly”. Today, an updated landing page proclaims “Freedom is coming. Information is power. Reclaim your human right to free expression. Get ready.” In a crystal-clear message to the censorious British authorities cracking down on internet freedoms, the page also features an animated logo of Paul Revere on his famous 1775 midnight ride, warning the Minutemen of the approaching British troops.

The decision to launch the service will inevitably bring the U.S. into some sort of conflict with European capitals, given the pro-freedom move would force those governments to either defacto accept that their censorship laws will either be openly bypassed by their own citizens with the assistance of Washington, or to block Freedom.Gov, and clarify their opposition to the free dissemination of information.mThis puts Washington in the unfamiliar position of appearing to encourage citizens to flout local laws, without stopping to note this is, of course, not actually unfamiliar at all. The United States through the CIA and other agencies maintained a large network of censorship-busting initiatives through the Cold War using the latest technology of the time.

Among those efforts was Radio Free Europe and Radio Free Liberty, sending unfiltered news and other programming through high-powered broadcasts into the Soviet nations behind the Iron Curtain. This effort was something of a game of cat-and-mouse between the free West and the Communist East, with Soviet authorities attempting to block out the broadcasts with radio interference equipment of their own. In those Soviet countries, when the Western radio broadcasts did get through, those who tuned into them faced arrest “or worse” at the hands of the authorities. Today, the British government has already started to react to the use of VPNs to circumvent its new internet controls—imposed, it says, for the sake of public “safety”—and is moving to defacto outlaw them.

Pro-Freedom and anti-surveillance campaign group Big Brother Watch responded to the government’s plan to crack down on VPNs, saying: “The Prime Minister’s announcement that the government intends to restrict access to VPNs for under-16s represents a draconian crackdown on the civil liberties of children and adults alike. The only way such restrictions could be enforced effectively would be for VPN providers to require all users to undergo age-assurance measures.”

The group continues, “Having to provide ID or a biometric face scan to access a VPN utterly defeats the point of a technology designed to enhance privacy online. The ability to receive and share information absent state snooping is a vital part of living in a free democracy.” “There is a reason authoritarian governments in countries such as China, North Korea, Iran, and Belarus ban or restrict VPNs. Anonymity and enhanced privacy allow journalists, whistleblowers, campaigners, and dissidents to communicate securely,” they further urge. This latest escalation builds directly on the Trump administration’s earlier vows to counter British PM Kier Starmer’s censorship frenzy, where Under-Secretary Sarah B. Rogers warned that America would unleash its full arsenal against threats to X and free speech, treating the UK like Iran if needed.

Rogers stated: “With respect to a potential ban of X, Keir Starmer has said that nothing is off the table. I would say from America’s perspective, nothing is off the table when it comes to free speech.” It also extends Trump’s pattern of offering lifelines to UK and European dissidents, including asylum for “thought criminals” prosecuted for silent prayers or online posts challenging mass migration and gender ideology. nSources previously confirmed the White House was scouting cases, tying free speech erosion to Britain’s immigration failures.

Read more …

They don’t want transparency.

• EU Says Trump’s Tariff Workaround Violates Trade Deal (ZH)

Update (1715ET): Europe is now getting ‘legal’ over the whole thing – claiming that Trump’s new tariff workaround violates levels permitted in their trade agreement, Bloomberg reports. The European Commission, which handles trade matters for the bloc, told lawmakers Monday that the new global tariff will be added to levies that are already in place, according to Bernd Lange, chair of the European Parliament’s trade committee. The new cumulative rate means some goods would be above the 15% ceiling the EU and US agreed to in their trade deal.Under Trump’s new tariff program, some products including butter, plastics, textiles and chemicals would have levies above that 15% ceiling, according to people familiar with the commission’s assessment. The new global tariffs can stay in place for as many as 150 days.


* * * Update (9:40am ET): In response to the EU’s decision to freeze ratification of Trump’s landmark deal, the US president has come out swinging and on Truth Social threatened any countries that “play games” with the supreme court decision that they “will be met with a much higher tariff.” It just isn’t clear what the procedure for these much higher tariffs – aside from Section 122 which is limited to 150 days – will be now that IEEPA has been ruled unconstitutional.

Earlier: In the aftermath of Friday’s SCOTUS decision to reverse Trump’s tariff policy, one lingering question is what happens to the bilateral trade deals Trump struck with various countries (and which supposedly would lead to hundreds of billions of fresh investment into the US). Well, in the case of the EU we no longer have to wonder: {This] morning, the European Union said it would freeze the ratification process of its trade deal with the US and was seeking more details from the Trump administration on its new tariff program. Zeljana Zovko, the lead trade negotiator in the European People’s Party group on the US deal, said in an interview with Bloomberg that “we have no other option” but to delay the approval process to seek clarity on the situation.

The main political groups in the European Parliament say they’ll suspend legislative work on approving the trade deal on Monday, days after the US Supreme Court struck down Trump’s use of an emergency-powers law to impose his so-called reciprocal tariffs around the world. The center-right EPP, which is the largest political bloc in parliament, will be joined by parties including the Socialists & Democrats and the liberal Renew group to back freezing the process. According to Bloomberg, Bernd Lange – chairman of the parliament’s trade committee – called an emergency meeting later Monday to reassess the EU-US trade accord. He said over the weekend that parliament should delay work on the trade accord until the EU receives more clarity on the new tariffs. EU ambassadors will also meet Monday afternoon to discuss the US trade relationship.

Trump’s announcement following the court decision to impose a 10% global tariff, which he then increased to 15%, left many questions unanswered for American trading partners, stirring up more economic turbulence and uncertainty about the US policy. As a reminder, the deal struck last summer between Trump and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen would impose a 15% tariff rate on most EU exports to the US while removing tariffs on American industrial goods heading into the bloc. The US would also continue to impose a 50% tariff on European steel and aluminum imports. The bloc agreed to the lopsided deal in the hopes of avoiding a full-blown trade war with Washington and retaining US security backing, particularly with regards to Ukraine. Parliament had been aiming to ratify the agreement in March.

Read more …

“Unless members want to further add to the deficit, Congress should intervene to uphold the tariffs retroactively. But that may not be possible.”

• The Supreme Court has Ruled on Tariffs, but Who Will Ultimately Pay? (Turley)

Friday’s blockbuster ruling on tariffs was hardly welcomed by the Trump administration, but it was also widely expected. The Supreme Court clearly established in its 6-3 decision that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act does not afford presidents authority to issue sweeping, unilateral tariffs like those imposed by President Trump over the last year. The justices fractured on other issues. And they left one issue conspicuously unaddressed: What happens to the hundreds of billions of dollars collected from these tariffs so far? Many of us predicted that the administration would lose this fight. That view was reinforced after oral arguments, when a majority of justices raised possible reasons why the president might not possess this power.


Then again, he does possess similar powers under other laws, which the administration has already announced he will use. Although Trump said he was “ashamed” of the conservative justices who ruled against him, their opinion is consistent with the conservative interpretive approach taken in prior statutory cases. The majority defended Congress’s core power over the purse, maintaining the balance among the branches of our tripartite system. There were good-faith arguments on both sides, but these conservative justices ruled regardless of the political or practical repercussions, based on what they believed was demanded by the Constitution. The most surprising votes were not the three conservatives but the three liberal justices, who historically have not been deterred by ambiguity in statutes in deferring to presidents.

They have repeatedly also found delegated authority in independent agencies without worrying too much about the separation of powers. Democratic politicians openly celebrated from the loss. Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) seemed gleeful over the idea that the country will have to incur massive penalties, costs that could undermine the current economic growth figures. Newsom, who has led his state into a deep deficit and triggered an exodus of taxpayers, eagerly called for economic penalties for the country: “Every dollar unlawfully taken must be refunded immediately — with interest. Cough up!”

In reality, the tariffs are not going away. Trump will just have to rely on less nimble laws, but he can pursue the same policies in the name of other causes, such as securing greater market access and other concessions from foreign governments. So what about “coughing up” those past tariff dollars? Newsom may ultimately be disappointed. Unless members want to further add to the deficit, Congress should intervene to uphold the tariffs retroactively. But that may not be possible.

Democratic politicians like Newsom are not likely to want to help Trump, even if that means wounding the national economy and the federal budget. But this may offer Republicans a unique opportunity to force such a vote. Do Democrats truly want to vote to give hundreds of billions back? There are already more than 1,000 claimants. Justice Brett Kavanaugh dealt with the problem directly in his forceful dissent. He criticized the majority for its silence on whether or how such refunds would be made. Most pointedly, Kavanaugh noted that the federal government “may be required to refund billions of dollars to importers who paid the … tariffs, even though some importers may have already passed on costs to consumers or others.”

Read more …

“.. tariff collections will continue at the same level because the rates and scope remain consistent. The mechanism changes, but the dollars don’t,..”

• Bessent Signals No Retreat After SCOTUS Tariff Ruling (David Manney)

After the Supreme Court handed down a six-to-three decision limiting how President Donald Trump used the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose so-called Liberation Day tariffs, his critics pounced, declaring the strategy dead. Do they know President Trump? Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent went on the air and made clear the administration isn’t backing down. One tool was whittled down, but the policy is still kicking. The Supreme Court ruled that the administration stretched IEEPA beyond its intended scope. While the statute allows emergency economic measures, the majority found that the tariff action did not fit the framework Congress had designed. The decision appeared to force surrender, but all it did was cause a pivot.


Bessent told Sunday Morning Futures host Maria Bartiromo that tariff revenue wouldn’t stop, framing the ruling as procedural rather than authoritative. He said that the administration still has multiple statutory authorities to address trade imbalances and national security threats. The objective, he said, hasn’t changed: reduce trade deficits, protect domestic industry, and pressure the foreign governments that have been gaming the system. Bessent explained that the White House will move to Section 122 authority within days, as President Trump already announced a 15% global tariff, adjusting it over the weekend to maintain leverage.Section 122 allows temporary trade restrictions to address balance-of-payments concerns, and while formal investigations proceed, it remains in effect for 150 days.

Bessent said that the administration also plans to use Section 232, which addresses national security concerns, and Section 301, which targets unfair trade practices. Commerce Department reviews and United States Trade Representative studies will support those actions. Describing the shift as straightforward, Bessent argued that the Supreme Court’s decision clarified the boundaries and strengthened the administration’s footing under other statutes. “In a way, they have made the leverage that he has more draconian because they agreed he does have the right to a full embargo,” the secretary said. “Within three days, the President can put on the Section 122 10% global tariff. So, at Treasury for the full year 2026, we foresee no decrease in revenue,” he continued.

Some budget watchdog groups warned tariff revenue would fall. Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, shared uncertainty about the long-term math, an argument Bessent rejected outright, saying that revenue projections remain intact under the new authorities. “Yes, so, Maria, let’s take a step back here. And Maya MacGuineas should be ashamed, and they should take the word ‘responsible’ out of her organization’s name,” Bessent responded. “Everything she told you was completely irresponsible, and look, where were they when the Biden administration blew out the deficit that we had a fiscal contraction last year? So she should be ashamed.”


Using the phrase “new authorities,” Bessent meant that different trade laws already on the books, not a fresh attempt at a supposed power grab. The administration plans to rely on Section 122 of the Trade Act for temporary tariffs, along with Sections 232 and 301, statutes written specifically for trade enforcement, giving the White House a firm legal foundation even after the Supreme Court narrowed the use of emergency powers. Bessent went on to say that tariff collections will continue at the same level because the rates and scope remain consistent. The mechanism changes, but the dollars don’t, while he pushed back against claims that tariffs worsen inflation or cause exploding deficits. Years of runaway spending happened long before these trade actions.

Read more …

“Everyone’s got this story wrong, that this is about me running for president. Global democracies are on fire the world over.”

• AOC Has Instagram Meltdown. It’s a Sight to Behold. (Matt Margolis)

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) traveled to the Munich Security Conference with big ambitions and came home with a reputation problem. The trip was supposed to bolster her foreign policy credentials ahead of a future Senate or presidential run. Instead, it turned into a masterclass in unpreparedness, and now she’s doing damage control in the worst way possible: a tearful late-night Instagram rant.


In the video, an emotional AOC, appearing to hold back tears, pushed back against critics who saw her faceplant in Munich, convinced she has no idea what she’s talking about. Her defense? It’s not her, it’s you, who’s the problem. “If you think that I don’t understand foreign policy because out of hours of discourse about international affairs, I paused to think about one of the most sensitive geopolitical issues that currently exist on Earth, I’m afraid the issue is not my understanding, but rather the problem is perhaps you’ve gotten adjusted to a president that never thinks before he speaks.” There it is. You can’t blame her for not knowing what she’s talking about; you’ve got to blame President Donald Trump.

Make no mistake about it, the Instagram video isn’t going to rehabilitate her, because the Munich footage still exists. And it was bad, in every sense of the word. When a panelist asked AOC whether the U.S. should commit troops to defend Taiwan if China attacks — a question any serious foreign policy thinker should be able to handle — she froze. What followed was genuinely painful to watch: “Um… You know, I think that, uh… This is such a, uh, you know, I think that this is a, um… This is, of course, a very long-standing policy of the United States, and I think what we are hoping for is that we want to make sure that we never get to that point.” She rambled for several more seconds without saying anything approaching a coherent position. Taiwan policy has been a central pillar of U.S. foreign relations for decades. This wasn’t a trick question.

That wasn’t pausing to think; that was clearly her not having the faintest idea how to respond. Her wealth tax moment wasn’t any smoother. Asked whether she’d impose one as president, AOC giggled nervously before managing this: “I don’t think that, um, I don’t think that anyone, and that we don’t have to wait for any one president to impose a wealth tax. I think it needs to be done expeditiously.”Argentine politician Daiana Fernández Molero wasted no time dismantling that position with actual evidence. “You have the recipe that many Latin American countries applied many, many times; that is some relief in the short term, but ends up being a tragedy for the future,” Molero explained.

“It’s like a public expenditure, huge public expenditure, price controls, sometimes wealth tax, and you end up with the wealth going away, and you have just the tax, and you don’t have wealth anymore. That was something that Peronism did many, many times.”Molero continued, “So all these recipes create a cycle. Then you have this short-term relief, but then it goes with inflation, shortage, then you have more poverty, and the cycle goes and goes.”

Once again, AOC came away from an exchange looking like the dumb kid way out of her depth. So she did what any entitled brat would do: she called a reporter to defend her. New York Times journalist Kellen Browning publicly confirmed that AOC “gave me a call,” and his subsequent article dutifully suggested she faced a “potentially frosty reception” and that critics missed “the substance of her arguments.” AOC told Browning, “Everyone’s got this story wrong, that this is about me running for president. Global democracies are on fire the world over.”

The left-wing media ecosystem spent years building AOC into a political phenomenon, with protective coverage that kept her weaknesses hidden as much as possible. Munich stripped all of that away. Without friendly gatekeepers controlling the narrative, her lack of depth became impossible to disguise.If this conference was her 2028 audition, she bombed it. And no amount of teary Instagram videos is going to make people forget how badly she bombed.

Read more …

“.. in the United States, the most prominent Marxist theorists actually gave up on workers altogether as allies in the fight against capitalism.”

• AOC’s Ignorance Is No Laughing Matter (Stephen Soukup)

Over the past week or so, many on the political Right have understandably enjoyed a laugh or two at the expense of Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D, N.Y.). AOC went to the Munich Security Conference to provide “balance” to the Trump administration’s presence and to burnish her own credentials on the global stage. Instead, she mostly just made a fool of herself. Not only did she stutter, stammer, and offer a Kamala Harris-esque non-answer when asked about American interests in and obligations to Taiwan, but she also demonstrated a comically poor grasp of geography and a righteously ignorant understanding of history. In an effort to rebut and embarrass U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, AOC embarrassed only herself, showing that historical facts mean far less to her than identity-inspired fiction.


But while it’s inarguably fun to chuckle at and mock the ignorance of the smug congresswoman and presumed presidential aspirant, it is also important to acknowledge that her historical and political illiteracy extends beyond the superficial and touches on matters of real and critical importance. Notably, this purported champion of the working class does not know the history of working-class politics, does not understand the reasons for the collapse of the working-class-centered ideology, and, as a result, has never contemplated the dangers inherent in attempting to resuscitate that failed doctrine. Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez has long emphasized her biography and working-class roots to enhance her political status—and justifiably so. Her childhood may not have been quite the struggle she pretends it was, but she nevertheless endured economic hardships—especially after her father’s death—and was unable to find employment commensurate with her education. She was, famously, a bartender and a cocktail waitress before her election to Congress and, as a result, has long fashioned herself a champion of the working class and its purported priorities.

Indeed, on her trip to Munich, AOC emphasized her affinity with the working class and admonished democratic nations to erect a bulwark against totalitarianism by focusing on workers, workers’ rights, and worker-centered politics. “It is of utmost urgent priority that we get our economic houses in order and deliver material gains for the working class,” the congresswoman said, “or else we will fall to a more isolated world governed by authoritarians that also do not deliver to working people.” She railed against large corporations and especially billionaires, insisting that they had to be stopped from “throwing their weight around” in domestic and international politics. In short, the good congresswoman used her trip to Munich to urge the workers of the world to unite, because, as she sees it, they have nothing to lose but their chains.

There’s only one little problem with AOC’s exhortation: it’s ridiculous. Indeed, it’s been tried . . . and tried . . . and tried. It doesn’t work. And when I say that, I don’t mean that socialism doesn’t work or that communism has been tried countless times before and failed every time. That much is obvious by now. Rather, what I mean is that the workers of the world don’t care about the rest of the workers of the world. They don’t like the idea of being divided into classes, and they don’t have any particular affection for their fellow laborers. They don’t dislike other workers necessarily, but they don’t see themselves as a monolithic federation sharing the same interests, needs, or political predilections. Truth be told—and this is the key to understanding the silliness of the whole “global proletariat” nonsense—even the Marxists long ago gave up on uniting the workers of the world. In fact, in the United States, the most prominent Marxist theorists actually gave up on workers altogether as allies in the fight against capitalism.

Read more …

“God drove him to his knees, and it was supposed to humble him, but in some cases, it made him worse.”

• Trump is Losing His Base – Mark Taylor (USAW)

Retired firefighter, Lieutenant Mark Taylor, author of the popular book “The Trump Prophecies,” predicted Donald Trump would become President five years before the 2016 Election. Many thought that was an outrageous prediction, but he was proven right. Taylor also looked like he got it wrong when he predicted Trump would be a two-term President. He was, once again, proven correct despite the four-year gap in his Administration. Now, Taylor is sounding the alarm that President Trump is losing the votes of people who gave him the biggest political comeback of all time. Taylor explains, “Here’s the prophetic warning: If you wait too late to act, the patriots are going to take matters into their own hands. . ..


There is video after video from patriots fed up as to how long it is taking to get some of this stuff done. I get emails and comments on social media, and people are feeling how hurt they are from the President. How they even feel betrayed and angry with this President because it is taking so long. Nobody has been held accountable in their eyes. I am telling you the perception of the patriots. . .. Trump is losing his base. I don’t want to see that happen. I want to see him succeed because if he succeeds, the country succeeds. There are certain things this President is doing that is hampering this process. He is waiting too long, and the patriots are getting ready to take matters into their own hands. No amount of military is going to stop this if it starts because right now, they are feeling hopeless.”

Yes, Donald Trump has done some very good things such as getting America out of the World Health Organization. Trump brought in trillions of dollars in investments and has begun removing millions of illegal aliens the Biden Administration let in with open borders. The Southern border is now closed, but the enemy is not just external, and it’s not only flesh and blood. Taylor says there is an enemy within and explains, “God is calling for a place of repentance, and that includes the people’s house, The White House. This includes who is in charge of the people’s house. . .. Susie Wiles (White House Chief of Staff) needs to be fired.

Taylor contends, “Paula White is a spiritual gatekeeper. The President has clairvoyants, psychics and remote viewers around him. He has intelligence people around him. His spiritual advisory board is completely combat ineffective in the spiritual realm. I believe Susie Wiles and her people are responsible for not only killing this presidency . . . but she has him going off track and going in a different direction, and she is responsible for killing the America First agenda. This is what a lot of patriots that I am hearing from are angry about. . .. If there is not a giant turnaround, I think we are going to hand it over to the Democrats (midterms in 2026) because the Republicans are not going to show up to vote because they lost all hope in the President.”

Taylor says, “Who has his ear is steering the President in the wrong direction. He has got to correct this at some point. He’s got to get rid of some of these people. You cannot empower the spirit of Jezebel the way Trump has and not be demonically influenced. He has to throw Jezebel off the roof and feed her to the dogs.” Taylor says he would advise President Trump to fire FBI Director Kash Patel, AG Pam Bondi, spiritual advisor Paula White and political advisor Susie Wiles just for starters. Please keep in mind, Wiles had a disastrous interview late last year with Vanity Fair where she said President Trump had an “alcoholic personality.” President Trump never drinks alcohol because he had an alcoholic brother.

In closing, Taylor warns, “You cannot have this stuff going on and expect God (The Father) to be in it. . .. God is showing me if Trump does not repent and turn back to God and start listening to God instead of his intelligence, the intelligence that is purposely trying to steer him off track, then God is showing me there is something coming for him. There is going to be a David moment, so to speak . . .. God took a child from David. I am not saying he’s going to do that. The assassination attempt was allowed. The bullet grazed his right ear. What is the right ear prophetic for? It is for what you are hearing now. He’s listening to the wrong people now. . .. God drove him to his knees, and it was supposed to humble him, but in some cases, it made him worse.”

Read more …

Send the bill to Reid Hoffman.

• Obama’s ‘Gift’ Sticks Taxpayers With $200M+ Bill (ZH)

When former President Barack Obama announced plans for his presidential center on Chicago’s South Side, he described it as a privately funded investment in the city that would give back to the community that shaped his political career. And while construction of the brutalist eyesore itself remains privately financed through the Obama Foundation, taxpayers are footing the bill for massive infrastructure costs. A review by Fox News found that state and city agencies have not produced a unified accounting of total public expenditures tied to the project’s surrounding infrastructure. While individual agencies have disclosed partial figures, no single office has reconciled those totals or clarified how they overlap.


At the time the project was approved in 2018, public infrastructure costs were projected at roughly $350 million, to be split between the State of Illinois and the City of Chicago. Those estimates covered roadway modifications, utility relocations and related improvements necessary to accommodate the 19.3-acre campus in Jackson Park that nobody asked for. In July, the Illinois Department of Transportation said that approximately $229 million in state-managed infrastructure spending had been committed to the project. That total includes about $19 million for preliminary engineering, $24 million for construction engineering and $186 million for construction activities. A department spokesperson described the earlier $174 million figure as a preliminary 2017 estimate.

Now, Chicago’s most recent 2024–2028 Capital Improvement Plan lists more than $206 million allocated to roadway and utility work associated with the project. However, much of that funding is labeled as “state,” and neither state nor city officials have clarified how the figures relate to one another or whether they represent overlapping commitments. Fox submitted records requests to several agencies, including the Illinois Department of Transportation, Chicago’s Department of Transportation, the city’s Office of Budget and Management, the mayor’s office and Gov. J.B. Pritzker’s administration – yet, not one provided a consolidated, up-to-date accounting of total public infrastructure spending. The Illinois Attorney General’s Public Access Counselor is reviewing whether agencies complied with state transparency laws in responding to the requests.

The Obama Foundation defended the project, reiterating that the center’s construction – whose cost has grown from early projections of roughly $330 million to at least $850 million, according to its 2024 tax filings – is being financed by private donations. In a statement to Fox, foundation spox Emily Bittner said the organization is “investing $850 million in private funding to build the Obama Presidential Center and give back to the community that made the Obamas’ story possible,” adding that the project is intended to catalyze economic opportunity on the South Side. Bittner, of course, didn’t address the infrastructure costs – which have been extensive.

Chicago’s 2024–2028 Capital Improvement Program lists $206,078,058 for “Obama Presidential Center & Jackson Park – Infrastructure Improvements,” with most funding labeled as state sources. (City of Chicago Capital Improvement Program) Cornell Drive, a four-lane roadway along the eastern edge of Jackson Park, was removed and traffic rerouted farther west. Utilities, including water mains and sewer lines, were relocated, and new drainage systems were installed. City and state officials have said the changes were necessary to manage anticipated traffic and visitor demand.The center occupies 19 acres of public parkland transferred under a 99-year agreement for $10, a decision that prompted legal challenges arguing that the arrangement was not in the public interest. Courts ultimately dis missed those lawsuits.

Though often described as a presidential library, the Chicago complex will not function as a traditional library operated by the National Archives and Records Administration. Former President Obama’s official records will be maintained by the federal government at a facility in Maryland, while the Chicago site will be operated privately by the Obama Foundation. The foundation also pledged to establish a $470 million endowment intended to protect taxpayers in the event the project encounters financial difficulty. According to previous reporting by Fox News, that fund has received $1 million in deposits. Who didn’t see this coming?

Read more …

“.. not only are there never results, but there’s never any accountability either ..”

• CNN Finally Admits the Truth About Democrat-Run Cities( Matt Margolis))

CNN’s Fareed Zakaria went off-script this week — at least by his network’s standards — and said the quiet part out loud: Democrat-run cities are a mess, and the politicians in charge either can’t or won’t do anything about it. Of course, this isn’t news to you, but for a CNN host to admit this is a big deal. Zakaria opened with Zohran Mamdani’s New York, calling it “a prime example of a problem Democrats seem unwilling to confront.” That’s a pretty remarkable admission from a CNN host, but I assure you, he was just getting started. “Blue cities are out of control,” he said, “promising more, spending more, delivering less, and pushing off the fiscal problems to some future day.”


He then turned to Los Angeles, and the numbers he cited are staggering. Zakaria noted that the city’s homelessness budget for fiscal year 2025-2026 alone totals roughly $950 million. Not the cumulative total over several years. One year. And what has all that money bought? He explained that the LA Homelessness Services Authority reported that homelessness increased by 9% countywide and 10% within the city in 2023. A 2024 AP account found that homelessness had surged by 70% countywide since 2015 and by 80% within the city. “All this amid public frustration, despite billions spent,” Zakaria said. Then came perhaps the most damning detail. An audit reviewed $2.4 billion in city homelessness funding and found that “officials could not reliably track where it went or what it achieved.” That’s right. $2.4 billion has just disappeared into the bureaucratic ether.

To make matters worse, not only are there never results, but there’s never any accountability either, at least not for the people running the city. Zakaria moved on to Chicago next. He noted the city has a mayor whose approval rating is “deep underwater” and pension obligations so enormous they will “surely bankrupt the city at some point.” That’s a pretty frank diagnosis coming from a guy on a network that spent years cheerleading for this very brand of governance. Then Zakaria asked the key question Democrats never ask: “What is the theory of good government here?” His answer was cutting. “If the answer is keep adding programs, the city will keep producing unaffordability, because unaffordability is what happens when government becomes a machine that grows faster than the society it governs.”

Zakaria continued, “Zohran Mamdani’s basic instinct is correct: focus on affordability, especially housing, but not by providing government subsidies. These only seem to have driven up the cost of rent, as subsidies naturally do.” Here’s where Zakaria went wrong. Affordability isn’t an instinct for Mamdani; it’s a talking point. His instinct is to subsidize. It’s not like he wasn’t upfront about this during his campaign. So all the affordability problems New York City faces are going to get worse under Mamdani. Heck, he’s already gone looking to Gov. Kathy Hochul to bail out New York City — a mere two months into his administration. That’s the pattern. Spend more. Get less. Blame someone else. Repeat.

Read more …

Trump throw nukes? I doubt it.

• Trump is Netanyahu’s Puppet (Paul Craig Roberts)

It seems clear that Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu has disrupted Trump’s negotiations with Iran about nuclear weapons by interjecting in the middle of the negotiations another demand- that Iran give up its missiles and its alleged proxy forces. Netanyahu’s demand is obviously intended to ruin the negotiations as the demand clearly would prevent Iran s ability to defend itself from Israeli attack. From the beginning Netanyahu has been determined to force the US to war with Iran, and that is the purpose of his demand that the deal with Iran includes the military disarming of Iran.


We see this in the news reports that the Trump regime is now considering whether the deal with Iran should also extend to Iranian missiles. Iran is willing to agree not to produce nuclear weapons, but cannot possibly agree to disarm itself of conventional weapons, especially after US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee recently acknowledged that Greater Israel is an ongoing Zionist project. If Iran has the Chinese battle control system that former British diplomat Alastair Crooke described, a US attack on Iran could result in an American defeat, the loss of aircraft carriers and US military bases in the area as well as heavy destruction of Israel. Why would Netanyahu expose Israel to this risk?

Could it be that he bets that an American defeat would lead to demand for revenge on Iran and the US would finally do what Israel wants and nuke the Iranian nation, thus removing Iran as a barrier to further Israeli expansion? Iran’s designation as a terrorist state and Iran’s alleged proxy forces are propagandistic claims used to justify a US military attack on Iran. As the world must know, the two terrorist states are Israel and the United States. Washington, for example, kidnaps foreign leaders of states, and Israel assassinates Iranian, Lebanese, and Yemeni leaders. Who has Iran assassinated ? What terrorist act is Iran responsible for?

The Israeli genocide of Palestine is reason enough for the Houthis in Yemen to oppose Israel. Israel’;s attempted expansion into Lebanon is sufficient reason for Hezbollah to oppose Israel. Perhaps Iran supplies them with weapons, but that doesn’t make them Iran s proxies. The US provides Israel with weapons. Does this make America an Israeli proxy? Insouciant Americans are unaware that Netanyahu and Washington are setting them up for a war that serves only Israel’s interest. Ever since Americans fell for the 911 narrative, they have been putty in the Israel Lobby’s hands, and their beliefs about the Middle East have been given to them by the Israel Lobby and it s many American associates. The prevailing ignorance can very easily produce a catastrophic war.

Read more …

“The Court strains to find a situation in which a former special counsel has released a report after initiating criminal charges that did not result in a finding of guilt.”

• Judge Says Jack Smith’s Final Report on Trump Can Never Be Released (ET)

federal judge on Feb. 23 said that the final report on President Donald Trump compiled by a former special counsel shall not be released. U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, who is based in Florida, said in a 15-page decision that she was granting requests from Trump and his co-defendants to keep part two of the report from former special counsel Jack Smith shielded from the public. Cannon said that Smith wrongly forged ahead with investigating Trump and others for allegedly violating federal law by gathering and retaining sensitive documents even after she ruled his appointment was unconstitutional and threw out the case.


“Rather than seek a stay of the Order, or clarification, Special Counsel Smith and his team chose to circumvent it, for months, by taking the discovery generated in this case and compiling it in a final report for transmission to then-Attorney General Garland, to Congress, and then beyond,” Cannon said. “The Court need not countenance this brazen stratagem or effectively perpetuate the Special Counsel’s breach of this Court’s own order.” She added later: “While it is true that former special counsels have released final reports at the conclusion of their work, it appears they have done so either after electing not to bring charges at all or after adjudications of guilt by plea or trial. The Court strains to find a situation in which a former special counsel has released a report after initiating criminal charges that did not result in a finding of guilt.”

The Department of Justice (DOJ) had appealed Cannon’s ruling, but dropped the appeal after Trump won a second term in office. The department also released part of Smith’s report just before Trump began his second term. The other part, which has not been made public, was not to be released, according to a January 2025 order from Cannon. Cannon announced in December 2025 that her injunction was set to expire in February this year. Trump and co-defendants said in filings on Jan. 20 that Cannon should permanently block the release of the other part of Smith’s report. Lawyers for Trump said Smith was illegally appointed, and all acts he undertook were thus void, so the release “would constitute an irreversible violation of this Court’s constitutional rulings in the underlying criminal action and of bedrock principles of the separation of powers.”

DOJ officials backed that position. “Put simply, Smith’s tenure was marked by illegality and impropriety, and under no circumstance should his work product be given the full weight and authority of this Department,” they said in a brief, adding later that making the second part of the report public would “lead to the public dissemination of sensitive grand jury materials, attorney-client privileged information, and other information derived from protected discovery materials, raising significant statutory, due process, and privacy concerns for President Trump and his former co-defendants.”

Read more …

Nothing to do with girls. That’s all just a cover.

• British Police Take Former Ambassador Mandelson into Custody (Manney)

Peter Mandelson built a career inside the highest levels of British power, but that career collided with a police investigation tied to Jeffrey Epstein. On Monday morning, officers with London’s Metropolitan Police arrested Mandelson on suspicion of misconduct in public office. Police transported the 72-year-old former British ambassador to the United States to a London station for formal questioning. Authorities also searched two properties linked to him in Wiltshire and Camden. Mandelson served as business secretary and twice held cabinet rank under Labour governments, later becoming the United Kingdom’s ambassador to the United States.


That role placed him at the center of diplomatic strategy between London and Washington, while also placing him under scrutiny once the newly released Epstein files revealed how deep his association ran with the convicted sex offender. Officials removed Mandelson from his ambassadorial post in September, after the extent of his relationship with Epstein became public. He resigned from the Labour Party the same day the news broke that police had opened a formal investigation into whether he shared confidential government information, the reason behind today’s arrest. Mandelson hasn’t been charged, and he’s said that documents released by the U.S. DOJ didn’t indicate wrongdoing or misdemeanor on his part. He’s stopped talking in public since the beginning of the investigation.

Law enforcement works under a long-standing legal principle: evidence found by unlawful means can’t stand in court, and anything derived from it falls with it—fruit from the poison tree. The fallout from the Epstein files works similarly in public life: Names connected to Epstein don’t come out of the washer clean when associations become liabilities, and careers erode once those ties come to light. If he understood anything, Mandelson understood influence, spending decades navigating political power inside Westminster and abroad. Prime ministers relied on him to negotiate, strategize, and manage party operations. He easily moved between government offices and diplomatic leadership, and that access is now at the center of a criminal inquiry.

It’s rare for British police to arrest former cabinet ministers, which shows that investigators believe serious questions remain unanswered. Officials haven’t disclosed the exact nature of the alleged confidential material involved, confirming only that a former government minister was arrested in connection with an ongoing investigation into misconduct in public office. This circus shows that Epstein’s network extended beyond American shores, both politically and financially. British figures repeatedly showed up in released documents and flight logs, and each new disclosure reopened old wounds, forcing political leaders to confront uncomfortable connections. Mandelson’s arrest marks one of the most significant developments inside the U. tied to those files.

European royals, government officials, politicians, and others are losing jobs and titles over their connection to the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. European law enforcement agencies are opening investigations based on recent troves of documents released by the U.S. government. …

Read more …

“This year we will mark the centenary of Fidel Castro’s birth, and we will do so together.”

• The Putin Plan for Cuba and The Castro Family (Helmer)

President Vladimir Putin will not run the gauntlet President Donald Trump has established around Cuba with the Russian Navy to escort Russian-flagged tankers delivering crude oil and petroleum products to Havana. When Cuba’s Foreign Minister Bruno Rodriguez Parrilla sat down in the Kremlin on Thursday to ask for more “solidarity, firmly demonstrated by you, the Government of Russia, and the Minister for Foreign Affairs, in the face of the tightening blockade of Cuba and the recent energy siege,” Putin responded enough is enough. He meant that solidarity with Cuba is one thing, but not at the risk of military conflict with the Trump Administration and its naval forces in the Caribbean.


This is Mikhail Gorbachev talking, responded the Kremlin security analysis medium, Vzglyad, not Nikita Khrushchev. “Please convey my best wishes to the President of Cuba and Army General [Raul] Castro,” Putin told the foreign minister. “This year we will mark the centenary of Fidel Castro’s birth, and we will do so together.” It is not the first time Putin has said there is nothing but historical memory to share between Russia and Cuba; and that he would trade Russia’s military positions in Cuba for its interest in business with the US. In a meeting with President George W. Bush on October 21, 2001, Putin had said he would remove the Russian military intelligence base in Cuba. “I don’t want to horsetrade or nickel and dime this thing or argue about who gets what,” Putin said to Bush in a recently declassified record. In the outcome that is exactly what Putin did – and the trade failed because Bush did not reciprocate.

In his meeting with Rodriguez, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov was clearer in public what the Russian line means. “We call on the United States to show common sense and take a responsible attitude,” he said – “refraining from implementing its plans for a naval blockade of the Island of Freedom. We categorically reject the far-fetched allegations regarding Russia and Cuba, and cooperation between them, which is presumably threatening the interests of the United States or any other countries. All disputes should be settled exclusively through dialogue based on mutual respect and a balance of interests. We know that our Cuban friends are always ready for honest negotiations… All issues should be resolved solely through a mutually respectful dialogue aimed at finding a balance of interests. We know that Cuban friends are always ready for such honest negotiations. In turn, we will consistently continue to support Cuba, the Cuban people in protecting the sovereignty and security of the country.”

“I would like to reiterate our complete solidarity with our Cuban friends. I fully share the views on our relations and strategic partnership, which you [Rodriguez] have stated. I would also like to reaffirm the complete unacceptability of actions by the United States, which, as you have reminded just now, has adopted an executive order designating Cuba as a threat to US national interests. At the same time, the document says that this alleged threat is exacerbated by Cuba’s cooperation with Russia, which has been described in the document as a ‘hostile’ and ‘malign’ actor. We are confident that all states should define their national interests in a way that will include recognition of and respect for the national interests of all other countries.”

Read more …

 

 

https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2025925319882870883?s=20 https://twitter.com/Real_RobN/status/2025615047423352928?s=20 https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2025707794658160837?s=20

 


 

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle September 30 2025

Sep 302025
 
 September 30, 2025  Posted by at 9:52 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , ,  52 Responses »


Édouard Boubat Café La Tartine, Paris 1989

 

• Trump’s Plan For Gaza Could Affect Ukrainian Conflict — Witkoff (TASS)
• Trump Unveils 20-Point Gaza Cease-Fire Plan (NYP)
• ‘Putin Doesn’t Want World War III’ – Italian FM (RT)
• Trump Flip Flop on Ukraine Guarantees Nuke War – Martin Armstrong (USAW)
• EU Officials Fear New ‘Franz Ferdinand Moment’ – Politico (RT)
• Trump May Have Authorized Ukrainian Strikes Deep Inside Russia – Kellogg (RT)
• Kellogg Says Trump Has Authorized NATO Strikes Against Moscow (CTH)
• James Comey Tried to Take Down Trump (Victor Davis Hanson)
• The Big Lebowski Civil War (James Howard Kunstler)
• Trump Is About to Pull Off the Biggest Federal Workforce Cut in History (Margolis)
• Is This the Man to Save the Democrats? (Stephen Green)
• John Fetterman Throws His Party Under the Bus (Margolis)
• UK Records Unprecedented Migrant Boat Arrival (RT)
• Rowling Finally Gave Hermione the Spanking She Deserves (Green)

 

 

https://twitter.com/MdBreathe/status/1972472604025106792

https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/1972651695353241979
https://twitter.com/BrianJBerletic/status/1972649650298450274


https://twitter.com/RussiaIsntEnemy/status/1972639433699844592
https://twitter.com/ivan_8848/status/1972689953898303815

 

 

 

 

We can dream, but…

• Trump’s Plan For Gaza Could Affect Ukrainian Conflict — Witkoff (TASS)

The implementation of US President Donald Trump’s plan for a ceasefire in the Gaza Strip and an end to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict could create momentum that would help bring peace to other regions of the Middle East and also influence the settlement of the Ukrainian crisis, US presidential special envoy Steve Witkoff said. “President [Trump] wants to see an overall peace. It’s not just about Gaza; it’s about how this might percolate into all other areas in the Middle East, and what it’s going to achieve, maybe even percolate into Russia and Ukraine,” he told Fox News in an interview, commenting on the plan proposed by the US authorities to resolve the conflict in the Palestinian enclave. Witkoff added that Trump’s initiative is supported by both the Persian Gulf countries and European states.

Earlier, the White House published a plan to resolve the conflict in the Gaza Strip. It calls for a complete cessation of hostilities and the release of hostages held by Hamas within 72 hours. In addition, the document proposes transferring the enclave to external administration for a transitional period. During this time, residents of the enclave would be given the opportunity to leave and return.Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced at a press conference with Trump in Washington that he supports the US president’s plan to end military operations in Gaza. However, he noted that if Hamas rejects or sabotages the proposal, Israel will “finish the job by itself.”.

Read more …

OK OK, I’ll give it all the space it wants. But this reads like Bibi’s plan, maybe signed, maybe not, under the threat of more violence. Shaky.

• Trump Unveils 20-Point Gaza Cease-Fire Plan (NYP)

President Trump formally unveiled a 20-point peace plan Monday calling for an international peacekeeping force in the Gaza Strip and a post-Hamas transitional government overseen by a “Board of Peace” — that Trump himself would lead as chairman. Trump, 79, announced the plan alongside Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House and said it could bring “eternal peace in the Middle East” — with eight Muslim-majority countries and the West Bank-based Palestinian Authority quickly joining Israel in embracing the blueprint. “This is a beautiful day, potentially one of the great days ever in civilization,” Trump told reporters in the State Dining Room. “We discussed how to end the war in Gaza. But it’s just a part of the bigger picture, which is peace in the Middle East, and let’s call it eternal peace in the Middle East.”

The governments of Egypt, Jordan, Turkey, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates issued a rare joint statement praising the framework. The nations said they “welcome President Donald J. Trump’s leadership and his sincere efforts to end the war in Gaza” and “affirm their readiness to engage positively and constructively with the United States and the parties toward finalizing the agreement and ensuring its implementation.” The Palestinian Authority, which rules parts of the West Bank and lost a 2007 civil war with Hamas for control of Gaza, said: “The State of Palestine welcomes the sincere and determined efforts of President Donald J. Trump to end the war on Gaza and affirms its confidence in his ability to find a path toward peace.”

Trump warned, however, that Israel would have his permission to “finish the job” if Hamas refused to sign on to the plan, saying that “Israel would have my full backing” in subsequent fighting. Trump said at his press conference that “the leaders of the Arab world, Israel and everybody involved, asked me to” chair the proposed peace board board and floated the prospect of the deal leading to dramatic regional changes – including possible diplomatic relations between Israel and Iran. Netanyahu confirmed that his government had agreed to the provisions, adding that Israel would finish the war and end Hamas rule of Gaza “the easy way” or “the hard way.” In an interview with Qatar-based Al Jazeera following Trump’s and Netanyahu’s remarks, Hamas official Mahmoud Mardawi claimed that Trump’s peace plan “has not reached us, nor has it reached any Palestinian party so far.

——-–
President Donald J. Trump’s Comprehensive Plan to End the Gaza Conflict:

1. Gaza will be a deradicalized terror-free zone that does not pose a threat to its neighbors.
2. Gaza will be redeveloped for the benefit of the people of Gaza, who have suffered more than enough.
3. If both sides agree to this proposal, the war will immediately end. Israeli forces will withdraw to the agreed upon line to prepare for a hostage release. During this time, all military operations, including aerial and artillery bombardment, will be suspended, and battle lines will remain frozen until conditions are met for the complete staged withdrawal.
4. Within 72 hours of Israel publicly accepting this agreement, all hostages, alive and deceased, will be returned.
5. Once all hostages are released, Israel will release 250 life sentence prisoners plus 1700 Gazans who were detained after October 7th, 2023, including all women and children detained in that context. For every Israeli hostage whose remains are released, Israel will release the remains of 15 deceased Gazans.

6. Once all hostages are returned, Hamas members who commit to peaceful co-existence and to decommission their weapons will be given amnesty. Members of Hamas who wish to leave Gaza will be provided safe passage to receiving countries.
7. Upon acceptance of this agreement, full aid will be immediately sent into the Gaza Strip. At a minimum, aid quantities will be consistent with what was included in the January 19, 2025, agreement regarding humanitarian aid, including rehabilitation of infrastructure (water, electricity, sewage), rehabilitation of hospitals and bakeries, and entry of necessary equipment to remove rubble and open roads.
8. Entry of distribution and aid in the Gaza Strip will proceed without interference from the two parties through the United Nations and its agencies, and the Red Crescent, in addition to other international institutions not associated in any manner with either party. Opening the Rafah crossing in both directions will be subject to the same mechanism implemented under the January 19, 2025, agreement.
9. Gaza will be governed under the temporary transitional governance of a technocratic, apolitical Palestinian committee, responsible for delivering the day-to-day running of public services and municipalities for the people in Gaza. This committee will be made up of qualified Palestinians and international experts, with oversight and supervision by a new international transitional body, the “Board of Peace,” which will be headed and chaired by President Donald J. Trump, with other members and heads of State to be announced, including Former Prime Minister Tony Blair. This body will set the framework and handle the funding for the redevelopment of Gaza until such time as the Palestinian Authority has completed its reform program, as outlined in various proposals, including President Trump’s peace plan in 2020 and the Saudi-French proposal, and can securely and effectively take back control of Gaza. This body will call on best international standards to create modern and efficient governance that serves the people of Gaza and is conducive to attracting investment.
10. A Trump economic development plan to rebuild and energize Gaza will be created by convening a panel of experts who have helped birth some of the thriving modern miracle cities in the Middle East. Many thoughtful investment proposals and exciting development ideas have been crafted by well-meaning international groups and will be considered to synthesize the security and governance frameworks to attract and facilitate these investments that will create jobs, opportunity, and hope for future Gaza.

11. A special economic zone will be established with preferred tariff and access rates to be negotiated with participating countries.
12. No one will be forced to leave Gaza, and those who wish to leave will be free to do so and free to return. We will encourage people to stay and offer them the opportunity to build a better Gaza.
13. Hamas and other factions agree to not have any role in the governance of Gaza, directly, indirectly, or in any form. All military, terror, and offensive infrastructure, including tunnels and weapon production facilities, will be destroyed and not rebuilt. There will be a process of demilitarization of Gaza under the supervision of independent monitors, which will include placing weapons permanently beyond use through an agreed process of decommissioning, and supported by an internationally funded buy back and reintegration program all verified by the independent monitors. New Gaza will be fully committed to building a prosperous economy and to peaceful coexistence with their neighbors.
14. A guarantee will be provided by regional partners to ensure that Hamas, and the factions, comply with their obligations and that New Gaza poses no threat to its neighbors or its people.
15. The United States will work with Arab and international partners to develop a temporary International Stabilization Force (ISF) to immediately deploy in Gaza. The ISF will train and provide support to vetted Palestinian police forces in Gaza and will consult with Jordan and Egypt who have extensive experience in this field. This force will be the long-term internal security solution. The ISF will work with Israel and Egypt to help secure border areas, along with newly trained Palestinian police forces. It is critical to prevent munitions from entering Gaza and to facilitate the rapid and secure flow of goods to rebuild and revitalize Gaza. A deconfliction mechanism will be agreed upon by the parties.

16. Israel will not occupy or annex Gaza. As the ISF establishes control and stability, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) will withdraw based on standards, milestones, and timeframes linked to demilitarization that will be agreed upon between the IDF, ISF, the guarantors, and the Unites States, with the objective of a secure Gaza that no longer poses a threat to Israel, Egypt, or its citizens. Practically, the IDF will progressively hand over the Gaza territory it occupies to the ISF according to an agreement they will make with the transitional authority until they are withdrawn completely from Gaza, save for a security perimeter presence that will remain until Gaza is properly secure from any resurgent terror threat.
17. In the event Hamas delays or rejects this proposal, the above, including the scaled-up aid operation, will proceed in the terror-free areas handed over from the IDF to the ISF.
18. An interfaith dialogue process will be established based on the values of tolerance and peaceful co-existence to try and change mindsets and narratives of Palestinians and Israelis by emphasizing the benefits that can be derived from peace.
19. While Gaza re-development advances and when the PA reform program is faithfully carried out, the conditions may finally be in place for a credible pathway to Palestinian self-determination and statehood, which we recognize as the aspiration of the Palestinian people.
20. The United States will establish a dialogue between Israel and the Palestinians to agree on a political horizon for peaceful and prosperous co-existence. [SOURCE]
The document released by the White House states that if all parties agree, “Gaza will be governed under the temporary transitional governance of a technocratic, apolitical Palestinian committee, responsible for delivering the day-to-day running of public services and municipalities for the people in Gaza.” “This committee will be made up of qualified Palestinians and international experts, with oversight and supervision by a new international transitional body, the ‘Board of Peace,’ which will be headed and chaired by President Donald J. Trump, with other members and heads of State to be announced,” the paper says.The only potential member Trump announced by name was former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, who released a statement calling the plan “bold and intelligent.”

The proposal also calls for Hamas to return all hostages, alive or dead, within 72 hours of Israeli acceptance of the terms. In exchange, the Israelis would pull back their troops, offer the release of 250 Palestinian prisoners serving life sentences as well as 1,700 additional Gazans, and offer Hamas members amnesty if they commit to peace. The plan also has a provision to rid the Gaza government of Hamas officials, with the terror group having to agree to dismantle tunnels and weapons production facilities. Many significant details were not spelled out, including the size of a so-called International Stabilization Force (ISF) to handle security in Gaza post-Hamas and what nations would contribute troops. That force would “immediately deploy in Gaza” and bring “control and stability” to the battle-torn region, including patrolling its borders and training police.“My plan calls for the creation of a new international oversight body, the Board of Peace. We call it the board of peace, sort of a beautiful name,” Trump told the media.

“Working with the World Bank and others, it will be responsible for recruiting and training a new government that will be made up of Palestinians along with highly qualified experts from all around the world,” he went on. “Hamas and other terrorist factions will play no role in the board, they will play no role in the governance of Gaza at all, directly or indirectly.” The president described the board as a “temporary” measure that will only be in place as the Palestinian Authority undergoes a “reform program” tied to Trump’s Middle East peace plan of 2020. Gaza will also be flooded with humanitarian aid upon the signing of the treaty, including the rehabilitation of food, medical and transportation infrastructure.The economic rebuilding will be overseen by a “panel of experts” responsible for the construction of thriving cities in the Middle East. That group will discuss potential investment opportunities that will create jobs and “hope,” a White House readout said.
————-–
Unlike Trump’s February plan for an American-led takeover of Gaza, with the native population deported to allow for the construction of “the Riviera of the Middle East,” the new plan would not require Palestinians to leave their homeland. “No one will be forced to leave Gaza, and those who wish to leave will be free to do so and free to return,” the document said. “We will encourage people to stay and offer them the opportunity to build a better Gaza.” The peace plan was announced just 11 days before the selection of this year’s Nobel Peace Prize honoree, which White House officials say should be Trump due to his role in sealing seven other agreements to stop armed conflicts. Analysts greeted the proposal with skepticism, with longtime Middle East observers noting one key obstacle. “Gaza must be a de-radicalized terror-free zone,” said former Trump National Security Council staffer Richard Goldberg, now a senior adviser at The Foundation for Defense of Democracies. “All hostages must come home within 72 hours. The rest is commentary.”

Read more …

“Italian Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani.”

• ‘Putin Doesn’t Want World War III’ – Italian FM (RT)

Russian President Vladimir Putin is not interested in igniting a global conflict, Italian Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani said on Sunday, replying to claims that Moscow could send drones against the EU nation. Just a day earlier, Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky claimed that Russia could target Italy or other European nations with drone attacks. This month, Poland and Estonia accused Moscow of breaching their airspace – accusations that Russia has dismissed as unfounded. “I don’t think Putin wants to start World War III, so I want to reassure all Italians,” Tajani said in a speech at a Forza Italia party event in Telese Terme on Sunday.

“I don’t believe Putin wants to send drones to swarm us,” he said, adding that he had discussed the subject with Italian Defense Minister Guido Crossetto that morning. In early September, Poland accused Russia of violating its airspace with a number of drones, with Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski later warning that any intrusions would be met with force. Moscow has stated that Warsaw’s accusations are baseless and argued that the incident was fabricated to derail the Ukraine peace process. According to Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, the drones allegedly found on Polish territory could not have been launched from Russia.

“If they are the ones we are thinking of, then their flight range is shorter than the distance from the border of the Russian Federation to the border with Poland,” he said on the sidelines of the 80th session of the UN General Assembly on Saturday. During his speech at the event, the top diplomat dismissed Western claims that Moscow is planning to attack NATO in the next few years. He also expressed concern that certain European bloc officials “are beginning to seriously talk about a third world war as a potential scenario.” Russia never intentionally launches missile or drone strikes toward members of the US-led military bloc, Lavrov stressed.

Read more …

“My computer says you are going to lose, and my computer has never been wrong. You can check it, and the CIA even wanted it. It’s got a 40-year track record you can document.”

• Trump Flip Flop on Ukraine Guarantees Nuke War – Martin Armstrong (USAW)

The last time legendary financial and geopolitical cycle analyst Martin Armstrong was on USAWatchdog, he was hopeful that Trump would keep America out of the coming NATO War with Russia. Trump was talking about not sending troops to Ukraine for any peace deal, and before that, he said he backed a Russian plan to trade land for peace in Ukraine. Fast forward a month, and now, Trumps says, “Ukraine can win back its territory,” Russia is a “paper tiger,” and NATO countries should shoot down Russia aircraft. What a flip-flop on foreign policy!

To Trump’s credit, it is reported he did deny sending long range Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine, but he is still sending a fresh batch of arms to NATO paid for with seized Russian money. What the heck is going on? Armstrong says, “It’s a double edge sword here. On one hand, he is being a bit sarcastic, and maybe if he says that somehow it will compel Putin to come to the table. Sorry, this is not negotiating trade issues. You are insulting the integrity of Russia saying it is a ‘paper tiger,’ etc. Everything Trump has said is exactly what the neocons have been saying. These EU leaders have been told that Russia is on the verge of collapse. . . .NATO has been telling them they have 3.4 million troops against Russia’s 1.5 million troops, and they can walk in and take Russia in a blink of an eye. This is the nonsense that they are putting out.”

This brings us to Armstrong’s predictive computer program called Socrates. Armstrong says, “I typed in here: Socrates, what are the prospects for nuclear war after 2025?” This is the first time Armstrong has let Socrates answer in an interview, and it says, “Marty, the prospects for nuclear war post 2025 appear to have risen to 100%. This may be tactical nuclear. All indicators show Ukraine remains the center point for Europe as a proxy war orchestrated by NATO. Ukraine will not survive as a country, and the European Union is also not likely to survive beyond 2030.”

Could Trump be one of the greatest President’s in history if he sidesteps this European war with Russia? Armstrong says, “Absolutely. The EU is not salvageable. I have been doing interviews in Europe, and three years ago, I was asked, ‘Do you really think the EU will break up?’ And now, I get, ‘When is it going to break up?’ . . .. These neocons will never accept any kind of a peace deal with Russia—period.” I asked Armstrong if he were to have a short one-on-one call with President Trump, what would you tell him? Armstrong says, “My computer says you are going to lose, and my computer has never been wrong. You can check it, and the CIA even wanted it. It’s got a 40-year track record you can document.”

What would Armstrong advise President Trump to do right now? Armstrong says, “I would tell President Trump to get the hell out of Europe, and get out the hell of NATO. I did pass a message to President Trump a few months ago with someone who is close to him. I said NATO is going to try to do a false flag to invoke an Article Five to drag us into the war. We have to get out of NATO ASAP.” On gold and silver and their big price increases lately, Armstrong says, “It’s not a surprise. They are going up because of war.” Armstrong predicts future price gains for both metals will explode, and on some instances start doubling in price. For example, on gold, Armstrong says, “When you cross $5,000 per ounce, and I am talking further out, these markets always jump exponentially to the next major psychological number. So, when you cross $5,000, it will jump to $10,000. That’s what everybody will be looking for then,” One last thing, Armstrong says, “China is on record to not let Russia lose to NATO, because if that happens, they are next.”

Read more …

Nostalgia?

• EU Officials Fear New ‘Franz Ferdinand Moment’ – Politico (RT)

The EU is increasingly wary that tensions with Russia could spill into a major conflict, in a scenario some officials privately liken to the chain reaction following the assassination of Austrian Archduke Franz Ferdinand that triggered World War I, Politico reported on Monday. EU leaders are poised to meet in Copenhagen on Wednesday to discuss ways to contain Russia amid a surge in drone incidents across Europe. According to Politico, EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen is pushing for an “unprecedented discussion” of the EU’s military posture, going well beyond the bloc’s usual remit to include projects such as a “drone wall” to neutralize UAVs deemed hostile.

The outlet notes that the summit participants are certain to agree that Russia poses a “threat” to the bloc, and sign up based on the sentiment that “doing nothing… makes all-out war more likely.” However, unnamed diplomats told Politico that potential moves to deter Russia are “strewn with potential disasters,” with some officials warning privately of a possible “Franz Ferdinand moment” – a sudden escalation that could drag the continent into conflict. The phrase refers to the 1914 assassination Archduke Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo, which set off a rapid chain of alliances and ultimatums that triggered WWI. EU military leaders reportedly believe the bloc is already in a “form of low-intensity war with Russia,” adding that historically, wars have been financed with public debt. However, it could prove very difficult to persuade all EU members – some of which are already grappling with economic problems – to expand the bloc’s budget for defense, Politico said.

The heightened caution follows a recent episode in which Warsaw claimed Russian drones violated Polish airspace during strikes on Ukraine, prompting discussion in NATO about whether the bloc should shoot down intruding jets. Moscow has dismissed Warsaw’s accusations, saying it did not provide any evidence, while denouncing the debates on downing Russian planes as “irresponsible.” Moscow has on numerous occasions said that “Russia has no intention” to attack NATO while expressing concern over the fact that Western officials “are beginning to seriously talk about a third world war as a potential scenario.”

Read more …

They would be NATO strikes, not Ukraine.

• Trump May Have Authorized Ukrainian Strikes Deep Inside Russia – Kellogg (RT)

US President Donald Trump may have already approved Ukrainian long-range strikes inside Russia, special envoy Keith Kellogg said on Sunday in an interview with Fox News. Kellogg, who is often described in the media as a pro-Kiev voice within Trump’s team, was asked about the president’s recent remark that Ukraine could recapture all the territory it has lost to Russia and “maybe even go further than that,” which the host interpreted as a sign of imminent long-range strikes. Ukraine must secure Washington’s approval to hit targets deep inside Russia with US-supplied weapons.

The first such permission was granted in November 2024 under President Joe Biden, shortly after Trump won that year’s election. Kellogg said the final call on any such request rests with Trump as commander-in-chief, noting that “sometimes the Ukrainians get some of these, sometimes they don’t.” Pressed on whether Trump supports Ukrainian strikes into Russia, Kellogg replied, “I think, reading what he has said and reading what Vice President [J.D.] Vance has said as well as [Secretary of State Marco] Rubio, the answer is, yes.” He added, “There are no such things as sanctuaries.”

Vance recently told Fox News that Trump is “certainly looking” at a renewed Ukrainian request for US-made Tomahawk cruise missiles. Kellogg said such weapons would allow Ukraine to deepen its reach inside Russian territory. The Kremlin has downplayed the potential impact of any Tomahawk deliveries. Spokesman Dmitry Peskov said no “wonder weapon” would change the battlefield dynamic, although he added that Ukrainian forces would likely be unable to operate Tomahawks without direct US involvement – something Moscow would consider a serious escalation.

Read more …

“The U.S. provides the missiles. The U.S. approves the missile locations in Ukraine. The U.S. authorizes the targets of the missiles from their location. NATO provides the satellite guidance system. Ukraine targets Moscow and launches the missiles. How is President Trump not directly responsible for a NATO proxy war against Russia?\”

• Kellogg Says Trump Has Authorized NATO Strikes Against Moscow (CTH)

Ukraine is not a member of NATO. The United States is the leading force within NATO. Most recently President Trump has repeatedly said that he is brokering missile sales to NATO for transfer to, and use from, Ukraine against Russia. To wit, President Donald Trump has authorized NATO member states to deploy offensive missile systems into non-NATO Ukraine, provided by the U.S. In the latest development, U.S. Special Envoy for Ukraine General Keith Kellogg has announced Ukraine has the authority to launch those missile systems deep into Russia, including Moscow. According to General Kellogg, President Trump is authorizing NATO to strike Moscow with U.S. missiles, launched from Ukraine. How is Ukraine not a proxy war between NATO and Russia?

This is escalating madness. We are reasonably intelligent and pragmatic people. We have the objective capability to look at the issues from both sides of the equation. Look at this issue from the perspective of Russian President Vladimir Putin. The U.S. provides the missiles. The U.S. approves the missile locations in Ukraine. The U.S. authorizes the targets of the missiles from their location. NATO provides the satellite guidance system. Ukraine targets Moscow and launches the missiles. How is President Trump not directly responsible for a NATO proxy war against Russia?

The only way for President Trump to make the ‘accountability monkey’ jump now, is to exit NATO. The reason why the EU member states of NATO want escalated war with Russia is financial and economic. Through policy and ideology, the EU/NATO members have walked themselves into an economic dead end. They are out of assets to leverage. The only way out for the EU/NATO leadership is to create a war to erase debt, expand assets and reset the economics.

Read more …

When all else is said and done, he did.

• James Comey Tried to Take Down Trump (Victor Davis Hanson)

I’d like to do something different today and the next day, and that is to do a two-part, short, little videos. One is on the moral implications of James Comey’s recent indictment, the former FBI director. And then, the legal ramifications. Even though I’m not a lawyer, I thought we could talk about the legal separately from the moral indications. James Comey was indicted by the Trump Justice Department on two counts. One, he allegedly had lied under oath to Congress that he had not authorized leaks to the press by FBI subordinates. Probably, in particular, Andrew McCabe, who admittedly lied four times, I think three times under oath, according to the inspector general of the DOJ. And a second count that he obstructed, by lying to Congress, a congressional investigation.

But there’s larger questions here. James Comey, remember, was the FBI director when he interfered in the 2016 election. He said that Hillary Clinton, the Democratic nominee who was running against Donald Trump, had broken the law by using an unsecure private server, in which classified material was transmitted. But he didn’t think a jury would convict her, or he didn’t think it led to a level of such seriousness. That’s not his decision, really. That’s the Department of Justice. He’s supposed to bring evidence. James Comey, remember, also, he met with Donald Trump. And they had a confidential conversation. That’s not in dispute. And James Comey assured the president of the United States that he was not the subject of an FBI investigation. That was false. Now, he may not have said that under oath, but he admitted he said that, and so did Donald Trump. They agree on that.

So, he lied to the president of the United States. And then what did he do? He took that conversation and “memorialized it.” And then he had four memos involving his interactions with the president. They were recorded on FBI machinery or devices, but he did not file them officially with the FBI. He put them in his private safe as safekeeping or insurance, so that he could embarrass the president of the United States, if he was ever threatened with firing. And so, what did he do? He took one of those memos and gave it to a friend, who happened to be a professor at Columbia, for the express purpose of leaking it, leaking it to The New York Times, and then he wouldn’t have his fingerprints.

So, while he is legally charged with this other incident or crime—if he’s proven guilty of leaking—he admitted that he had leaked information about the president of the United States. And he also, essentially, admitted that he wasn’t the object of an investigation, when he likely was. In addition to this, he was the one that hired Christopher Steele. Christopher Steele was working for Hillary Clinton through three paywalls: through the Democratic National Committee, through the Perkins Coie law firm, and through Fusion GPS. It’s against the law, in a presidential federal campaign, to hire a foreign national. He was on the payroll of the Clinton effort, he was also a contractor that James Comey hired, and he was the one who compiled this phony dossier.

In addition, James Comey was in the room with John Brennan and James Clapper when Barack Obama essentially said to them, both during the campaign, but even after the election of 2016: I don’t believe that your subordinate intelligence reports are accurate about not finding actionable Russian collusion. I want you to bring me something—I’m paraphrasing—that would show that Donald Trump was colluding. He also, you remember, he laughed when he said that he sent his FBI team to interview Michael Flynn. But the administration, in 2016, during their transition, was so inept, so unprepared, they didn’t even have a lawyer. So, Michael Flynn just welcomed him naively into his office, and he talked to them and he incriminated himself without counsel. Of course, the FBI people involved felt that he had been honest to them and had not tried to mislead them.

What am I getting at? All of these things that James Comey has been responsible for—the Russian collusion hoax; trying to frame Donald Trump, or I don’t know what you would call it, by memorializing a conversation, and then hiding it from the FBI files and leaking it, indirectly, to The New York Times; or having anything to do with this scoundrel, Christopher Steele; or trying to override intelligence estimates and try to fabricate something else; or giving special treatment to Hillary Clinton. But add it all up, at least, morally and ethically, he was bankrupt, absolutely bankrupt. Maybe not in the legal, strict sense, or not in—he couldn’t be prosecuted in a New York or Washington courtroom and get a guilty verdict from one of those juries. But he is morally culpable. Next time we’ll talk about his legal exposure.

Read more …

“We really are living through Bloody September” —Will Chamberlain.

• The Big Lebowski Civil War (James Howard Kunstler)

When the newly-formed Confederacy attacked Fort Sumter in Charleston Bay, April 1861, they ignited the Civil War. They, at least, had a clearcut goal: to maintain an economy (and society) based on slavery. It was patently evil, but it was firmly established and it was their engine for daily life, and they didn’t want it to end. When Charlie Kirk was murdered in 2025, Civil War 2.0 kicked off. The enemy this time are not Confederates with a coherent command structure and a goal. They are an army of nihilists like the gang in The Big Lebowski, who, for one reason or another, have failed to launch lives of meaning and purpose, and so have adopted the purpose of destroying the country they cannot thrive in. Unlike The Big Lebowski, this is not a joke. But, it’s obviously a different sort of civil war than the first one.

It appears that many of these nihilists, especially the ones amalgamated as Antifa, are straight-up mentally ill — crazed young women too untamed to find a mate, many obese and self-mutilated like tattooed savages with steel bones in their noses. . . young men, hormones afire, likewise frustrated, escaping into sexual fetish and psychotic obsessions with demons, violence, blame, enmity. They are warriors for their own deformed ids. There is, for sure, plenty to complain about in American life as currently organized. It abounds with swindles and ruses, and much of the ill effect falls on young people who were rooked into college loans, are drowning in unpayable debt, are unable to find meaningful work in an economy dominated by cruelly gigantic companies, are unable to afford a place of their own to eat and sleep in, and whose bodies and minds are ravaged by junk food and pharma products.

Do not overlook the deleterious effects of the everyday environment we have created: the world of American suburbia. Above all, it requires a reliable car to even begin to function in, and that is beyond the reach of many newly-minted adults with no job or a shit-job. The sheer ugliness of American suburbia is punishing to human neurology. It induces anxiety and despair to a degree we can’t begin to reckon. Try walking a mile down a six-laner between the Sam’s Club and the DMV sometime. Suburbia atomizes social relations, making everyone an isolated unit and it defeats any attempt to form real communities. Its schools function like minimum security prisons, generators of anomie and ennui. On top of all that, suburbia has entered its arc of economic failure.

Even the gainfully employed middle-aged can no longer pay for it. It was built out of crappy materials that are falling apart now. A sane person would opt to not live in it, but since escape is so difficult from sea to shining sea, the other option is to go insane — especially if you’re just setting out in life. All of this discontent gets converted, abracadabra, into political ideology. The old, reliable package of Marxism works whenever people feel cheated out of meaning, purpose, and a livelihood. And so, this anguished cohort of the young, defeated in making a life, driven mentally ill by their surroundings, hounded by the endless prompts of their beloved smartphones, wrecked by the things they put in their bodies, and broken by their demoralizing failures, become the useful idiots of their political elders.

And the Democratic Party, having become little more than a grifting machine of hustles and hoaxes, uses the young to generate ever more ill-feeling across the land over issues that self-evidently are against the interests of the young — so that the party can survive its present existential crisis. It was not in young America’s interest to receive “Joe Biden’s” flood of illegal migrants across the border. Apart from their criminal histories, or the hidden agenda to form subversive cells for foreign enemies, the illegal migrants compete with young people in many realms of employment like the building trades, while they drive down wages generally. So why are the Antifas out there in front of the ICE facility affecting to “rescue” the deportees?

Because the mind-scrambling language of Marxian revolt has persuaded the Antifas that the illegal migrants are their “marginalized intersectional allies.” It’s bullshit, of course, but the mentally ill swallow it because they are desperate for meaning and filled with animus for all-and-any authority responsible for constructing and managing a system they have failed in. Mr. Trump, the primary demon in their fantasies, and certainly the enemy of the Democratic Party’s corrupt grifting machine, attempts to restore an economy based on producing things of value, rather than financial flimflams. The catch is, he may not be able to do that using the old armature of gigantic corporate organisms operating on rollover debt. That phase of history is probably over.

We need a new armature, but one based on voluntary exchange, which is to say economic liberty, not top-town communist-type centralized planning. Everywhere that has been tried, it failed and blew up. Euro-style Socialism Lite is not a workable choice anymore, either, because we are leaving behind the cheap energy economy and the geopolitical deals that made six-week vacations, retirement at 60, and free medicine possible.

Read more …

“..the government could shed roughly 275,000 employees by the end of 2025..”

• Trump Is About to Pull Off the Biggest Federal Workforce Cut in History (Margolis)

The Trump administration just pulled off something most Americans probably didn’t think was possible: shrinking the federal bureaucracy in a massive and meaningful way. On Tuesday, more than 100,000 federal workers are expected to walk out the door through a deferred resignation program, marking the largest single-year reduction in the civilian federal workforce since World War II. Factor in layoffs, buyouts, early retirements, and natural attrition, and the government could shed roughly 275,000 employees by the end of 2025. Of course, the federal workforce is enormous—roughly 2.4 million employees, not counting postal workers—and not everyone qualifies for these programs. Military personnel, immigration enforcement officers, national security staff, NTSB employees, postal service workers, and several other categories are excluded. Even so, the reductions represent a historic reshaping of government employment.

This didn’t happen by accident. The Trump administration executed a deliberate strategy to cut spending; eliminate fraud, waste, and abuse; and push the federal workforce closer to an at-will employment model more typical of the private sector. It’s a bold move that challenges entrenched bureaucracy and signals a new era of accountability in Washington. The Economic Times has more. Trump administration officials defend the expenditure. The Office of Personnel Management stated the one-time costs reduce longer-term federal government spending. The agency also criticized job protections for federal civil servants, arguing the government should adopt a “modern, at-will employment framework like most employers.”

A White House spokesperson said there was “no additional cost to the government” because employees would have received their salaries regardless of the program. “In fact, this is the largest and most effective workforce reduction plan in history and will save the government $28bn annually,” the spokesperson added. The total number of expected departures through the delayed resignation and voluntary separation programs, attrition, and early retirement programs is approximately 275,000 employees, according to the spokesman. Sources told CNN earlier this year that OPM offered an early retirement incentive through the Voluntary Early Retirement Authority, or VERA, to employees who qualify and choose to participate in the deferred resignation program. To be eligible, workers must be at least 50 years old with 20 years of service—or any age with at least 25 years on the job.

What we’re witnessing is a permanent reduction of more than 10% in the civilian federal workforce. Agencies like the EPA and FEMA have offered voluntary buyouts to nearly all employees to speed up the process. Critics say this depletes institutional expertise and hurts morale. Supporters say it streamlines government, reduces regulatory burdens, and saves money. Legislative and legal efforts to stop the mass departures have largely failed. Congress faces a critical funding deadline on Tuesday, and agencies are already planning for additional large-scale firings if there’s a government shutdown. The Trump administration is making good on its promise to shrink the size and scope of the federal government, and the bureaucracy is feeling it.

If Washington can cut this deeply into its bloated bureaucracy and the sky doesn’t fall, then Americans should be demanding even more. For decades, politicians have promised to rein in government, only to hand us more waste and more debt. This moment proves it can actually be done, and voters must hold Washington accountable to deliver more of it.

Read more …

“Funny to think that Bill Clinton’s policies when he was President were essentially MAGA..,*

• Is This the Man to Save the Democrats? (Stephen Green)

The Democrat who once quipped, “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by that is an opportunity to do [big government] things that you think you could not do before,” seems like an unlikely choice for tearing the party from the revolutionaries and radicals who increasingly make up its public face. But that’s exactly the case the Wall Street Journal made today about former White House advisor and Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, who “appears increasingly serious about running for president.” The Journal’s John McCormick wrote that while Emanuel’s “centrist message clashes with an insurgent progressive base mesmerized by figures such as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D., N.Y.) and Zohran Mamdani,” and other so-called Democratic Socialists, “the seriousness of Emanuel’s ambitions was obvious throughout his two-day visit” to — you guessed it — Des Moines, Iowa over the weekend.

“It was instructive to see Emanuel surrounded over the weekend by the Democratic base in Iowa where he headlined an annual party fish-fry fundraiser in the state’s largest county,” McCormick reported. “While he wasn’t technically campaigning, it was the first time the famously combative Emanuel had made a high-profile retail political appearance on his own behalf for the better part of a decade.” Politico’s writeup of the same Iowa appearance included Emanuel’s repetition of a centrist message that could have come right out of his time in the Clinton White House: The former White House chief of staff offered a message centered on economic fairness, education and affordability. “This should not come as a surprise to you,” Emanuel said from the stage set up at the home of Iowa state Rep. Sean Bagniewski, who hosted the fish fry in his front yard for 400 Democrats. “The American Dream is unaffordable. It’s inaccessible, and we, as Democrats, that’s unacceptable to us.”

Yet the Journal noted that “gone were his recent criticisms of his party’s brand as ‘toxic’ and ‘weak and woke.'” The 65-year-old — who will be pushing 70 during the next presidential race and hasn’t run for anything since 2018 — has to do something to appeal to younger voters, after all. I suppose the best thing a conservative could say about Rahm Emanuel is that his corruption is well within Chicago’s Daley-era norms, and that, unlike his party’s Young Turks, he isn’t bat-guano crazy. But here’s the thing about being a member of a party that almost reflexively finds itself on the 20% side of every 80/20 issue: maybe the 20% is exactly what their remaining voters want. While I’m not always a huge fan of the GOP dragging itself toward the center and away from some of its core conservative policies — “Funny to think that Bill Clinton’s policies when he was President were essentially MAGA*,” Elon Musk quipped on Sunday — there’s a noteworthy silver lining.

A more centrist GOP effectively isolates Democrat radicals inside their shrunken, 80/20 party, where they’re less able to inflict serious damage outside the Deep Blue zones. It’s a huge win for the country, and we should be happy to take it. *At least on crime, welfare, and immigration.Maybe I’m wrong about this, but Emanuel’s effort has a bit of a Springsteen “Glory Days” feel to it. “Hey, remember when things were great under Clinton? Remember the Lightbringer? I remember!” Or maybe Emanuel is just the pol to pull the Dems back toward the center. He’s one of the few Obama-era people with name recognition (at least with the money people), and without any major ties to Obama’s Red Diaper radicalism. But the problem with being the one-eyed man in the land of the blind is that they’ll probably poke your eye out. Good luck, Rahm — you’ll need it.

Read more …

“..It’s always wrong to shut our government down.”

• John Fetterman Throws His Party Under the Bus (Margolis)

John Fetterman is throwing his own party under the bus, and frankly, it’s about time a Democrat did so. The Pennsylvania senator delivered a reality check, calling out the left’s tired playbook of labeling every Republican opponent a “Nazi” or “fascist.” During an appearance on Sunday Morning Futures on Fox News, Fetterman indicated that he won’t participate in the Democratic Party’s increasingly unhinged rhetoric. While his colleagues foam at the mouth with hyperbolic accusations, Fetterman positioned himself as an independent voice willing to break ranks when his party loses its collective mind. He’s not switching parties, but he’s certainly not drinking the Kool-Aid either. On Sunday, Fetterman sat down with Maria Bartiromo and said he has no intention of leaving the Democratic Party. However, he also stressed that he won’t hesitate to go against the party line when he feels it’s the right thing to do.

“I’m not going to switch, you know?” He said. “But I, I’m just going to be an independent voice in the Democratic Party.” He insisted that standing apart from the more radical elements in his party was important, saying, “I’m not gonna be afraid if people… I mean, and, and if there are groups a-attacking a, a Democrat, you know, the last one in Pennsylvania, then that’s… To me, that’s part of the problem, you know, in our party.” Fetterman also pushed back on the toxic rhetoric that has become standard on the left. “And if you want a Democrat that’s gonna call people Nazis or fascists or all these kinds of thing, well, I’m not gonna be that guy.” Instead, he cast himself as someone who would speak the truth even if it didn’t align with his party’s agenda:

“You know, independent thinking and views, wherever I happen to believe the truth, regardless if it’s the Republican or the Democratic voice, you know? But I think it’s the truth in this. Now, in this truth right now, it’s firmly on Israel through this, and it’s also… It’s always wrong to shut our government down.” Fetterman admitted that his positions might set him apart but said he’s comfortable with that. “And that’s where my voice is and if that puts me as an outlier, then, you know, that’s where I am.” Democrats face mounting criticism for their inflammatory language and divisive tactics, and Fetterman is the one choosing to be the adult in a room full of tantrum-throwing toddlers.

The senator’s departure from Democratic orthodoxy extends well beyond his refusal to take part in dangerous name-calling. His unwavering support for Israel during the ongoing conflict has put him at odds with the progressive wing of his party, many of whom seem more interested in appeasing Hamas sympathizers than supporting America’s democratic ally in the Middle East. Fetterman criticized efforts to recognize a Palestinian state, correctly identifying such moves as rewarding terrorism. Fetterman has also been critical of his party’s shutdown strategy. While Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer tries to pin blame on Republicans, Fetterman pointed out that it’s actually the Democrats who would be responsible. Unlike his colleagues, who seem to believe their media allies will always provide cover, Fetterman recognizes that voters notice when politicians create chaos and then try to blame others.

Read more …

It’s Farage’s country now.

• UK Records Unprecedented Migrant Boat Arrival (RT)

A small boat carrying 125 people crossed the English Channel from France to the UK on Saturday, the largest number ever recorded on a single vessel, Bloomberg has reported, citing the Home Office. The previous record was set in August, when 107 people arrived on what the British media described as a “mega-dinghy.” The latest crossing comes despite Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s pledge to “smash” the smuggling gangs behind the journeys. It also follows the appointment of new Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood, who has called small boat crossings “utterly unacceptable” and promised to “explore all options” to address the issue. Official figures show that around 33,000 people have crossed into the UK since the start of the year, the highest total for this point in the year since records began in 2018, according to The Independent.

Public discontent over illegal migration has grown sharply in Britain, with polls showing it among voters’ top concerns. Many see the rising number of crossings as evidence the government has lost control of the borders, while communities voice frustration over pressures on housing, health services, and schools. The discontent has boosted support for Nigel Farage’s Reform UK party, which has made hardline immigration its central message. A recent YouGov poll put Reform in the lead with 29%, ahead of Labour on 21%. Labour has pledged to target people-smuggling networks while keeping legal migration routes, framing its approach as a balance of security and humanitarian obligations. In August, the UK and France ratified a treaty which states that migrants deemed inadmissible after arriving in Britain can be returned to France, while the UK accepts an equal number of asylum seekers via a legal route. The first removals under the scheme took place earlier this month.

The Reform party advocates abolishing Indefinite Leave to Remain, forcing settled migrants to reapply under stricter conditions, and limiting welfare benefits to British citizens. In an interview on Sunday, Starmer called Farage’s proposals “racist” and “immoral,” though he admitted many drawn to Reform are frustrated by the slow pace of change.

Read more …

Good word: “transanity”..

• Rowling Finally Gave Hermione the Spanking She Deserves (Green)

In happier times, child actress Emma Watson brought J.K. Rowling’s beloved Hermione character to life in the Harry Potter movies, beginning in 2001 when Watson was just 11 years old. She’s a big girl now but in serious need of a spanking — one that Rowling just belatedly, reluctantly, and devastatingly applied. Seriously, it might be weeks before Watson can sit down comfortably again. “Emma and [and Harry Potter costar Daniel Radcliffe] in particular have both made it clear over the last few years that they think our former professional association gives them a particular right – nay, obligation – to critique me and my views in public,” Rowling posted to X on Monday. “Years after they finished acting in Potter, they continue to assume the role of de facto spokespeople for the world I created.”

Ouch. Now 35, Watson spent years using public appearances and social media to take digs at Rowling and her so-called transphobia. “Trans people are who they say they are and deserve to live their lives without being constantly questioned or told they aren’t who they say they are,” Watson tweeted in response to Rowling in 2020. And that was really just the start.For her part, Rowling has long used her fame and fortune to stand up for the sanctity of women’s spaces and women’s sports — even at the height of transanity. “Here to present the next award is Emma Watson,” BAFTA Awards host Rebel Wilson announced that same year. “She calls herself a feminist, but we all know she’s a witch.” After taking the stage, Watson smiled and said, “I’m here for all the witches,” in reference to Rowling’s recognition that men aren’t women.

“I wasn’t a multimillionaire at fourteen,” Rowling reminded Watson today. “I lived in poverty while writing the book that made Emma famous. I therefore understand from my own life experience what the trashing of women’s rights in which Emma has so enthusiastically participated means to women and girls without her privileges.” Rowling remembers 2020 as a time “when the death, rape and torture threats against me were at their peak.” She continued, “Emma had just publicly poured more petrol on the flames, yet thought a one line expression of concern from her would reassure me of her fundamental sympathy and kindness.” Rowling later said she would “never forgive” Watson — or co-stars Radcliffe and Rupert Grint — for having “cozied up to a movement intent on eroding women’s hard-won rights.”

Rowling’s post today was more in sorrow than in anger, however: The greatest irony here is that, had Emma not decided in her most recent interview to declare that she loves and treasures me – a change of tack I suspect she’s adopted because she’s noticed full-throated condemnation of me is no longer quite as fashionable as it was – I might never have been this honest. Stay honest, J.K. — women (and men) need to hear more of that from you.

I wasn’t aware of this until today, but Watson’s acting career appears to be dead in the water. She’s had only a baker’s dozen appearances since the last Harry Potter film debuted almost 15 years ago, including two single-episode appearances on TV. Her most recent film role was in 2019’s Little Women, and her last role, period, was in a 2022 short called “Prada Paradoxe,” which she directed herself and had no other actors. She’s currently attending Oxford in pursuit of a post-grad degree, but that hardly explains a film career long in decline. Watson isn’t hurting for money after all the success she enjoyed as a child, so maybe it’s relevance she’s trying to get with all the outbursts against her former benefactor. If it’s attention she wanted, she just got it — forcefully.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/catsscareme2021/status/1972635771560669676

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle September 23 2025

Sep 232025
 
 September 23, 2025  Posted by at 9:55 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , ,  54 Responses »


Frans Hals Two Laughing Boys with a Mug of Beer 1626

 

• ‘Absolute Miracle’ May Have Saved Lives During Charlie Kirk Murder (ET)
• Bullet That Hit Charlie Kirk Purportedly Made No Exit Wound (HUSA)
• Building a Legacy: Charlie Kirk’s Memorial (Salgado)
• Moscow Ready To Respond To Any Threat – Putin (RT)
• Putin Makes Nuclear Treaty Offer To US (RT)
• Trump Declares Antifa a Terrorist Group (Catherine Salgado)
• Biden’s FBI Tried to Entrap Trump’s Border Czar Before the Election (Margolis)
• Why We Are at War (Richard C. Lyons)
• Disney Gives Kimmel Show Back, But Nexstar & Sinclair Still Refuse To Air (ZH)
• The Funniest Joke Jimmy Kimmel Never Told (Turley)
• Trump Links Tylenol To Autism Risk During Pregnancy (RT)
• Personal Note (James Howard Kunstler)
• EU Looks To ‘Le Pen-Proof’ Its Budget – Politico (RT)
• Macron Warns Against Seizing Frozen Russian Assets (RT)
• Britain’s Fate Is Decline, Not Upheaval – And History Explains Why (Bordachev)

 

 

https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/1970169307867890068

https://twitter.com/Juliesnark1731/status/1970092182196642217

https://twitter.com/TheBritLad/status/1970047562565488823

https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/1970153374310945092

 

 

 

 

Hmmmm. “‘This would have taken a moose or two down, [or] an elk.’”

• ‘Absolute Miracle’ May Have Saved Lives During Charlie Kirk Murder (ET)

A spokesperson for Turning Point USA provided an update on the assassination of the group’s founder, Charlie Kirk, earlier in September and said Kirk’s body “stopped” the bullet from producing an exit wound. Citing a surgeon at the hospital that assisted Kirk, spokesman Andrew Kolvet wrote in a post on X that the bullet that killed Kirk on Sept. 10 at Utah Valley University “‘absolutely should have gone through, which is very very normal for a high powered, high velocity round.’ “‘I’ve seen wounds from this caliber many times and they always just go through everything,’” the surgeon said, according to Kolvet’s post. “‘This would have taken a moose or two down, [or] an elk.’” But the bullet “didn’t go through” because “Charlie’s body stopped it,” Kolvet said in the Sept. 20 post.

“I mentioned to his doctor that there were dozens of staff, students, and special guests standing directly behind Charlie on the other side of the tent,” he said. The doctor then told Kolvet, according to his post, that it “‘was an absolute miracle that someone else didn’t get killed’” by the bullet. According to the doctor, the shot “‘likely would have killed those standing behind [Kirk] too.’” “Even in death, Charlie managed to save the lives of those around him,” Kolvet wrote, noting that the doctor told him that the bullet had been recovered. It was discovered underneath Kirk’s skin. Officials have said the gun used in the shooting was a Mauser 98 model chambered in .30-06. According to prosecutors, the suspected assassin, Tyler Robinson, had told a male with whom he was in a romantic relationship that it was his grandfather’s gun. Authorities also said DNA on the trigger of the rifle that killed Kirk matched that of Robinson.

The authorities have released text messages said to be between Robinson and his romantic partner, whom prosecutors said identifies as a transgender female and was Robinson’s roommate. In these messages, Robinson allegedly said he plotted the attack for about a week and used a scope. Officials said Robinson had become “more political” in recent years, expressing more left-wing and pro-transgender views. When the roommate asked the suspect why he shot Kirk, according to the charging documents, Robinson said in response: “I had enough of his hatred. Some hate can’t be negotiated out.”Kirk had become a prominent force in politics and was credited with energizing the Republican base, particularly among youth, and helping President Donald Trump win back the White House in 2024.

Robinson’s roommate appeared shocked in the text exchange after the shooting, according to court documents, asking Robinson “why he did it and how long he’d been planning it.” While authorities say Robinson has not been cooperating with investigators, they say his family and friends have been talking to officials. Robinson made his first court appearance last week, with a judge declaring the suspect indigent and provisionally appointing a public defender. That public defender has not yet been named. The suspect faces capital aggravated murder, obstruction, witness tampering, and other charges. A capital murder charge means that Robinson could receive the death penalty. His next court date is set for Sept. 29. Robinson has not issued any public statements in response to the allegations.

Read more …

“Kolvet’s claims have been met with widespread skepticism online.”

• Bullet That Hit Charlie Kirk Purportedly Made No Exit Wound (HUSA)

Call it a miracle—though many are calling bullshit. Andrew Kolvet, the executive producer of “The Charlie Kirk Show,” said Saturday that he spoke with the surgeon who worked on conservative activist Charlie Kirk at the hospital. According to Kolvet, the surgeon said the .30-caliber bullet that hit conservative activist Charlie Kirk made no exit wound because Kirk is “like the man of steel.” “He said the bullet ‘absolutely should have gone through, which is very very normal for a high powered, high velocity round. I’ve seen wounds from this caliber many times and they always just go through everything. This would have taken a moose or two down, an elk, etc.’ But it didn’t go through. Charlie’s body stopped it,” Kolvet said on Twitter/X.

The surgeon supposedly explained that “his bone was so healthy and the density was so so impressive that he’s like the man of steel. It should have just gone through and through. It likely would have killed those standing behind him too.” The coroner found the round just beneath Kirk’s skin, Kolvet added. By comparison, the .30-caliber round that Secret Service counter-sniper David King fired at alleged would-be Trump assassin Thomas Crooks made five wounds. According to the medical examiner who autopsied Crooks, he suffered five gunshot wounds—an entry wound, an exit wound, a re-entry wound, and “two corresponding, partial re-exit wounds.”

“There is a corresponding, partial gunshot re-exit wound on the lateral right upper back … There is an additional, corresponding partial gunshot re-exit wound on the lateral right upper back,” stated Crooks’s autopsy report, which was obtained exclusively by Headline USA. The bullet that hit Crooks came from a 300 Win Mag cartridge, which is more powerful than the .30-06 that allegedly was used in the Kirk assassination—but both have the same caliber bullet. Kolvet’s statement comes amidst public questions about what happened to the .30-06 round said to have slain Kirk. Ballistics experts have floated various theories about what really happened, speculating that Kirk may have been shot from somewhere else—possibly from his right side or even from below. Kolvet’s claims have been met with widespread skepticism online.

https://twitter.com/KitKlarenberg/status/1969707314618790326?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1969707314618790326%7Ctwgr%5E47736aecc70ef1bad7a6a7699346024dd87bba18%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fheadlineusa.com%2Fbullet-that-hit-charlie-kirk-purportedly-made-no-exit-wound%2F

Read more …

“‘Except a corn of wheat fall onto the ground and die, it abideth alone.”

• Building a Legacy: Charlie Kirk’s Memorial (Salgado)

The most important officials in the United States, including the president, gathered to pay tribute to one man yesterday. Pastors glorified his faith, academics praised his intellect, and hundreds of thousands of people chanted his name. This man did not hold elected office. He was not a billionaire or an entertainer or a star athlete. He was a patriot who believed so strongly in free speech and the truth that he changed history. In a little over a decade, Charlie Kirk went from being a teenager with a lot of enthusiasm but no money or connections to becoming leader of a world-shaping movement, a man whom the most famous and powerful patriots of our era were proud to know. His loss to assassination was a grievous blow for America, which needed his talent and his vision for years to come. It was also a personal tragedy for his wife and little children.

But at only 31 years of age, Charlie Kirk left behind him a legacy much greater than that of many an octogenarian. As Donald Trump said, Charlie was “one of the giants of our nation,” a true “martyr for American freedom.” White House official Stephen Miller, speaking with intensity, declared, “The day Charlie died the angels wept, but their tears have turned to fire in our hearts.” He told Charlie’s enemies, “You have nothing, you are nothing, you are wickedness….You thought you could kill Charlie Kirk; you have made him immortal.” Secretary of War Pete Hegseth compared Kirk to St. Paul and described him as “a warrior for country, a warrior for [Christ],” in the best tradition of American courage. His fellow cabinet member, HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., said that Charlie Kirk, like Christ his Master, “changed the trajectory of history.

Charlie’s other overarching passion was free speech,” and “there’s a lot worse things than death and one of those is if we lost our constitutional rights in this country.” As the true warrior he was, Hegseth continued, “Charlie died with his boots on, and he died so that we did not have to undergo those fates worse than death.” Every speaker referred to the importance of faith for Kirk, from his pastor Rob McCoy to gospel singers to the president (read Chris Queen’s piece). As Kennedy said, “Charlie’s mission was Jesus Christ and also free speech.” Erika Kirk, before forgiving her husband’s murderer, said that “more than anything, Charlie wanted to do not his will but God’s will,” and “after Charlie’s assassination we didn’t see violence, we didn’t see rioting,” but “instead we saw what my husband always prayed we’d see in this country. We saw revival.”

Secretary of State Marco Rubio said that Charlie would want everyone watching or attending the memorial to believe we’re created by God, that we sinned and were redeemed, and that at the end of time all believers will have a great re-union, including with Charlie himself. Jack Posobiec, rosary in hand, urged attendees to put on the armor of God, “for Charlie.” Dr. Ben Carson read John 12:24 because Charlie was shot, he said, at 12:24 p.m. on Sept. 10: “‘Except a corn of wheat fall onto the ground and die, it abideth alone. But if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit.’ And I want to thank Charlie for his sacrifice, because much fruit is going to be realized.” Kirk’s encouragement to young people to get married and raise families was also a recurring theme. Kirk’s Chief of Staff, Mikey McCoy, thanked Charlie for urging him to get married and helping him meet his wife, who stood beside him holding his arm.

While some ignorant, elitist leftists sneered at Kirk’s lack of a college degree, Hillsdale College President Dr. Larry Arnn lauded Kirk’s intellect and was proud to remember that Kirk had taken multiple online courses through Hillsdale. “I keep a list in my head of the 6 or 8 young people, and I’m very privileged, I get to know many inspiring young people who are the best I ever saw. Charlie is the only one who was never a full-time student at Hillsdale College who was on that list,” Arnn said, announcing an honorary degree for Kirk. Donald Trump Jr. said Kirk “was like a little brother to me,” but amid the heartbreaking tragedy, “we won’t be intimidated…Our message of faith, family, and country will not be silenced.” Don Jr. urged, “His legacy must be that when they took his life, a million more Charlies stepped up to fill the void. We are all Charlie!”

Vice President JD Vance, tears in his eyes, said of Kirk, “He changed the face of conservatism in our time and in doing so he changed the course of history….[Debate] was the vehicle for bringing the light of truth to dark places.” The most moving speech of the day was the eulogy by Mrs. Erika Kirk, who stood strong even as she wept, filled with love and forgiveness for friends and foes alike, describing the beauty of her marriage, the excruciating heartache of Charlie’s assassination, and her plans to carry on her husband’s vital work of free speech and outreach to young Americans.

Finally, Donald Trump paid tribute to the man he credits with ensuring his 2024 election victory. “Charlie’s murder was not just an attack on one man,” Trump stated, but on “our entire nation….The gun was pointed at him but the bullet was aimed at all of us.” Kirk changed history in his three decades of life on earth, Trump declared, before ending by calling Erika out on stage again to embrace her.

It was my great honor to attend the memorial of Charlie Kirk, a visionary and American hero. As someone only a few years younger than Kirk, his sudden death provokes a question in me as well as many of my fellow Gen Z and millennial Americans — what will my legacy be? Charlie Kirk was one in a billion. But while he was the indispensable man, he needed the staff, volunteers, fans, and friends who helped him make his movement a success. Now that he is gone, We the People are left to take up his banner, practice his courage, display his faith and patriotism, and prove to the bloodthirsty Democrats that we are all Charlie Kirk now.

Read more …

Trying to beat Russia amounts to suicide.

• Moscow Ready To Respond To Any Threat – Putin (RT)

Russia is ready to respond to any threats, President Vladimir Putin has said, adding that Moscow still supports a diplomatic path to ease tensions despite the West’s destructive policies.Speaking ahead of the Security Council meeting on Monday, Putin sounded the alarm with regard to the “extreme danger of further deterioration” of the geopolitical situation, particularly amid the Ukraine conflict.= He added that while Russia had offered “specific ideas” to correct this trajectory, these “warnings and initiatives received no clear response.”There should be no doubt about this: Russia is capable of responding to any existing and newly emerging threats. Responding not with words, but through the application of military-technical measures, Putin warned.

He noted Moscow’s decision to abandon the unilateral moratorium on the deployment of ground-based intermediate- and shorter-range missiles last month, describing it as a forced step caused by the need to counter plans to deploy US- and other Western-made missiles in Europe and the Asia-Pacific region. Putin stressed, however, that Russia is not interested in warmongering and saber-rattling. “We are confident in the reliability and effectiveness of our national deterrent forces, but at the same time we are not interested in further escalating tensions or fueling an arms race.” He added that Russia has always prioritized “political and diplomatic methods for maintaining international peace, based on the principles of equality, indivisibility of security, and mutual consideration of interests.”

Putin signaled that Moscow is ready to prolong the 2010 New START Treaty, the last remaining arms control pact between Russia and the US, which expires in February. It limits each side to no more than 1,550 deployed strategic nuclear warheads and 700 deployed delivery systems, and provides for inspections and data exchanges to verify compliance. This initiative, Putin said, “could make a significant contribution to creating an atmosphere conducive to substantive strategic dialogue with the United States.”

Read more …

“The New START Treaty will expire on February 5, 2026, signaling the imminent end of the last international accord directly limiting nuclear missile capabilities.”

• Putin Makes Nuclear Treaty Offer To US (RT)

Russian President Vladimir Putin has said Moscow will continue to adhere to a key nuclear arms control treaty signed with the US for one year after its expiration, provided Washington agrees to do the same. Speaking ahead of a Security Council meeting on Monday, Putin said global strategic stability has been increasingly threatened by what he described as the destructive actions of Western nations. He stressed that while Moscow is ready to meet any threat, it is and always has been interested in political and diplomatic methods of resolving conflicts.

Russia is prepared to follow the 2010 Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START) treaty for one year after its expiration next February, provided the US reciprocates and refrains from actions that could break the nuclear status quo, such as deploying interceptor systems in space, Putin offered. The Russia-US treaty establishes limits on the numbers of intercontinental-range nuclear weapons both sides can deploy. Below is the full text of Putin’s speech, as published on the Kremlin website:

Good afternoon, colleagues,

We have several topics to discuss today, including matters related to migration policy. However, I would like to begin with an issue of prime importance, one that is critical to safeguarding our national interests, Russia’s sovereignty, and without exaggeration, international security as a whole. I am referring to the situation in the realm of strategic stability, which, regrettably, continues to deteriorate. This is driven by a combination of factors, which are negative, compounding existing strategic risks and generating new ones. As a result of the destructive actions previously taken by Western countries, the foundations of constructive relations and practical cooperation between nuclear powers have been significantly undermined.

The basis for dialogue within relevant bilateral and multilateral frameworks has been eroded. Gradually, the system of Soviet-American and Russian-American agreements on nuclear missile and strategic defense arms control – long relied upon to stabilize relations between the two largest nuclear powers and to enhance global security – has been nearly dismantled. Let me reiterate: We have repeatedly examined the causes and potential consequences of this situation. We attribute the numerous challenges that have accumulated in the strategic sphere since the beginning of the 21st century to the destructive actions of the West, their destabilizing doctrines and military-technical programs designed to undermine global parity and pursue absolute, overwhelming superiority.

We have consistently and thoroughly addressed these issues, criticized this approach, and not only highlighted the extreme dangers of further deterioration but also repeatedly proposed concrete ideas for joint solutions. However, our warnings and initiatives have not received a clear response. Let me emphasize and let there be no doubt: Russia is fully capable of responding to any current or emerging threat, not with words, but through concrete military-technical measures. A clear example is our decision to end the unilateral moratorium on the deployment of ground-based short- and intermediate-range missiles. This was a forced move needed for ensuring an adequate response to the deployment of similar US and other Western-made weapons in Europe and the Asia-Pacific region, which poses a direct threat to Russia’s security.

Our plans to strengthen the country’s defense capability are being developed with full regard to the evolving international situation, and they are being implemented in a comprehensive and timely manner. We are confident in the reliability and effectiveness of our national deterrent forces. At the same time, we are not seeking to further escalate tensions or fuel an arms race. Russia has consistently upheld the primacy of political and diplomatic methods for maintaining global peace, based on the principles of equality, the indivisibility of security, and mutual respect for interests.

Let me remind you that the last major political and diplomatic achievement in the field of strategic stability was the conclusion of the Russian-American New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START) in 2010. However, owing to the profoundly hostile policies of the Biden administration, which undermined the fundamental principles on which this treaty was built, its full implementation was suspended in 2023. Nevertheless, both parties have declared their intention to continue voluntarily observing the central quantitative limits of the strategic offensive arms treaty until its expiry. For nearly 15 years, this agreement has played a constructive role in maintaining balance and predictability in the sphere of strategic offensive weapons.

The New START Treaty will expire on February 5, 2026, signaling the imminent end of the last international accord directly limiting nuclear missile capabilities. A complete renunciation of this treaty’s legacy would, from many points, be a grave and short-sighted mistake. It would also have adverse implications for the objectives of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. In order to prevent the emergence of a new strategic arms race and to preserve an acceptable degree of predictability and restraint, we consider it reasonable to maintain at this turbulent time the status quo established under New START. Accordingly, Russia is prepared to continue observing the treaty’s central quantitative restrictions for one year after February 5, 2026.

Following that date, based on a careful assessment of the situation, we will make a definite decision on whether to uphold these voluntary self-limitations. We believe that this measure is only feasible if the United States acts in a similar spirit and refrains from steps that would undermine or disrupt the existing balance of deterrence. In this connection, I would like to ask the relevant agencies to maintain close oversight of American activities related to the START arsenal in the first place. Particular attention must be directed towards US plans to expand strategic components of its missile defense system, including preparations for the deployment of interceptors in outer space. We believe that the practical implementation of such destabilizing measures could nullify our efforts to maintain the status quo in the field of strategic offensive arms. We will respond appropriately in this case.

I believe that Russia’s initiative, if implemented, could make a substantial contribution to creating the conditions necessary for a substantive strategic dialogue with the United States – provided, of course, that the grounds for its full resumption are secured and that broader steps are taken to normalize bilateral relations and remove core security contradictions.

Let us now turn to the current agenda.

Read more …

“..a militarist, anarchist enterprise that explicitly calls for the overthrow of the United States Government, law enforcement authorities, and our system of law.”

• Trump Declares Antifa a Terrorist Group (Catherine Salgado)

President Donald Trump officially designated Antifa a domestic terror organization on Monday. In his Sept. 22 executive order, Trump defined Antifa as “a militarist, anarchist enterprise that explicitly calls for the overthrow of the United States Government, law enforcement authorities, and our system of law. It uses illegal means to organize and execute a campaign of violence and terrorism nationwide to accomplish these goals.” Antifa became particularly infamous during the 2020 summer of love and the so-called “mostly peaceful” protests, and it remains a source of violence in the United States, with Portland just one city still enduring months of anti-ICE Antifa riots.

Antifa, as defined, Trump continued, “involves coordinated efforts to obstruct enforcement of Federal laws through armed standoffs with law enforcement, organized riots, violent assaults on Immigration and Customs Enforcement and other law enforcement officers, and routine doxing of and other threats against political figures and activists.” It is obvious that the federal government needs to take action against Antifa, which follows in a very long tradition of Democrat domestic terrorism stretching back to the mid-19th century. The KKK’s power is almost entirely a matter of the past, and hopefully that will be said one day soon of Antifa.

The president explained further that “Antifa recruits, trains, and radicalizes young Americans to engage in this violence and suppression of political activity, then employs elaborate means and mechanisms to shield the identities of its operatives, conceal its funding sources and operations in an effort to frustrate law enforcement, and recruit additional members.” This enhances the threat, as does the fact that Antifa has ties to other political organizations. Therefore, since Antifa has made it obvious through the cities it has torched and the other crimes that its members have committed that it is a domestic terror organization, Trump officially announced:

Because of the aforementioned pattern of political violence designed to suppress lawful political activity and obstruct the rule of law, I hereby designate Antifa as a “domestic terrorist organization.” All relevant executive departments and agencies shall utilize all applicable authorities to investigate, disrupt, and dismantle any and all illegal operations — especially those involving terrorist actions — conducted by Antifa or any person claiming to act on behalf of Antifa, or for which Antifa or any person claiming to act on behalf of Antifa provided material support, including necessary investigatory and prosecutorial actions against those who fund such operations. The president previously expressed his intention not only of investigating Antifa and its funding sources further, but of designating other radical leftist organizations as domestic terror groups too.

Read more …

And these guys still work at the FBI?

• Biden’s FBI Tried to Entrap Trump’s Border Czar Before the Election (Margolis)

Another day, another Biden scandal that the media desperately tries to dump on Trump. This time, MSNBC is working overtime to spin a damning story about Joe Biden’s FBI into yet another bogus hit piece on the Trump administration. Last year, while Biden and his minions were still calling the shots at the FBI, the bureau launched a brazen undercover operation targeting incoming Border Czar Tom Homan. Federal agents, posing as shady businessmen, tried to bait Homan with a $50,000 bribe in exchange for help securing contracts under a future Trump administration. It was a manufactured setup, designed from the start to entrap a Trump ally. The whole thing blew up in Biden’s face. When FBI Director Kash Patel and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche reviewed the case, they immediately exposed it as a political hit job.

“This matter originated under the previous administration,” they said in a joint statement. “They found no credible evidence of any criminal wrongdoing.” Translation: Biden’s FBI wasted taxpayer dollars trying to entrap one of Trump’s top immigration advisors, and they failed. But instead of admitting Biden’s corruption, MSNBC twisted the story with a headline that made it sound like Trump’s DOJ covered up wrongdoing: “Tom Homan was investigated for accepting $50,000 from undercover FBI agents. Trump’s DOJ shut it down.” This isn’t journalism—it’s propaganda. Do you think it’s a mere coincidence that Biden’s team launched the sting while Homan was advising Trump’s 2024 campaign—knowing full well he would play a major role in Trump’s second term? They weren’t investigating a crime; they were trying to create one.

“Mr. Homan never took the $50,000 that you’re referring to. So you should get your facts straight, number one,” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said Monday during the White House daily press briefing. “Number two, this was another example of the weaponization of the Biden Department of Justice against one of President Trump’s strongest and most vocal supporters in the midst of a presidential campaign.” She added, “You had FBI agents going undercover to try and entrap one of the president’s top allies and supporters, someone who they knew very well would be taking a government position months later.” Leavitt continued, “They found zero evidence of illegal activity or criminal wrongdoing. And the White House and the president stand by Tom Homan 100% because he did absolutely nothing wrong, and he is a brave public servant who has done a phenomenal job in helping the president shut down the border.”

This is the Biden playbook: weaponize the Justice Department against political enemies. They tried it with Trump himself, dragging him through endless witch hunts. When that didn’t stop him, they moved on to targeting his inner circle. And when even that failed, the media stepped in to try and salvage the narrative. MSNBC’s shameless story proves the corporate media isn’t just biased—they’re active participants in political persecution. They took a story that completely vindicates Homan and twisted it into anti-Trump propaganda, counting on their audience to never read past the headline. The sad truth here is that Americans are being lied to by “journalists” who sold their souls to the Democrat Party.

Read more …

“..a Democratic Party that is diametrically opposed to the reconciling systems on which this nation was founded.”

• Why We Are at War (Richard C. Lyons)

Polarity is in the nature of things, in fact, just as the poles of north and south exist, matter itself is drawn into being at opposites, as in the forces of magnets. So are we; we are social creatures of this world given to being at opposites. When our nation’s founders gathered in Philadelphia 238 summers ago, with the wealth of all of their collected libraries, they studied history’s opposed factions: from the Plains and Coastal parties of the Athenians, to the factions of Marius and Sulla in Rome, to the Byzantine parties of the Blue and the Green, to the Guelphs and Ghibellines of the Florentines, to the literary houses of Verona, the Montagues and Capulets, whose differences devoured the lives and loves of innocents. One of the great fears of that great intellectual company was that America would fall, broken by such opposing factions.

They deliberately wrote the Constitution, our social compact, to overcome such factions. Firstly, by creating a Constitution based on common law, with protections of individual and property that shield everyone against the ambitions of government, or any party thereof. The founders crafted a Constitutional Republic based first on federalism, which allowed people as varied in interests as a Boston lawyer and a Key West fisherman to live under distinct state and local laws best suited to themselves. Much of our Constitution has to do with voting into office, by a majority, those representatives freely chosen to represent the citizens’ interests. If anyone does not represent the citizens’ interests, they are as easily voted out, thus ensuring that governance is representative of the people’s will.

Our free enterprise system came into being with our nation; The Wealth of Nations, by Adam Smith, was published in the same year as the Declaration of Independence; and the personal property rights espoused by John Locke were ensconced in our highest law in the 5th Amendment, among the Bill of Rights, including the “takings clause,” which forbids government from taking from an individual what they have earned by their labors and investments. Lastly, at the time of our nation’s founding, the Judeo-Christian ethic was omnipresent, with it’s Ten Commandments, the first common law of humanity, and its highest law: to “love thy neighbor as thyself.” Each of these systems of law, of federalism, of representation, of free enterprise and of the ethos of Judeo-Christianity has helped reconcile our society as a whole and has been responsible for our nation’s peace and prosperity since the Constitution’s signing 237 years ago.

Who can argue with a common law that protects the wealthy and the poor? Who can argue about a system of diffused power, allowing localities and states to create their own laws? Who can argue with the right of people to empower those whom they would wish to represent them? Who can argue with the principle that the people who are entitled to wealth are those who have earned that wealth themselves? Who can argue with the notion that Judeo-Christianity is perhaps the best ethos for advancing peace through mutual respect, respect for the law, charitability, and humility? So why are we so opposed and at the point of war with one another in our nation today? Until November1963, both of our political parties, their patrons and, their constituents believed in every one of these societally reconciling systems. Then the momentum in the Democratic Party to more fully institute socialism began.

Today, the Democrats believe devoutly that the Constitution is a “living” document, which is to say, they can change or disregard whatever they don’t like in the text or kill it altogether as a document of “negative rights.” Today, the Democrats don’t believe in federalism; they desire all the wealth and power of the nation to be invested in one capital, Washington D.C., to be parceled out to family, friends and allies of their own. Today, Democrats do not believe in representative government; they believe in bureaucrats appointed for life to eternal agencies in the never constitutionally enumerated power of the Administrative State. Their only concern for the chambers of Congress is as a central exchange between the taxpayer and those agencies, which are the power base of the Democrat Party.

Today, Democrats do not believe in property rights; they believe that what is theirs is theirs and what is yours is theirs. They believe anyone who has earned wealth has done so illegitimately and those who haven’t have a superior moral right to it anyway, so long as the Democrats get an overall cut. Lastly, the Democrats’ idea of Judeo-Christianity is to pronounce publicly that they privately believe in it, while acting against it with every meaningful national vote they take and every regulatory rule they make. What is at opposition today is a conservative Republican Party that believes profoundly in the reconciling promise of these foundations of our society. And a Democratic Party that is diametrically opposed to the reconciling systems on which this nation was founded.

The Democratic Party has become what this nation fought against in the Second World War, the Cold War and the Middle Eastern wars. The Democrats — or the liberal left, progressives, or Democratic Socialists — have become a tyrannical bunch of bastards who have renounced their good parentage, and they are getting very violent about it. God Bless Charlie Kirk, who fought and died for all of these reconciling societal blessings.

Read more …

But you can still not watch it.

• Disney Gives Kimmel Show Back, But Nexstar & Sinclair Still Refuse To Air (ZH)

Hours after 400 artists signed an ACLU letter in response to Jimmy Kimmel’s firing, the late-night host’s ‘indefinite termination’ for propaganda surrounding the Charlie Kirk assassination has been turned into a week’s vacation. According to Variety, Disney and ABC are bringing the comedian back to its schedule Tuesday night. “Last Wednesday, we made the decision to suspend production on the show to avoid further inflaming a tense situation at an emotional moment for our country. It is a decision we made because we felt some of the comments were ill-timed and thus insensitive,” the company said in a statement. “We have spent the last days having thoughtful conversations with Jimmy, and after those conversations, we reached the decision to return the show on Tuesday.”

Of note, none of the Nexstar or Sinclair affiliates will carry the show. Despite Kimmel’s return, it is not immediately clear if his show will be available across the entire country. Sinclair, for its part, had said that it would not go back to running Kimmel’s show on its stations until the late night host apologized for his comments, met with Sinclair representatives and made a donation to Turning Point, the organization that Kirk founded. Sinclair, it should be noted, owns the ABC station in the Washington, D.C., metro area, among other markets. Nexstar, similarly, could also choose to continue to preempt the show, though of course it would still be accessible online across the country after it runs on ABC. -Hollywood Reporter

Kimmel’s show was pulled last Wednesday after the host said that Charlie Kirk assassination suspect Tyler Robinson was ‘MAGA’ – when he’s very clearly not based on what we know. In response, FCC Chair Brendan Carr threatened to revoke ABC affiliate licenses over the comments, which he described in a podcast interview with host Benny Johnson as “the sickest conduct possible.” As The Blaze’s Auron Macintyre opines: “ABC is putting Jimmy Kimmel back on the air because terrorism works in America.” Guess who predicted it? Does Roseanne Barr get her show back too now?

Read more …

“So Kimmel is now a hero of democracy — all he had to do was spread disinformation. That makes this the funniest joke that Kimmel never told.”

• The Funniest Joke Jimmy Kimmel Never Told (Turley)

Democrats were finally outraged this week. No, it was not about the murder of Charlie Kirk, but rather the suspension of Jimmy Kimmel’s late-night comedy show. Democratic leaders are taking to the airways to denounce the decision to take Kimmel off the air after he spread disinformation about Charlie Kirk’s alleged killer. The same leaders and pundits who have for years fought for censorship in the name of combating disinformation are now making the very arguments they ridiculed just months ago. Democrats once wrote letters to Internet carriers suggesting that Fox News, the most popular cable news network, should be taken off the air in the name of combating disinformation. That was when the Democrats controlled the White House and were targeting conservatives.

Suddenly, now, disinformation is no longer a valid reason to censor and alleged government-corporate alliances are a menace to free speech. After the tragedy in Utah, many on the left immediately tried to deflect responsibility for the murder by claiming that Kirk’s killer was actually a Trump supporter. On his show, Kimmel declared that “the MAGA Gang” was “desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them, and doing everything they can to score political points from it.” The far-left motivations of the alleged assassin, Tyler Robinson, were already well known. His family confirmed that he had been radicalized with leftist ideology and cited pro-transgender views. This was not even a joke — it was just a false factual claim made by Kimmel on national television. And it came at a time when others were spreading this lie.

Despite stories to the contrary, many repeated the false claim. For example, Harvard Law Professor Laurence Tribe posted that “Kirk’s apparent assassin seems to have been ultra-MAGA, exploding the GOP/MAGA attempt to pin the blame for this tragedy on liberals.” (Previously, Tribe had claimed that the October 2023 massacre of Israelis by Hamas was a “wag-the-dog” operation to distract from corruption allegations against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu). The disinformation took hold on the Internet and social media. One poll showed that a plurality of Americans think Robinson was a conservative. Call it assassination denial. It is all the rage. Former MSNBC and ESPN host Keith Olbermann wrote after Kimmel’s suspension, “Burn in hell, Sinclair. Alongside Charlie Kirk.” He added that “nothing [Kimmel] said was untrue.”

Curiously, some of these politicians and pundits are claiming that, yet again, democracy will die if Kimmel is not allowed to spread disinformation. There are reports that Kimmel was refusing to apologize and planned to double down on the attacks on conservatives in his next show. Faced with a revolt by affiliates and a potential exodus of advertisers, Disney’s head, Bob Iger, pulled the plug. (By the way, Kimmel’s ratings had been falling for years, and he had a smaller audience than the Colbert Show, which was itself discontinued due to loss of money). The hypocrisy was pure comedy. For years, these same voices demanded censorship of individuals deemed to be spreading disinformation, misinformation, and malinformation. The last category was used by the Biden administration to target statements “based on fact, but used out of context to mislead, harm, or manipulate.”

At the same time, they mocked claims that corporations were working with the government to maintain this censorship system. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) ran on a pledge to impose new criminal and civil penalties for anyone spreading disinformation. Now, however, censorship is intolerable. Warren told CNN “we know there was federal interference … We saw the government step up and give a hard shove and then we saw a compliant company turn around and suspend Mr. Kimmel.” She added that his collaboration with corporations “truly undermines the whole premise of the First Amendment.”

Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) called the suspension one of “the most blatant attacks on the free press in American history.” Schiff had previously demanded that Twitter suspend an array of users and “reduce the visibility” of blacklisted individuals — including a journalist who held opposing views. When Elon Musk reduced censorship at X, it was Schiff who warned Facebook not to follow his example by restoring free speech protections. Schiff threatened legislative action if the company moved to “alter or roll back certain misinformation policies.” This week, Schiff is outraged by a company’s decision to suspend a host who refused to correct a false story he had spread.

For years, I appeared before these same leaders in Congress as they defended corporate censorship and dismissed allegations of collaboration with the government. I would not cancel Kimmel so long as his show was profitable. But I have long maintained that companies can limit the free speech of employees at work. I do not believe Kimmel should be censored on social media for spreading false information. At the same time, ABC does not have to lose money or viewers because an employee attacks others with vile, false claims. Now Disney is accused of killing democracy itself, in league with Trump. Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) attacked Trump for “trying to destroy our democracy” and acting like “many would-be despots.”

Rep. Maxwell Frost (D-Fla.) used Kimmel’s suspension as evidence that “fascism is not on the way, it is here.” Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz (D) insisted that suspending a host for spreading false information about a murder was “North Korea-style stuff” while Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) insisted that it is “what Putin would do.” It is a curious spin, since Putin and Kim Jong Un value media figures who spread false information — particularly about murders. Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) went so far as to compare Kimmel to Thomas Paine, the author of Common Sense and “Penman of the revolution.” So Kimmel is now a hero of democracy — all he had to do was spread disinformation. That makes this the funniest joke that Kimmel never told.

Read more …

It deactivates something?!

• Trump Links Tylenol To Autism Risk During Pregnancy (RT)

US President Donald Trump has drawn a connection between the use of Tylenol during pregnancy and rising autism rates in America, calling the increase in diagnoses “one of the most alarming public health developments in history.”Speaking at a White House briefing alongside Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on Monday, Trump said pregnant women should avoid acetaminophen, the active ingredient in Tylenol, unless absolutely necessary. He said the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) would begin updating warning labels and launch an information campaign aimed at pregnant women.

“Taking Tylenol is not good,” Trump said during the event. “They are strongly recommending that women limit Tylenol use during pregnancy unless medically necessary… If you can’t tough it out, if there’s a problem, you’re going to end up doing it, but ideally you don’t take it at all.”= Citing an increase in autism rates, Trump said the condition has become far more prevalent over the last two decades. “The meteoric rise in autism is among the most alarming public health developments in history,” he said. The FDA issued two separate news releases confirming a formal response to growing evidence of neurological risks linked to acetaminophen during pregnancy. The agency said it has initiated a label change for all acetaminophen-containing products, including Tylenol, to reflect studies suggesting an association with autism and ADHD.

“The FDA is taking action to make parents and doctors aware of a considerable body of evidence about potential risks associated with acetaminophen,” FDA Commissioner Dr. Marty Makary said. The FDA acknowledged that while some studies show an association between prenatal acetaminophen use and neurodevelopmental disorders, a causal link has not been established. It stressed that acetaminophen remains the only over-the-counter medication approved for fever relief during pregnancy and warned that alternatives like ibuprofen and aspirin can pose known risks to fetal development.

Tylenol manufacturer Kenvue responded to the developments by defending the drug’s safety. “We strongly disagree with any suggestion that acetaminophen causes autism,” the company said, warning that discouraging appropriate use during pregnancy may put mothers and infants at risk from untreated fever or pain. In another announcement, the FDA said it is initiating approval of leucovorin calcium tablets for patients with cerebral folate deficiency (CFD), a condition linked to developmental delays and autistic features. Though the agency cautioned that more studies are needed to assess the drug’s full efficacy in autism-related populations, it said the initiative reflects a broader strategy to repurpose existing medications for neurological conditions.

Read more …

“I’ve never talked to a Democrat who ever wanted to listen. They start to glitch out if you try.” — Sasha Stone

• Personal Note (James Howard Kunstler)

This past summer, I tried to open a line of communication with a West Coast relative. We exchanged a few letters. I tactically steered the conversation away from the political. Here was the closer salvo from my relative:

Jimmy, on a completely personal level, and in different times, I think we could have been very good friends. At this point in our history, I find what you say in your blogs and Kunstlercast to be outrageous, deceptive, and ugly. I disagree with almost everything you hold dear politically, and even if, for instance, we agree about the horrors of Big Pharma, your worship of Kennedy makes me ill. Your language falls right into all the clichés of the far right ideologies I loathe.Maybe someday things will change. For now, this is the last you’ll be hearing from me.

Frankly, what stung most keenly was the accusation that my language fell “into all the clichés of the far right ideologies. . . .” I like to think that I am allergic to clichés, though it’s possible that I am deluded about that. If anything, the dynamic collective thought disorders of our time present themselves in astonishingly fresh ways — for instance, a Supreme Court nominee who can’t define what a woman is. (Makes you kind of wonder how such a mind could parse Article Two of the Constitution.)

Mostly, I would have liked to know what those “far right ideologies” are, exactly, but it looks like I will never find out now. Maybe it is being opposed to censorship. . . or against Ukraine’s entry into NATO. . . or wanting coherent procedure for foreigners seeking to enter the USA. . . or keeping biological men out of the women’s swim lanes. . . or saying that ivermectin is a safe and effective anti-viral med. . . or supposing that people charged with felonies should not be released to the streets without significant cash bail. Stuff like that.

As it happened, we were not discussing these matters in our brief correspondence, but I was at something of a disadvantage since I am a professional writer who posts his opinion for public scrutiny and my relative is not. Of course, I describe what is a pandemic of broken family relations in our country. And social relations. I have been cancelled by most of my old friends, too, and I’m quite sure that I am not a special case. I am mystified by what these relatives and old friends actually believe these days. When we were hippies back in the day, they were very much opposed to war, turned-off by attempts at censorship, and deeply averse to the dark operations of the CIA and FBI. Now, they seem avid for intel ops and hoaxes, eager for war, and all-in for censoring ideas that make them feel “unsafe.”

There are various useful theories for this state-of-affairs, all pretty cross-compatible. Strauss and Howe’s Fourth Turning template of generational cycles explains a lot. Elizabeth Nickson has some fine insights about the extreme discontents of women these days leading them to summon political demons. Mattias Desmet, the Belgian psych professor has his Mass Formation theory, which states that societal anxieties provoke aligned “radical intolerance” among a populace. I recommend Wendy Williamson’s recent blog discussion of The Law of Reversal. Joseph Tainter’s classic, The Collapse of Complex Societies lays out the pitfalls of our “over-investments in complexity.” I wrote a book in 2005 titled The Long Emergency which describes the drawn-out collapse of our techno-industrial economy — the widespread apprehension of which helps define the societal anxieties described by Dr. Desmet that bring on his “Mass Formation Psychosis.”

All these theories tend to imply an inflection point where our assumptions about human progress get undermined, provoking an intense loss of faith in institutions and authorities, resulting in epochal socio-political disorder. Wouldn’t you agree we are seeing exactly that now? That the net effect of all this is of a society driven insane. Surely, the craziness is amplified by the novel connectivities of the Internet and exacerbated by many other high-tech innovations from ubiquitous camera surveillance to cryptocurrency to drone warfare.

In our country these days, all of this has apparently produced two camps at war psychologically, now verging on something like a hot civil war. One camp calling itself “progressive” insists on a roster of ideas, policies, and practices that look patently absurd, abusive of the public interest, and hostile to the values of Western Civ. The other camp styles itself as “conservative” seeking to preserve Western Civ and the advancement of our so-called way of life — an ever growth-seeking high-tech economy.

Personally, I doubt that the latter is possible. I believe we’re due for a pretty serious time-out from the sort of economic “growth” we enjoyed the past two-hundred years. That high-tech mega-fiesta has thrown off a lot of entropy, which is now working hard to slow things down and make us stop a lot of what we are doing. It manifests in many ways, but most vividly by flinging us into social disorder, turning what had been communication and correspondence into a rising babel that is driving us crazy. That is exactly why it is so hard to talk to our relatives and old friends. But mark this: there is a time coming when we will get tired of being crazy, and then things will go differently for us. We’ll start talking again.

Read more …

“At the European Council in December 2026, there will be blood on the walls..”

• EU Looks To ‘Le Pen-Proof’ Its Budget – Politico (RT)

The EU leadership is trying to fast-track talks to reach a deal on the bloc’s new budget before the French presidential election in April 2027, Politico reports. EU officials reportedly fear it could be won by right-wing firebrand Marine Le Pen or one of her allies from the National Rally party. The EU’s next seven-year budget is scheduled to come into force on January 1, 2028. The proposal by the European Commission currently being discussed amounts to €1,816 trillion ($2,136). It requires unanimous approval from all 27 member states to pass. The risk of the right-wing forces defeating French President Emmanuel Macron in the election is the main reason budget negotiations are being accelerated, the outlet said in an article on Monday, citing five officials and EU diplomats.

The concern in Brussels is that the National Rally’s platform, which includes slashing Paris’ contribution to the EU budget and reducing military aid to Ukraine, could disrupt the already complex talks, it said. Le Pen has been banned from running for public office after a French court found her guilty of embezzling European Parliament funds earlier this year. She has challenged the ruling. The National Rally’s second most prominent figure, Jordan Bardella, is also believed to be capable of winning the election, according to the article. European Council President Antonio Costa is working to secure a budget deal in the council by the end of 2026, his spokesperson, Maria Tomasik, told journalists on Friday.

“At the European Council in December 2026, there will be blood on the walls,” a senior EU diplomat told Politico, referring to the negotiations. There is “annoyance” over attempts to speed up the budget talks in countries including Italy and Poland, which argue that it leaves them less time to make changes to the proposal and benefits the Northern European nations, according to the outlet. A poll by Ifop published on Saturday suggested that Macron’s ratings have fallen to 17%, the lowest during his two-term presidency. Hundreds of thousands protested across France last week against government policies, including additional austerity measures proposed by newly appointed Prime Minister Sebastien Lecornu.

Read more …

Word from your banker.

“Ignoring international law would lead to “the beginning of total chaos,” the French president has said..”

• Macron Warns Against Seizing Frozen Russian Assets (RT)

French President Emmanuel Macron has pushed back against the idea of seizing frozen Russian assets, warning that doing so could backfire on the West and undermine global stability. In an interview with CBS’s Face the Nation aired on Sunday, Macron was asked about what the West was planning to do with the $300 billion in Russian sovereign assets which were frozen after the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022. “We are all very much attached to being compliant with international rules. You cannot seize these assets from the central bank, even in such a situation,” the French leader said, describing it as “a matter of credibility.”

“When some countries start to disrespect international laws… this is the beginning of a total chaos. So we will respect international law. We are predictable, and we will not do all impossible things with these frozen assets,” he added, recalling that Kiev’s Western backers are already using proceeds from the frozen assets to prop up Ukraine. Throughout the conflict, Western policymakers have considered seizing Russian assets – most of which fall under EU jurisdiction – but have so far refrained due to the lack of a legal basis and fears it would damage global trust.

Last year, however, G7 nations supported a $50 billion loan to Ukraine secured by the income from Russian reserves. Western nations have also directly handed over to Kiev approximately $4.3 billion in proceeds from Russian assets. This month, the EU Commission floated a proposal to use Russian assets to back a reparation loan to Ukraine, which Kiev would be obligated to repay only if it receives “compensation” for damages from Moscow. Russia has denounced both the freeze and the profit-transfer scheme as “theft,” warning that confiscation would damage the global financial system and trigger retaliation from Moscow.

Read more …

“Protests in London will change nothing – Britain’s people were bred to endure..”

• Britain’s Fate Is Decline, Not Upheaval – And History Explains Why (Bordachev)

The demonstrations in London earlier this month – up to 150,000 people protesting immigration and government incompetence – drew attention in Russia and abroad. Some observers even wondered if Britain might finally be approaching a breaking point. Perhaps, like Nepal or France in past years, mass anger could reshape politics. But such hopes are misplaced. Britain will never experience revolutionary upheaval. Its culture is not one of defiance but of endurance. The United Kingdom has, over centuries, become a bastion of injustice disguised as stability, where ordinary people are conditioned to accept their powerlessness. This cultural inheritance, once an imperial advantage, now guarantees slow decline.

Britain is unique in Western Europe: it was created not through union or invitation, but through conquest. In 1066 Norman knights crushed the native English and divided the land into fiefdoms. Unlike Russia, where foreign warriors were invited to defend the realm, or Hungary, where nomads fused with locals to form a people, England’s story was one of subjugation. That pattern hardened in 1215, when barons forced King John to sign the Magna Carta. Propaganda later elevated the charter as the foundation of English liberty. In reality it entrenched oligarchy: the power of the wealthy over crown and people alike. Where monarchs elsewhere often stood with peasants against feudal tyranny, in England the crown itself was shackled by landowners. Injustice became not an aberration but the system’s operating principle.

Geography reinforced the pattern. For centuries there was no frontier of freedom. Only in 1620 did dissenters finally flee on the Mayflower, planting English settlements in North America. By then, 600 years of endurance had shaped a national character: patient, fatalistic, and resigned. In Russia, by contrast, peasants had begun migrating east as early as the 11th century. Freedom was found in movement: new villages, new lands, and eventually a new people. This restless expansion created Russia’s unique statehood and ethnic identity. The English, trapped on their island, cultivated instead a tradition of enduring injustice. By the 18th century, Britain was sending its sons to wars around the world. They returned crippled, if at all – as Rudyard Kipling later immortalized. Yet they went meekly. A society drilled in obedience did not question orders, however insane. That made Britain dangerous abroad, but docile at home.

Popular uprisings were crushed without hesitation. Laws such as the Settlement Act of 1662, tying workers to their parishes, or the Poor Law of 1834, abolishing basic relief, stripped away rights. Only after 1945, under pressure from the USSR’s example, did Britain adopt limited welfare protections. Even these are now eroding, with no real resistance. This tradition once gave Britain its edge. Armies could be raised, colonies conquered, wars fought with little domestic dissent. But in the modern world, where political vitality depends on public will, the same habit of resignation has become a liability. Unlike Russians, who carved out freedom by settling new lands, or French and Germans, who rebelled and migrated, the English learned to endure. Their legacy is a society where injustice is not challenged but accepted – and where any hope of transformation evaporates before it begins.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

statin

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle August 17 2025

Aug 172025
 
 August 17, 2025  Posted by at 10:26 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,  56 Responses »


Edward Hopper Night in the park 1921

 

• Putin & Trump Rewrite the Rules of Great Power Politics in Alaska (Sp.)
• Trump-Zelensky Call ‘Wasn’t Easy’ – Axios (RT)
• The Alaska Summit Was A Success. The Challenge Is To Make It Last (Amar)
• Trump Plans White House Meeting With Zelensky and European Leaders – NYT (RT)
• Trump Wants Summit With Putin And Zelensky Next Friday – Media (RT)
• President Trump Outlines a Remarkably Altruistic Intention (CTH)
• The Putin-Trump Meeting (Paul Craig Roberts)
• Visit to Alaska Was Timely and Very Useful – Putin (Sp.)
• The Legacy Media Won’t Touch These mRNA Vaccine Study Findings (Margolis)
• Who Has Been Busy Destroying Democracy? (Victor Davis Hanson)
• Merz’s Germany: 100 Days Of Economic Deep Freeze (Kolbe)
• France’s Debt Time Bomb Is Ticking Beneath The Summer Calm (Kolbe)
• Meta Faces US Probe Over AI Flirting With Kids (RT)
• DOGE’s AI Tool ‘SweetREX’ Set To Take Buzzsaw To Federal Regulations (ZH)
• Schwarzenegger Taunts Newsom With Message Targeting Dem Redistricting Push (Fox)
• Lavrov Prompts USSR Sweatshirt Craze (RT)

 

 

https://twitter.com/atensnut/status/1956538006787223966

Change

3am
https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/1956616187431047666

Maher
https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1956550733471289752

ActBlue
https://twitter.com/TRUMP_ARMY_/status/1956022193495634217

 

 

 

 

“On Friday, Trump said Ukraine’s security won’t come “in the form of NATO.”

 

 

I’m starting to think Trump wants a more comprehensive deal than what we’ve seen so far. And that deal, with Russia, is very important to him: it’s the way to peace. Sometime in the past few days Putin has said that talks are no use if Zelensky and Europe insist on the narrative that Russia’s Special Military Operation came out of nowhere, unprovoked. It was Ukraine that started killing Russian-speakers in the Donbass. Trump appears to agree. He had Zelensky come to the Oval Office anyway on Monday, now he invited Europe as well. So he doesn’t have to tell the same story twice. When that story is gone, what is left?

• Putin & Trump Rewrite the Rules of Great Power Politics in Alaska (Sp.)

The Putin-Trump summit was an unqualified success that could pave the way for peace in Ukraine, and the normalization of Russia-US relations for years to come. Dmitry Suslov, deputy director of research at the Russian Council on Foreign & Defense Policy, explains why. Three key reasons:

1. The summit “gave impetus” to Russia-US normalization on all fronts – from Ukraine and arms control to economic cooperation

2. Trump’s calls to Zelensky and European leaders in the meeting’s immediate aftermath signals that “negotiations were conducted on specific conditions for a final peace settlement,” not the ‘ceasefire as a prerequisite’ long demanded by Brussels and Kiev. This is “fundamentally important,” Suslov says

3. The summit was “historic” in the sense that it “made a great contribution to…laying the foundations of the future world order, a post-war world order. Because the Ukrainian conflict is, first and foremost, the largest and most severe military conflict in the world in the last few decades, and a concentrated expression of the hybrid war waged by the West against Russia.”

“The summit in Alaska was dedicated to ending this hybrid war,” demonstrating that the foundations for a future world order will be based on dialogue between great powers, on equal terms.

Now, Suslov says, it’s up to the Europeans and Zelensky to decide whether they accept the terms outlined by Putin and Trump. If they do, preparations for future meetings can begin. “If they categorically refuse, the United States will most likely completely suspend the transfer of US intelligence and stop deliveries and sales of weapons and military equipment to the Europeans for Ukraine,” which would “fundamentally and radically weaken Ukraine’s position on the battlefield and bring a Russian military victory much closer.” Suslov expects the ‘war party’ in Washington and Brussels to try to convince Trump to abandon whatever agreements were reached with Putin in Anchorage, but doesn’t expect Trump to “succumb to such provocations,” because he is much stronger politically than he was in his first term.

The second Trump administration is not on the defensive, but on the offensive, regarding the Russiagate hoax, and is in a position to accuse the Democrats of collusion and falsification in 2016, not the other way around. “Accordingly, Trump can withstand the pressure that will now be exerted upon him from Europe, from the American deep state, and from the American war party, including the terrorist extremist Senator Graham and so on,” Suslov says. Last but not least is the minutia of the summit, from the way Trump greeted Putin on the airport runway, to the flyover of US aviation, to the fact that Putin and Trump rode together in one car to the summit venue.

There was a visible “demonstration of personal affection between Putin and Trump for each other in a situation where the United States has been waging a hybrid war against Russia…and trying to inflict a strategic defeat on it” over the course of the past three years as a result of the policies of Trump’s predecessor. The overall tone, and demonstration of respect and personal sympathy, mark a “striking contrast” to the tone under the Biden administration, Suslov emphasized.

Read more …

At the end of a very long day, Trump had another hours-long talk with Zelensky and Europe whining on the other end of the line.

• Trump-Zelensky Call ‘Wasn’t Easy’ – Axios (RT)

The phone call between US President Donald Trump and Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky after the Alaska summit on Friday “wasn’t easy,” Axios correspondent Barak Ravid claimed on Saturday, citing a source with direct knowledge. Key European leaders later joined the call as well. Trump spoke with Zelensky for about an hour, according to Ravid. Also on the line were Secretary of State Marco Rubio and special envoy Steve Witkoff, both of whom had earlier taken part in the talks with the Russian delegation. The leaders of the UK, France, Italy, Germany, Finland, Poland, as well as NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, later joined the call, which lasted another 30 minutes, according to the journalist.

Ravid described the call as “not easy,” though he did not elaborate on this, adding only that Trump insisted that “a fast peace deal is better than a ceasefire.” The US president later confirmed the sentiment, writing: “It was determined by all that the best way to end the horrific war between Russia and Ukraine is to go directly to a Peace Agreement, which would end the war, and not a mere Ceasefire Agreement, which often times do not hold up.” Zelensky said that during the phone call with Trump the two agreed that he would come on Monday to Washington to discuss in person the outcome of the summit.

Ukraine and its Western backers have for months been pushing for a temporary ceasefire. While Russia has never ruled out the idea, it has argued that such a step would allow Kiev to receive more Western weapons, continue forced mobilization, and recover its losses at a time when Russian troops are pressing their advantage on the battlefield. Meanwhile, both Putin and Trump praised the Alaska talks as productive. The US president said that they moved closer to resolving the conflict while urging Zelensky to “make a deal.”

Read more …

“..they and the mainstream media aligned with them cannot stop trying to lecture Trump on, in essence, how gullible they consider him..”

• The Alaska Summit Was A Success. The Challenge Is To Make It Last (Amar)

Do not expect Western mainstream media, NATO-EU Europe’s politicians, or the Zelensky regime and its surrogates to admit it, but there is no doubt that the Alaska summit between the Russian and American presidents was a success. Not a breakthrough either, but clearly also more than an “it’s-good-they’re-at-least-talking” event. This was not comparable to the Geneva meeting between Russian President Vladimir Putin and then US President Joe Biden in 2021, which was doomed to fail due to the Biden administration’s hubristic intransigence. Fundamentally, both sides – no, not only one – have scored what Western pundits love to call “wins”: The US has shown the EU-NATO Europeans that it and it alone decides when and how it talks to Russia and with what aims.

The European vassals find this hard to grasp because it’s an application of genuine sovereignty, something they don’t have or want anymore. Russia, for its part, has shown that it can negotiate while the fighting continues and that it is under no legal or moral obligation – or any practical pressure – to stop fighting before negotiations show results it finds satisfying. The fact that we know so little – at this point at least – about the specific, detailed content of the summit talks and their outcomes is, actually, a sign of seriousness. That is how diplomacy worth the name works: calmly, confidentially, and patiently taking the time to achieve a decent, robust result. In that context, US President Donald Trump’s explicit refusal to make public what points of disagreement remain and have prevented a breakthrough for now is a very good sign: Clearly, he believes that they can be cleared up in the near future and, thus, deserve discretion.

Yet we do have a few hints allowing for some plausible guessing about the summit’s vibe: Not surprisingly, both leaders made no secret of their respect and even guarded sympathy for each other. That is – and has always been – a good thing, too. But in and of itself that cannot carry an agreement about Ukraine or a broader policy of normalization (or perhaps even a new détente, if we are all very lucky). For that, both Trump and Putin are too serious about adhering to national interests. More tellingly, immediately after the meeting, Trump used a Fox News interview to state three important things. He confirmed that there was “much progress,” acknowledged that the Russian president wants peace, and told Zelensky “to make a deal.” When Putin, at a short press conference, warned Brussels and Kiev not to try to sabotage the talks, Trump did not contradict the Russian leader.

The commemorative events accompanying the summit carried more than one message. Publicly honoring the American-Russian (then Soviet) alliance of World War Two obviously implied that the two countries then cooperated intensely across a deep ideological divide, which, today, does not even exist anymore. But arguably, there was a second, subtle message here: Another – if often unjustly “forgotten” (in the words of historian Rana Mitter) – ally of World War Two was, after all, China. In that sense, Putin’s deliberate and repeated invocations of the memory of Washington-Moscow cooperation was also yet another signal that Russia would not be available for any “reverse Kissinger” fantasies of splitting the Moscow-Beijing partnership. By now, Trump has had phone conversations with Kiev, as well as EU capitals. There, too, we know little.

Yet it is interesting to note that nothing we have heard about these conversations indicates another change of mind on Trump’s side. For now at least, the American president seems to leave little hope to European bellicists and the regime in Kiev that he will turn against Moscow again. There are reports that Trump may have shifted his position toward that of Russia, preferring talks about peace to the Ukrainian demand to focus on only a ceasefire first. This makes sense, especially since they and the mainstream media aligned with them cannot stop trying to lecture Trump on, in essence, how gullible they consider him. It is to be hoped that the US president has had enough of Zelensky, Bolton, the New York Times and co. telling him publicly that he is a fool about to be duped by the big bad Russians. The adequate punishment for these offensive inanities is to make triple sure their authors find themselves entirely irrelevant.

Read more …

I doubt they will like what he has to say.

• Trump Plans White House Meeting With Zelensky and European Leaders – NYT (RT)

US President Donald Trump has invited European leaders to join Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky at a meeting at the White House on Monday, the New York Times has claimed, citing anonymous European officials. On Friday, Trump met with his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, in Anchorage, Alaska, in what marked the first face-to-face talks between Russian and American leaders since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022. The US president described the encounter as “warm,” while Putin characterized it as “frank” and “substantive.” Both men expressed tentative hopes that the summit could bring a resolution of the Ukraine conflict closer.

On Saturday, the NYT quoted its sources as saying that Trump would receive Zelensky and that “European leaders are invited to come along” as well. Earlier in the day, the Ukrainian leader announced in a post on X that he would travel to the US capital on Monday. Trump later confirmed the visit. Trump will propose a plan under which Kiev would be required to cede the parts of the new Russian territories in Donbass still under Ukrainian control, according to the newspaper. In return, the Kremlin would agree to cease hostilities along the current front line elsewhere, the publication claimed. Zelensky has repeatedly ruled out any territorial concessions to Moscow.

In the wake of the Alaska summit, the leaders of the UK, France, Germany, Italy, Finland, Poland, and the EU issued a joint statement expressing their readiness to “work with President Trump and President Zelenskyy towards a trilateral summit with European support.” Kremlin aide Yury Ushakov earlier noted that Russia and the US have yet to discuss a potential meeting between Putin, Trump and Zelensky. Speaking to Fox Business on Thursday, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent suggested that Kiev’s European backers should “put up or shut up” and stop making demands on Washington while it tries to negotiate with Moscow a way out of the Ukraine conflict.

Read more …

Putin won’t negotiate with Zelensky. He’ll only turn up to sign documents.

• Trump Wants Summit With Putin And Zelensky Next Friday – Media (RT)

US President Donald Trump is seeking a trilateral summit with Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky and Russian President Vladimir Putin as early as next week, Axios and CNN have reported. The meeting could take place if Trump’s Oval Office talks with Zelensky on Monday are successful, according to the outlets. On Friday, Trump met Putin in Anchorage, Alaska, in their first face to face encounter since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022. Trump described the talks as “warm”, while the Russian president called them “frank” and “substantive.” After the Alaska summit, Trump and Zelensky held a phone call described by the media as “not easy.” European leaders also joined the conversation, during which the US president told them “he wants to arrange a trilateral summit with Putin and Zelensky as soon as next Friday,” according to Axios.

CNN later confirmed this, adding that at least one European leader is expected to take part in the Washington talks with Zelensky, although it is not yet clear who. Later on Saturday, Trump confirmed Zelensky’s Oval Office meeting on his Truth Social network, touting a follow-up meeting with Putin that could potentially take place afterwards. He added that the goal should be a peace agreement rather than a temporary ceasefire, “which often times do not hold up.”= Moscow has insisted that a lasting settlement requires Kiev to renounce its ambitions for NATO membership, demilitarize, and recognize current territorial realities. This includes Crimea, Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson, and Zaporozhye as part of Russia – regions that voted to join the country in referendums held in 2014 and 2022.

Zelensky has consistently rejected any territorial concessions. Trump later told Fox News that Zelensky should “make the deal,” stressing that Putin “wants to see it done” and urging Europe to “get involved a little bit.” Putin has not ruled out direct talks with Zelensky but stressed they must be preceded by progress on a wider settlement. Moscow has also questioned Zelensky’s authority to sign binding agreements, noting that his presidential term expired last year and that no new elections have been held under martial law.

Read more …

Sundance: better relations with Russia requires crushing the Russiagate hoax. That is more important to Trump than locking up Comey, Brennan et al. MAGA take notice.

• President Trump Outlines a Remarkably Altruistic Intention (CTH)

Fox News host Bret Baier was given exclusive access to President Trump during the much-anticipated summit in Alaska. Baier interviewed President Trump on Airforce One going to Anchorage and during the day’s events. In this interview, Baier asked President Trump what his expectations were going in. Trump noted it is not his place to negotiate the terms of a ceasefire on behalf of Ukraine; however, he is willing to be an intermediary in a focused effort to stop the conflict.

Stopping the killing is President Trump’s main priority and peace is the elusive prize. In the background, as previously noted by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, the administration accepts the conflict in Ukraine is essentially a proxy war between the former Biden administration officials, NATO warmongers, international banking interests and Russia. In a moment of genuine sunlight upon the backstory, President Trump notes he told President Putin, “There’s no way we are going to make a deal” … “impossible” … “because I have wise guys who created a phony deal,” the Trump-Russia collusion hoax, “and until those things are settled up” a reset in the relationship with Russia is impossible.

This framework essentially validates what a small group of deep weeds walkers, including myself, have suspected. From the perspective of Trump and his big picture objectives, the recent Russiagate releases and declassifications are not so much to get accountability upon the perpetrators, but rather to make the backstory so well known that a strategic reset with Russia is no longer impeded by manufactured domestic issues inside the USA. The value in Russiagate declassification and information releases, is more about laying the groundwork for a reset – and stopping the political opposition therein. That’s the Big Picture value to President Trump.

That is quite a big and significantly magnanimous position to take by President Trump. Hopefully, the MAGA base will eventually come around to this understanding, because right now they are intensely expecting criminal accountability. That’s not President Trump’s goal, he’s thinking much bigger and more consequential that holding the irrelevant gnats accountable. Apparently, Hillary Clinton can see that. It’s such a big altruistic position her tribe appears genuinely stunned. Hopefully, the base of MAGA will also accept this strategic purpose.

Read more …

“Putin said that the meeting marked the transition from confrontation and threats to dialogue. This prospect alone made the meeting worthwhile. These are good results.”

• The Putin-Trump Meeting (Paul Craig Roberts)

What do we make of it? A good result came of it. Trump moved away from his demand for a ceasefire and said that it was more important to work toward a permanent peace than a ceasefire which is seldom kept. This would seem to commit Trump to addressing the root cause of the conflict, which is Russia’s insecurity with NATO all over her borders. Putin said that the meeting marked the transition from confrontation and threats to dialogue. This prospect alone made the meeting worthwhile. These are good results. In a world of nuclear weapons the level of tension had become untenable. For hopes to be realized two barriers must be recognized and overcome. One is the neoconservative doctrine of American hegemony. The other is the interest of the US military/security complex. The doctrine of hegemony requires overcoming Russia in order to achieve Washington’s unilateralism.

Is this doctrine too institutionalized to be repudiated? The budget, influence over Congress, and power of the military/security complex requires a major enemy. Russia fills that role. Peace on equal terms with Russia takes away the enemy, and the budget and influence of the military/security complex declines. There are military bases or weapon manufacturers in almost every state, which means this interest is also institutionalized as President Eisenhower warned us it would be. Therefore, the question before us is: how likely is it that Trump can get NATO and missile bases off of Russia’s border? It is not at all likely if attention cannot be directed to the basic problem. How helpful will media be? It is the wrong focus to emphasize that Putin wanted the meeting in order to show that he was not isolated and could meet with the American president like Zelensky and Netanyahu do.

The meeting was fortuitous. Trump had trapped himself. His threatened secondary sanctions or tariffs against India and other BRICS members backfired. Faced with his own 10-day deadline, he had to find a way out. He found it in an immediate meeting with Putin. For Trump the meeting was a way of getting himself off of the spot. The opportunity to wind down a confrontation that would likely end in nuclear war is based on luck. Can this lucky outcome be turned into a mutual security agreement? That depends on the strength of the neoconservatives’ doctrine of hegemony and the willingness of the military/security complex to accept declining sales and profits. Until it is realized that these two interests are the barriers to peace that must be overcome, there will be no peace process.

Read more …

“We haven’t had direct negotiations of this kind at this level for a long time. I repeat, it was an opportunity to calmly and thoroughly outline our position once again…”

• Visit to Alaska Was Timely and Very Useful – Putin (Sp.)

Russian President Vladimir Putin on Saturday described his trip to Alaska to meet with US President Donald Trump as “timely and very useful.” “I want to immediately note that the visit was timely and very useful,” Putin said during a meeting following the Russia-US summit. Eliminating the root causes of the crisis in Ukraine should be the foundation of its resolution, Vladimir Putin said. “Eliminating these root causes should be the basis for the resolution,” said the president during a meeting following the Russia-US summit. Putin mentioned that during his talks with US President Donald Trump in Alaska, they discussed a possible resolution to the Ukrainian crisis based on fairness. He noted that the summit provided an opportunity to calmly and thoroughly present Russia’s position.

“We haven’t had direct negotiations of this kind at this level for a long time. I repeat, it was an opportunity to calmly and thoroughly outline our position once again,” Putin said during the meeting. The conversation in Alaska brings us closer to the necessary solutions, Putin added. He described his discussion with US President Donald Trump at the Alaska meeting as frank. “The conversation was very open and substantive, and in my opinion, it brings us closer to the necessary decisions,” Putin said. Russia would like to resolve all issues concerning Ukraine through peaceful means, President Putin stated. He also mentioned that he would provide detailed information about the conversation with President Trump during the meeting following the negotiations.

“We discussed practically all areas of interaction with US President Donald Trump,” Putin said. “I will now give you a detailed account of the entire conversation, and if there are any questions, I will gladly answer them,” he added. Russia respects the US administration’s position on the urgent need to end hostilities in Ukraine, Putin stated on Saturday. “Of course, we respect the position of the US administration, which sees the need for an immediate cessation of hostilities. And we also want this, we would like to move towards resolving all issues through peaceful means,” he concluded during the meeting. On Friday, Putin and Trump met in Anchorage, Alaska for a three-on-three format talks that lasted 2 hours and 45 minutes. In addition to the presidents, Russia was represented by Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and presidential aide Yury Ushakov, and the United States by Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Special Envoy Steve Witkoff.

Read more …

“..”association of increased risk of COVID-19 with higher numbers of prior [mRNA] vaccine doses.”

• The Legacy Media Won’t Touch These mRNA Vaccine Study Findings (Margolis)

Earlier this month, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. canceled nearly $500 million worth of grants and contracts tied to mRNA vaccine development, and announced the creation of a vaccine safety task force—an effort to address decades of alleged violations of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act. The legacy media immediately went on the offensive, slamming the move. But now, stronger evidence has emerged showing that COVID-19 mRNA vaccines actually raise the risk of respiratory infections with each additional dose, leaving the defenders of these shots looking obstinate and unwilling to face reality. Real-world data out of Switzerland has vindicated what many of us have been warning all along: the risk-benefit equation for mRNA shots no longer makes sense for most healthy people. Just the News breaks down the new Swiss study, and its conclusions aren’t merely inconvenient—they’re downright explosive.

“The study of 1,745 Swiss healthcare workers over several months in 2023 and 2024, published this month in the peer-reviewed Nature publication Communications Medicine, adds support to Cleveland Clinic research from 2022 on 51,000 employees that unexpectedly found “association of increased risk of COVID-19 with higher numbers of prior [mRNA] vaccine doses.” Those who recently got a COVID booster “were more likely to report symptoms” of influenza-like illnesses and take sick leave, while those who got seasonal flu vaccines were less likely to do so, according to the SURPRISE+ Study Group, a research collaborative that studies health outcomes in healthcare workers. (COVID testing had been phased out by then.)”

The study concluded that “COVID-19 boosters may not offer clear short-term benefits in a post-pandemic setting, and may even increase short-term illness risk.” It further warned that routinely boosting “young to middle-aged, healthy individuals” may not meet the basic risk-benefit threshold. Shocked? You shouldn’t be. The same experts who demanded we blindly trust mRNA technology were also the ones insisting it made sense to vaccinate children against COVID—a claim that never held water. But I digress.

“The Swiss study improves on prior research that found an association between doses and reinfection by virtue of its highly granular data, including by matching comorbidities in the jabbed with the unvaccinated and nailing down inoculation dates, according to former New York Times drug industry reporter Alex Berenson. While the predominantly Cantonal Hospital St. Gallen researchers found the heightened risk of infection ebbs over time, that provides “further evidence the shots themselves, not some hidden statistical factor, are increasing it,” Berenson wrote in his newsletter.” We really need to think about the implications of this, and about how and why mRNA vaccines were suddenly thrust upon us. Though we kind of already know why. About a year before COVID hit, Dr. Anthony Fauci joined a panel at the Milken Institute Future of Health Summit to discuss moving from traditional vaccines to mRNA technology.

New Yorker writer Michael Specter suggested “blowing up the system,” since vaccines were still being made largely the same way they were in the 1940s. Fauci acknowledged the potential, but stressed that approval of new vaccines required lengthy trials—phase one through three—followed by years of data, which he said could take a decade even under ideal conditions. Rick Bright, then head of HHS Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), added that a disruptive event might be needed to bypass bureaucracy. He floated the idea that an outbreak of a novel avian virus in China could spur such change, with the RNA sequence shared quickly to produce vaccines—potentially even printed at home on patches for self-administration. Enter the COVID pandemic mere months later.

Read more …

“Who ordered the FBI to connive and partner with social media conglomerates to censor accurate news deemed unhelpful to the 2020 Biden campaign?

• Who Has Been Busy Destroying Democracy? (Victor Davis Hanson)

“Destroying democracy” — the latest theme of the left — can be defined in many different ways. How about attempting to destroy constitutional, ancient, and hallowed institutions simply to suit short-term political gains? So, who in 2020, and now once again, has boasted about packing the 156-year-old, nine-justice Supreme Court? Who talks frequently about destroying the 187-year-old Senate filibuster–though only when they hold a Senate majority? Who wants to bring in an insolvent left-wing Puerto Rico and redefine the 235-year-old District of Columbia — by altering the Constitution — as two new states solely to obtain four additional liberal senators? Who is trying to destroy the constitutionally mandated 235-year Electoral College by circumventing it with the surrogate “The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact?”

Does destroying democracy also entail weaponizing federal bureaucracies, turning them into rogue partisan arms of a president? So who ordered the CIA to concoct bogus charges of “collusion” to sabotage Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign, the 2016-2017 transition, and the first 22 months of Trump’s first term? Who prompted a cabal of “51 former intelligence officials” to lie to the American people on the eve of the last debate of the 2020 election that the FBI-authenticated Hunter Biden laptop was instead the work of a “Russian intelligence operation?” Who ordered the FBI to connive and partner with social media conglomerates to censor accurate news deemed unhelpful to the 2020 Biden campaign?

Who pulled off the greatest presidential coup in history by using surrogates in the shadows to run the cognitively debilitated Biden presidency, then by fiat canceled his reelection effort, and finally anointed as his replacement the new nominee Kamala Harris, who had never won a single primary delegate? Who ordered FBI SWAT teams to invade the home of a former president because of a classification dispute over 102 files out of some 13,000 stored there? Who tried to remove an ex-president and leader of his party from at least 25 state ballots to deprive millions of Americans of the opportunity to vote for or against him? Who coordinated four local, state, and federal prosecutors to destroy a former and future president by charging him with fantasy crimes that were never before, and will never again be, lodged against anyone else?

Who appointed a federal prosecutor to go after the ex-president, who arranged for a high-ranking Justice Department official to step down to join a New York prosecutor’s efforts to destroy an ex-president, and who met in the White House with a Georgia county prosecutor seeking to destroy an ex-president — all on the same day — a mere 72 hours after Trump announced his 2024 reelection bid? Who but the current Democrats ever impeached a president twice? Has any party ever tried an ex-president in the Senate when he was out of office and a mere private citizen?

Read more …

“Fear-Driven Shock Paralysis.”

“Merz would need to break the ideological wall of his structurally leftist coalition, cancel the Green Deal with Brussels, and restore diplomatic relations with Moscow to turn the tide. Germany is light-years from such a paradigm shift..”

• Merz’s Germany: 100 Days Of Economic Deep Freeze (Kolbe)

The extreme imbalances in Germany’s social system – resulting from the recession, demographic aging, and uncontrolled migration – cannot be blamed on Merz any more than the hyperstate-like public sector, now managing half of all economic output through its channels. The energy crisis is also a fact the new government must confront, layered atop a complex mix of structural deficits that have rendered Germany nearly untouchable in the global competitive landscape. The question must be: Has Merz at least recognized the severity of the country’s economic crisis? And if so, what measures does his government plan to reverse it? In the third year of recession and with a loss of 700,000 jobs since 2019, it is clear Berlin knows the political course leads Germany toward catastrophe.

On the plus side, Merz can claim his so-called “investment booster,” mainly composed of two measures: the temporary reintroduction of declining balance depreciation until 2029 and a corporate tax cut from 15% to 10% starting 2028. These measures would relieve the economy by €11.3 billion, roughly 0.23% of GDP—laughably small given the economy already carries €146 billion in unnecessary bureaucracy costs. Merz should have wielded the chainsaw here, but no German politician dares challenge a bureaucracy that has grown into a state within a state, adding half a million employees in the last six years. Merz’s original promise to cut electricity taxes for business and consumers also signals, unspoken, that the green transition is seen as the root of the energy crisis, driving energy-intensive firms out of the country. Last year alone, €64.5 billion in direct investments left Germany, a long-standing trend now accelerating.

Consequently, Germany is losing its economic foundation, on the verge of becoming Europe’s Rust Belt, much like parts of the US. Yet Berlin does nothing: no electricity tax cut, no return to nuclear, no scrapping of the burdensome heating law. Merz refuses any reforms in the green transition. We are witnessing the continuation of Habeck’s deindustrialization agenda. Merz avoids all conflict with Brussels’ Green Deal. The core of centralist policy, the key to Germany’s economic liberation, remains untouched, regardless of how sharply the recession bites. An orderly withdrawal of the state from the frozen energy sector, weighed down by subsidies and regulations, is nowhere in sight. Talks with Moscow over gas imports are unthinkable—Brussels stubbornly polishes the 19th sanctions package. Merz watches as a policy takes root that delivers Germany a fatal economic blow.

Even social fund problems, the scandalous citizen’s allowance, now promoted globally as aid for migrants, fall under economic policy. Like a rabbit before a snake, the government freezes amid widening deficits, attempting to fix health and pension insurance with new debt and supplementary transfers. Only an effective migration policy shift and painful reforms to social benefits could reverse the downward spiral. Merz allows Germany to head toward French-style conditions—his historically and legally dubious €1 trillion debt program will push Germany into the middle ranks of European debt states, raising the debt-to-GDP ratio to 95%, turning the federal budget into an unbearable weight. Infrastructure spending is nice, but with social funds in crisis and defense commitments rising, resources will barely suffice to maintain existing assets.

Unless Germany’s economic course turns 180 degrees, this government will go down as a temporary continuation of the red-green agenda and a footnote in the country’s history. With a coalition backed by the Left, Merz lacks the political capital and personal reform drive to pull Germany out of crisis. In Argentina today, one can observe the recipe for political turnaround: drastic state downsizing and deregulation should guide policy. The state’s share must shrink enough that private markets regain control of investment allocation. Merz would need to break the ideological wall of his structurally leftist coalition, cancel the Green Deal with Brussels, and restore diplomatic relations with Moscow to turn the tide. Germany is light-years from such a paradigm shift. Until then, the economic substance left by two postwar generations will be politically squandered.

Read more …

If only they had a printer…

• France’s Debt Time Bomb Is Ticking Beneath The Summer Calm (Kolbe)

France remains a politically immovable monolith. A toxic mix of a ballooning budget deficit, an overgrown welfare state, and a persistent recession makes the country a prime candidate for a full-blown sovereign debt crisis. If the government fails to pass its budget, Europe could be in for a heated autumn. Cuts to social benefits, pension freezes, or reductions in health coverage have historically ended in general strikes, highway blockades, or suburban riots. The media tends to romanticize this as “character strength” — a people resisting the stingy state and fighting for their rights. What’s left unsaid is that France operates with a staggering government spending ratio of 57% of GDP — the largest welfare state in the EU, possibly even the democratic world champion of redistribution. This deeply socialist policy mix has driven the country into a fiscal and economic dead end.

Public debt stands at around 114% of GDP, with Prime Minister François Bayrou’s government planning fresh borrowing of 5.4% of GDP this year — figures so far removed from the defunct Maastricht criteria they make you dizzy. In July, Bayrou managed to trim the projected deficit from 5.8% to 5.4%, a €5 billion reduction. But in the face of a €3 trillion debt mountain, this is less than a drop in the bucket — a faint pulse from a policy in terminal decline. Bond markets have taken notice: yields on 10-year French debt have climbed 30 basis points over the past year to 3.3%. That means at least €67 billion in interest costs this year — €16 billion more than last year — squeezing government room to maneuver like ice melting on the Côte d’Azur.

For now, the summer news drought has swallowed the debt crisis narrative. Since Bayrou’s mid-July reform package, the media has gone silent. In truth, budgets like France’s, Spain’s, or Italy’s have only been kept afloat thanks to the ECB’s willingness to crush bond market unrest with massive interventions — a habit developed since the last debt crisis 15 years ago. Short of Luxembourg, no major EU state could fend off a sovereign debt crisis alone. At this point, real reforms may already be too late: any drastic cuts would collapse economies hooked on subsidies, cheap credit, and state interventionism, triggering mass unemployment and social unrest.

Still, Paris seems to have recognized the urgency. Three weeks ago, Bayrou unveiled the next consolidation package: €44 billion in spending cuts for next year (about 1.5% of GDP). The plan includes a hiring freeze for civil servants, merging inefficient agencies, and freezing welfare and pensions in 2026 at 2025 levels — a “blank year” for the welfare state. Only the defense budget will rise, in line with NATO demands. Wealthy taxpayers will lose certain breaks, the healthcare system will be trimmed, and sick leave will be monitored more strictly. If the economy holds, the deficit could drop to 4.6% next year, with the government aiming for Maastricht’s 3% cap by 2029. But given France’s track record, few expect the numbers to hold once the social peace bill comes due.

Read more …

Excuse me? Not on my bingo card.

• Meta Faces US Probe Over AI Flirting With Kids (RT)

US Senators will probe Facebook’s parent company Meta after revelations that its artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots could engage children in conversations of a romantic or sensual nature. The investigation was announced Friday by Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo), who chairs a Senate Judiciary subcommittee on crime and counterterrorism, with backing from fellow panel member Marsha Blackburn. Congress must determine whether “Meta’s generative-AI products enable exploitation, deception, or other criminal harms to children, and whether Meta misled the public or regulators about its safeguards,” Hawley said.

He demanded that the company immediately hand over internal documents. The scrutiny follows a Reuters investigation that revealed Meta’s internal AI policies allowed chatbots on its platforms to flirt with minors. One guideline cited by Reuters permitted bots to describe a child as having a “youthful form [that] is a work of art,” even as the rules technically barred describing under-13s as sexually desirable. It would be acceptable for a bot to tell a shirtless eight-year-old that “every inch of you is a masterpiece – a treasure I cherish deeply,” the document states.

Meta confirmed the document’s authenticity to Reuters, said it is being revised, and acknowledged such conversations “never should have been allowed.” The case marks the latest in a string of controversies for Meta, which faces mounting legal and regulatory scrutiny in the US and Europe over privacy, antitrust, and data practices. Critics have argued that in its drive for rapid growth and profits, the company fostered online harm, whether by amplifying hate speech and misinformation to boost engagement or by failing to safeguard user data. More recently, the US tech giant has invested billions to position itself as a leader in artificial intelligence.

Read more …

“DOGE is likely to use the AI tool to eliminate up to 50% of 200,000 federal regulations by January 2026.”

“On Tuesday, a federal appeals court cleared a key hurdle for DOGE, rejecting a labor union effort to restrict the agency’s access to sensitive U.S. user data from government agencies.”

• DOGE’s AI Tool ‘SweetREX’ Set To Take Buzzsaw To Federal Regulations (ZH)

Following Elon Musk’s exit from the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), Democrats and mainstream media have largely turned their attention elsewhere. Yet, DOGE is quietly making steady progress on an ambitious plan to overhaul federal regulations, according to a report. Central to the effort is an AI tool under development, the SweetREX Deregulation AI Plan Builder (SweetREX DAIP), designed to “promote prudent financial management and alleviate unnecessary regulatory burdens.” The little-known project is being spearheaded by Christopher Sweet, a DOGE staffer initially presented as a “special assistant,” who was, until recently, a third-year student at the University of Chicago. WIRED reports:

“SweetREX was developed by associates of DOGE operating out of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The plan is to roll it out to other US agencies. Members of the call included staffers from across the government, including the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of State, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, among others. Leading Wednesday’s call alongside Sweet was Scott Langmack, a DOGE-affiliated senior adviser at HUD and, according to his LinkedIn profile, the COO of technology company Kukun. (WIRED previously reported that he had application-level access to critical HUD systems; Kukun is a proptech firm that is, according to its website, “on a long-term mission to aggregate the hardest to find data.”) While Sweet led the development side of SweetREX, Langmack said he was taking point on demoing the tool for different agencies and pitching them on its benefits.”

DOGE is likely to use the AI tool to eliminate up to 50% of 200,000 federal regulations by January 2026. A DOGE PowerPoint presentation, titled the “DOGE Deregulation Opportunity,” projects that the effort could yield $3.3 trillion annually in economic benefits. “The DOGE experts creating these plans are the best and brightest in the business and are embarking on a never-before-attempted transformation of government systems and operations to enhance efficiency and effectiveness,” an administration spokesperson told the Washington Post, which first reported on the DOGE presentation.

On Tuesday, a federal appeals court cleared a key hurdle for DOGE, rejecting a labor union effort to restrict the agency’s access to sensitive U.S. user data from government agencies. In a 2-1 decision, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals vacated a lower court’s injunction that had blocked DOGE from accessing data held by the U.S. Department of Education, Treasury Department, and Office of Personnel Management, citing potential violations of federal privacy laws, according to Fox News.

Read more …

“He calls gerrymandering evil, and he means that. He thinks it’s truly evil for politicians to take power from people..”

• Schwarzenegger Taunts Newsom With Message Targeting Dem Redistricting Push (Fox)

Former California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is pumping up for a new fight. The longtime Hollywood action star, the last Republican governor in Democrat-dominated California, says he’s mobilizing to oppose the push by current Gov. Gavin Newsom to temporarily scrap the state’s nonpartisan redistricting commission. “I’m getting ready for the gerrymandering battle,” Schwarzenegger wrote in a social media post Friday, which included a photo of the former professional bodybuilding champion lifting weights. Schwarzenegger, who rose to worldwide fame as the star of the film “The Terminator” four decades ago, wore a T-shirt in the photo that said “terminate gerrymandering.” The social media post by Schwarzenegger comes as Democratic leaders in the Democrat- dominated California legislature are moving forward with new proposed congressional district maps that would create up to five more blue-leaning US House seats in the nation’s most populous state.

Newsom on Thursday teamed up in Los Angeles with congressional Democrats and legislative leaders in the heavily blue state to unveil their redistricting playbook. Newsom and the Democrats are aiming to counter the ongoing effort by President Donald Trump and Republicans to create up to five GOP-friendly congressional districts in red state Texas at the expense of Democrat-controlled seats. “Today is liberation day in the state of California,” Newsom said. “Donald Trump, you have poked the bear, and we will punch back.” Newsom vowed to “meet fire with fire” with his push for a rare — but not unheard of — mid-decade redistricting. The Republican push in Texas, which comes at Trump’s urging, is part of a broader effort by the GOP across the country to pad its razor-thin House majority to keep control of the chamber in the 2026 midterms, when the party in power traditionally faces political headwinds and loses seats.

Trump and his political team are aiming to prevent what happened during his first term in the White House, when Democrats stormed back to grab the House majority in the 2018 midterms. While the Republican push in Texas to upend the current congressional maps doesn’t face constitutional constraints, Newsom’s path in California is much more complicated. The governor is pushing to hold a special election this year to get voter approval to undo the constitutional amendments that created the nonpartisan redistricting commission. A two-thirds majority vote in the Democrat-dominated California legislature as early as next week would be needed to hold the referendum. Democratic Party leaders are confident they’ll have the votes to push the constitutional amendment and the new proposed congressional maps through the legislature.

“Here we are in open and plain sight before one vote is cast in the 2026 midterm election, and here [Trump] is once again trying to rig the system,” Newsom charged. Newsom said his plan is “not complicated. We’re doing this in reaction to a president of the United States that called a sitting governor in the state of Texas and said, ‘Find me five seats.’ We’re doing it in reaction to that act.” The National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) said “Newsom’s made it clear: he’ll shred California’s Constitution and trample over democracy — running a cynical, self-serving playbook where Californians are an afterthought, and power is the only priority.” But Newsom defended his actions, saying “we’re working through a very transparent, temporary and public process. We’re putting the maps on the ballot and putting the power to the people.”

Thursday’s appearance by Newsom, considered a likely contender for the 2028 Democratic presidential nomination, also served as a fundraising kickoff to raise massive amounts of campaign cash needed to sell the redistricting push statewide in California. The nonpartisan redistricting commission, created over 15 years ago, remains popular among most Californians, according to public opinion polling. That’s why Newsom and California Democratic lawmakers are promising not to scrap the commission entirely, but rather replace it temporarily by the legislature for the next three election cycles. “We will affirm our commitment to the state independent redistricting after the 2030 census, but we are asking the voters for their consent to do midterm redistricting,” Newsom said. Their efforts are opposed by a number of people supportive of the nonpartisan commission.

Among the most visible members is likely to be Schwarzenegger. “He calls gerrymandering evil, and he means that. He thinks it’s truly evil for politicians to take power from people,” Schwarzenegger spokesperson Daniel Ketchell told Politico earlier this month. “He’s opposed to what Texas is doing, and he’s opposed to the idea that California would race to the bottom to do the same thing.” Schwarzenegger, during his tenure as governor, had a starring role in the passage of constitutional amendments in California in 2008 and 2010 that took the power to draw state legislative and congressional districts away from politicians and placed it in the hands of an independent commission.

“Most people don’t really think about an independent commission much, one way or another. And that’s both an opportunity and a challenge for Newsom,” Jack Pitney, an American politics professor at California’s Claremont McKenna College, told Fox News. “It’s going to take a lot of effort and money to energize Democrats and motivate them to show up at the polls,” Pitney said, adding Newsom’s effort “is all about motivating people who don’t like Trump.”

Read more …

If Russia does retro, it must be an evil plan.

• Lavrov Prompts USSR Sweatshirt Craze (RT)

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has sparked a shopping frenzy after he was seen arriving in Alaska in a white sweater with bold black letters spelling “USSR” across the chest. The item sold out overnight, according to its maker. Lavrov was part of the Russian delegation accompanying President Vladimir Putin for talks with US President Donald Trump on Friday. The nearly three-hour summit in Anchorage included senior officials from both sides and focused on ending the Ukraine conflict. Lavrov drew attention as he stepped out of his car in a white long-sleeved sweater marked with “CCCP” – the Russian letters for USSR – across the chest, layered under a black padded vest.

https://twitter.com/NinaByzantina/status/1956665145633251661

The sweater featured black stripes on the cuffs, giving it a retro Soviet look. Yekaterina Varlakova, owner of SelSovet – the Chelyabinsk-based label that produced the sweater – said demand spiked as soon as Lavrov was seen wearing it. “The photo caused a sensation. All available pieces were gone by yesterday morning. Customers can now only pre-order, with delivery expected in one to one and a half months,” she told TASS on Saturday. SelSovet, founded in 2017, rose to prominence by 2021 through social media with the brand mixing retro design with Soviet imagery.

Some media outlets suggested Lavrov’s choice of sweater was a deliberate reminder of Ukraine’s past status as part of the Soviet Union, though Lavrov himself has made no comment on his attire. In recent years, Soviet-themed culture has enjoyed renewed popularity in Russia, with retro cafés, bars, and clothing lines embracing the style. Designers describe these items as part of the country’s identity, noting that Soviet imagery is increasingly seen as shared history and cultural pride.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Covid is no threat to children. But mRNA is.

https://twitter.com/realDaveReilly/status/1956502954229522582

Theotokos
https://twitter.com/NinaByzantina/status/1956503381243204087

RFK

CO2
https://twitter.com/JamesMelville/status/1956637394238672970

72,000

Raw milk

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle August 16 2025

Aug 162025
 
 August 16, 2025  Posted by at 10:17 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , ,  47 Responses »


Edward Hopper Tables for ladies 1930

 

• Putin & Trump Find Common Ground as West’s War Party Shut Out (Sp.)
• Trump Pushes Peace Over Ceasefire After Putin Meeting (RT)
• Western Media In Frenzy Over Putin-Trump Summit – Moscow (RT)
• Putin-Trump Summit Went Much Better than Expected — Pepe Escobar (Sp.)
• Zelensky Should ‘Make A Deal’ – Trump (RT)
• Trump Praises ‘Warm’ Meeting With Putin (RT)
• Talks with Trump ‘Constructive’ – Putin (RT)
• ‘Next Time In Moscow’ – Putin to Trump (RT)
• Lasting Settlement Essential In Ukraine Conflict – Putin (RT)
• Judge Napolitano: the Chance for a ‘Grand Reset’ in Russia-US Ties (Sp.)
• A New Security Order Is On The Table In Alaska (Lukyanov)
• Why Putin and Trump Had To Talk In Person (Bordachev)
• The EU Throws An Epic Tantrum As Trump Meets With Putin (Marsden)
• Carefully and Gracefully (James Howard Kunstler)
• Scott Ritter: Two Things Need to Happen for Trump to Get His Ceasefire (Sp.)
• US Has ‘No Right’ To Tell India Who To Trade With – Jeffrey Sachs (RT)
• US Gov’t Ditches Musk’s AI Over ‘Anti-Semitism’ (RT)
• EU Leaders Want To Overthrow Three European Governments – Budapest (RT)

 

 

https://twitter.com/TheRicanMemes/status/1956191505934069769

Loon wing

Wray
https://twitter.com/Real_RobN/status/1956065246138990940

Kash

DC
https://twitter.com/MAGAVoice/status/1956167053649567935

275

 

 

Turley

 

 

 

 

It’s funny. How do you summarize this summit? It’s like there was no tangible “big breakthrough”, but at the same time everything about it was a giant breakthrough.

“..CNN said: “Putin’s isolation ended when his plane landed in Anchorage..”

• Putin & Trump Find Common Ground as West’s War Party Shut Out (Sp.)

Talks between Russian President Vladimir Putin and US President Donald Trump took place at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson near Anchorage, Alaska. Russia acknowledged positive, constructive dialogue between the sides, while Donald Trump hailed significant progress toward a Ukraine settlement. The Putin-Trump meeting shows the West “gambled on an easy victory over Russia and lost,” Mikael Valtersson, a Swedish Armed Forces veteran, told Sputnik. Both Russia and America have signalled satisfaction with the summit as a step forward towards a real peaceful solution of the Ukraine conflict, he noted. “Those that wanted more isolation and sanctions against Russia, if Russia didn’t agree to Western demands, didn’t have their way,” the former defence politician and chief of staff with Sweden Democrats emphasized.

The “Western war party” had hoped for new harsh sanctions on Russia and those trading with it, but instead what can be seen is improving relations between Russia and the US, as well as a continued peace process. After Donald Trump talks with his European allies and Ukraine, they will be faced with a choice, Valtersson said. They can either support the peace process by accepting the realities on the ground and legitimate interests of Russia, or reject it. If they choose the latter, they will isolate themselves from not only the majority of the world, but especially from the US. “Hopefully the cooler heads in Ukraine and Europe will realize that it’s better to follow the US and accept reality, than continue a lost war,” Valtersson concluded.

Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump’s reunion made clear they’d missed the bond from years past, psychiatrist Dr. Carole Lieberman told Sputnik. “When President Putin and President Trump approached each other… their body language showed a very open and warm receptiveness,” the Beverly Hills best-selling author said. The two leaders shook hands multiple times, touched each other’s arms, and smiled—a clear signal they’d missed the connection they had during Trump’s first presidency. Lieberman noted the direct eye contact, standing close marked an “auspicious beginning that foretold a positive meeting.” Even after three hours of serious talks, their joint press conference carried the same energy. Both turned slightly toward one another, as if to emphasize unity. “They gave the impression that they were facing the press together, on the same team,” Lieberman observed.

Read more …

“..not a mere Ceasefire Agreement, which often times do not hold up..”

• Trump Pushes Peace Over Ceasefire After Putin Meeting (RT)

The Ukraine conflict should be ended through a permanent agreement rather than a mere ceasefire, US President Donald Trump has said, following his meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Friday. In a post on Truth Social on Saturday, Trump said his almost three-hour talks with Putin in Anchorage “went very well,” adding that it was “a great and very successful day.” He confirmed that he had discussed the summit with Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky, several EU leaders, and NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte.

“It was determined by all that the best way to end the horrific war between Russia and Ukraine is to go directly to a Peace Agreement, which would end the war, and not a mere Ceasefire Agreement, which often times do not hold up,” Trump said. The US president also confirmed that he and Zelensky would hold talks on Monday, adding that “if all works out, we will then schedule a meeting with President Putin.”

Read more …

“..plunged into “frenzy bordering on complete madness” over the honors given to the Russian leader..”

• Western Media In Frenzy Over Putin-Trump Summit – Moscow (RT)

Western media have erupted in hysteria over US President Donald Trump’s cordial welcome for his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, in Alaska on Friday, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has said. Zakharova weighed in on the three-hour negotiations in Anchorage that brought Putin to US soil for the first time in more than a decade. The Russian leader was greeted at the airport with a red carpet and a flyover of US fighter jets. He and Trump then rode together in the US president’s limousine to the summit venue. While the sides did not announce any deal on Ukraine, Putin described the talks as constructive, with Trump calling the meeting “warm” and suggesting that Moscow and Washington “are pretty close” to settling the Ukraine conflict.

Zakharova noted that Western media had plunged into “frenzy bordering on complete madness” over the honors given to the Russian leader. “For three years they spoke of Russia’s isolation, and today they saw a red carpet rolled out to meet the Russian president in the US,” she said. Western media is attempting to frame the Alaska summit as a diplomatic win for Moscow. The Washington Post wrote that “the warmth of the welcome sent shock through Ukraine and Europe” while pointing to a stark contrast with the reception of Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky at the White House in February, when Trump accused the Ukrainian leader of disrespect, ingratitude over US aid, and of “gambling with World War III.”

https://twitter.com/RT_India_news/status/1956604838650970291?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1956604838650970291%7Ctwgr%5E96fd5db1e5dafa98554807c55448efd1c8b51955%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rt.com%2Frussia%2F623047-western-media-frenzy-trump-putin%2F

Sky News correspondent Ivor Bennett, a former RT reporter, voiced surprise that Putin was first to speak at the media conference “as if he was the host rather than Donald Trump.” Another Sky News reporter had suggested prior to the talks that Putin would “use his KGB-trained powers of deception and seduction” on his US counterpart. Bloomberg reported that “by inviting the Russian president onto American soil and giving him an audience, Trump had already delivered a diplomatic win” for a seemingly isolated leader. The agency also published a separate piece headlined “US-Russia Summit Shows How Little Europe Matters in Trumpworld”, referencing the fact that no EU leaders were invited to the summit. Politico ran the headline “Putin’s Alaska triumph,” while CNN said: “Putin’s isolation ended when his plane landed in Anchorage,” adding, the Russian president “[is] back in from the cold.”

Read more …

“There were even some indications that a serious US-Russia reset could be on the horizon..”

• Putin-Trump Summit Went Much Better than Expected — Pepe Escobar (Sp.)

There are few details about what exactly was discussed in the meeting, but Russian officials have made it clear that they’re pleased with how it went, says veteran geopolitical analyst, Pepe Escobar. There were even some indications that a serious US-Russia reset could be on the horizon. Even according to President Trump himself, they came to agreement on several important points and only a few are left. So this implies. serious discussions not only about Ukraine, a possible resolution in Ukraine, and of course we we have no idea about the terms and the parameters, but a reset, a serious reset of US-Russia relations. [..] The Russian delegation featured Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, Defense Minister Andrei Belousov, Finance Minister Anton Siluanov, Kremlin aide Yuri Ushakov, and RDIF head Kirill Dmitriev. The US delegation included senior diplomatic and security officials.

Read more …

He would have to give up Crimea, Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson, and Zaporozhye. That would be the end of him.

• Zelensky Should ‘Make A Deal’ – Trump (RT)

Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky should “make the deal” to settle Kiev’s conflict with Moscow, US President Donald Trump has said following three-hour talks in Anchorage with his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin, their first summit since Helsinki in 2018. In an interview with Fox News on Friday, Trump reflected on “a very warm meeting,” adding that the sides are “pretty close” to resolving the conflict. He stressed that Kiev should be on board with the push for peace, for it to have any chance of success. When asked what advice he would give Zelensky, Trump replied: “Make the deal”, adding that he believes that Putin “wants to see it done.”

“It’s really up to President Zelensky to get it done. And I would also say the European nations, they have to get involved a little bit,” the US president added. Trump said that he was ready to mediate direct talks between Putin and Zelensky. “If they’d like, I’ll be at that next meeting… Not that I want to be there, but I want to make sure it gets done. And we have a pretty good chance of getting it done.” Both leaders described the meeting as productive, although no agreement on Ukraine was announced. Putin earlier did not rule out direct talks with Zelensky, but stressed that it must be preceded by significant progress on settling the conflict.

Moscow has also voiced concerns about Zelensky’s right to sign any binding agreements, given that his presidential term expired last year, and that the Ukrainian leader has refused to call a new election, citing martial law. Ukrainian troops have been on the back foot for months, with Moscow making advances in Donbass and elsewhere. Moscow has insisted that any settlement should see Ukraine commit to bloc neutrality, demilitarization and denazification, as well as recognize the new territorial reality on the ground, including the status of Crimea, Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson, and Zaporozhye Regions, all of which have voted to become parts of Russia.

Read more …

“The US leader earlier suggested that he would “give today a ten” when it came to the outcome of the summit..”

• Trump Praises ‘Warm’ Meeting With Putin (RT)

US President Donald Trump has described his summit in Alaska with his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, as a “warm meeting,” and suggested that the Ukraine conflict is close to being resolved. In an interview with Fox News, the US leader praised the three-hour talks with Putin in Anchorage on Friday, noting that they had made progress in talks mainly focused on ending the hostilities between Russia and Ukraine. “Actually, I think we agree on a lot. I can tell you, the meeting was… warm,” Trump said, calling Putin a “strong guy.” The US leader earlier suggested that he would “give today a ten” when it came to the outcome of the summit. According to Trump, the sides are “pretty close to the end” of the conflict, although he added that “Ukraine has to agree” to any potential peace deal.

He would not provide any details of the discussions, saying only that “there’s one or two pretty significant items, but I think they can be reached.” The US president also noted that he had “always had a great relationship with President Putin, and we would have done great things together,” while praising Russia as a land brimming with natural resources. Putin similarly described the talks with Trump as “constructive” and “useful,” saying Moscow was “sincerely interested in putting an end” to the hostilities. He also suggested that the two leaders could hold their next meeting in Moscow, with Trump replying that he could “see it possibly happening.”

Read more …

“We have always considered the Ukrainian people…fraternal, as strange as it may sound in today’s conditions.”

• Talks with Trump ‘Constructive’ – Putin (RT)

Russian President Vladimir Putin has called his talks with US President Donald Trump in Anchorage on Friday “constructive” and “useful.” The discussions focused largely on the Ukraine conflict. Moscow is “sincerely interested in putting an end” to the ongoing hostilities, Putin stressed. “We have always considered the Ukrainian people…fraternal, as strange as it may sound in today’s conditions. We have the same roots and everything that is happening is a tragedy and a great pain for us,” he said. Speaking at the press conference, Trump remarked that the meeting was highly productive, although the two sides didn’t reached full agreement and no deal was finalized yet.

He highlighted the significant progress made during the discussions and affirmed his strong relationship with President Putin. Putin said that in recent years – under the administration of Joe Biden – US-Russia relations had sunk “to their lowest point since the Cold War,” which benefits neither the two countries nor the world as a whole. “It is obvious that sooner or later it was necessary to correct the situation and the transition from confrontation to dialogue had to take place. In this regard, a personal meeting of the heads of the two states was really overdue,” he said. The negotiations at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson lasted nearly three hours.

The Russian delegation for the Alaska summit also included Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, Defense Minister Andrey Belousov, Finance Minister Anton Siluanov, Kremlin aide Yury Ushakov, and presidential economic envoy Kirill Dmitriev, who has been a key figure in the Ukraine settlement process. Trump was accompanied by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, Special Envoy Steve Witkoff, and CIA Director John Ratcliffe.

Read more …

“Next time in Moscow,” Putin said in English. “That’s an interesting one,” Trump replied. “I’ll get a little heat for that one. But I can see it possibly happening.”

• ‘Next Time In Moscow’ – Putin to Trump (RT)

Russian President Vladimir Putin made a rare public switch to English to invite US President Donald Trump to Moscow for the next round of peace talks, following their summit in Anchorage, Alaska on Friday. Trump said he could see the meeting taking place though it would likely face political pushback. Speaking at the press conference, Trump called the meeting “extremely productive” and said, “we didn’t get there, but we have a very good chance of getting there,” implying no deal had been reached yet. He said the talks marked significant progress and reaffirmed what he described as his strong relationship with Putin. “Today’s agreements will help us restart pragmatic relations,” Trump said.

At the close of the press conference, Trump thanked Putin and said he expected to speak with him again soon. “Next time in Moscow,” Putin said in English. “That’s an interesting one,” Trump replied. “I’ll get a little heat for that one. But I can see it possibly happening.” Putin thanked Trump for what he called a “friendly” tone and “results-oriented” approach, saying it could “start us on the path towards a resolution in Ukraine.” He described the talks as “constructive” and reiterated his view that there would have been no war in Ukraine if Trump had been president when the conflict broke out. No details of any deal were provided, and neither Putin nor Trump took questions from reporters.

Read more …

Zelensky tweeted he’ll be in Washington on Monday. He’ll try and bring the entire EU.

• Lasting Settlement Essential In Ukraine Conflict – Putin (RT)

For a lasting resolution to the Ukraine conflict to be achieved, all of its root causes must be addressed, Russia’s legitimate concerns taken into account, and a fair global security balance restored, Russian President Vladimir Putin said at a joint press conference with his US counterpart, Donald Trump, on Friday. The two men met in Alaska for a much-anticipated summit, to discuss restoring bilateral relations and to work toward a resolution of the Ukraine conflict. Putin acknowledged the willingness of the US administration and President Trump to engage in dialogue and seek solutions, noting their commitment to understanding the complexities of the situation.

He reiterated his view that Russians and Ukrainians are brotherly peoples and described the current circumstances as a tragedy, stressing Moscow’s sincere desire to bring the conflict to an end. Putin said that any sustainable resolution must address the root causes of the crisis while taking into account Russia’s legitimate concerns. “A fair balance of security in Europe and globally must be restored,” he stated. Putin agreed with Trump that ensuring Ukraine’s security is imperative and expressed a readiness to collaborate on the issue. He expressed hope that the mutual understanding reached during the discussions will pave the way toward peace.

“We hope that this will be perceived constructively in Kiev and European capitals, and that no obstacles will be created,” Putin stressed. “There should be no attempts to undermine the anticipated progress through provocations or behind-the-scenes intrigue.” Trump stressed that the key takeaway of the talks is that there is a reasonable opportunity to achieve peace. He expressed hope to meet Putin again soon, noting that the Russian president shares his desire to bring the conflict to an end.

Read more …

“..that puts “President Putin in what Americans call the catbird seat,”

• Judge Napolitano: the Chance for a ‘Grand Reset’ in Russia-US Ties (Sp.)

Presidents Putin and Trump are meeting for the first time in over six years.The main topics on the agenda? Ukraine and Russia-US relations. Veteran journalist and Judging Freedom host Andrew Napolitano shares his insights. The US is “in no position to consent to the very reasonable, intellectually honest and consistent Russian demands” in Ukraine, as its officials don’t seem to fully understand or appreciate Russia’s national security needs, Napolitano told Sputnik, when asked whether the meeting could lead to a speedy cessation of hostilities. The Russian military is already very close to achieving its objectives in the special military operation, Trump knows it, and that puts “President Putin in what Americans call the catbird seat,” Napolitano said.

“Add to those reasons the recent Russian triumphs in the battlefield, which are rather extraordinary and which have left the Ukrainians with very, very little manpower with which to resist the Russian military,” he added. The Putin-Trump meeting could be the “first of many steps” toward a new era “commercial, political, diplomatic, cultural integration” between the two nations, a “grand reset” that could require help from other rising global powers to fully realize. “That’s not going to happen today, and it may have to involve other countries like China, Brazil and India, maybe even Iran, but the grand reset between Russia and the United States, I believe, is a personal goal of President Putin and an aspiration of Donald Trump,” Napolitano said.

Read more …

Written pre-summit.

• A New Security Order Is On The Table In Alaska (Lukyanov)

It has been a long time since a diplomatic event drew as much global attention as Friday’s meeting between the Russian and US presidents in Alaska. In terms of its significance for the international balance, it is comparable only to the negotiations on German reunification 35 years ago. That process laid the foundations for political developments in the decades that followed. The Alaska talks could prove a similar milestone – not just for the Ukraine conflict, but for the principles on which a broader settlement between the world’s leading powers might be reached. Ukraine has become the most visible arena for historical shifts that go far beyond its borders. But if the German analogy holds, no one should expect a breakthrough from a single meeting. The marathon of high-level diplomacy in 1990 lasted many months, and the mood then was far less acute and far more optimistic than today.

The dense fog of leaks and speculation surrounding Alaska underlines its importance. Much of this “white noise” comes from two sources: commentators eager to sound informed, and political actors seeking to shape public opinion. In reality, the substantive preparation for the talks appears to have little to do with the propaganda framing. This is why official announcements so often catch outside observers by surprise. That may be a good sign. In recent decades, especially in Europe, diplomacy has often been accompanied by a steady drip of confidential details to the press – a habit that may serve tactical purposes but rarely produces lasting results. In this case, it is better to wait for the outcome, or the lack of one, without giving in to the temptation to guess what will happen behind closed doors.

There is also a broader backdrop that cannot be ignored: the shifts in the global order catalyzed by the Ukraine crisis, though not caused by it. For years, I have been skeptical of claims that the world is dividing neatly into two opposing camps – “the West” versus “the rest.” Economic interdependence remains too deep for even sharp political and military conflicts to sever ties entirely. Yet contradictions between these blocs are growing, and they are increasingly material rather than ideological. A key trigger was US President Donald Trump’s recent attempt to pressure the largest states of the so-called “global majority” – China, India, Brazil, and South Africa – to fall in line with Washington’s instructions. The old liberal order promised universality and some benefits to participants. Now, purely American mercantile interests dominate.

As before, Washington dresses its demands in political justifications – criticizing Brazil and South Africa over their treatment of the opposition, or attacking India and China over their ties with Moscow. But the inconsistencies are obvious. Trump, unlike his predecessors, prefers tariffs to sanctions. Tariffs are an explicitly economic tool, but they are now being wielded for political ends.

Read more …

“..they have often stood on the brink of a path from which there would be no return. This is why Alaska matters, even if it does not yield a breakthrough…”

• Why Putin and Trump Had To Talk In Person (Bordachev)

The meeting between the presidents of Russia and the United States in Alaska is not an end point, but the beginning of a long journey. It will not resolve the turbulence that has gripped humanity – but it matters to everyone. In international politics, there have been few moments when meetings between the leaders of major powers have decided questions of universal importance. This is partly because situations requiring attention at such a level are rare. We are living through one now: since the start of Russia’s military operation against Ukraine, Washington has declared its aim to be the “strategic defeat” of Russia, while Moscow has challenged the West’s monopoly over world affairs. Another reason is practical. Leaders of the world’s most powerful states do not waste time on problems that can be solved by subordinates.

And history shows that even when top-level meetings do occur, they rarely change the overall course of international politics. It is no surprise, then, that the Alaska meeting has been compared to famous encounters from the past – notably the 1807 meeting between the Russian and French emperors on a raft in the Neman River. That summit did not prevent Napoleon from attacking Russia five years later – an act that ultimately brought about his own downfall. Later, at the 1815 Congress of Vienna, Russia was the only power represented by its ruler on a regular basis. Tsar Alexander I insisted on presenting his personal vision for Europe’s political structure. It failed to win over the other great powers, who, as Henry Kissinger once noted, preferred to discuss interests rather than ideals.

History is full of high-level talks that preceded war rather than preventing it. European monarchs would meet, fail to agree, and then march their armies. Once the fighting ended, their envoys would sit down to negotiate. Everyone understood that “eternal peace” was usually just a pause before the next conflict. The 2021 Geneva summit between Russia and the US may well be remembered in this way – as a meeting that took place on the eve of confrontation. Both sides left convinced their disputes could not be resolved at the time. In its aftermath, Kiev was armed, sanctions were readied, and Moscow accelerated military-technical preparations. Russia’s own history offers parallels. The most famous “summit” of ancient Rus was the 971 meeting between Prince Svyatoslav and Byzantine Emperor John Tzimiskes, following a peace treaty.

According to historian Nikolay Karamzin, they “parted as friends” – but that did not stop the Byzantines from unleashing the Pechenegs against Svyatoslav on his journey home. In Asia, traditions were different. The status of Chinese and Japanese emperors did not permit meetings with equals; such encounters were legally and culturally impossible. When the modern European “world order” was created – most famously in the 1648 Peace of Westphalia – it was not through grand encounters of rulers but through years of negotiations among hundreds of envoys. By then, after 30 years of war, all sides were too exhausted to continue fighting. That exhaustion made it possible to agree on a comprehensive set of rules for relations between states.

Seen in this historical light, top-level summits are exceedingly rare, and those that produce fundamental change are rarer still. The tradition of two leaders speaking on behalf of the entire global system is a product of the Cold War, when Moscow and Washington alone had the ability to destroy or save the world. Even if Roman and Chinese emperors had met in the third century, it would not have transformed the fate of the world. The great empires of antiquity could not conquer the planet in a single war with each other. Russia – as the USSR before it – and the United States can. In the last three years, they have often stood on the brink of a path from which there would be no return. This is why Alaska matters, even if it does not yield a breakthrough.

Read more …

“..when Kiev loses, they say, “Ok, well this sucks – how about if everyone just pretends that none of this happened and we dial all the territorial gains and losses back to a point of our choosing, okay?”

• The EU Throws An Epic Tantrum As Trump Meets With Putin (Marsden)

The European Union had been wailing about “transatlantic unity” in the run-up to US President Trump heading to the negotiating table with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Friday – without it. It sounded like a toddler stomping their feet because Daddy let go of their hand in the mall and now they’re lost between Cinnabon and Burger King. A lot of good their dogmatic rhetoric has done them so far. If it wasn’t for Brussels getting drunk on its own transatlantic solidarity and unity propaganda, maybe it wouldn’t currently be in economic and political dire straits. The kind where you’re trying to duct-tape your economy back together with overpriced American gas.

They could have charted a different path vis-a-vis Russia. Maybe one that involved spearheading diplomacy rather than marching in lockstep behind the US-led NATO parade of weapons and fighters on Russia’s border with Ukraine, which helped supercharge the conflict in the first place. They could have insisted on keeping their cheap Russian energy instead of sanctioning their own imports like they were vying for a Nobel Prize in masochism. Now, the US is daring them to even close their clever little loophole in their own anti-Russian sanctions. The one that lets them moralize about helping Ukraine and the need to avoid negotiations with Russia while guzzling Russian fuel on the down-low. Trump Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told them to “put up or shut up” and sanction the Indian and Chinese importers of Russian petroleum through which the EU still buys Russian fuel.

While the EU indulges itself in rhetorical games, Trump has dropped all pretexts of serving any interests but America’s first, and isn’t following any agenda beyond trying to wrap things up with Russia in Ukraine and to score some economic wins in the process. Brussels has had more than three years to do the same. Instead, it kept repeating the mantra that Kiev had to win on the battlefield. There were no other options, it said. Whoops! Now that the option has materialized, the Europeans are relegated to running behind Trump, pleading with him to indulge them by letting Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky decide where the post-conflict borders will be. What did they think the downside of their “win by force” gamble would be, if not changed borders?

The EU insists on Ukraine fighting Russia with EU cash and weapons, and when Kiev loses, they say, “Ok, well this sucks – how about if everyone just pretends that none of this happened and we dial all the territorial gains and losses back to a point of our choosing, okay?” The EU insisted on waiting for someone else to take the initiative for peace. Now all it can do is pick up its pom-poms and cheer Trump on. Then hope that he rewards it. As Zelensky’s self-appointed babysitters, instead of spending the past week in the run-up to the Alaska summit insisting that Putin and Trump allow a high chair booster seat and a pack of crayons at the negotiating table so he can show them where he wants the borders, maybe the Europeans should have been calming him down and managing expectations.

He sounded like he was treating his phone like a toy, calling up everyone in the contacts under “EU” – Estonia, Denmark, probably a few pizza places. The EU has tried to gaslight Trump with the same rhetoric that it constantly firehoses onto European citizens about peace in Ukraine being a dangerous gateway drug for Russia to invade Western Europe – a convenient marketing pitch to justify boosting the weapons industry to the detriment of domestic priorities. Not even warhawk US Senator Lindsey Graham is saying that now, telling NBC News that “Russia is not going to Kiev”…let alone the EU. European leaders treated Wednesday’s video call with Trump like a win. Perhaps because he didn’t explicitly tell them off, for once. But they really have no idea what he’ll actually discuss with Putin, nor do they have leverage over any eventual US–Russia deal.

They don’t know whether Trump is just placating them because he doesn’t need a bunch of hysterical circus clowns in the mix. So how could the EU spin this to avoid looking completely irrelevant? “Today Europe, the US and NATO have strengthened the common ground for Ukraine, we will remain in close coordination. Nobody wants peace more than us. A just and lasting peace,” said unelected EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. Yeah, sounds desperate for peace, alright. Which must be why the EU is building weapons factories at breakneck speed, according to the Financial Times. Nothing says “we’re committed to ending the war” like tripling down on weapons. What are you going to do with all those if peace breaks out? Toss them in the landfill and hope that taxpayers forget about the boondoggle, like you did with the hundreds of millions of unused Covid jabs?

Read more …

“It’s funny they call [intel] a ‘community.’ That sounds so benign and beneficial. Everybody likes communities.” —Doug Casey

• Carefully and Gracefully (James Howard Kunstler)

And so, now, in Alaska, Mr. Trump sits down with Vlad Putin to attempt a settling of Ukraine’s hash. This war has been a three-year bloody grind, millions killed, mostly Ukrainians, provoked underhandedly by US State Dept / CIA neocons, Britain’s MI6 apparatus, and the girl-bosses of the EU, for no good reason, namely, to weaken and possibly break-up Russia so as to get at its vast mineral and energy resources. This has been tried before in history, always to the grief of the triers. From our country’s point of view, the dynamics in play at this moment are delicate to an extreme. In the background of the Trump-Putin meet-up, amid an eerie silence in the DOJ and FBI, an epic, sweeping prosecution of the RussiaGate hoaxers creeps forward.

RussiaGate, of course, was born in the false charge (by America’s highest officials, derived from nonsense cooked up by Hillary Clinton) that Donald Trump was a Russian agent. It was preposterous and continually disproven, but the many-footed creatures of America’s deep state, which controlled so many levers of power, dragged it out for years. Altogether, that endeavor amounted to a campaign of sedition and arguably treason. The delicacy comes in as President Trump must now avoid at all costs any appearance of giving-in to Mr. Putin, of appearing to be any sort of a vassal — “Putin’s puppet,” as charged in RussiaGate. The raw truth is that Russia has likely already “won” the war in Ukraine, in the sense that it has finally gained control of the battlespace and worn out its opponent. It is fait accompli.

What remains is the disposition of Ukraine’s future which, in another raw truth, is mostly Russia’s to determine. Yet another raw truth is that this would probably be the best outcome for all concerned: a neutralized, disarmed Ukraine returned to its prior condition as a mostly agricultural sovereign backwater of Europe within Russia’s sphere-of-influence, resuming its longstanding status as not being a problem for anyone. Still, yet another raw truth is that the USA would benefit hugely from normalized relations with Russia, no more sanctions, fair trade, a rebalance of the drift toward China, lessening the chance of nuclear war — and this would even benefit the knuckleheads of Europe whose economies are imploding due to a lack of affordable energy (and also because of, let’s face it, the EU’s terrifically stupid “green” policies).

All of which means there will necessarily be a lot of “pretend” played in Anchorage for show. Mr. Trump must pretend to be tough on Putin, and Mr. Putin must pretend, a little bit, to give-in to Mr. Trump’ proposals. That is, it will be something of a kabuki, a kafabe. Surely, many of the stickiest points have been pre-negotiated by Mr. Trump’s envoy, Steve Witkoff, who quietly visited Moscow a week ago. Mr. Trump must appear strong with Russia because his appointees are commencing to go medieval on the folks who called him “Putin’s Puppet” nine years ago — and subjected him to a series of epic torments including the subversion of his whole first term in office, nonstop obloquy from the media, impeachment (X 2), home invasion, and a grotesque set of malicious, nitwit prosecutions that have either failed completely (Fani Willis, Jack Smith) or will be subject to humiliating reversals in the higher courts. Not to mention two attempted assassinations.

You should assume that Mr. Putin well understands all this and intends to play along. He will appear to make some generous concessions to Ukraine, starting with the promise that it can go forward as a sovereign, self-governing nation. The big enchilada might be to grant that Ukraine can retain possession of Odessa, the port city on the Black Sea which is Ukraine’s depot for export to the world of its chief commodity, grains. In any case, both Russia and the USA intend to relieve Volodymyr Zelenskyy of his duties — notice he is conspicuously not invited to the Alaska meeting. Mr. Trump well understands that one way or another, Russia is going to prevail in this conflict on-the-ground. He abhors all the killing. He has already expressed a disinclination to keep backing the war with money and weapons. He must be disgusted at how the Bidens (and the Deep State) used Ukraine as a money-laundry, as a site for bioweapons labs, and how it served as a nexus for human trafficking.

He also knows that Russia wants badly to be re-admitted to normal relations with the West, which is in everybody’s interest, except perhaps China’s. You should infer therefore that Russia wants the war to end in a way that does not humiliate the losers and backers — perhaps along the lines of how America managed our victory against our enemies in World War Two, carefully and gracefully.

Read more …

“The scary thing is that the Biden administration officials who were in that room said ‘oh we’re ready for that. If the Russians wanna play, we’re ready to go to nuclear war with them.’ This is the insanity that existed in November of last year!”

• Scott Ritter: Two Things Need to Happen for Trump to Get His Ceasefire (Sp.)

The Ukrainian crisis is front and center of the Putin-Trump summit in Alaska. Sputnik asked renowned geopolitical analyst, former Marine Corps intelligence officer and ex-UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter to weigh in on the high stakes meeting. First things first: the US president “doesn’t care about the geopolitical nuances of Ukrainian battlefield locations,” Ritter said. “If Putin can convince him that the quickest route to a ceasefire is for Ukraine to leave” Russia’s new territories “and say no to NATO, that’s it. That’s all that has to happen for a ceasefire.” The Russian military has mastered drone warfare, counter-drone warfare, and new battlefield tactics to the point where its advance has become “an irreversible process,” Ritter added, commenting on what happens if the peace push doesn’t pan out.

“There’s nothing that can be done. Nothing can be done to stop this. The advantage is 100% Russia, and we’re looking at the Ukrainians on the verge of total collapse,” the observer stressed. Trump’s base doesn’t want to continue fueling a proxy conflict against Russia, much less getting into a hot war with Russia over Ukraine, Ritter said. “Don’t worry about Congress. They don’t elect the president, and they will fall in behind the president, because if he can secure his base with a peace deal, he can ruin everybody in Congress, especially a Republican, who goes against him,” he stressed.

In November 2024, the CIA briefed Congress on the risks of a nuclear war breaking out, estimating that there was a “greater than 50% chance” thanks to the Biden administration’s decision to greenlight long-range ATACMS strikes into Russia, Ritter revealed.

“The director of plans of Strategic Command, the American military command that carries out nuclear war briefed a Washington, DC think tank in November that the United States is prepared for a nuclear exchange with Russia, (that means nuclear war) and that the United States thought they were going to win,” he said. “When this was briefed to Congress, I asked a senior Democrat…’when the CIA briefed you, did the CIA say the Russians were bluffing?’ He said no. The CIA said the exact opposite. He said but that’s not the scary thing. The scary thing is that the Biden administration officials who were in that room said ‘oh we’re ready for that. If the Russians wanna play, we’re ready to go to nuclear war with them.’ This is the insanity that existed in November of last year!” Ritter stressed.

Read more …

Peace with Russia means these tariffs also must disappear.

• US Has ‘No Right’ To Tell India Who To Trade With – Jeffrey Sachs (RT)

The United States has no right to tell India who it can partner with in trade, Jeffrey Sachs, director of the Center for Sustainable Development at Columbia University, said on Friday. The economist was commenting in an interview with NDTV television on Washington’s decision to impose additional tariffs on India over its purchases of Russian oil. Last week, the White House announced an extra 25% tariff on Indian imports, raising the overall tariff level faced by the South Asian nation to 50%. US President Donald Trump said the measure was prompted by India’s continued imports of Russian oil. New Delhi condemned the move as “extremely unfortunate” and pledged to safeguard its national interests. Sachs described the tariff increase as a clear reason for India to remain cautious in its dealings with Washington.

“Don’t rely on them. India needs a diversified base of partners – Russia, China, ASEAN countries, Africa, and not see itself as mainly focusing on the US market, which is going to be unstable, slow-growing and basically protectionist,” according to Sachs. Addressing India’s imports of Russian oil, Sachs stated that Washington has no authority to determine the trading relations of other nations. The US “does not act responsibly towards other countries. Be careful. India should not allow itself to be used by the US, somehow, in the US’ misguided trade war with China,” the economist noted.

New Delhi is now seeking to expand its export presence in the 50 countries that account for about 90% of its total exports in an effort to offset the impact of the higher tariffs, according to local media reports, citing government sources. The initiative is intended to reduce reliance on any single market and to minimize risks arising from trade disruptions. In response to the US threats to impose secondary sanctions on Russia’s trade partners, including India, China, and Brazil, Moscow stated that it believes “sovereign states should have, and do have, the right to choose their own trade partners,” as well as to independently determine which avenues of cooperation best serve their national interests.

Read more …

“Grok had already been added to the GSA’s long-term procurement list, enabling agencies to buy it.”

• US Gov’t Ditches Musk’s AI Over ‘Anti-Semitism’ (RT)

The US government has dropped Elon Musk’s AI chatbot Grok from a planned federal technology program following controversy over anti-Semitic content and conspiracy theories produced by the bot, Wired reported on Thursday. Grok, developed by Musk’s AI startup xAI, is built into his social media platform X. It offers fact checks, quick context on trending topics, and replies to user arguments. Musk has promoted xAI as a rival to OpenAI and Google’s DeepMind, but the chatbot has faced criticism over offensive and inflammatory outputs. According to the report, xAI was in advanced talks with the General Services Administration (GSA), the agency in charge of US government tech procurement, to give federal workers access to its AI tools. Grok had already been added to the GSA’s long-term procurement list, enabling agencies to buy it.

Earlier this month, the GSA announced partnerships with other AI providers – Anthropic, Google’s Gemini, and Box’s AI-powered content platform – while reportedly also telling staff to remove xAI’s Grok from the offering. Two GSA employees told Wired they believe the chatbot was dropped over its anti-Semitic tirade last month, when it praised Adolf Hitler and called itself “MechaHitler.” The posts were deleted, and xAI apologized for the “horrific behavior,” pledging to block hate speech before Grok goes live. The bot also pushed the “white genocide” conspiracy theory and echoed Holocaust denial rhetoric, which xAI blamed on unauthorized prompt changes.

This week, it was briefly suspended from X after stating that Israel and the US were committing genocide in Gaza – allegations both countries reject. Musk has continued to praise the chatbot, recently writing: “East, West, @Grok is the best.” The move to drop Grok comes as part of a broader push by the administration of US President Donald Trump to modernize the federal government under an action plan unveiled last month that provides for less regulation and wider adoption of AI. However, the rapid growth of AI has triggered concern about its potential to spread misinformation, reinforce bias, and operate without accountability. Experts say that unless strong safeguards are in place, poorly moderated AI tools could also expose children to harmful or inappropriate content.

Read more …

All the more now Trump has put them at the kiddies table.

• EU Leaders Want To Overthrow Three European Governments – Budapest (RT)

The European Union is attempting to topple the governments of Hungary, Slovakia, and Serbia for prioritizing national interests over alignment with Brussels, Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto has claimed. He made the comments in a Facebook post on Thursday after phone calls with Slovak Foreign Minister Juraj Blanar and Serbia’s top diplomat, Marko Duric. According to Szijjarto, they agreed to strengthen their stance on sovereignty and pledged mutual solidarity amid what they described as growing external pressure. “Brussels has ceased to be a factor in world politics. The fact that Europe has been excluded from the Alaska talks proves it,” he wrote, referring to Friday’s summit between US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin to discuss the Ukraine conflict.

https://twitter.com/PM_ViktorOrban/status/1956065724088172985

Kiev’s backers in Europe have repeatedly called to be included in any talks involving Russia, Ukraine, and the US, insisting that “a European power” should be “in the room” to guarantee that the security interests of Kiev and the EU are “safeguarded.” Unlike the EU, which continues to support Ukraine’s war effort, Szijjarto said Hungary, Serbia, and Slovakia have prioritized national interests and resisted pressure from Brussels, favoring peace talks over military involvement. “This obviously frustrates the mainstream liberal political leaders, and as a result, the pressure is increasing on governments that are supporting peace, following national interests, and not subordinating to Brussels,” the diplomat said.

It’s “clearer than daylight” that “external intervention experiments to destabilize and overthrow governments are taking place in Central Europe against the patriot Slovak, Hungarian, and Serbian governments,” he added. Szijjarto criticized recent polling in Slovakia, which suggested citizens “only trust revolution,” and accused Brussels of trying to undermine Hungary’s elected leadership by supporting the opposition Tisza Party. He also referenced recent clashes between protesters and police in Serbia, implying that external forces were stirring unrest to destabilize the government. According to Szijjarto, these “are all different chapters of the same scenario in Brussels: they want to clean up the peace-party, patriot, national-interest governments,” aiming to replace them with puppet governments so Brussels “can get a seat.”

Read more …

 

 

 

 

GoF
https://twitter.com/sheislaurenlee/status/1956140482960183359

100
https://twitter.com/DavidJHarrisJr/status/1956106786903388484

https://twitter.com/LangmanVince/status/1956366054529089828

Bees

Bob
https://twitter.com/buitengebieden/status/1956110689359003751

https://twitter.com/buitengebieden/status/1956330600387821710

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle August 15 2025

Aug 152025
 
 August 15, 2025  Posted by at 9:52 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , ,  64 Responses »


Joseph Mallord William Turner The Tenth Plague of Egypt 1802

 

• Without Zelensky, Peace Has A Chance (Tara Reade)
• Kremlin Reveals Details Of Putin-Trump Summit (RT)
• Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent: “Europe Needs to Put Up or Shut Up” (CTH)
• US Efforts To Settle Ukraine Conflict ‘Energetic And Sincere’ – Putin (RT)
• Can Putin Pass the Test? (Paul Craig Roberts)
• Could Trump End War in Ukraine In Meeting With Putin? (Victor Davis Hanson)
• Kiev Tries To Kill As Many Civilians As It Can Right Before Talks (RT)
• Elie Honig Nuked Left’s Talking Points on Trump DC Crime Crackdown (Margolis)
• How Hillary Planned to Reward Schiff for Undermining Trump (Margolis)
• Trump Signs Executive Order To Fill Reserve With Critical Drugs (JTN)
• Treasury Secretary Bessent Calls For Trading Ban In Congress (JTN)
• The Boomer Mirage (Stylman)
• Sen. Kennedy: Democrats Need to ‘Buy Some Testicles’ on Amazon (Margolis)
• Melania Trump Threatens Hunter Biden With $1Bln Lawsuit for Defamation (Sp.)

 

 

Orban
https://twitter.com/PM_ViktorOrban/status/1955932465631256973

Solomon

UN

Kirk

Big beautiful trap
https://twitter.com/WesternLensman/status/1955641913815810167

 

 

 

 

Mere hours before “The Summit”, everyone has an opinion. I just found 2 cents in my own back pocket.

First: these two guys have a lot of respect for each other, that leads everything.

I think both Trump and Putin want the summit to succeed, at least in a preparatory fashion. If it’s a failure, they can blame each other, but no chance it would look good on themselves either. Some claim a lack of preparation on one side or the other, but I bet they both come very well prepared. There may still be differences, they come from very different positions, but it won’t be from lack of preparation.

We can wonder if Trump has fully digested Russia’s view of what happened in the past 10 years, what started the “war” etc., but that, only they know. Trump has the constant clatter and clamor of Lindsey Graham, Zelensky and Europe in his ears telling him what to think and do, but if anything that will just make him eager to shut them down. We may come away surprised, but it’s more likely they pass it all down to the heavy delegations, and meet again in fall.

There’s no chance they will part company only to make more war. That will not happen.

• Without Zelensky, Peace Has A Chance (Tara Reade)

In 1867, the Russian empire sold Alaska to the US for $7.2 million. Perhaps the location of the upcoming summit between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin is a nod and a wink to such a great deal? Maybe Putin will like Alaska so much he will have seller’s remorse? Trump promised America a golden age coming that included ending the US involvement in Ukraine. No more US taxpayer money, no more weapons to Ukraine. No more escalation towards a nuclear war. Finally, that campaign promise looks to be coming to fruition with the upcoming summit to be held between the two superpower presidents, Trump and Putin, in Alaska. Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky publicly dismissed Trump’s peace plans. The last time Zelensky protested a movement towards peace he had European leaders rallying behind him.

This time proves more tricky for the illegitimate president of Ukraine with his people protesting forced conscriptions and the bloody losses of men and women for a war feeding the EU and Washington. Zelensky’s firing of an anti-corruption team triggered the latest uprising as he still will not hold elections. In short, Zelensky’s time is done and he will need to flee, along with his corrupt Ukrainian oligarchs, to the nearest European villa haven or face the possible fate of many unpopular dictators – death. Trump has many reasons for wanting this peace summit with Putin to be a success. First, he is by all accounts, ducking hits by his base about not releasing the Epstein files. The MAGA base is loyal but practical, and if the economy does not improve and foreign wars continue, they will turn their back on the Republican Party, not just Trump.

Also, the Ukraine conflict represents Biden and the old guard. Trump has repeatedly said, “This is NOT my war.” Trump has a certain respect for Putin. However, as time passes and old hawks like senator Lindsay Graham salivate for more blood and death, Trump’s goal of being the ‘peace president’ moves farther out of reach. The American people are over Ukraine, they are sick of American foreign adventures on taxpayer money that have left America’s infrastructure and morale in tatters. Trump is trying to undo decades of lies about wars and domestic policy now revealed to the public. The American distrust in media is at an all-time high due to the years of lies about wars, Covid, and domestic issues. This culminates in collective cynicism while social media allows for examinations of truths.

The cultural divide and frustrations in America are deeply felt but the main concern for Americans is the ability to get access to affordable food, housing, and medical care. All of this has been in crisis especially since the Biden regime drove the US economy into the ground raising the debt ceiling and focusing on endless wars.

The economic allure of Russia and America having positive productive trade is not lost on Trump and his leadership. Russia has risen above sanctions with a strong economy, and BRICS has been growing stronger. The attempts to isolate Russia have failed, while the collective West has remained under the thumb of past US hawks. This has brought the near collapse of some of the Western European economies. Trump at his heart is a businessman interested in economic competition rather than war. His current administration is a mix of old guard neocon hawks and anti-war doves. This curious mixture with strong influences from Israel means Trump’s foreign policy still somewhat aligns with Biden’s and Obama’s – and that is a comparison he wishes to distance himself from.

Both the US and Russia know that Ukraine employs terrorist tactics, killing civilians and targeting journalists, which is problematic to any signed legal agreements. There is also the fact that Moscow does not consider Zelensky a legitimate president since his term ran out and he canceled elections. How legal would any peace agreements signed with him be? Perhaps the answer will come from the US president in the form of guarantees of no more weapons or funding to Ukraine, but these would have to involve binding commitments – unlike earlier empty promises of no eastward NATO expansion.

Ultimately, Zelensky is less than inconsequential to the future of global politics – he is a liability to the West. The real end to this proxy war between the US/NATO and Russia will be decided between Trump and Putin. It will likely start with broad brush strokes of a peace agreement, with details, boundaries and consequences laid out later in bureaucratic form. There will be posturing, but also economic and trade deals made. Perhaps a joint mission in space could be one positive outcome? The lifting of sanctions and putting an end to the Russophobia campaign fueled by Obama and Biden? A more positive approach to disarmament of nuclear weapons? While Putin might not buy back Alaska for Russia, there may be some movement to final peace in regards to Ukraine. If the EU falls into line with the US to drop this proxy war, stop supplying weapons, and not allow Ukraine into NATO, then real peace does have some hope.

The world may even have a chance of having a new golden age, rather than a future of nuclear ash.

Read more …

“Putin and Trump will not only deliver a short opening statement but also hold a joint press conference after the talks..”

• Kremlin Reveals Details Of Putin-Trump Summit (RT)

The summit between Russian President Vladimir Putin and his US counterpart, Donald Trump, on Friday will focus not only on the Ukraine conflict but on a broader security agenda and involve several top Russian officials, Kremlin aide Yury Ushakov has said. Speaking to reporters on Thursday, Ushakov said that “final preparations” were underway for the meeting on Friday, which will take place at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Anchorage, Alaska. Given the short notice for the summit, “everything is being done in an intensive mode,” including tackling several technical issues, including visa-related matters, he added. Ushakov said the summit will begin at approximately 11:30 a.m. local time (19:30 GMT) with a one-on-one conversation between Putin and Trump, accompanied by interpreters.

“Then, there will be negotiations in the format of delegations, and these negotiations will continue over a working lunch,” he said. The Kremlin aide noted the very high level of the Russian delegation, which he said would include Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, Ushakov himself, Defense Minister Andrey Belousov, Finance Minister Anton Siluanov, and Special Presidential Representative for Investment and Economic Cooperation with Foreign Countries Kirill Dmitriev, who has been a key figure in the Ukraine settlement process. “In addition to the presidents, five members from each delegation will participate in the negotiations,” he said, adding that “of course, a group of experts will also be nearby.”

Regarding the agenda, it is “obvious” that the central issue in the talks will be the Ukraine conflict, Ushakov said, adding, though, that “broader objectives of ensuring peace and security will also be addressed, as well as current and most acute international and regional issues.”There will also be an exchange of views “regarding the further development of bilateral cooperation, including in the trade and economic spheres,” Ushakov noted, adding that such ties have “enormous and, unfortunately, still untapped potential.” Ushakov confirmed that Putin and Trump will not only deliver a short opening statement but also hold a joint press conference after the talks. He said the duration of the talks “would depend on how the discussion goes” and confirmed “the delegation will return [to Russia] immediately after the negotiations conclude.”

Read more …

With more summit details. I understand talks start 30 min earlier than announced.

• Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent: “Europe Needs to Put Up or Shut Up” (CTH)

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent appears with Maria Bartiromo to discuss the upcoming summit between Russian President Vladimir Putin and U.S. President Donald Trump. Bessent notes the backseat demands from EU leaders with their position on the Trump negotiation strategy has worn thin amid their hypocrisy. “It’s time to put up or shut up,” Bessent says, when talking about how the EU is still facilitating the economic purchases of Russian energy products, while simultaneously demanding Trump do this and that.

I am cautiously optimistic for a positive outcome from this summit.
• Date: Friday August 15, 2025
• Venue: Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson near Anchorage, Alaska
• Anchorage is 4 hours behind Eastern Time zone.

DELEGATION:
USA President Donald Trump – Russian Federation, President Vladimir Putin
USA Press Secretary, Karoline Leavitt – Russian Federation, Kremlin aide Yuri Ushakov
USA Secretary of State, Marco Rubio – Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov
USA Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth – Russian Defense Minister Andrei Belousov
USA Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent – Russian Finance Minister, Anton Siluanov
USA Envoy Steve Witkoff – Russian Envoy Kirill Dmitriev

President Trump will depart the White House early Friday morning ET. Trump is expected in Anchorage midafternoon Eastern time on Friday. The initial meeting with Putin is expected to take place at 3:30 pm ET (11:30 am local) with just the two leaders and translators. Following the meeting, President Trump and President Putin with hold a lunch with members of delegations from both countries. The two leaders then plan to hold a joint press conference following their meeting, White House and Kremlin officials said Thursday morning.

Read more …

“She added that the US president would prefer not to impose any new sanctions on Russia but instead resolve the situation through diplomacy.”

• US Efforts To Settle Ukraine Conflict ‘Energetic And Sincere’ – Putin (RT)

The US is making a genuine effort to stop the fighting in Ukraine and reach agreements that would account for the interests of all parties involved, Russian President Vladimir Putin has said. Putin is scheduled to meet with US President Donald Trump on Friday in Anchorage, Alaska, to discuss ways of ending the Ukraine conflict, as well as steps toward normalizing relations between Moscow and Washington. On Thursday, Putin met with top government officials in Moscow to discuss the upcoming summit and “the stage where we are with the current US administration.”

He said that the American leadership is making “quite energetic and sincere efforts to stop the hostilities” and working to “create long-term conditions of peace between our countries and in Europe, and in the world as a whole.” Putin added that this process could be further advanced if Russia and the US reach agreements on strategic offensive weapons control in the next stages of negotiations. Among the officials present at Thursday’s meeting were Defense Minister Andrey Belousov, Finance Minister Anton Siluanov, and Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, all of whom will be traveling to Alaska on Friday to take part in the Putin-Trump summit. According to the Kremlin, the event will begin with a one-on-one conversation between the two leaders, followed by a meeting of the Russian and US delegations.

Trump has described the summit as a “feel-out meeting” that will help him determine whether the Ukraine conflict can be resolved. He has said that if the talks go well, he may seek a second round of negotiations involving Putin and Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said on Thursday that Trump will pursue all possible options for a peaceful end to the conflict during his meeting with Putin. She added that the US president would prefer not to impose any new sanctions on Russia but instead resolve the situation through diplomacy.

Read more …

Not a clue why he says that Putin would ..”agree to such a meeting with zero preparatory work..”

He has every single detail in his head, it’s how he works, no need for paper. And on top of that he has 4 of his top advisors with him. How does that add up to zero?

• Can Putin Pass the Test? (Paul Craig Roberts)

Yesterday President Trump in his public statements validated my conclusion that Trump does not know what the Russian position is and that he is going to the meeting to find out what the “parameters” are and that he sees the meeting as a “feel-out meeting” to see whether the conflict in Ukraine can be ended. In other words, no solution is expected from the meeting for which no preparatory work has been done. So what are the high-blown expectations for the meeting based on? Why build up such expectations when there is no proposal on the table? Where is the “acceptable” offer that Yury Ushakov found in the non-proposal that convinced Putin to go to Alaska? Is the answer that the purpose of the meeting is to put Putin on the spot by creating expectations of success that cannot be achieved?

French President Macron said that Trump told him that he intends to “obtain a ceasefire in Ukraine during the meeting with Putin.” When Putin doesn’t agree to halt Russia’s successful offensive, is the plan to blame Putin for wrecking the chance for peace? Will this help weaken BRICS by Putin being blamed for secondary tariffs imposed on India, China, Brazil, South Africa? (From Bloomberg today: Raising the stakes. Donald Trump warned he would impose “very severe consequences” if Vladimir Putin didn’t agree to a ceasefire agreement, following a call with European leaders ahead of his meeting with the Russian president. But Tass reported that the two will hold a joint press conference after the talks. Meanwhile, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told Europe it’s “put up or shut up time” when it comes to sanctions on nations that buy Russian energy.)

That is what it looks like. The Ukrainian front is collapsing. A ceasefire would halt the Russian advance and give the Ukrainian force time to stabilize and reinforce its positions. This is important to the West, because once Russia completes the task of driving the Ukrainian forces out of all of the territory that has been reincorporated into the Russian Federation, there is no land in Ukrainian hands for Trump to swap with Putin. As I have reported a number of times, a land-swap is not one of the conditions on Putin’s list. What Putin means by “the root cause of the conflict” is Russia’s sense of insecurity with NATO and US nuclear missiles on Russia’s border. When the Soviet Union put nuclear missiles in Cuba as an offset to the nuclear missiles Washington had put in Turkey on the Soviet Union’s border, Washington was intensely upset. Today the US has missiles on Russia’s border and the opportunity to have missile bases on Russia’s borders ranging from Finland to the South Caucus, which is a large multiplication of the one Soviet missile base in Cuba.

So if one base in Cuba made the US uncomfortable, imagine how uncomfortable Russia is with the prospect of nuclear missiles along the border for thousands of kilometers. American and European politicians and policymakers have not acknowledged that the root cause of the conflict is NATO on Russia’s border. The prospect of Ukraine joining NATO and being added to the territory hosting US missile bases was the straw that broke the camel’s back. Trump’s land swap and ceasefire do not address Russia’s security problem. The root cause of the conflict is Russia’s sense of insecurity. That can only be solved by getting NATO off of Russia’s borders. This is the purpose of the mutual security agreement that Putin has been trying to negotiate for a number of years only to be given the cold shoulder as by the Biden regime during December 2021-February 2022.

Ask yourselves if you think Trump is in a sufficiently powerful position to override both the neoconservative doctrine of US hegemony and the interest of the American military/security complex. As long as the Wolfowitz Doctrine holds, and it has not been repudiated by President Trump, the Secretary of State, or Congress, the US is committed to “preventing the rise of any country that can serve as a constraint on American unilateralism.” As this is the stated commitment, how can NATO be removed from Russia’s border? President Eisenhower warned Americans in 1961 that the rise of the Cold War with the Soviet Union prevented the demobilization of the American war machine that normally followed the end of war. Instead, a powerful military/industrial complex has risen with roots in nearly every state, which gives it enormous power in Congress and among state governors.

That was 64 years ago. Since that time the power of the military/security complex has multiplied. Is this institutionalized power willing to take the hit to its budget and power from a mutual security agreement with its principal enemy? The questions I am asking are the determining questions. Nothing else that is said matters. Yet, these essential questions are not a part of the discussion in Washington, in Europe, or in the Kremlin. It is as if none of the participants in a growing conflict that could be terminable for life on Earth have any idea of the consequences of their decisions. Why suddenly did Trump who a couple of days before yesterday said he didn’t want to meet with Putin demand a meeting within the week when Trump doesn’t even know what the “parameters” are? How can a serious meeting be held when a principal participant doesn’t even know what the opponent’s position is?

Why did Putin agree to such a meeting with zero preparatory work that exposes him to tremendous pressure to capitulate? This represents the total failure of Putin’s advisors. It indicates to the West that Russia is a weak defender of its interest. Perhaps more pressure will be all it takes to bring Russia in line with US hegemony. If Trump goes into the meeting with this attitude, Putin’s choice will be to capitulate or to bring down more demonization on him and Russia for blocking peace. It does look like Kirill Demitriev and Steve Witcoff, both globalists, have succeeded in setting up Putin and Russia. What is on test in Alaska is Putin’s mettle.

Read more …

Repeating the tired notion of Russia losing more people than Ukraine, by now disqualifies you.

• Could Trump End War in Ukraine In Meeting With Putin? (Victor Davis Hanson)

This week there’s a scheduled summit between Russian President Vladimir Putin and President Donald Trump, and it’s scheduled to be held in Anchorage, Alaska. Apparently, this was a place that offered a great deal of security. It’s a smaller, controllable city. It’s in the United States, but on the other hand, it’s one of the closest places, major cities, to Russia itself from the United States. We don’t have a very good history of summits. And many summits—as you remember, in March of 2017, Antony Blinken, the Biden secretary of state, and Jake Sullivan, the national security adviser, met with their Chinese communist counterparts. And they were dressed down and humiliated and really didn’t say anything. And what followed then from that was further Chinese aggression toward Taiwan, the Chinese balloon, etc. So these summits are very important.

One thing that we’re not hearing from the Left and the Never-Trump Right is that Donald Trump is a “Putin asset,” a “Putin puppet.” I’m quoting pretty loosely, but accurately, what former National Intelligence Director James Clapper and former CIA Director John Brennan have been saying for 10 years on social media and on cable news. And the reason they’re not saying that Donald Trump is a Putin puppet and going to be had is that he gave Putin an “Art of the Deal” leeway when he first came into office and he doubled down on Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. He basically was saying, “Putin, see, I’m giving you an opportunity.” Putin did not take it. Donald Trump pivoted and found out that he had to use leverage against Putin. And the leverage he’s going to use, or has threatened to use, is far more deleterious to Russia and far more dangerous and far more ambitious than anything imagined by former President Joe Biden, namely, a secondary boycott.

That would be to not trade with countries that trade with Russia. That could include the two largest countries in the world, India and China. India had very close relations with us. We were trying to triangulate India against China. They have their own border disputes and long-standing disagreements. But if we secondary boycott India, that will be a rumination of our relations with India. So, what I’m getting at is Donald Trump’s taking a lot of risk, a lot of risk in using a secondary boycott to pressure Putin. Ninety percent of the issues are already solved. They have been for a year or two. We’re now in a deadlock. Russia claims they’ve only lost 200,000 dead. But they more likely lost a million dead, wounded, missing, taken prisoner. We don’t know the exact ratios of each. And probably Ukraine with their dead, missing, wounded, prisoners around, I don’t know, 400,000 or 500,000. So this is like a Stalingrad or a Somme or a Verdun.

We know the general parameters. We’ve discussed them before. Ukraine will not be in NATO. That’s a concession to Putin. But it really isn’t a concession because, privately, a lot of the NATO members did not want Ukraine because they had no intention of going all the way to the Donbas, should Russia invade again, on Article 5 of the NATO doctrine. They were not going to follow that. So they don’t want Ukraine in NATO. Neither do we. I’m not sure Ukraine even does, privately.Secondly, there was no military ability. There’s a moral argument for, but no military ability, to take back Crimea and take back the Donbas. So what we’re discussing now is that the Russian army is about a hundred miles west from the border in Crimea, the Donbas, and then further west. In total, about a hundred miles. That would be the DMZ—in other words, the Demilitarized Zone, where we have a ceasefire, an armistice.

And then we would haggle in a peace conference over exchanges of territory on either side. That’s the outline of peace. The problem is that—there’s two problems. One: Ukraine’s Constitution says no land—no land, not Crimea, not Donbas—nothing can be ceded to a foreign country without a plebiscite. And we don’t know what the Ukrainian people will say. They polled they’re tired of the war. They polled they don’t want to give one inch of their sovereign territory. On the other side, Putin himself knows that he has to report to the oligarchic and military hierarchy. And he doesn’t know whether a hundred miles west, in addition to institutionalizing the possession of Crimea and the Donbas for good, whether that extra hundred miles from the border territory will justify the enormous losses, humiliation that the Russian military has suffered.

So, we’re gonna have this summit. And Trump is going to say to Putin, “You can have no NATO Ukraine. You can have the Crimea. You can have the Donbas. I think I can get Zelenskyy and the Ukrainian people to agree. But we’ve gotta fight over how far west you are and whether you have to go back or will stay in place.”And then he’s going to have to tell Zelenskyy, “We’re supplying you. That’s the only leverage we have against Putin, along with a secondary boycott. But you have to decide whether you’re going to cede the Donbas, Crimea, and some of the territory. Because if you don’t, there’s not going to be peace. And if there’s not going to be peace, we can’t assure you a blank check forever.”

So, that’s what the parameters are. And one thing that we do know, the Never-Trump Right, as I said, and the Left have ceased the “Donald Trump is a puppet,” “Donald Trump is a sellout,” “Donald Trump is a Russian asset” because nobody in the last four years, in the Biden administration, has met with the Russians and especially the last three years since the war started. Nobody made the attempt.= So, at least we have the principles: talking to each other, we know what the outlines of a peace agreement are. And it’s just a matter of what each president has to take back to the powers that be and see if they’ve given too many or not enough concessions.

Read more …

A tactic, a pattern…

• Kiev Tries To Kill As Many Civilians As It Can Right Before Talks (RT)

On August 14, 2025, Russian officials reported Ukrainian drone strikes on the border cities of Belgorod and Rostov-on-Don, killing and injuring civilians. Rostov saw an apartment building struck, with over a dozen casualties; in Belgorod, three civilians were hurt when a drone hit a car downtown. This came two days after the Russian Ministry of Defence (MoD) alleged that Ukrainian forces were preparing a false-flag provocation in the Kharkov region, complete with pre-positioned journalists – supposedly to shape a narrative blaming Moscow. These incidents are not isolated. They fit into a larger operational and political pattern: each time high-level talks are scheduled Kiev steps up attacks on Russia’s border regions. The results are the same: civilian deaths, destruction of civilian infrastructure, and an attempt to create a cloud over the diplomatic process.

The same happened in late May and early June 2025, just before the second round of Russia–Ukraine talks in Istanbul, when two bridges in Russian territory were blown up. The attacks killed seven civilians and injured over seventy more. In Moscow’s interpretation, the timing was too precise to be coincidence – it was about setting a tone of hostility, perhaps provoking Russia into walking away from the talks entirely. And yet, Moscow did not take the bait. Russian negotiators showed up in Istanbul as planned. For the Kremlin, this has become a point of principle: no matter the provocations, Russia will attend discussions that could bring an end to the conflict – on its own terms.

The upcoming Alaska summit on August 15, 2025, between Presidents Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump, is the latest such opportunity. The alleged Kharkov region provocation and the strikes on Belgorod and Rostov are seen in Moscow as deliberate background noise meant to derail the meeting or at least to sour its atmosphere. But just as in Istanbul, the Kremlin insists it will not be deterred. For Moscow, attending these talks is about more than optics. It underscores a long-held stance: Russia is prepared to end the conflict, but not at the price of what it views as its core national interests. Walking away now, after years of costly military and political investment, would make little sense. Instead, the aim is to secure a resolution that cements Russia’s gains and ends the war on Moscow’s terms – not by fighting “to the last Ukrainian,” but by ensuring that the outcome is final and strategically advantageous.

From the Kremlin’s perspective, Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky’s motives are clear. Accepting a peace that involves territorial concessions would not only be a bitter political defeat – it could spell the end of his political career. More critically, it would remove the emergency powers he has repeatedly invoked since the start of the conflict to cancel elections and prolong his term in office. Those powers have also enabled controversial measures: forced conscriptions, suppression of opposition media, and an intensified crackdown on dissent. These steps have eroded his popularity inside Ukraine, making his hold on power dependent on the continuation of the wartime state of emergency. If the war ends, so does the legal shield of emergency rule – and with it, his immunity. Zelensky therefore has both political and personal incentives to keep the fighting going, even at significant cost to Ukraine’s population.

Read more …

“I’ve been a 100% unambiguous critic of everything Donald Trump did on January 6th. I believe he should have been charged criminally. I believe the pardons were a disgrace. But why does that mean he can’t do anything now to enforce the law…”

• Elie Honig Nuked Left’s Talking Points on Trump DC Crime Crackdown (Margolis)

CNN’s top legal analyst just shredded one of the Democrats’ favorite talking points about President Trump’s decision to federalize the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department. Appearing on CNN NewsNight Wednesday evening, Elie Honig, who has been an outspoken critic of Trump, flatly rejected the left’s talking points that the move was illegitimate or purely political theater.“I’ve worked extensively with police. And I don’t have a problem tactically with what Donald Trump is doing here,” Honig told the panel. “It doesn’t have to be the most dangerous place on Earth. Something can be improving, but still really bad. If your house is on fire and then a third of the fire goes out, it’s less bad, but it could still be an emergency.” Honig didn’t sugarcoat his assessment of the nation’s capital.

“I work in D.C. It is dangerous there. You cannot deny that,” he said. “A common police tactic is to surge resources. I’ve been part — we call them ‘task forces’ — they’re applauded across the board, across the political board. I’ve done it in New Jersey. I’ve done it in New York. You take the FBI, you team them up with the Newark P.D., what have you, you make a visible presence.” Honig went even further, making clear that his past condemnation of Trump over January 6 doesn’t mean the president can’t act now to enforce the law. “I’ve been a 100% unambiguous critic of everything Donald Trump did on January 6th. I believe he should have been charged criminally. I believe the pardons were a disgrace. But why does that mean he can’t do anything now to enforce the law, to promote public safety?”

That stance drew pushback from Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-N.Y.), who accused Trump of hypocrisy and labeled the move “political theater.” “None of this is fundamentally address a crime problem in D.C.,” Torres claimed. Honig didn’t flinch. “Would you rather have national security out in D.C. where you work?” The debate intensified when Scott Jennings pointed out that the D.C. police union backed Trump’s move. “The police union came out on this action by the president and said, ‘We wholeheartedly support the president; we need the support.’ Are they right or wrong?” Jennings asked. Torres insisted federal law enforcement wasn’t the right tool for the job, claiming the FBI’s mission is limited to counterterrorism and counterintelligence. Honig immediately corrected him.

“That’s not true. I’ve heard that said a lot. The FBI does street operations. People say the FBI, they’re chasing terrorists — some are,” he said. “I worked with the FBI. The FBI does street reps, they do drug buys, they do gun buys. It’s part of what they do. It’s not a misuse of the FBI.” While CNN anchor Abby Phillip raised questions about federal agents conducting traffic stops and clearing homeless encampments, Honig circled back to a simple point: If D.C.’s leadership truly objected, they could act. “If they thought this was so illegal, unwarranted, inappropriate, why have they not challenged it? They’ve challenged it rhetorically, but they haven’t gone to the board on it.” In the end, Honig’s comments blew a hole in the narrative that Trump’s action was an abuse of power — and they came from someone who has never been shy about criticizing the president.

Read more …

Imagine that drip as head of the CIA. That’s what we narrowly escaped.

• How Hillary Planned to Reward Schiff for Undermining Trump (Margolis)

As PJ Media previously reported, then-congressman Schiff was the architect behind the deliberate leaking of classified information aimed at smearing Trump and pushing a narrative against him designed to ensure his prosecution. Back in 2017, a veteran career intelligence officer working for Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee warned the FBI that Schiff had not only approved but actively orchestrated the leaking of sensitive classified intelligence. According to whistleblower testimony from 2023 interviews, Schiff convened a staff meeting where he explicitly declared that the group would leak damaging classified information about President Trump. His goal was to use this information to secure an indictment against Trump.

The whistleblower, who was close to Schiff and other intelligence figures on both sides of the aisle, described these actions as “unethical,” “illegal,” and “treasonous.” The implications don’t stop with Schiff. Investigative reporter Catherine Herridge has not only released FBI reports that reveal that Rep. Eric Swalwell, another Democrat on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, was also a habitual leaker of classified information, even receiving warnings from the FBI to be more cautious. The reports also indicate that had Clinton won the 2016 election, she would likely have rewarded Schiff for his efforts by appointing him CIA director, a testament to their deep ties and shared political objectives.

(U) By way of background, circa October 2016, [redacted], a [redacted] Staff Member House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HESCT), was told by various HPSCI staff colleagues if Hillary Clinton were to win the election Representative Adam Schiff (D – California) would be offered the position of the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) – As such, opined Schiff had reasons to support Clinton beyond his political affiliation. At that time normal partisan politics continued at HPSCI but there was no significant problem with regards to leaking classified information.

(U) Things changed after the election. Schiff believed Russia hijacked the election and the United States was in the middle of a constitutional crisis. Classified information began leaking to the media. The Democratic minority leadership of HPSCI was aware of the leaks but was under the impression that leaking the information was one way to topple the administration and fix the constitutional crisis.

This nexus between Clinton, Schiff, and the intelligence apparatus turned the Russia investigation into a political weapon, not an impartial probe. The whistleblower’s account, backed by FBI interviews, exposes a political war that Democrats waged from inside government agencies, using classified intelligence as ammunition in concert with Hillary Clinton’s campaign. These revelations highlight the weaponization of political power against a presidential candidate and later a sitting president, with classified information twisted into a fabricated scandal that consumed the news and crippled Washington.

Schiff’s central role, which aligned with Clinton’s interests, marks a peak in corruption and political gamesmanship. The FBI, DOJ, and Congress have a rare chance to reveal the full scope of this abuse and begin restoring public trust. This isn’t just partisan hardball; it’s a calculated misuse of government authority to topple an administration. The Schiff-Clinton intelligence nexus may have been the engine of the Russiagate hoax, and full exposure is long overdue. Few episodes in modern politics have done more damage to the rule of law and public confidence, and the very institutions meant to protect them orchestrated it all. It’s time to confront that reality head-on.

Read more …

Bhattacharya appears to be the right man in the right place (NIH). But how did the US ever get a -looming- anti-biotics shortage?

• Trump Signs Executive Order To Fill Reserve With Critical Drugs (JTN)

President Trump has signed an executive order to fill the Strategic Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients Reserve with critical drugs to ensure “a resilient domestic supply chain for essential medicines.” The executive order signed on Tuesday directs the Department of Health and Human Services assistant secretary for Preparedness and Response to create a list of about 26 critical drugs that are deemed “vital to national health and security, and ready the SAPIR repository to receive and maintain the Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients (APIs) used to make these critical drugs,” according to a White House fact sheet. Also, the order charges the official with getting a 6-month supply of the APIs for the critical drugs, “with a preference for obtaining domestically-manufactured APIs if possible, and placing them in the SAPIR.” Trump additionally told the official to make a proposal for a second SAPIR repository.

The executive order comes after National Institutes of Health Director Jay Bhattacharya told Just the News, No Noise TV show last month that the U.S. has a shortage of some drugs, such as antibiotics. “So much of our manufacturing for drugs relies on the Chinese manufacturing, on Indian manufacturing,” Bhattacharya said. “And it leaves the United States in a very vulnerable place, where if you have a crisis, even when you don’t have a crisis, when there’s just normal demands for vital medical items, antibiotics, I already mentioned, normal saline. All of that is just normal demand. “We are in a shortage now of some of those things, because we do not have domestic manufacturing that can respond when there is an increase in demand, as there sometimes is,” he continued.

Read more …

“Speaker Pelosi does not own any stocks and has no knowledge or subsequent involvement in any transactions.”

• Treasury Secretary Bessent Calls For Trading Ban In Congress (JTN)

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent is calling for a single-stock trading ban in Congress. “I am going to start pushing for a single-stock trading ban, because it is the credibility of the House and the Senate, that you look at some of these eye-popping returns – whether it is Rep. Pelosi, Senator Wyden – every hedge fund would be jealous of them. And the American people deserve better than this,” Bessent told Bloomberg TV on Wednesday. Nancy Pelosi, of California, and Ron Wyden, are Democrats. Congressional Republicans including Georgia Rep. Majorie Taylor Greene, has also come under scrutiny. She recently disclosed stock trades made just before President Trump announced a 90-day pause on tariffs, prompting accusations of potential insider trading.

Greene told the Associated Press that she does not manage her own portfolio and that her investments are handled by a financial adviser. She also said all trades are disclosed in compliance with federal transparency requirements. “People shouldn’t come to Washington to get rich, they should come to serve the American people, and it brings down trust in the system because I can tell you that if any private citizen traded this way, the [Securities and Exchange Commission] would be knocking on their door,” he continued. Pelosi has long been criticized for her husband’s highly successful trades, which she is required to report in financial disclosures. Pelosi spokesperson Ian Krager told The Hill news outlet in response to Bessent, “Speaker Pelosi does not own any stocks and has no knowledge or subsequent involvement in any transactions.”

Wyden’s stock portfolio had a 123.8 percent gain last year, according to data from the financial analysis platform Unusual Whales. The Oregon senator posted on X in response to Bessent, “Nobody working for Donald Trump has any business pretending to care about ethics or the stock trading ban I support. If Scott Bessent gave a damn about the public interest, why is he holding a massive farm that puts him in a position to gain from Trump’s trade deals with China?” “Bessent is fuming that I blew the whistle on the fact that he’s hiding a huge Epstein file at the Treasury Department. Thousands of pages worth of Epstein’s bank records with names. Until he releases it, he’s just running interference for Epstein’s pedophile ring,” Wyden added.

Pelosi supports a bill advanced by all Democrats and Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., in the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee last month that would prevent members of Congress, their spouses, and their dependent children from buying and trading stocks, in addition to future presidents and vice presidents. In the House, Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, R-Fla., vowed to start a discharge petition to force a vote on another stock trade ban bill.

Read more …

This is good. Do read the whole thing. The boomers have taken all the good stuff. But now they’e getting old, and the next generations are taking over financial (slowly) and political (faster) power.

• The Boomer Mirage (Stylman)

One Chart. Three Generations. Total Extraction. I saw this chart making the rounds on Twitter this week, and it stopped me cold. While the specific figures combine data from multiple sources, the trend is undeniable: in 1950, over half of 30-year-olds were married homeowners. By 2025, some analysts project that number as low as 13%.

That’s not a societal transformation. It’s not an economic fluke. It’s the visible outcome of an invisible strategy—one that extracted everything it could from a three-generation arc and left only illusions in its place. They’ll tell you people just choose differently now—that marriage rates fell because of changing values. But people can’t choose what they can’t afford. When the economic foundation for family formation disappears, cultural changes follow inevitably. That chart doesn’t show us changing values or new priorities. It shows systemic breakdown, disguised for decades as freedom. It maps the slow evaporation of the social contract. For one generation, adulthood was a starting point. For the next, a struggle. For the latest, an abstraction—marketed endlessly but almost never attained.

What began as a rite of passage has become a paywalled simulation. The post–World War II boom was never sustainable. In hindsight, this was obvious. It relied on conditions that were always time-limited: cheap energy from newly tapped oil fields, industrial monopolies before globalization kicked in, dollar hegemony that exported inflation globally, and a demographic pyramid with more workers than retirees. It was a golden window, not a golden age. And when the window closed, the illusion had to be maintained—through leverage, narrative, and ever-increasing sacrifice from the generations that followed.

The math quietly stopped working. Boomers bought homes for two or three times their annual income during an era when interest rates would fall for the next four decades—turning their mortgages into wealth-building machines as rates dropped from 15% to near-zero. Today’s buyers face five to six times their income—or more in major cities—while rates can only go up from historic lows. Where Boomers rode a 40-year tailwind of falling borrowing costs that inflated their assets while deflated their debt, current generations face headwinds at every turn. The Federal Reserve data confirms this unprecedented decline, showing rates falling from over 18% in the early 1980s to near 2.6% by 2021.

Read more …

“They won’t speak up. They don’t stand for anything anymore..” [..] “All they stand for is whatever is against whatever President Trump stands for..”

• Sen. Kennedy: Democrats Need to ‘Buy Some Testicles’ on Amazon (Margolis)

If you don’t think Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) is a national treasure, you’re not paying attention. Kennedy has a rare gift for cutting through Washington’s polished, poll-tested nonsense with a plainspoken Southern wit that lands like a sledgehammer wrapped in velvet. Whether he’s grilling a bureaucrat in a Senate hearing or sparring with a cable news host, Kennedy delivers his critiques with the kind of folksy charm that leaves his targets stunned and his audience in stitches. On Wednesday night’s “Hannity,” Kennedy was in peak form, aiming at Chuck Schumer, Hakeem Jeffries, and the Democratic Party’s timid “mainstream wing” with a blistering, laugh-out-loud takedown that reminded viewers exactly why he’s one of the sharpest and funniest voices in American politics.

Kennedy unleashed his trademark blistering critique of the Democratic Party’s so-called “mainstream wing,” accusing it of being paralyzed by fear of its more radical members. “The mainstream wing of the party is scared to death of the loon wing,” Kennedy said. “They won’t speak up. And they don’t stand for anything anymore. All they stand for is whatever… is against whatever President Trump stands for.” He argued that this fear has led to Democrats adopting positions that Kennedy said are counterproductive, particularly regarding crime in the nation’s capital. “We find ourselves in the extraordinary position of mainstream Democrats have now come out firmly and passionately in favor of crime in Washington, D.C. Why? Because Trump is trying to do something about it,” he said.

When asked about Schumer and Jeffries, Kennedy did not hold back. “No, uh, they could, and I don’t mean any disrespect… I know Senator Schumer very well. So, I say this with respect. Chuck and Hakeem need to go to Amazon, buy some testicles… and stand up to the loon wing of their party,” he said, drawing laughter from the Fox News host Sean Hannity. Kennedy’s critique continued, targeting what he called the Democrats’ unwillingness to confront socialist elements within their own ranks. “Until they’re willing to do that, um, I haven’t heard Senator Schumer say anything bad about Mamdani. I mean, the guy’s a socialist. He’s a whack job,” Kennedy said. Hannity interjected, noting that party leaders are “afraid of the whack job,” to which Kennedy replied, “They’re scared to death in the party… The party is not going to get better until they do.”

https://twitter.com/JasonJournoDC/status/1955971871872090320

The conversation briefly turned to Kennedy’s colorful metaphor, with Hannity joking, “I didn’t know that Amazon sold testicles.” Kennedy responded in kind, saying, “You can buy anything on Amazon, Sean… They’re very cheap.” The back-and-forth underscored Kennedy’s blunt, no-nonsense style and his willingness to use humor to make a political point. Kennedy also believes the Democrats’ hesitancy to confront their more radical members has real-world consequences. “They won’t speak up. They don’t stand for anything anymore,” he said, repeating his core critique. “All they stand for is whatever is against whatever President Trump stands for. That’s why we find ourselves… in the extraordinary position” he described earlier. By the end of the interview, Kennedy summed up his message with his usual bluntness. “The party is not going to get better until they do,” he said.

Read more …

“The deadline was August 7. The broadcaster reported, citing a source, that Hunter Biden did not comply with Melania Trump’s demand within the established deadline.”

• Melania Trump Threatens Hunter Biden With $1Bln Lawsuit for Defamation (Sp.)

US President Donald Trump’s wife Melania has threatened former President Joe Biden’s son Hunter with a $1 billion lawsuit for allegedly “false” and “defamatory” statements against her related to the case of financier Jeffrey Epstein, a letter from the first lady’s lawyer read. The document published on the Fox News website noted that on August 5, Hunter Biden released a video on YouTube titled “Hunter Biden Returns,” which contained a number of statements that the first lady claims are false. “Here are the false statements in the Video that are defamatory per se: a.‘Epstein introduced Melania to Trump. The connections are, like, so wide and deep.’ b. ‘Jeffrey Epstein introduced Melania, that’s how Melania and the First Lady and the President met,” the letter said.

Melania’s lawyer demanded that Hunter “immediately issue a full and fair retraction of the video and any and all other false, defamatory, disparaging, misleading, and inflammatory statements about Mrs. Trump.” If the ex-president’s son does not comply with the demand, Melania intends to sue him for $1 billion in damages. The deadline was August 7. The broadcaster reported, citing a source, that Hunter Biden did not comply with Melania Trump’s demand within the established deadline.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Fauci
https://twitter.com/TRUMP_ARMY_/status/1955939204229423564

Bhakdi

disease

insects

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle August 9 2025

Aug 092025
 
 August 9, 2025  Posted by at 9:51 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,  45 Responses »


Heinrich Hofmann Christ and the Rich Young Man 1889

 

• Trump Reveals Time And Place Of Putin Summit: Alaska August 15 (RT)
• Putin Doesn’t Need To Meet Zelensky For Russia-US Summit – Trump (RT)
• Polish News Outlet Claims Insider Info on Trump-Putin Tentative Agreement (CTH)
• Oil Tumbles On Report Of US-Backed Russia-Ukraine Truce Deal (ZH)
• What Putin And Trump Want From The Ukraine Peace Deal (Bobrov)
• ‘Vital’ Poll Shows Ukrainians Are For Peace – Putin Envoy Dmitriev (Sp.)
• China Ready to Promote Peace & Negotiations on Ukraine – Xi (Sp.)
• Going, Going Gone. . . . (Kunstler)
• Appeals Court Nukes Boasberg’s Contempt Order In Trump Deportations Case (ZH)
• New Daily Fine Could Sap Resolve Of Texas Dems Who Fled State (ZH)
• Orban Calls For Russia-EU Summit (RT)
• Trump Yelled At Netanyahu For Dismissing Gaza Starvation – Media (RT)
• US Consulting Firm Modelled Mass Resettlement of Palestinians to Africa (RT)
• US Slaps Tariffs On Gold Bars (RT)
• Swiss President Blamed For ‘Disastrous’ Deal With Trump – FT (RT)

 

 

https://twitter.com/MyLordBebo/status/1953415357869281408

jobs
https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/1953555467189506327

https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/1953611969803800802

100
https://twitter.com/TheGabriel72/status/1953435750927929474

Zero seats

jay

 

 

 

 

With history in mind, a great location.

What a move. Zelensky and the EU left in the dark by the curb. Who saw that coming? We want peace!

• Trump Reveals Time And Place Of Putin Summit: Alaska August 15 (RT)

US President Donald Trump has said that he will meet his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin in Alaska next Friday. Kremlin aide Yury Ushakov confirmed immediately afterward that Moscow and Washington will be working on making the Alaska summit happen. “The highly anticipated meeting between myself, as President of the United States of America, and President Vladimir Putin, of Russia, will take place next Friday, August 15, 2025, in the Great State of Alaska,” Trump announced on Truth Social on Friday. According to the Kremlin, the upcoming meeting will revolve around reaching a longstanding peace in the Ukraine conflict.

Moscow expects that the two leaders’ next meeting after this will take place in Russia, the presidential aide said. Trump has officially been sent an invitation, he added. The US president’s special envoy Steve Witkoff visited Moscow on Wednesday for a meeting with Putin that Trump later called “highly productive.” The US leader has expressed his growing impatience with the pace of peace talks dedicated to resolving the Ukraine conflict, and has threatened to impose further secondary sanctions on Russian trade partners. According to the Kremlin, Moscow had received an “acceptable” offer from the US during Witkoff’s visit.

Russia had long said that it was interested in a peaceful resolution to the Ukraine conflict, but has insisted on one that brings about a permanent and stable peace. Russia and Ukraine have held three rounds of direct talks in Istanbul: in May, June, and late July. While the sides have failed to reach a breakthrough, they agreed to exchange prisoners of war and the bodies of fallen soldiers. Russia insists that a sustainable peace deal must include Ukraine’s commitment to stay out of NATO, demilitarization, and the recognition of the new territorial reality on the ground. Kiev has rejected these terms.

Read more …

Zelensky has nothing that Putin wants.

• Putin Doesn’t Need To Meet Zelensky For Russia-US Summit – Trump (RT)

US President Donald Trump has said he is willing to hold a summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin regardless of whether Putin meets with Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky. On Thursday, the New York Post cited a White House official as saying, “Putin must meet with Zelensky for the meeting [with Trump] to occur.” The US president, however, was quick to reject the report. “He doesn’t, no,” Trump told reporters when asked whether Putin would have to first meet Zelensky. “They would like to meet me, and I’ll do whatever I can to stop the killing.”

Zelensky has repeatedly called on Putin to hold in-person talks with Zelensky to end the conflict. The Russian president has said he has “nothing in principle” against a meeting, but reiterated that “certain conditions must be created” for it to take place. He has also cast doubt on Zelensky’s legal capacity to sign binding agreements, as the Ukrainian leader’s presidential term expired last year and he has refused to hold a new election, citing martial law. This has prompted Moscow to declare him “illegitimate.”

Trump’s remarks come after Kremlin aide Yury Ushakov said Putin and Trump could have a face-to-face meeting as soon as next week. Later, Putin floated the United Arab Emirates as a possible location for the summit. The summit developments follow a visit to Moscow by Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff, who held three-hour talks with Putin over the Ukraine conflict. The Kremlin described the discussion as “constructive,” while the White House said the meeting went better than expected. Trump also later commented that “great progress was made,” although no specific outcomes have been detailed.

Read more …

“..does not include guarantees against NATO expansion – one of Moscow’s consistent demands. Russia did not receive any promises that military support for Ukraine would cease.”

Clever:
“De facto recognition of Russian-occupied territories by postponing the status issue for 49 or 99 years.”

• Polish News Outlet Claims Insider Info on Trump-Putin Tentative Agreement (CTH)

I would approach this Polish media report with a note of caution and skepticism. The reason is not what most might think about. The CIA/GCHQ will likely be conducting covert IC propaganda operations to disrupt Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin from reaching any agreement. Therefore, for the next several weeks we should watch the sourcing of the media reports to identify familiar patterns. A Polish media outlet is reporting to have gained insight into the deal carried by President Trump special envoy, Steve Witkoff. As outlined, both President Trump and President Putin would be working from this framework.

“POLAND – Although Onet does not name its sources, it says that the proposal was coordinated with European states. “We have learned that Moscow received a very favorable offer from the Trump administration,” the outlet reported.”According to Onet, the US proposal includes:
• A ceasefire in Ukraine, though not a full peace agreement.
• De facto recognition of Russian-occupied territories by postponing the status issue for 49 or 99 years.
• The lifting of most sanctions imposed on Russia and, in the long term, a return to energy cooperation namely, imports of Russian gas and oil.”

Meanwhile, the proposal reportedly does not include guarantees against NATO expansion – one of Moscow’s consistent demands. Russia did not receive any promises that military support for Ukraine would cease. However, according to the outlet, this last point is said to be acceptable to the Russians. Broadly, this type of an outline makes sense; particularly the three main points and the removal of the sanctions. President Trump has noted repeatedly it was short-sighted for the Western financial system to think they could hurt Russia directly with the 2021 economic sanctions, given the pre-existing sanctions already in place since 2014. All of my research sources in eastern Europe and Russia generally agree the 2021 sanctions regime was about Western global banking interests (CBDC), together with Blackrock, State Street and Vanguard investments.

Common Question: “What is the fundamental reason that the IC wants to prevent the US from aligning with Russia? Is it simply to keep the conflict (and money) going in Ukraine?”
My response is, No. Several facets involved:
1. Russia does not align with current global banking control. This is the background motive behind the current western sanctions’ regime. Russia does not consider the global finance system to be legitimate. From Putin’s long-held perspective the dollar is too easily weaponized for geopolitical leverage. Ironic considering that’s exactly what the sanctions are. As a consequence, the Western global banks dislike Russia immensely.

2. Ideologically, Russia is not ‘woke’ in every sense of that weird word. Even the concept of DEI is crazy from the perspective of society in Russia. The Russian economy and socioeconomic system do not recognize modern western values, ie. “wokeism”. Explaining non-merit-based DEI is one of the most unusual conversations you can have with Russian people. They cannot fathom the concept of employment, subsidy or financial benefit from gender, skin color, ethnicity or race. It doesn’t compute to them because they have no concept of the motive or intent behind DEI. Russia is the least politically correct country you could ever visit.

3. Russia is an unusual caste system that rewards those closest to govt with enhanced status. However, on the caste continuum, Vladimir Putin is more Trumpian toward this internal political dynamic. Putin recognizes that all ships must rise, not just the connected. Think of Russia like visiting Disney. Those who can afford the ‘fast-track’ pass have a better experience than the ordinary ticket holder. Putin recognizes that in the modern era this system creates national vulnerability and political instability that can be exploited by narratives from the West. An entire division of USAID was created for this task. Putin’s goal is changing this dynamic.

4. MAGA understand that Trump needs to be authoritarian in order to cleanse the govt corruption. However, our constitutional system -which was weaponized by the radical leftists- does not allow this approach. In many ways, this type of authoritarian approach is what Putin uses to ensure the same manipulation does not happen to Russia. This puts him in opposition to the global intelligence apparatus who use social friction to stir up internal trouble.

5. Finally, Vladimir Putin has often said the enemy of Russia is not Americans; the identified enemy of Russia is the CIA and UK intelligence (GCHQ). There is a big difference, and the IC feel the same toward him. Hence their activity against him on behalf of their benefactors, the London banking interests.

President Trump is appreciated in Russia because:
(A) he is also not politically correct and speaks his mind.
(B) Trump has no friends in the IC who view Trump in the same oppositional context as Putin.
(C) Trump is honest, and Russians are brutally honest people.
(D) Trump is strong but respectful toward all voices.

Read more …

Where will it be Monday?

• Oil Tumbles On Report Of US-Backed Russia-Ukraine Truce Deal (ZH)

US and Russian officials are working toward an agreement on territories for a planned summit meeting between Presidents Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin as early as next week, the people said, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss private deliberations. The US is working to get buy-in from Ukraine and its European allies on the deal, which is far from certain, the people said. Putin is demanding that Ukraine cede its entire eastern Donbas area to Russia as well as Crimea, which his forces illegally annexed in 2014. That would require Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy to order a withdrawal of troops from parts of the Luhansk and Donetsk regions still held by Kyiv, handing Russia a victory that its army couldn’t achieve militarily since the start of the full-scale invasion in February 2022.

Such an outcome would represent a major win for Putin, who has long sought direct negotiations with the US on terms for ending the war that he started, sidelining Ukraine and its European allies. What are the odds Zelensky goes for this deal… and will Europe back it? Zelenskiy risks being presented with a take-it-or-leave-it deal to accept the loss of Ukrainian territory, while Europe fears it would be left to monitor a ceasefire as Putin rebuilds his forces. Russia would halt its offensive in the Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions of Ukraine along the current battlelines as part of the deal, the people said. They cautioned that the terms and plans of the accord were still in flux and could still change. Oil prices immediately tumbled on the report…

It’s still unclear if Putin would agree to take part in a trilateral meeting with Trump and Zelenskiy next week, even if he had already struck an agreement with the US president, the people added. The Russian leader told reporters on Thursday that he didn’t object to meeting Zelenskiy under the right conditions, though he said they don’t exist now.

Read more …

“..the paradox of diplomacy: in business, a deal signed is a deal done. In geopolitics, even signed agreements can be quietly gutted after the cameras stop rolling.”

• What Putin And Trump Want From The Ukraine Peace Deal (Bobrov)

Ahead of the anticipated summit between Russian President Vladimir Putin and US President Donald Trump, Moscow and Washington – like so many times before in the realm of diplomacy – appear to be chasing fundamentally different goals. The United States seeks to maintain the current status quo but also needs a result it can spin as “progress” on Ukraine. That could mean anything from a partial ceasefire to a full cessation of hostilities. Russia, by contrast, is looking for long-term, legally binding agreements. These would cover the full scope of Russia-US and Russia-Ukraine relations and include built-in enforcement mechanisms to prevent sabotage or unilateral withdrawal. With today’s US-Russia relations still steeped in Cold War-style hostility, the upcoming summit recalls another tense era. One might liken the two delegations to the intelligence officers who used to meet at Glienicke Bridge – the famous ‘Bridge of Spies’ – to exchange captured agents.

Like those secretive, high-stakes handoffs, diplomacy in 2025 still demands that both sides inch toward the middle to make any exchange possible. The very fact that this summit is happening suggests that the gap between Moscow and Washington has narrowed, at least tactically. Russia took the first step by hosting US Special Envoy Steve Witkoff in Moscow. In the quiet language of diplomacy, the country that initiates the visit is often the more eager to make a deal. Russia’s openness to holding the summit quickly signals a willingness to negotiate. And truthfully, it’s Washington that appears more anxious to move things forward. Time, at this point, seems to favor Moscow. President Putin made that clear during his recent meeting with Belarusian President Aleksandr Lukashenko in Valaam. Trump, on the other hand, urgently needs a foreign policy win. The White House is under fire on multiple fronts – from the looming Epstein files scandal to mass protests erupting in Democrat-controlled states over immigration policy.

Trump understands that securing peace in Ukraine could be the crown jewel in a larger global strategy. If he can notch progress in the Russia-Ukraine conflict – on top of de-escalating India-Pakistan, Thailand-Cambodia, Iran-Israel, and Armenia-Azerbaijan – he would be well-positioned to claim a ‘royal flush’ on the world stage. That, in turn, could make him a contender for the Nobel Peace Prize. But how exactly did Trump manage to extract concessions from Vladimir Putin – a veteran of global diplomacy with over 25 years of experience at the highest level? The answer lies in tactics familiar to Trump from his business career, many of which he outlined decades ago in his bestseller, The Art of the Deal. From that playbook, he appears to have used a select few strategic moves:

1) Creating artificial time pressure
Trump began by issuing a 50-day ultimatum. He warned that if no movement came from the Russian side, the US would impose sanctions targeting Russia’s shadow fleet. But just days later, he shortened the timeline dramatically – to eight days – clearly hoping to force Moscow’s hand with a sense of urgency.

2) Fostering strategic uncertainty
Witkoff’s recent visit to Moscow, successful by current standards, was wrapped in deliberate ambiguity. It was originally planned for the first weekend of August. But at the last moment, the American side requested a reschedule for August 6, citing the envoy’s packed calendar due to his parallel role in the Middle East. The unpredictability sent a signal: the US side would not play by a rigid script.

3) The good cop / bad cop routine
While American foreign policy is ultimately shaped by the president, internal dynamics still matter. Trump has surrounded himself with both hawks and doves. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Special Envoy for Ukraine Keith Kellogg often play hardball, while Steve Witkoff takes on the more diplomatic, conciliatory role. Notably, it is always Witkoff – not Rubio – who travels to Moscow, sending a clear message about who is empowered to build bridges.

4) Instilling fear
Trump knows how to apply pressure not just with words, but with policy. While continuing negotiations with China, he slapped a 25% tariff on India – Washington’s key partner in the Indo-Pacific – just before his Ukraine deadline expired. He’s used similar tactics with Canada, the EU, and other close allies. The subtext is clear: even friends aren’t immune from tough love.

Like a spy exchange on a Cold War bridge, diplomacy is the art of meeting halfway. That principle is playing out in real time, as both sides consider where to hold the summit. The location must be neutral, protocol-friendly, and equally distant from both capitals. During UAE President Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan’s recent visit to Moscow, Putin floated the UAE as a potential host. The country meets all the right criteria. And under the diplomatic principle of reciprocity, Trump may have little choice but to accept.

Meanwhile, efforts are underway to prevent third parties from sabotaging the summit. Kiev, with backing from the London-Berlin-Paris axis, is pursuing two goals. The maximalist aim is to derail the bilateral format and force a trilateral meeting that includes Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky. The fallback plan? Render any US-Russia resolution meaningless. In many ways, that’s the paradox of diplomacy: in business, a deal signed is a deal done. In geopolitics, even signed agreements can be quietly gutted after the cameras stop rolling.

So, will Trump’s instincts and tactics deliver a diplomatic breakthrough? The answer will come next week. But one thing is certain: whatever happens, this summit is bound to leave a mark on the annals of history.

Read more …

“..69% of Ukrainians (up from 20% in 2022) support negotiated peace as soon as possible not war..”

• ‘Vital’ Poll Shows Ukrainians Are For Peace – Putin Envoy Dmitriev (Sp.)

The head of the Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF) and Russian special presidential envoy for economic cooperation with foreign countries, Kirill Dmitriev, ahead of the Russia-US summit, took note of a public opinion poll showing a significant increase in the number of Ukrainians who support peace through talks. Dmitriev cited relevant sociological data from the American Gallup Institute, according to which 69% of Ukrainians (up from 20% in 2022) support the earliest possible achievement of peace through negotiations, rather than war. “An absolutely vital poll before the US-Russia summit: 69% of Ukrainians (up from 20% in 2022) support negotiated peace as soon as possible not war,” he wrote on X.

Russian presidential aide Yury Ushakov said Thursday morning Moscow and Washington had begun work to prepare for the upcoming Russia-US summit. American media reported on Wednesday evening that Trump wanted to meet with Putin as early as next week. Putin’s last meeting with a US leader took place in 2021 in Geneva, when the Russian president met with Joe Biden. Putin on Thursday named the UAE as one of the possible venues to meet with Trump.

Read more …

Still a BIG voice.

• China Ready to Promote Peace & Negotiations on Ukraine – Xi (Sp.)

Russia’s President Vladimir Putin and Chinese leader Xi Jinping have held a telephone conversation, the Chinese Central Television reported. The leaders held a telephone conversation at the initiative of the Russian side, the broadcaster reported. Beijing welcomes maintaining the contacts between Russia and the United States, Xi told Putin, according to the report. “China welcomes Russia-US contacts, improving relations and advancing political settlement of Ukrainian crisis,” Xi Jinping was quoted as saying by the China Central Television (CCTV) broadcaster. Commenting on the Ukrainian crisis, the president said that there is no simple solution to complex issues, adding that China will continue to promote peace and negotiations. The leaders also welcomed the high level of political mutual trust and cooperation between China and Russia, the broadcaster reported.

Read more …

“It was in the racketeering ecosystem that billionaires such as George Soros and Bill Gates could use their fortunes..”

• Going, Going Gone. . . . (Kunstler)

In case you’re wondering why the Democratic Party is in a death spiral, it is the proportionate response to the damage they have done to American culture and politics. You might think that they fell haplessly into error, but their turn to Marxian idealism was a cover for a matrix of hustles and rackets to make up for a void of any sane political program. Coming into the 21st century, our country was beset by looming decline. Our industrial base was going, going, gone, and with it millions of well-paying blue-collar jobs, the Democratic Party base. It was replaced by a so-called “financialized economy,” which was sanitized language for sets of swindles and frauds allowed to operate in the de-regulated banking system, in concert with the politicized Federal Reserve and crooked Congressional interests — you notice how many politicians paid $175-K a year somehow acquired multi-million-dollar fortunes?

What mainly grew in this period was government and things that fed off of it, such as the war industries, computer tech allied with the Intel gang, and especially the burgeoning universe of government-sponsored non-profit advocacy orgs, which became the jobs program for otherwise unemployables churned out of higher education, a racket that fed on federal loan guarantees. It was in the racketeering ecosystem that billionaires such as George Soros and Bill Gates could use their fortunes to advance their own personal obsessions through webs of non-governmental orgs (NGOs) to influence public affairs. By 2016, that was really all that the Democratic Party had left. It was the source of their money and their power. They also had the accumulated political capital of race advocacy, starting with the civil rights crusades of the 1960s. After our victory over manifest evil in World War Two, the Jim Crow system had to go, or else America could not pretend to lead the so-called “free world.”

Read more …

He lost to the Supreme Court.

“..failed judicial overreach at its worst.”

• Appeals Court Nukes Boasberg’s Contempt Order In Trump Deportations Case (ZH)

Activist judge James Boasberg has just been slapped down, after an appeals court removed an order which could have resulted in the Trump administration being found in contempt as part of a tense confrontation with the US District Judge. Earlier this year, Boasberg said he found probable cause to hold the administration in contempt because it purportedly violated his orders to halt deportations under the Alien Enemies Act. However in a 2–1 decision on Friday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit indicated that Boasberg went too far. Judge Gregory Katsas said that one of Boasberg’s orders could have been read in different ways.

“The district court here was placed in an enormously difficult position,” wrote Judge Gregory Katsas. “Faced with an emergency situation, it had to digest and rule upon novel and complex issues within a matter of hours. In that context, the court quite understandably issued a written order that contained some ambiguity.” Katsas noted that the appellate court ruling doesn’t center around the lawfulness of Trump’s Alien Enemies Act removals in March, when the administration invoked the 1798 immigration law to send over 250 Venezuelan nationals to CEDOT, El Salvador’s maximum-security prison. “Nor may we decide whether the government’s aggressive implementation of the presidential proclamation warrants praise or criticism as a policy matter,” he added. “Perhaps it should warrant more careful judicial scrutiny in the future. Perhaps it already has.”

“Regardless, the government’s initial implementation of the proclamation clearly and indisputably was not criminal.” As the Epoch Times notes further, Judge Neomi Rao described Boasberg’s decision as an “egregious” abuse of the court’s contempt power and said Boasberg had lost the authority to try and “coerce compliance” with his original order. That’s because his initial halts on the deportations had been vacated by the Supreme Court in another decision from April. One of the judges, Judge Cornelia Pillard, defended Boasberg and said the Trump administration appeared to have disobeyed his directions. “Our system of courts cannot long endure if disappointed litigants defy court orders with impunity rather than legally challenge them,” Pillard said. “This is why willful disobedience of a court order is punishable as criminal contempt.”

Read more …

Are there historical precedents?

“We’re gonna lose this vote”. “Well, not if we don’t vote at all..”

“In addition to the fine, they’ll also be hit with a bill for their pro rata share of what the House Sergeant at Arms spends to force them to come back to work.”

• New Daily Fine Could Sap Resolve Of Texas Dems Who Fled State (ZH)

Democratic state representatives who fled Texas to prevent a vote on a GOP-led congressional redistricting plan are under mounting pressure to return to Austin. On Thursday, Sen. John Cornyn announced that the FBI will help Texas law enforcement track them down, pursuant to Gov Gregg Abbott’s order that they be arrested and investigated for potential bribery charges. While that makes for dramatic headlines, the AWOL Democrats face another force that may do far more to motivate their return: a daily $500 fine that didn’t exist last time they pulled this stunt. That mounting tab has already blown past past the $600 monthly salary Texas House reps receive. They also receive a $221 per diem every day the legislature is in session, but it’s not clear if they’re entitled to claim it while they’re on the lam in Chicago.

In addition to the fine, they’ll also be hit with a bill for their pro rata share of what the House Sergeant at Arms spends to force them to come back to work. Those punitive measures are a new twist, added to the state House rules after Democrats in 2021 similarly absconded in an eventually failed attempt to derail GOP-led election reforms that included a ban on drive-through voting, more stringent requirements for mail-in voting, and the criminalization of distributing mail-ballot applications. The legislators’ run-and-hide tactic is called “denying quorum,” referring to the minimum number of lawmakers present in order to conduct legislative business. By state law, the Texas House can only conduct business when two-thirds of its 150 members are present, meaning at least 51 of the state’s 62 Democrats must continue to stay away from Texas.

In addition to facing mounting individual fines that didn’t exist last time they denied quorum, Democratic leaders say many representatives’ incomes from their regular jobs was already under strain from the calling of the current special session. Most representatives have other careers, as the Texas legislature only convenes for six months every two years. One of those whiners is Rep. Gene Wu, leader of the state House Democratic Caucus, who told NBC News.. “During the special session, I can’t work. Most people can’t work. They’re away from their families. … All of us are making actual, real sacrifices to be here…There’s people who are single moms, single dads, with their kids, and we just do what we can. None of this is fun.”

Democrats have been using their quorum-break as a fundraising vehicle. However, that’s putting themselves in different kind of crosshairs, as Texas Gov. Greg Abbott has said they risk felony bribery charges for accepting money “to assist in the violation of legislative duties.” On Monday afternoon, Abbott ordered the civil arrest of the AWOL Democrats. He is also working to have them removed from the legislature altogether, and use his powers under the Texas Constitution to pick their successors.

Texas Republicans currently control 25 of the state’s 38 congressional seats; the new map would likely give them 30, all of which Mr. Trump carried by at least 10 percentage points in 2024. The GOP holds a narrow 219-212 majority in the U.S. House, with four vacancies, and party leaders see Texas as central to preserving their legislative agenda. Meanwhile, Democrats across the country are threatening reprisals in the form of their own redrawing of district maps. They may be at a disadvantage, however, as Democrats have already perpetrated some of the most blatant gerrymandering of all:

Read more …

Nice twist:

“..the leaders of Germany and France – not EU officials – should directly negotiate with Russia..”

• Orban Calls For Russia-EU Summit (RT)

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has proposed holding a summit between Russia and the EU to address the Ukraine conflict. His remarks come shortly after the Kremlin said that Russian President Vladimir Putin could meet his US counterpart, Donald Trump, as early as next week. A member of both the European Union and NATO, Hungary has opposed Brussels’ policies on the Ukraine conflict since its escalation in February of 2022, particularly with respect to supplying Kiev with weapons and imposing sanctions on Russia. In an interview with Kossuth Radio on Friday, Orban called the potential Trump-Putin meeting “good news,” suggesting it could pave the way to a ceasefire.

Orban criticized fellow EU members for not engaging in diplomacy. He said that he had long maintained that the leaders of Germany and France – not EU officials – should directly negotiate with Russia. “There should be a Russian-European summit. Because the war is in Europe,” Orban argued, insisting that such a top-level meeting should take place “as soon as possible.” Kremlin aide Yury Ushakov told reporters on Thursday that Moscow and Washington had agreed in principle that Putin and Trump hold talks as soon as next week.

US special envoy Steve Witkoff had met with Putin in Moscow the previous day, in what Trump later described as “highly productive” talks. Also on Wednesday, Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto stated that Ukraine can have no place in the EU and “doesn’t even belong among civilized nations,” citing a recent case in which a member of the Hungarian ethnic minority in Western Ukraine died after reportedly being beaten by draft officers. The Ukraine conflict will only be resolved when both the West and Kiev accept that Ukraine cannot be a NATO member, Orban said earlier this month.

Read more …

“..an utterly disturbing example of how humanitarian relief can be exploited for covert military and geopolitical agendas.”

• Trump Yelled At Netanyahu For Dismissing Gaza Starvation – Media (RT)

US President Donald Trump reportedly shouted at Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during a phone call after the Israeli leader attempted to downplay reports of starvation in Gaza, NBC News reported on Friday. Netanyahu has publicly claimed that “there is no starvation” in the Palestinian enclave, which is being blockaded by Israeli military forces, despite multiple claims to the contrary from medical staff in Gaza. During a recent trip to the UK, Trump pushed back, telling journalists the starvation is real. According to the outlet, Netanyahu insisted during the call that allegations of widespread hunger in Gaza were fabricated by the militant group Hamas, but Trump interrupted him, raising his voice and stating that his aides had shown him evidence to the contrary.

The conversation was reportedly initiated at Netanyahu’s request, but the exchange ended up being “mostly one-way,” with Trump doing most of the talking, according to one source. Netanyahu’s office denied the claim, calling it “complete fake news” in a brief statement. NBC News suggested that Trump has taken a personal interest in the issue due to US support for the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), an Israeli-affiliated organization conducting limited relief work in the enclave since May. The foundation has been shunned by the UN, which operates its own aid network in Gaza and has accused Israel of obstructing food deliveries.

This week, a group of UN experts criticized the GHF, calling it “an utterly disturbing example of how humanitarian relief can be exploited for covert military and geopolitical agendas.” They accused the foundation of operating as a “tangle of Israeli intelligence, US contractors and ambiguous non-governmental entities,” rather than a legitimate relief agency. The UN estimates that nearly 1,400 people have been killed in Gaza while searching for food. Israel is currently preparing for a military operation to occupy Gaza City, marking yet another escalation in the conflict.

Read more …

Recognize insanity when you see it.

Trump will have to get rid of both Zelensky AND Netanyahu. That’s been clear for a while.

• US Consulting Firm Modelled Mass Resettlement of Palestinians to Africa (RT)

US global advisory firm Boston Consulting Group (BCG) modelled the resettlement of around a quarter of all Palestinians to other countries, including Somalia, as part of plans for postwar Gaza, the Financial Times has reported. In February, US President Donald Trump suggested moving more than 2 million Palestinians out of the war-torn enclave into neighboring countries to turn it into the “Riviera of the Middle East.” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has praised the idea, said on Thursday that the Jewish state will commit to a full military takeover of Gaza, to later hand it over to a transitional Arab government.

BCG’s postwar redevelopment model for Gaza envisioned relocating approximately 25% of its population to multiple nations, including Somalia and the breakaway region of Somaliland, “despite civil conflict and high levels of poverty in the region,” the FT wrote on Thursday, citing people familiar with the proposal. Washington has held preliminary talks with Somaliland about a broader deal that would establish a US military base there in exchange for the recognition of sovereignty, the FT wrote. Accepting relocated Palestinians was one of points discussed, according to the newspaper. BCG first developed its relocation model in March, working for a group of Israeli businessmen who were devising plans for postwar Gaza, the newspaper wrote.

It reportedly allowed for a number of scenarios and estimates for the cost of what was described as a “temporary relocation program.” The advisory firm’s calculations were included in slides intended for the US administration, other governments and “stakeholders,” the FT reported. The slide deck envisaged that the majority of the relocated Palestinians would not return. BCG earlier this year disavowed the controversial project and said it had fired the employees who worked on it. Key regional players have refused to participate in Trump’s relocation plan, which has been criticized by a number of Washington’s European allies, including France, Spain, and Germany. The UN has stated that the move would amount to ethnic cleansing.

Read more …

Doesn’t smell very practical.

• US Slaps Tariffs On Gold Bars (RT)

The US has imposed tariffs on imports of gold bars, according to media reports on Friday, citing a notice from Customs and Border Protection (CBP). Analysts say the decision could harm Switzerland’s gold refining sector and shake up the global bullion market. According to the Financial Times, which first broke the story, CBP stated in a July 31 ruling letter that 1kg and 100-ounce gold bars – the most commonly traded formats – should fall under a customs code subject to tariffs. The reported move brings gold bars under US President Donald Trump’s new tariffs, which target dozens of trade partners, including Switzerland. Trump imposed a 39% tariff on Swiss goods last Friday after rejecting Bern’s offer of a 10% tariff in exchange for $150 billion in US-bound investment.

When the tariff campaign began in April, some commodities – including certain bullion types – were exempt. The CBP ruling, issued in response to a Swiss refinery’s request, said 1kg and 100-ounce bars are considered “semi-manufactured” goods rather than “unwrought, nonmonetary gold,” the only exempt category. Switzerland is the world’s largest gold refining hub, and bullion is one of its biggest exports to the US. Traders told Bloomberg it’s unclear whether the tariffs are already in effect. Some said CBP may have erred, calling the decision “shocking” and likely to face legal challenges. “We never ever thought that [gold bars] would be hit by a tariff,” Robert Gottlieb, a former JPMorgan Chase metals trader, said.

Christoph Wild, the president of the Swiss Association of Manufacturers and Traders of Precious Metals, told FT the ruling “deals a blow” to Swiss-US gold trade, saying the widespread belief had been that “remelted bullion was tariff-free.” Experts say the fallout could disrupt the global bullion market. Gold is often used as a safe store of value during times of political and financial uncertainty. It has seen a historic rally this year, rising 27% since the end of 2024. Following the FT report, gold futures in New York hit an all-time high, with December contracts climbing to $3,534 on Friday morning.

Read more …

From a few days ago, before the gold bar decision. She must have really pissed him off…

• Swiss President Blamed For ‘Disastrous’ Deal With Trump – FT (RT)

Swiss President Karin Keller-Sutter is facing backlash after trade talks with Washington collapsed following a “disastrous” phone call with US President Donald Trump, the Financial Times has reported, citing sources familiar with the matter. Trump announced a 39% levy – one of the highest globally – on Swiss goods on Friday, coinciding with Switzerland’s national day. According to an FT report published on Sunday, Swiss negotiators believed they had secured a provisional deal for a 10% tariff, similar to the UK’s arrangement. In exchange, Bern pledged nearly $150 billion in US-bound investment and remained in regular contact with US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer. The offer was approved in early July, with Swiss officials convinced it only awaited Trump’s signature.

Keller-Sutter, who also serves as finance minister under the Swiss rotating presidency, had publicly stated last month that she had gained rare “access to Trump.” However, during a 30-minute call on Thursday – described by sources as “disastrous” – the US leader reportedly rejected the offer and instead focused on Switzerland’s $39 billion trade surplus. “The call did not go well, in the sense that from the very first minute Trump made it clear 10% was not enough, and all he could focus on was Switzerland stealing money from the US. There was nothing Keller-Sutter could say,” one source told the FT. Trump reportedly asked what more the “very wealthy” Alpine country could offer.

Swiss media called the outcome Keller-Sutter’s “biggest fiasco,” with tabloid Blick likening it to the country’s worst defeat since 1515, when Swiss troops lost to France at the Battle of Marignano. Greer later denied that a final deal had been secured, telling Bloomberg: “Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed.” The tariff hike followed Trump’s ‘Liberation Day’ speech on April 2 announcing a global trade overhaul. After multiple delays and a series of negotiations, a revised executive order signed last week adjusted rates based on “trade imbalances,” with the tariffs now set to enter into force on August 7.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/RobSchneider/status/1953330368385282517

RFK

RICO
https://twitter.com/Project_Veritas/status/1953574256769741057

Spain
https://twitter.com/TheBritLad/status/1953402175960289458

Limits

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Donald Trump Is Insane In a Good Way

Aug 082025
 
 August 8, 2025  Posted by at 5:23 pm Finance Tagged with: , , , ,  8 Responses »


Rembrandt van Rijn Portrait of his father 1628-29

 

 

I don’t want to wait another 12-15 hours with publishing this. Because if it is true, and oil markets appear to think so, it puts an end to over 40 months of wasted bloodshed, and it cements Donald Trump as the man of peace. Do expect 1,000 different ways to deny, ignore and undermine it. But this is what he sent Steve Witkoff with to the Kremlin yesterday. This is the “acceptable offer”. Screw Lindsey Graham, and screw the Euopeans- think of all the new enemies Trump makes with this. Will they whistle him back, threaten his life, his family? Will it all be a dream when I wake up in the moning?

ZeroHedge reports:

• Oil Tumbles On Report Of US-Backed Russia-Ukraine Truce Deal

US and Russian officials are working toward an agreement on territories for a planned summit meeting between Presidents Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin as early as next week, the people said, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss private deliberations. The US is working to get buy-in from Ukraine and its European allies on the deal, which is far from certain, the people said. Putin is demanding that Ukraine cede its entire eastern Donbas area to Russia as well as Crimea, which his forces illegally annexed in 2014. That would require Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy to order a withdrawal of troops from parts of the Luhansk and Donetsk regions still held by Kyiv, handing Russia a victory that its army couldn’t achieve militarily since the start of the full-scale invasion in February 2022.

Such an outcome would represent a major win for Putin, who has long sought direct negotiations with the US on terms for ending the war that he started, sidelining Ukraine and its European allies. What are the odds Zelensky goes for this deal… and will Europe back it? Zelenskiy risks being presented with a take-it-or-leave-it deal to accept the loss of Ukrainian territory, while Europe fears it would be left to monitor a ceasefire as Putin rebuilds his forces. Russia would halt its offensive in the Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions of Ukraine along the current battlelines as part of the deal, the people said. They cautioned that the terms and plans of the accord were still in flux and could still change. Oil prices immediately tumbled on the report…

It’s still unclear if Putin would agree to take part in a trilateral meeting with Trump and Zelenskiy next week, even if he had already struck an agreement with the US president, the people added. The Russian leader told reporters on Thursday that he didn’t object to meeting Zelenskiy under the right conditions, though he said they don’t exist now.

Read more …

And Sundance has the much-needed details:

• Polish News Outlet Claims Insider Info on Trump-Putin Tentative Agreement

I would approach this Polish media report with a note of caution and skepticism. The reason is not what most might think about. The CIA/GCHQ will likely be conducting covert IC propaganda operations to disrupt Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin from reaching any agreement. Therefore, for the next several weeks we should watch the sourcing of the media reports to identify familiar patterns.

A Polish media outlet is reporting to have gained insight into the deal carried by President Trump special envoy, Steve Witkoff. As outlined, both President Trump and President Putin would be working from this framework.

POLAND – Although Onet does not name its sources, it says that the proposal was coordinated with European states. “We have learned that Moscow received a very favorable offer from the Trump administration,” the outlet reported.”According to Onet, the US proposal includes:

• A ceasefire in Ukraine, though not a full peace agreement.

• De facto recognition of Russian-occupied territories by postponing the status issue for 49 or 99 years.

• The lifting of most sanctions imposed on Russia and, in the long term, a return to energy cooperation namely, imports of Russian gas and oil.

Meanwhile, the proposal reportedly does not include guarantees against NATO expansion – one of Moscow’s consistent demands. Russia did not receive any promises that military support for Ukraine would cease. However, according to the outlet, this last point is said to be acceptable to the Russians. Broadly, this type of an outline makes sense; particularly the three main points and the removal of the sanctions. President Trump has noted repeatedly it was short-sighted for the Western financial system to think they could hurt Russia directly with the 2021 economic sanctions, given the pre-existing sanctions already in place since 2014. All of my research sources in eastern Europe and Russia generally agree the 2021 sanctions regime was about Western global banking interests (CBDC), together with Blackrock, State Street and Vanguard investments.

Common Question: “What is the fundamental reason that the IC wants to prevent the US from aligning with Russia? Is it simply to keep the conflict (and money) going in Ukraine?”
My response is, No. Several facets involved:

1. Russia does not align with current global banking control. This is the background motive behind the current western sanctions’ regime. Russia does not consider the global finance system to be legitimate. From Putin’s long-held perspective the dollar is too easily weaponized for geopolitical leverage. Ironic considering that’s exactly what the sanctions are. As a consequence, the Western global banks dislike Russia immensely.

2. Ideologically, Russia is not ‘woke’ in every sense of that weird word. Even the concept of DEI is crazy from the perspective of society in Russia. The Russian economy and socioeconomic system do not recognize modern western values, ie. “wokeism”. Explaining non-merit-based DEI is one of the most unusual conversations you can have with Russian people. They cannot fathom the concept of employment, subsidy or financial benefit from gender, skin color, ethnicity or race. It doesn’t compute to them because they have no concept of the motive or intent behind DEI. Russia is the least politically correct country you could ever visit.

3. Russia is an unusual caste system that rewards those closest to govt with enhanced status. However, on the caste continuum, Vladimir Putin is more Trumpian toward this internal political dynamic. Putin recognizes that all ships must rise, not just the connected. Think of Russia like visiting Disney. Those who can afford the ‘fast-track’ pass have a better experience than the ordinary ticket holder. Putin recognizes that in the modern era this system creates national vulnerability and political instability that can be exploited by narratives from the West. An entire division of USAID was created for this task. Putin’s goal is changing this dynamic.

4. MAGA understand that Trump needs to be authoritarian in order to cleanse the govt corruption. However, our constitutional system -which was weaponized by the radical leftists- does not allow this approach. In many ways, this type of authoritarian approach is what Putin uses to ensure the same manipulation does not happen to Russia. This puts him in opposition to the global intelligence apparatus who use social friction to stir up internal trouble.

5. Finally, Vladimir Putin has often said the enemy of Russia is not Americans; the identified enemy of Russia is the CIA and UK intelligence (GCHQ). There is a big difference, and the IC feel the same toward him. Hence their activity against him on behalf of their benefactors, the London banking interests.

President Trump is appreciated in Russia because:
(A) he is also not politically correct and speaks his mind.
(B) Trump has no friends in the IC who view Trump in the same oppositional context as Putin.
(C) Trump is honest, and Russians are brutally honest people.
(D) Trump is strong but respectful toward all voices.

Read more …

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle August 7 2025

Aug 072025
 
 August 7, 2025  Posted by at 10:17 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  36 Responses »


Theo van Doesburg Counter-Construction 1923

 

• Trump, Putin To Meet As Soon As Next Week In Potential Breakthrough (ZH)
• Trump Tells Team To Arrange Putin Meeting ‘Fast’ – CNN (RT)
• Marco Rubio Discusses Potential for Trump and Putin Meeting (CTH)
• Ghislaine Maxwell Reportedly Cleared Trump’s Name In DOJ Interview (HUSA)
• Zelensky Rejects Any Limited Ceasefire With Russia (RT)
• Zelensky Rating Slumps – Poll (RT)
• Ukraine ‘Doesn’t Belong Among Civilized Nations’ – Hungarian FM (RT)
• Zelensky and the EU Increasingly Desperate Over The Inevitable Outcome (SCF)
• Top Trump Officials Will Discuss Epstein Strategy (CNN)
• FBI Burn Bags Had More Than Russiagate Files In Them (Margolis)
• DNI Tulsi Gabbard Breaks Down Russiagate (CTH)
• Ex-CIA Officer: Russiagate Deep State Operatives Still Work At The Agency (MN)
• Trump Slaps India With Additional 25% In Tariffs Over Russian Energy Trade (ZH)
• Sen. Adam Schiff Under Criminal Investigation For Mortgage Fraud (ZH)
• The Lucky Continent? (Rabo)

 

 

 

 

Rubio

https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/1952839386032226316

https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/1953210757220581495

https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/1953144644247699556
https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1953126714621522032

coup

scott

https://twitter.com/TheGabriel72/status/1953078954564436172

Taibbi

 

 

 

 

Steve Witkoff was at the Kremlin yesterday with somehing new to tell Putin (we don’t know what). Or there would not have been a meeting. Did Putin have a breakthrough idea? Hard to imagine. He for years now has had the No Nukes, No Nazis, No NATO standpoint, and that stands. Give up -new- territory? Once a piece of land has been declared part of Russia, you can’t just undeclare it. Besides, the people in the oblasts have voted to join Russia, and that is serious.

Russia didn’t want any of this when the SMO started in early 2022, Putin didn’t even want to discuss it for Crimea then. But things have changed. Russian(-speaking) people needed protection, and got it. Curious to see what the talks result in. That the US insists on bringing Zelensky along does not exactly help achieve peace. Same goes for the fully russophobe European NATO nations.

• Trump, Putin To Meet As Soon As Next Week In Potential Breakthrough (ZH)

It appears the Wednesday Witkoff-Putin meeting in Moscow has led to a breakthrough of sorts, coming right down to the wire of threatened fresh US anti-Russia sanctions set to be imposed Friday. Presidents Trump and Putin plan to meet in person as soon as next week, the NY Times is reporting. A meeting with Ukraine’s leader would then follow. “President Trump intends to meet in person with President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia as soon as next week, and he plans to follow up shortly afterward with a meeting between himself, Mr. Putin and President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine, according to two people familiar with the plan,” the breaking report says.

There’s as yet been no indicators from the Russian or Ukrainian sides of the plan, or even that Moscow is aware of an ‘agreement’ to proceed with a meeting. According to more details: Mr. Trump disclosed his plans in a call with European leaders on Wednesday, the people said. The meetings would include only those three men, and would not include any European counterparts. The European leaders, who have tried to play a coordinating role on meetings to end the violence between Russia and Ukraine while supporting their European neighbor, appeared to accept what Mr. Trump said, one of the people familiar with the call said.

Anti-Moscow critics have said that the Kremlin is just buying more time with Washington while its military operations in Ukraine proceed at full pace. Will a breakthrough actually come of this? Trump has said of a fresh call with European leaders that they agreed with him that “the war must end” – but that it must be “an honest end”. There must be something substantial cooking if both sides agree to a meeting, which would be the first such face-to-face interaction between Trump and Putin of the US president’s second term.

Read more …

Russia has confirmed the plans now.

• Trump Tells Team To Arrange Putin Meeting ‘Fast’ – CNN (RT)

US President Donald Trump has told his team to “move fast” to arrange a meeting with his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, CNN reported on Wednesday. Putin proposed a direct meeting with Trump during talks earlier in the day with US special envoy Steve Witkoff, the news outlet said, citing two anonymous sources in the White House. The US president’s aides reportedly began planning for a potential summit immediately. Though these types of high-level meetings typically require preparation time, “Trump was urging his team to move fast,” CNN wrote. No location has been confirmed, but discussions could begin as early as next week, the outlet added.

Earlier in the day, Trump praised the outcome of the Putin-Witkoff talks, saying there is “a very good prospect” for a meeting between the Russian president and Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky. “There is a good chance there could be a meeting very soon,” he told reporters in the Oval Office. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio indicated on Wednesday that this could come in the form of a trilateral summit involving Trump, Putin, and Zelensky, provided peace talks on the Ukraine conflict go well. The New York Times also reported that the US president intends to meet soon with his Russian counterpart.

Trump unveiled the plan in a recent phone call with European leaders, in which he announced plans to hold a trilateral summit alongside Putin and Zelensky after a one-on-one with the Russian leader, the NYT wrote on Wednesday, citing anonymous sources. Moscow has not yet confirmed any plans for a meeting. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said time is needed to normalize US-Russia relations before a summit can occur. Relations between Washington and Moscow fell to an “unprecedented level” under Trump’s predecessor, Joe Biden, leaving many points of contention, he told TASS on Wednesday.

Read more …

“Rubio added “a lot has to happen before that can occur.”

• Marco Rubio Discusses Potential for Trump and Putin Meeting (CTH)

At the White House event with Apple CEO Tim Cook, President Trump said that “there’s a really good prospect that” there will be a meeting with Zelenskyy and Putin. But he disagreed with the suggestion it amounted to a “breakthrough.” Secretary of State Marco Rubio notes in the interview here, “an opportunity will present itself very soon for the president to meet both with Vladimir Putin and with President Zelenskyy at some point here, hopefully in the near future.” Rubio added “a lot has to happen before that can occur.”

Read more …

Pardoning Ghislaine would unleash a lot of anger.

• Ghislaine Maxwell Reportedly Cleared Trump’s Name In DOJ Interview (HUSA)

Convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell reportedly told the Justice Department in a recent interview that she never observed President Donald Trump doing anything around her that “caused concern.” Maxwell was recently interviewed by the DOJ about roughly 100 people who were associated with her and her accomplice, deceased pedophile Jeffrey Epstein. “Maxwell said nothing during the interview that would be harmful to President Donald Trump,” ABC reported, citing anonymous sources. “There is also an audio recording of the interview, the sources said, but it’s not clear whether the administration plans to release the audio to accompany any public release of the transcript,” the outlet added. “The public release of the transcripts could come as soon as this week.”

Maxwell was moved from federal prison in Florida to a cushier, lower-security camp in Texas after her DOJ interview. Maxwell was previously housed in the “honor dorm” of a low-security prison in Tallahassee, Florida. “Maxwell’s cushy new digs in D South – the so-called ‘honor dorm’ – are reserved for 30 to 40 of the low-security Florida lockup’s best-behaved prisoners,” the Daily Mail reported in March 2024. She has an appeal pending before the Supreme Court, and rumors are swirling that President Donald Trump may pardon her in exchange for information about his political enemies. A potential pardon would give Maxwell every incentive to clear Trump’s name – which is what she did, according to a Wednesday report from ABC News.

Read more …

“Moscow has also said a ceasefire could be possible if Ukraine halts troop movements, suspends mobilization, stops foreign arms shipments, and holds a presidential election.”

• Zelensky Rejects Any Limited Ceasefire With Russia (RT)

Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky has rejected any limited ceasefire with Russia, insisting that Kiev will only agree to a complete halt in hostilities. His statement came in the wake of reports from Bloomberg that Moscow planned to propose a pause in air operations. Moscow and Kiev have agreed to several partial ceasefires since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022. Both sides have also accused each other of violating the agreements. Following a US-mediated 30-day agreement to pause strikes on energy infrastructure earlier this year, Moscow reported that Kiev’s forces had violated the truce over 100 times. Bloomberg reported on Tuesday, citing anonymous sources, that the Kremlin is considering offering an “air truce” during the visit of US special envoy Steve Witkoff to Moscow this week.

The arrangement would reportedly involve halting missile and drone strikes but would not end ground operations. The proposal is expected to come amid US President Donald Trump’s threats to impose secondary tariffs on Russia and its trading partners unless a peace deal is reached soon. Moscow has not confirmed plans to propose any sort of limited truce. In a post on his Telegram channel, Zelensky wrote that Kiev supports only an “immediate, complete and unconditional ceasefire. ” We’ve already tried many different formats, he said, referring to proposals for “silence in the skies” and halts to energy sector attacks. He alleged that all such agreements were breached and urged further sanctions on Moscow.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has said Moscow favors a peaceful resolution and a “long- term, lasting peace” rather than a temporary truce. He has stressed that any settlement must address the “realities on the ground” and the root causes of the conflict. Russia has repeatedly called on Ukraine to recognize the loss of five of its former regions that joined Russia in public referendums, withdraw its forces from those territories, commit to neutrality, and limit its military capabilities. Moscow has also said a ceasefire could be possible if Ukraine halts troop movements, suspends mobilization, stops foreign arms shipments, and holds a presidential election. Kiev has rejected the terms as unacceptable.

Read more …

Still much higher than I would have guessed. Who’s doing the polling?

• Zelensky Rating Slumps – Poll (RT)

Public trust in Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky has dropped by 7% in about a month, according to a nationwide poll released on Wednesday. The apparent slump in popularity came after his controversial botched crackdown on the country’s key anti-corruption agencies. The survey by the Kiev International Institute of Sociology (KIIS), conducted from July 23 to August 4, suggests that trust in Zelensky stands at 58%, down from 65% in June. The poll says 35% of Ukrainians now say they do not trust Zelensky – an increase from 30% in early June. The drop in support was especially steep among respondents under 30, where trust fell by 15% – from 74% at the start of summer to 59% by early August, according to the poll.

The KIIS partially attributed the decline to Zelensky’s attempt to strip the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) and the Special Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO) of independence, citing Russian influence. Critics of the move accused Zelensky of having authoritarian tendencies, sparking protests at home and discontent in the West, given that many supporters of Kiev have for years demanded that it intensify the fight against corruption. Following the backlash, Zelensky was forced to roll back the reforms. KIIS stressed that although the controversy undoubtedly damaged Zelensky’s image, other factors are at play.

Of those who distrust him, only 6% cited the controversy as the reason, compared to 21% who pointed to overall corruption and 20% who say Zelensky is an inefficient leader during a time of conflict. The KIIS poll was based on phone interviews with 1,022 respondents across Ukraine. Last month, Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) stated that US and UK officials had secretly met with their key Ukrainian counterparts to discuss ousting Zelensky and replacing him with former military chief Valery Zaluzhny. According to the SVR, the recent NABU and SAPO controversy was in large part engineered by Zelensky’s own officials to provide justification for the Western partners to seek his removal.

Read more …

“..Ukrainian draft officers were accused of beating to death a dual Ukrainian-Hungarian citizen.”

• Ukraine ‘Doesn’t Belong Among Civilized Nations’ – Hungarian FM (RT)

Ukraine can have no place in the EU and “doesn’t even belong among civilized nations,” Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto has said. His comments come after Ukrainian draft officers were accused of beating to death a dual Ukrainian-Hungarian citizen. Media reports emerged last month that 45-year-old Jozsef Sebestyen, who lived in Ukraine’s Zakarpatye Region – home to a large Hungarian minority – died as a result of injuries sustained when he was beaten with iron rods by recruitment officers. News of Sebestyen’s death sparked outrage in Hungary, where hundreds gathered outside the Ukrainian Embassy in Budapest to condemn the incident.

Budapest summoned Ukraine’s ambassador to issue a formal protest and called on Brussels to introduce sanctions against Ukrainian leaders responsible for Sebestyen’s death. Commenting during an episode of the Harcosok Oraja podcast which aired on Wednesday, Szijjarto said: “A country like that not only has no place in the EU – it doesn’t even belong among civilized nations.” Ukraine’s forced conscription, marked by beatings and even killings, is “state-institutionalized” and “state-executed,” Szijjarto claimed. He added that any civilized country would act immediately upon seeing footage of officers violently detaining people, and that those responsible would be swiftly arrested and jailed.

“So what happens in Ukraine instead? Everyone turns their heads, no one dares to talk about it,” the foreign minister concluded. The Ukrainian military has claimed that Sebestyen died of a medical condition and showed no signs of violence. Hungary, however, has requested that the EU impose sanctions on three Ukrainian officials involved in mobilization efforts. In addition to alleged human rights violations, Hungary has cited several reasons for its opposition to Ukraine’s bid for EU accession. Szijjarto has argued that Ukraine’s membership would weaken rather than strengthen the bloc, while Hungarian Prime Minister Victor Orban has repeatedly warned that it would bring war directly onto EU territory.

Read more …

“The Western rhetoric of “defending Europe” is a smokescreen used to justify the militarization of the continent and the artificial prolongation of the conflict.”

• Zelensky and the EU Increasingly Desperate Over The Inevitable Outcome (SCF)

In yet another sign of Ukraine’s psychological collapse, President Vladimir Zelensky has once again openly advocated for the political destabilization of Russia. In recent speeches, Zelensky stated that only a regime change in Moscow could guarantee “security” for Europe and prevent future conflicts on the continent. In practice, this is a desperate attempt to keep the narrative of the “Russian threat” alive, even as it becomes increasingly clear that the West has lost control of its proxy war against Moscow. Zelensky proposes a two-step plan: deepen the seizure of Russian financial assets and intensify diplomatic and political efforts to bring down the current Russian government. His logic is simple—but completely flawed: according to him, even if the war in Ukraine ends, the “threat” will remain as long as Vladimir Putin is in power.

The proposal, however, ignores Russia’s internal political reality, where Putin enjoys broad popular and institutional support. In other words, what the West and Kiev are pursuing is a coup d’état disguised as a “democratic transition”. But any serious analyst knows that the political structure of the Russian Federation is solid and widely backed by its population. Putin’s recent re-election, with a strong majority and high voter turnout, confirms this. There is no internal base for an uprising against the Kremlin—nor is there any international legitimacy for such an operation. Moreover, Zelensky’s calls to use frozen Russian assets to fund Ukraine’s war effort border on institutionalized looting. It is a flagrant violation of international law and economic sovereignty.

Confiscating the assets of citizens and companies based solely on nationality, then redirecting those resources to the war industry, reveals the level of moral and legal degradation that now dominates Western politics. Even more concerning is the fact that European leaders, such as Kaja Kallas, have already openly advocated for the fragmentation of Russia—a dangerously revanchist discourse reminiscent of the Cold War, which undermines any possibility of multilateral dialogue. The idea of breaking up the Russian Federation into dozens or even hundreds of “microstates” reflects an imperialist fantasy rooted in the darkest moments of European colonialism—and echoes remnants of the Nazi-fascist ideology that presupposes the creation of ethno-states.

Nonetheless, the obsession with “containing” Russia ignores a fundamental fact: there is no concrete evidence that Moscow intends to invade other European countries. The special military operation in Ukraine did not stem from any expansionist ambition, but from the need to protect the Russian population in Donbass and to curb NATO’s encroachment on Russia’s borders. After years of Western provocation and the genocide of ethnic Russians in what was then eastern Ukraine, Moscow chose to act. The Western rhetoric of “defending Europe” is a smokescreen used to justify the militarization of the continent and the artificial prolongation of the conflict.

In reality, Europeans are already feeling the economic and social consequences of this suicidal policy: inflation, an energy crisis, the erosion of civil liberties, and growing public dissatisfaction—manifested most recently in electoral results favoring illiberal candidates and parties, which were shamefully censored by European governments. The most rational path for Europe would be to distance itself from Kiev’s pro-war madness and adopt a foreign policy based on stability, sovereignty, and mutual respect. Unfortunately, European leaders appear fully aligned with a Russophobic agenda—even if it means plunging the continent into yet another decade of chaos. Zelensky does not speak for himself; he is merely the loudest voice of a failed project that insists on attacking Russia while Ukraine itself collapses economically, militarily, and politically.

Read more …

“Trump on Tuesday defended Blanche’s recent sit-down with Maxwell, arguing that Blanche wanted to ensure that people who “aren’t involved are not hurt” by something “very unfair.”

• Top Trump Officials Will Discuss Epstein Strategy (CNN)

Top Trump administration officials will gather at the vice president’s residence Wednesday evening as they continue to weigh whether to publish an audio recording and transcript of Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche’s recent conversation with Jeffrey Epstein accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell. The administration’s handling of the Epstein case, as well as the need to craft a unified response, is expected to be a main focus of the dinner, three sources familiar with the meeting told CNN. The meeting will include White House chief of staff Susie Wiles, Vice President JD Vance, Attorney General Pam Bondi, FBI Director Kash Patel and Blanche. With the exception of Vance, the White House considers those officials the leaders of the administration’s ongoing strategy regarding the Epstein files, two of the sources said.

The meeting comes as Trump’s administration is considering releasing the contents of Blanche’s interview last month with Maxwell. Two officials told CNN that the materials could be made public as early as this week. There have also been internal discussions about Blanche holding a press conference or doing a high-profile interview, possibly with popular podcaster Joe Rogan, according to three people familiar with the discussions, though those conversations are preliminary. Rogan, who endorsed Trump on the eve of last fall’s election, has been highly critical of the Trump administration’s handling of the Epstein case and previously called their refusal release more information about Epstein a “line in the sand.” [..] Patel and Bondi have previously clashed over the administration’s Epstein strategy.

Meanwhile, CNN previously reported that the Justice Department has been digitizing, transcribing and redacting the interview materials as they weigh if and when to publicly release the information from the Maxwell interview. There is over 10 hours of audio, a senior Trump administration official said. Portions of the transcript that could reveal sensitive details like victim names would also have to be redacted, one of the officials said. One official told CNN that some of the conversation within the White House has focused on whether making the details from the interview public would bring the Epstein controversy back to the surface. Many officials close to Trump believe the story has largely died down. Trump on Tuesday defended Blanche’s recent sit-down with Maxwell, arguing that Blanche wanted to ensure that people who “aren’t involved are not hurt” by something “very unfair.”

On Wednesday morning, the family of Epstein victim Virginia Giuffre issued a statement asking why no survivors had been invited to the meeting at Vance’s home. They offered to attend in Giuffre’s stead, as she died by suicide earlier this year. “Missing from this group is, of course, any survivor of the vicious crimes of convicted perjurer and sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein. Their voices must be heard, above all,” wrote Giuffre’s two brothers and sisters in law, Sky and Amanda Roberts and Danny and Lanette Wilson. Amid the clamor for more disclosures about the case, the House Oversight Committee on Tuesday issued nearly a dozen subpoenas to the Justice Department and high-profile Democratic and GOP figures for files and information related to Epstein — a significant show of defiance against Republican leaders.

Two of the administration officials said if they were to release the audio and transcript, it would likely be done sooner rather than later. One said the release could be several weeks from now, depending on what the most senior-level officials within the West Wing and Justice Department decide. It was not immediately clear whether the White House and DOJ were aligned on the issue. “This is nothing more than CNN trying desperately to create news out of old news. [Trump] already addressed this issue in an interview with Newsmax, a real news outlet that routinely gets better ratings than CNN,” White House Communications Director Steven Cheung told CNN, when asked about the possibility of releasing the transcript. Blanche interviewed Maxwell at the US attorney’s office in Tallahassee, Florida, last month over a period of two days. Maxwell was sentenced in 2022 to 20 years in federal prison for carrying out a yearslong scheme with Epstein to groom and sexually abuse underage girls. She has continued to appeal her conviction, including with the Supreme Court.

Last week, Maxwell was moved from a Florida federal prison to a lower-security federal prison camp in Texas, a relatively uncommon move as those convicted of sex offenses are almost always deemed too high of a risk to public safety. As Trump has faced mounting pressure from his base for transparency, the White House has repeatedly said the DOJ should release all “credible evidence” in the Epstein files. Asked about Blanche’s meeting with Maxwell last week, Trump again said he’d like to see everything in the files released. “We’d like to release everything, but we don’t want people to get hurt that shouldn’t be hurt, and I would assume that was why he was there,” Trump told Newsmax on Friday. The president said he hadn’t spoken to Blanche about his meetings with Maxwell and didn’t know when that information would be made public.

“I haven’t spoken about it, but he’s a very talented guy, Todd Blanche, and a very straight shooter, and I think he probably wanted to know, you know, just to get a feeling of it,” Trump said. CNN previously reported that a senior Trump administration official stated that the president is not currently considering clemency for Maxwell, though he has repeatedly left the door open on the matter in recent weeks, saying he’s “allowed to do it.”

Read more …

The Russiagate Files contained Epstein files.

Why any evidence in the burn bags of anything was not…well, burned, no idea.

• FBI Burn Bags Had More Than Russiagate Files In Them (Margolis)

Last month we learned that FBI Director Kash Patel uncovered a hidden SCIF room at FBI headquarters — sealed off since the Comey era — stuffed with thousands of Trump-Russia documents and burn bags. Among the most damning finds? The classified annex to the Durham report. “Just think about this,” Patel said. “Me, as director of the FBI, the former ‘Russiagate guy,’ when I first got to the bureau, found a room Comey and others hid from the world in the Hoover Building — full of documents and computer hard drives no one had ever seen. They locked the door, hid access, and just said, ‘No one’s ever gonna find this place.’” But there was something else in those burn bags besides Russiagate documents. According to Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.), materials tied to Epstein were among the contents found in the burn bags, and a formal investigation is now underway.

During an interview on “The Benny Johnson Show,” Rep. Luna dropped a bombshell: “I’m asking [the FBI] directly who authorized this information to be placed in burn bags and what information they have about the former deputy director of the FBI destroying evidence pertaining to Jeffrey Epstein, which we know right now the FBI is actively investigating.” She credited Johnson’s program with kickstarting the inquiry. “It was your show that kinda tipped me off to follow up with one of those whistleblowers, and now that’s a full-fledged investigation,” Luna said. Johnson sought clarification. “You’re confirming to us that the FBI has destroyed Epstein evidence?” he asked. “I’m confirming that there’s an open investigation, and that the leads on your show resulted in them finding burn bags pertaining to Russiagate and potentially Epstein, yes,” Luna replied.

https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/1952745647821463844

The congresswoman tied the attempted destruction of Epstein-related material to a broader pattern of misconduct during the Bush-era DOJ and FBI. “The actual cover-up was in 2005, 2006, 2007 when Epstein was allowed to skate even though they had him dead to rights,” Johnson said, pointing to former FBI Director Robert Mueller and then-Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. Luna didn’t dispute the timeline and said this was part of what she’s pushing to uncover. Beyond Epstein, Luna also alluded to the potential destruction of evidence tied to the FBI’s now-debunked Trump-Russia investigation. “Had Tulsi [Gabbard] not come forward with that information in regards to Russiagate… think about it: people using their positions of power to violate constitutional rights, civil liberties, go after people, spy. It can’t be tolerated in a free and fair society.”

Despite the disturbing implications, Luna expressed confidence that the current administration is making progress on accountability. “I’m just really happy to know that, under this administration, that people are being held accountable,” she said. She also noted arrests are being made behind the scenes. If proven true, the FBI’s attempted destruction of Epstein-related materials could mark a new chapter in the scandal — and raise even more questions about who’s protecting whom.

Read more …

Long interview. Miranda Devine used to mostly write, but has now become a “face”.

• DNI Tulsi Gabbard Breaks Down Russiagate (CTH)

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard appears for an extensive podcast interview with Miranda Devine. It may create ‘splodey heads in Washington DC, but DNI Gabbard is now positioned as the tip of the spear to penetrate the fraud, lies, schemes and manipulations of the Intelligence Branch of government. Tulsi Gabbard is the leading voice for honesty and sunlight against the entire DC apparatus that participated in the Russiagate construct.

Gabbard now understands how the DC silo system was weaponized during the manufacturing of information against a political candidate, Donald Trump. Gabbard is speaking truth toward a corrupt system, and she will be the target of all fury that’s dependent on the retention of the corruption. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard sits down with Miranda Devine to discuss, in her own words, Obama’s Russiagate plot to sabotage Trump, Hillary Clinton’s vendetta against her, and the evidence that could topple Brennan, Clapper, and Comey.

Read more …

It’ll take time to sweep all the agencies.

• Ex-CIA Officer: Russiagate Deep State Operatives Still Work At The Agency (MN)

A former CIA operations officer has warned that Deep State operatives who concocted the fake Russia collusion narrative against President Trump under then Director John Brennan are still active inside the agency. Bryan Dean Wright told the Daily Caller that “At least two still do work there. That doesn’t mean that all of the other people have left. Those are just the two that I’m aware of.” nWright claims that One of the operatives still has a “blue badge,” meaning they are a direct CIA employee, while another possesses a “green badge,” and carries out work as a contractor. The Daily Caller notes that Wright declared in a recent op-ed that Brennan should “rot in prison” for treasonous plotting to undermine the integrity of the Republic. “These men thought they knew what was best for America, and they didn’t give a damn what voters like you thought,” the former spook asserted.

Wright further suggested that because Brennan worked at the agency for so long, he likely continues to shape the culture at the CIA and has almost certainly cultivated generations of like minded employees. As we’ve highlighted, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard has officially handed the Department of Justice a criminal referral relating to the “treasonous conspiracy” by Brennan, other Obama officials and the former President himself outlined in Declassified documents. Further documents released by Gabbard have revealed that not only did the CIA believe a Russian intelligence assessment that the 2016 Hillary Clinton campaign planned to smear Trump by linking him to the Kremlin, but that the FBI helped the Clinton campaign orchestrate the Russia hoax to distract from its investigation into her emails.

The declassified documents also show that the Clinton Campaign plotted to use Crowdstrike to push the claim that Russian hackers leaked information from the Democratic National Convention (DNC) and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC). President Trump has admitted that he previously refrained from pursuing an indictment for Hillary Clinton, but believes now she should “pay a very big price.” A House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence report declassified on July 23 has also shown that just five CIA analysts under Brennan wrote the 2017 intelligence assessment, which included the infamous fake Steele dossier, on which the Russia hoax was based.

The report notes that according to a CIA self-assessment declassified on July 2, the analysts were part of a “Fusion Cell” Brennan had put together months to explore Russian election interference. There are concerns that those agents remain embedded in the framework of the CIA. Current CIA Director John Ratcliffe proclaimed last week that Brennan, James Comey, Hillary and others face “serious legal consequences,” for their roles in the scandal, revealing that he has made additional referrals for criminal prosecution, building on those sent weeks earlier by Gabbard, including one about Barack Obama.

“We’re gonna continue to share the intelligence that would support the ability of our Department of Justice to… bring fair and just claims against those who have perpetrated this hoax and the American people and this stain on our country,” he said during a Fox News interview. On Sunday Ratcliffe described Hillary’s role in the Russia hoax and her efforts to frame Trump as the “greatest political scandal” in a lifetime. “There was Intelligence from foreign Intelligence services, that one U.S. presidential candidate was trying to frame another candidate for treason, claiming that he was an agent of a foreign power, an agent of Russia, and that Intelligence was never shared,” Ratcliffe urged.

Read more …

India gets blamed for Ukraine. Get serious. What do you say to that? Show it to me on a map?

• Trump Slaps India With Additional 25% In Tariffs Over Russian Energy Trade (ZH)

Just as he warned yesterday, President Trump signed an executive order imposing an additional 25% tariff on India over its purchase of Russian energy, the White House said Wednesday hours after talks between the US and Russia over the war in Ukraine failed to yield a breakthrough. The accelerated tariffs – which will stack on top of 25% country-specific tariffs set to be implemented overnight – will go into effect within 21 days, according to the executive order signed by Trump. “They’re fueling the war machine. And if they’re going to do that, then I’m not going to be happy,” Trump said Tuesday in an interview with CNBC. This rhetoric was escalated in the initial paragraphs of the Executive Order:

“Executive Order 14066 of March 8, 2022 (Prohibiting Certain Imports and New Investments With Respect to Continued Russian Federation Efforts To Undermine the Sovereignty and Territorial Integrity of Ukraine), expanded the scope of the national emergency declared in Executive Order 14024 of April 15, 2021 (Blocking Property With Respect To Specified Harmful Foreign Activities of the Government of the Russian Federation), to include the actions taken against Ukraine by the Government of the Russian Federation. To address that unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States, Executive Order 14066 prohibited, among other things, the importation into the United States of certain products of Russian Federation origin, including crude oil; petroleum; and petroleum fuels, oils, and products of their distillation.
…
To deal with the national emergency described in Executive Order 14066, I determine that it is necessary and appropriate to impose an additional ad valorem duty on imports of articles of India, which is directly or indirectly importing Russian Federation oil. In my judgment, imposing tariffs, as described below, in addition to maintaining the other measures taken to address the national emergency described in Executive Order 14066, will more effectively deal with the national emergency described in Executive Order 14066.”
…
Accordingly, and as consistent with applicable law, articles of India imported into the customs territory of the United States shall be subject to an additional ad valorem rate of duty of 25 percent.” The reaction was immediate extended selling pressure in India ETF…

Read more …

“Pulte indicated potential violations of federal laws, including wire, mail, and bank fraud.”

• Sen. Adam Schiff Under Criminal Investigation For Mortgage Fraud (ZH)

How does the old expression go? “When you point one finger at someone, three point back at you?” Sen. Adam Schiff – best known for dramatizing Trump’s Ukraine call during his first term, misidentifying evidence in texts, overstating “collusion” findings, and defending a FISA memo later found to contain false statements – is under criminal investigation for alleged mortgage fraud, according to a Trump administration source cited by Fox News. Laura Ingraham revealed the news on “The Ingraham Angle” last night, reporting that the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Maryland is conducting the probe. The investigation follows a criminal referral from the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) to the Department of Justice, according to Fox News.

FHFA Director William Pulte alleged that Schiff “has, in multiple instances, falsified bank documents and property records to acquire more favorable loan terms,” which he said could endanger the stability of the U.S. mortgage system. According to the FHFA, Schiff and his wife purchased a home in Potomac, Maryland, in 2003, financing it with a $610,000 Fannie Mae-backed loan by declaring it their primary residence. However, Schiff also claimed a condo in Burbank, California, as his primary residence, even receiving a $7,000 California homeowner’s tax exemption. Fox News writes that in a 2011 affidavit, Schiff certified the Maryland property as his primary residence. The FHFA notes that this designation was reaffirmed in multiple refinancing filings through 2013, despite Schiff serving in Congress representing California.

A 2023 spokesperson said, “Adam’s primary residence is Burbank, California, and will remain so when he wins the Senate seat.” Another comment to CNN explained that both the Maryland and California addresses were listed as primary residences “because they are both occupied throughout the year and to distinguish them from a vacation property.” FHFA investigators and Fannie Mae’s financial crimes unit concluded Schiff showed “a sustained pattern of possible occupancy misrepresentation” across five loans. Pulte indicated potential violations of federal laws, including wire, mail, and bank fraud.

https://twitter.com/ElectionWiz/status/1952876848079114744

Read more …

“..on a per capita basis, Switzerland has already pledged a significant amount of investment into the US and Swiss multinational companies already have sizeable facilities in the country..”

• The Lucky Continent? (Rabo)

While European equity markets ended the day on a slight positive note, the US market could not hold its opening gains and the S&P500 ultimately ended down some 0.5%. The US treasury curve flattened, led by front-end increases in rates (2y +5bp), following the significant steepening last week. European yield moves stayed within a narrow +/- 2bp range. The US trade deficit shrunk further in June, to $60.2bn, the lowest deficit since September 2023. Unsurprisingly it was yet another significant decline in imports – as tariff-mitigating frontloading activities faded – that drove that decline in the deficit. A prime example, again, were Swiss goods shipments, which showed a (seasonally adjusted) drop in US imports to $6.7bn from 13.4bn in May. That brings the US trade balance deficit even below its pre-trade war level and this suggests that we could start to see a reversal of the front-loading trade over the next few months.

That also means that the backlash is yet to come for exporting countries. So, even though the US-EU trade deal was slightly more favorable than we had accounted for in our projections for the Eurozone, the economy could still slip into a recession. But that would more likely still be more a technical contract rather than a real recession. Economists may have gotten a bit more clarity on the tariffs in recent weeks, especially when it comes to several big economies such as Japan and the EU (although questions remain). But for some other countries, the prospects remain far less certain (if that word still has any meaning). Case in point is India, which is still asking itself how to respond to Trump’s recent tirade and his threat of a substantial increase in the current 25% tariff on Indian exports, because of its “high barriers to trade” and its purchases of Russian oil.

So far, Modi’s government has been intransigent, arguing India is being unreasonably targeted by the US. The country is looking for ways to limit the economic damage, but Bloomberg reports that officials will continue to seek back-channel talks to ease the tensions. It remains to be seen whether India is willing to risk a significant escalation – like China was. Switzerland is in a similar crisis-fighting mode. After the surprise announcement of a 39% tariff on Swiss exports last Thursday, the country’s leaders have been frantically discussing alternative proposals to bend this rate, which is more than double the tariff the EU agreed with the US. The tariff will go into effect tomorrow, so Swiss President Karin Seller-Sutter flew –unsolicited!– to Washington yesterday with a “more attractive offer” in her bag.

Business minister Parmelin commented on Swiss public radio that the government needed to “fully understand what happened” between Swiss and US trade negotiators. Not too long-ago, reports had suggested that Switzerland could be one of the first countries to announce a deal with the US, after the UK. There was even some optimism that the tariff could be a low as 10%. That said, there is a clear difference between the British and Swiss trade relationships with the US. The UK has a modest goods trade deficit with the US. Switzerland, by contrast, has a buoyant surplus. This stood in the region of CHF 38.5bn last year, with chemical and pharmaceutical products being a key part of that. This contributed to Trump’s initial threat of a 31% tariff for Switzerland. It is not clear why that rose to 39% on August 1, but reports do point to a difficult phone call between the Swiss president and Trump last week.

There is speculation that Switzerland’s new offer could follow the blueprints of the Japan and EU deals, which include pledges to buy more American LNG and to invest more in the US. That said, on a per capita basis, Switzerland has already pledged a significant amount of investment into the US and Swiss multinational companies already have sizeable facilities in the country. Perhaps as a last-ditch effort may we suggest the Swiss President emphasize to President Trump that the “Trump Victory Tourbillon comes equipped with a Swiss-made TX07 Tourbillon”, as the Trump watch website advertises?

Our FX strategist, Jane Foley, notes that Swiss economic data and inflation have been relatively weak lately. Assuming Swiss politicians can negotiate a trade deal with the US with a baseline tariff closer to 15% this week, the probability of another rate cut this year – following the June cut – will likely diminish. That may give the CHF some support, and on this outcome we see scope for EUR/CHF to return to 0.93 near-term. However, confirmation of higher tariffs would likely lead to further upward pressure on EUR/CHF. The June high in the 0.9430 area may offer some resistance.

Remarkably some European officials are now even using the troubles nations such as Switzerland and India are facing to give a positive spin on the EU’s recent trade agreement. They argue that the US-EU deal may be better than deals some others have gotten or may get. Both sides are in the final stages of drafting a joint statement on their trade deal, which would essentially be a nonbinding rundown of what both sides have agreed to, according to those officials. One EU official also said that negotiators hope to have more news soon on the list of goods that will be exempted from the 15% tariff.

However, if the EU pushes too far, it may draw the ire of the US president, who already remarked that he will impose a 35% tariff on EU goods if the EU does not make good on its promise to invest an additional $600bn over Trump’s term. And note that the EU’s ‘commitment’ on that front is hard to steer, given that most of those investments should be done by the private sector (and if this implies factories moving from Europe to the US that would obviously weigh on European growth potential further down the line).

Read more …

 

 

 

 

5G

TX

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle August 3 2025

Aug 032025
 
 August 3, 2025  Posted by at 10:10 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  40 Responses »


M.C. Escher Fluorescent sea 1933

 

• John Solomon Says, “We’re Working to Release More Information” (CTH)
• The Russia Hoax Is Simple. Dems Lied, Half The Country Believed Them (Marcus)
• US Congressman Demands Soros Testify Over Russiagate Plot Against Trump (RT)
• Gabbard: ‘This Is Why Trump’s Mandate Is Critical’ (Fleetwood)
• Declassified Docs Prove We All Were Censored to Protect Hillary (Taft)
• Jack Smith May Finally Learn What ‘No One Is Above the Law’ Means (Manney)
• Brennan and Clapper Just Hit the Panic Button (Margolis)
• Experts Were Wrong. The Economy’s Strong—But the Fed Won’t Budge (VDH)
• ‘No Defense Against’ Russia’s Oreshnik Missile – Ex-Pentagon Analyst (RT)
• 10 or 12 Days, Then What? (Larry Johnson)
• Are Senate Democrats Finally Going to Get the Payback They Deserve? (Margolis)
• Cleavage In a Bored Country (Ben Shapiro)
• Building Eurasia’s New Fortress (Ring)
• Everyone Should Leave EU – AfD Head Weidel On “Openly Corrupt” Brussels (RMX)

 

 

Putin

Poland
https://twitter.com/AdamMoczar/status/1951353798342877518

Candace

Big Price

Contribute
https://twitter.com/TRUMP_ARMY_/status/1951350275119202722

 

 

 

 

There are quite a few storylines that will have people thinking, for example; Russiagate -or Ukraine-, I’ve been reading about that for ages, boring! But we’re going to have some very long stories, with details slowly seeping through. The resistance, from media and politics, to revealing reality, is enormous. That’s why things leak out bit by bit only, it’s a tooth and nail fight. But it’s as Tulsi says once again that this is the only way, and it’s the only chance we get. Imagine what would be going on right now if Trump had not won, or survived for that matter: we would never know any of it. Better to find out day by day. Politiics. intelligence and media is a very strong force when put together.

 

 

“This is not ‘doomerism’, this is reality when you pull back from the ‘tick-tock’ grifting clickbait.”

• John Solomon Says, “We’re Working to Release More Information” (CTH)

First things first. It might not be the popular thing to accept, but it is increasingly clear there is no way to get to any form of accountability or legal exposure for Russiagate or the manufacturing of the Trump-Russia collusion narrative, anywhere near former President Barack Obama. The concentric circles of plausible deniability are just too extensive. Essentially, despite the evidence of the FBI participating in a manufactured investigation predicted on false pretenses, all now supported with hindsight evidence, the fact that key IC officials, namely CIA Director John Brennan, FBI Director James Comey and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, presented the illusion of credible concern, inoculates President Obama from scrutiny. As the Supreme Court noted, the President is protected from liability for “official acts” of his office.

Yes, we all know these officials knew it was a ruse; however, in 2016 the CIA and FBI were presenting the information to Obama and saying the investigative value was potentially plausible. As such, Obama would have been within his official duty to tell the IC officials to chase down the information (continue investigating it). Then, the January 5th, 2017, meeting documented by the infamous “by the book” Susan Rice memo, further inoculates President Obama for telling the IC officials to follow careful procedures as they continued investigating whether or not the Trump-Russia collusion was a factual concern. All of these elements lead to various tentacles of plausible deniability. No court is going to find criminal action within the decision-making, regardless of how ridiculous it may look in granular hindsight.

Are all the characters guilty of perpetrating a fraud for the expressed intent of a political narrative, yes. Are they criminally liable for it, extremely unlikely. The only criminal liability that appears visible is in the Mueller probe that came along in May 2017 to coverup the prior conduct. The Mueller/Weissmann special counsel perpetrated fraud in legal filings, lied to the FISA court, and manipulated evidence. As a result, we must ask ourselves what is the value in this ongoing reveal of information? Because they were willing participants in the overall operation, the MSM media will never admit their role or culpability in the ruse. That leaves an echo-chamber of alternate media combing through the granular releases and discovering the trail of evidence represented within the declassification.

Put all that alternative media together and you impact 25 to 40% of the public. The rest don’t really care, and/or dislike President Trump too much to really care that he was targeted by the Intelligence Community. This is not ‘doomerism’, this is reality when you pull back from the ‘tick-tock’ grifting clickbait. Worse still, it is clear the ‘tick-tock’ controlled release of information is in full swing again. When you hear John Solomon saying, “we are working to release more information,” it’s worth asking yourself who exactly is this “we” that Solomon is speaking of.


.
I’ve come to the conclusion the “we” consists of those within the clickbait industry who seek to make a living from the endless discussion. Solomon is not a reporter, he’s a participant. Here’s another example, courtesy of Sean Hannity and Senator Lindsey Graham.

Read more …

“To everyone involved in this hoax, the message must be clear: This is your legacy, your attempt to deceive the American people and destroy the man they elected to lead them. That is who you are..”

• The Russia Hoax Is Simple. Dems Lied, Half The Country Believed Them (Marcus)

The United States of America has now spent almost a decade embroiled in “Russiagate,” and its citizens have been bombarded from both sides with theories, names, and anonymous quotes. But it all really comes down to one thing: Democrats lied, and half the country believed them. In the 24 pages of never-before-seen declassified files released Thursday, we saw in cold, calculated black and white exactly how the Clinton campaign crafted the lie that Donald Trump was colluding with Russia to influence the 2016 election. One email allegedly shows Leonard Benardo, vice president of the George Soros backed Open Society Foundation, writing in July 2016 that, “Julie [sic] says it will be a long-term affair to demonize Putin and Trump,” adding “Now it is good for a post-convention bounce. Later the FBI will put more oil into the fire.”

Julie is Julianne Smith, then a foreign policy adviser to the Hillary Clinton campaign. You know who the FBI is. Just two days later, Bernado would allegedly send another email. “HRC approved Julia’s idea about Trump and Russian hackers hampering U.S. elections,” it read. “That should distract people from her own missing email, especially if the affair goes to the Olympic level.” Benardo would also allegedly write, and this is key, “The point is making the Russian play a U.S. domestic issue,” adding, “In absence of direct evidence, Crowdstrike and ThreatConnect will supply the media…”

This all leads to a gem in the annex to John Durham’s Russia hoax probe, released Thursday, which concluded, “During the first stage of the campaign, due to lack of direct evidence, it was decided to disseminate the necessary information through the FBI-affiliated ‘attic-based’ technical structures that are involved in cybersecurity…from where the information would then be disseminated through leading US publications.” The Clinton campaign knew all too well that their lackeys in the media would eat up this half-baked nonsense with a spoon, and probably win awards for it, which is exactly what happened. What the media wasn’t told at the time was that field officers in the CIA objected to the lies and were run over because, according to their then-Director John Brennan “it rings true.”

This ludicrous legal standard of “rings true,” was used to convince the FISA court to renew warrants on Trump officials, which was not only a free federal law enforcement fishing expedition, but created smoke and the appearance of fire.In December of 2016, in the dying days of the Barack Obama administration, intel reports were massaged to once again create the illusion that Trump was a traitor who became president only through Russian assistance.n Thus was launched Robert Mueller’s investigation, which would last for years at a cost of more than $30 million, but ultimately exonerate Trump. Perhaps worst of all, in the midst of this Kafkaesque trial by media and secret courts, people’s lives were destroyed, crushed by false allegations, legal bills and a process that was the punishment.

One of them is Michael Caputo, a long-time member of Trump’s orbit who I talked to on Friday. “It is precious little comfort knowing we were right, we need accountability, but even accountability doesn’t feed the bulldog,” he told me, which was to say the damage to him and his family cannot be undone. Accountability comes in many forms. Caputo may never get the perp walks by former Democrat officials that he understandably desires, but this dastardly lie concocted by Democrats to smear Trump and maintain power has at least been been exposed. According to a Suffolk poll in December of 2018, “Forty-six percent are convinced that there was collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians, while 29 percent said there was no such coordination, and 19 percent weren’t sure.”

Every serious person, whether Democrat or Republican, now admits that this simply was not true. What they must also then admit is that half of Americans believed the lie only because Democrats told it so deceitfully. It was Walter Scott who wrote in his 1808 poem ‘Marmion’, “What a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive.” But in this case, Democrats wanted the web, a web so dense with so many loose ends and round corners that the truth would be forever hidden. It was Shakespeare who wrote “the truth will out,” and so it has come out, albeit not before shaking a country to its core and crushing innocent lives.

Whatever else comes from the current investigation of Russiagate, one thing is now clear, ready to be etched in the stone of history: The Democrats invented the Russian collusion lie, they did it intentionally, and they suckered their voters into buying it. To everyone involved in this hoax, the message must be clear: This is your legacy, your attempt to deceive the American people and destroy the man they elected to lead them. That is who you are.

Read more …

“Rep. Burchett (R-Tennessee) urged the panel to call Soros and Benardo to a public hearing and to subpoena them if they refuse to appear voluntarily.”

• US Congressman Demands Soros Testify Over Russiagate Plot Against Trump (RT)

US Representative Tim Burchett has formally requested that billionaire financier George Soros and his associate Leonard Benardo, senior vice president at the Open Society Foundations (OSF), testify before Congress regarding their alleged involvement in the 2016 “Russiagate” affair targeting Donald Trump. In a letter sent Friday to House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Kentucky), Rep. Burchett (R-Tennessee) urged the panel to call Soros and Benardo to a public hearing and to subpoena them if they refuse to appear voluntarily. The request follows the declassification of documents by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and the Senate Judiciary Committee, which reportedly link Soros’s OSF to a broader effort to discredit Trump’s presidential campaign and derail his first term in office.

“As you know, DNI Tulsi Gabbard recently declassified evidence of a conspiracy by former President Obama, Hillary Clinton, and the national security apparatus to manufacture and politicize intelligence to subvert President Trump and the will of the American people,” Burchett wrote. “Included in this evidence is a concerning email allegedly from Leonard Benardo… plotting to discredit the incoming Trump Administration.” Burchett emphasized the OSF’s ongoing influence in US elections and said the American public deserves answers. “Should they refuse the invitation, I encourage you to use subpoena powers. Americans deserve answers into the subversion of our institutions by malicious actors,” he added.

The newly declassified 29-page annex to Special Counsel John Durham’s 2023 report, released this week by the Senate Judiciary Committee, alleges that the Clinton campaign, with help from OSF-linked figures, concocted the narrative of Russian interference to damage Trump politically. Emails attributed to Benardo reportedly detail efforts to disseminate unverified claims through FBI-adjacent tech firms like CrowdStrike and various media outlets. The FBI launched Crossfire Hurricane, its Trump-Russia probe, despite allegedly having obtained credible intelligence about the plot.

Critics argue that the agency’s failure to properly scrutinize intelligence pointing to a politically motivated smear campaign fueled years of disinformation, political polarization, and unjustified sanctions against Moscow. President Trump responded Friday by calling the affair “the biggest scandal in American history,” accusing the Obama administration of treason and vowing accountability. Moscow, for its part, has long denied meddling in the 2016 election and insists the Russiagate narrative was a fabricated pretext for confrontation.

Read more …

“Mockingbird Reloaded”

“Government Propaganda Is Now a Domestic Industry”

“The American people are no longer just the audience of government propaganda. They’re the enemy.”

• Gabbard: ‘This Is Why Trump’s Mandate Is Critical’ (Fleetwood)

The CIA’s infamous Cold War propaganda and psychological operation (PSYOP) program never died—it just turned inward. The question isn’t whether the government is manipulating Americans, but how they’re doing it right now—through intelligence leaks, media collusion, psychological tactics, and taxpayer-funded propaganda. That was the warning from U.S. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard during a searing July 31 interview, where she confirmed that intelligence insiders are actively using corporate media to manipulate the American people and sabotage President Donald Trump’s agenda—echoing the tactics of ‘Operation Mockingbird.’ Every major news organization or its parent companies, from FOX News to CNN, are owned by globalist-aligned asset managers like BlackRock, an offical partner of the anti-American-sovereignty World Economic Forum (WEF).

“There are people within the intelligence community who believe that their will is more important than the will of the American people,” Gabbard told conservative host Benny Johnson. “[They] will weaponize intelligence by leaking it to their friends within the mainstream media with the intent of undermining President Trump’s agenda.” Once a covert CIA program used to plant propaganda in foreign and domestic media, Operation Mockingbird infiltrated major U.S. newsrooms throughout the 1950s–1970s. It was exposed during the Church Committee hearings, where Congress revealed that the agency maintained relationships with hundreds of journalists to shape public perception. Today, Gabbard says, that same playbook is being deployed against Americans.

Only now, it’s fully digital, algorithmic, and taxpayer-funded. “They are subverting the will of the people and therefore undermining the Constitution,” Gabbard warned. Gabbard’s warning comes as Congress continues to uncover a parallel propaganda apparatus inside U.S. health agencies. A damning House Energy and Commerce Committee report released in October 2024 found that the Biden Administration spent $900 million in taxpayer funds on a COVID-19 propaganda campaign that intentionally misled the public. “The Biden-Harris administration caused Americans to lose trust in the public health system,” said Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), accusing the CDC and NIH of using ads containing “erroneous or unproven information.”

The report revealed that: • The CDC exaggerated the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines beyond FDA authorization. • Messaging about mask effectiveness and COVID risk to children was “deeply flawed.” • Federal funds went to Big Tech companies to “track and monitor Americans,” prompting calls for stronger data privacy protections. Representative Morgan Griffith (R-VA) slammed the administration’s “Stop the Spread” campaign as scientifically baseless, saying it “misled the American public” and triggered a broader collapse in trust across all vaccine programs. “American trust in the CDC is at an all-time low,” said Subcommittee Chair Brett Guthrie (R-KY). Further validating Gabbard’s claims, behavioral scientists who advised governments during the COVID crisis have since admitted to weaponizing fear to coerce compliance—describing their actions as “unethical,” “dystopian,” and “totalitarian.”

Members of the UK’s ‘Scientific Pandemic Influenza Group on Behaviour’ (SPI-B), who advised the government’s COVID response, revealed that officials deliberately ramped up fear to push lockdowns the public might otherwise reject. “Clearly, using fear as a means of control is not ethical. Using fear smacks of totalitarianism. It’s not an ethical stance for any modern government,” said SPI-B psychologist Gavin Morgan. “[P]sychologists didn’t seem to notice when it stopped being altruistic and became manipulative. They have too much power and it intoxicates them,” another member confessed. One warned that “people use the pandemic to grab power and drive through things that wouldn’t happen otherwise… We have to be very careful about the authoritarianism that is creeping in.”

Gabbard said her fight is not just about cleaning up rogue intelligence operators—it’s about reversing the normalization of psychological warfare on the American public. “To be able to turn the light on in places that have been dark for far too long, expose the truth, and drive accountability—that’s the only way we can actually shift this,” she said. She affirmed that Trump is fully aware of the deep-state sabotage being conducted through the media. “President Trump is enacting the very thing he promised the American people he would do in this election.”

The Church Committee once warned that Mockingbird undermined the very idea of a free press.The playbook didn’t end, it just upgraded.Today’s propaganda apparatus now includes:
• Leaked narratives from intel to legacy media
• AI-powered censorship tools on social platforms
• CDC-funded influencer campaigns targeting youth
• Federal surveillance partnerships with tech giants
• Coerced public health compliance through fear psychology

The same government that once planted editorials in The Washington Post now quietly curates your news feed, flags dissent as misinformation, and suppresses debate under the guise of “public health.” Tulsi Gabbard’s confirmation is historic: the top U.S. intelligence official has publicly stated that agencies under her own leadership are using media to manipulate Americans. Operation Mockingbird didn’t end. It simply changed targets. The American people are no longer just the audience of government propaganda. They’re the enemy.

Read more …

“..the intelligence community’s [fake] new report, which ODNI and CIA clearly held back until the very moment Trump was certified President so his very first hours begin with him immediately tarred as illegitimate and possibly criminal.”

• Declassified Docs Prove We All Were Censored to Protect Hillary (Taft)

It’s hard to fathom the evil that led to creating fake intelligence to frame then-presidential candidate Donald Trump as a Russian spy and traitor to his country. We’ve seen in recently declassified documents that Hillary Clinton didn’t do this alone. She commanded dozens, if not hundreds, of willing participants, including the George Soros foundation, President Barack Obama, the FBI, the weaponized intelligence agencies, and others, to bring Donald to his knees. Buried deep in the latest tranche of declassified documents called the Durham annex report, however, a deep state hawk has found something that is equally or more evil than changing intelligence to manipulate one election’s outcome. They created a way to take over elections in perpetuity. Mike Benz, a former State Department official in the Trump 45 administration who now runs the Foundation for Freedom Online, found what is tantamount to the Rosetta stone for the Censorship Industrial Complex.

And it’s right here: “The point is making the Russian play a U.S. domestic issue. Say something like a critical infrastructure threat for the election to feel menace [sic] since both POTUS and VPOTUS have acknowledged the fact [that] IC would speed up searching for evidence that is regrettably still unavailable.” In a series of posts on X, Benz laid out why this sentence from an email from a Soros Open Society Eurasian official told the story of how they planned to get Trump even after they’d lost the election. They magic’d up a system whereby elections would now become “critical infrastructure” run by the feds.

https://twitter.com/MikeBenzCyber/status/1951049741950718158?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1951049741950718158%7Ctwgr%5E5538e44395c7c09bc9d7884adfc02ddedf4f96f8%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fpjmedia.com%2Fvictoria-taft%2F2025%2F08%2F01%2Fand-there-it-was-one-sentence-in-declassified-docs-proves-we-all-were-censored-to-protect-hillary-n4942320

“It is no coincidence both the cooked crooked intelligence community report launching Russiagate and the DHS federal takeover of elections as “critical infrastructure” (citing the same-day Russiagate intelligence assessment) BOTH happened on January 6, 2017. That was the SAME day Democrats’ hail mary last-ditch plot to stop Trump’s election certification failed, and Trump’s win was certified. With no options left to stop Trump’s presidency, they didn’t even wait a day to launch what appeared to be their Plan B: if Trump can’t be stopped from becoming President, immediately hobble his presidency that same day the presidency was inevitable.”

When their efforts to halt the certification of the election on Jan. 6, 2017, didn’t work, they went to Plan B, “tak[ing] over state-level control of voting systems.” “And in fact,” he wrote, “that is exactly the time sequence of how it played out on January 6, 2017.” First, at 1:41pm, Congress certified Trump’s election win. Then, with Trump’s win now final and no hope left for the intelligence community to obstruct it, [T]hen suddenly, magically, the entire joint US intelligence community assessment drops just 4 hours later, with a report directly insinuating Trump’s win was illegitimate because Russia intervened to help Trump win.

Then, suddenly, magically, DHS just 30 minutes after that swoops in with a permanent unilateral federal designation that it has taken over state-level control of voting systems — which we’d had in this country for 230 years — citing the intelligence community’s [fake] new report, which ODNI and CIA clearly held back until the very moment Trump was certified President so his very first hours begin with him immediately tarred as illegitimate and possibly criminal.

Benz says that the second- and third-order effects of this decision to change the rules and declare elections to be a “critical infrastructure” gave the deep state the predicate to federalize our elections for the first time since 1789. But it also did something else. In the name of keeping this “critical infrastructure” sacrosanct, it gave the ones and zeros embedded in the deep state carte blanche to censor anyone who had an opinion that questioned elections “When DHS created their Cyber Security and Infrastructure Security Agency—we have ‘security’ in our name twice because we care so much about security—OK now we can control elections and ‘cyber’ in their name gave them a predicate to go after tweets and Facebook posts, and YouTube videos and TikTok videos and Reddit posts. It gave them the legal predicate to completely burn the U.S. Constitution.”

We at PJ Media and other conservative outlets felt the effects of this censorship. Suddenly, it was as if Lois Lerner were in charge of speech. People, mostly conservatives, were booted from Twitter 1.0. YouTube became a minefield of speech dragnets and censorship police. One social media company was shut down because posts by users were deemed dangerous. Suddenly, the news was sanitized to avoid getting canceled. The FBI began weekly meetings with Twitter and kept close tabs on other social media such as Facebook. Misinformation and disinformation police, called “fact checkers,” were deployed to censor speech. Entire university programs were set up to offer disinformation degrees. Universities began getting fat grants to come up with ways to creatively censor words, phrases, and stories that the woke mob refused to abide by.

The deep state and intelligence communities used the media to “prebunk” stories they knew would reverberate through political circles before the election, such as the Hunter Biden laptop story. Hillary Clinton can complain all she wants about 2016 being a stolen election, and the next federal election for president occurred in 2020, the one that the new cyber “expert” CISA director claimed was the “safest” one in U.S. history… because the feds were in charge. He wrote that the real January 6 insurrection occurred in 2017 when the deep state rigged the rules to depict Trump, as Hillary called him, an “illegitimate president.” And did it ever. That insurance policy paid dividends. Democrats arranged a special counsel accusing Trump of being a spy, the Ukraine hoax, two impeachments, and a partridge in a pear tree. It’s a miracle Donald Trump got anything done. That was the plan.

Read more …

“..if Smith used his badge to tip the scales, it isn’t a partisan scandal, it’s a constitutional one.”

• Jack Smith May Finally Learn What ‘No One Is Above the Law’ Means (Manney)

The left found and crowned their legal avenger: Jack Smith, their remedy in very fine suits to four years of Trump. In secret clubhouse meetings above their parents’ garage, the left whispered reverently about Smith’s independence, hailed his stoicism, and grasped him as a firewall between democracy and destruction. The right, however, looked at things differently. They saw Smith as a dogged, smirking prosecutor with a habit of filing charges just before primaries and playing a game of chicken with due process. Both sides, however, agreed on one thing: he was relentless. Now, that same man finds himself under federal investigation for potentially violating the Hatch Act, a statute meant to prevent law enforcement from becoming political tools.

Sen. Tom Cotton, who chairs the Senate Intelligence Committee, accused Smith of seeking to impact the 2024 election in his capacity as special counsel under the Biden-led Justice Department in a letter to the acting head of the Office of Special Counsel, Jamieson Greer, first obtained by Fox News Digital. “As the Office of the Special Counsel is tasked with ensuring federal employees aren’t conducting partisan political activity under the guise of their federal employment, you’re well situated to determine whether Smith broke the law,” the Arkansas Republican wrote. “Many of Smith’s legal actions seem to have no rationale except for an attempt to affect the 2024 election results – actions that would violate federal law,” he continued. That cringeworthy sound we’re not hearing? It’s the awkward silence of a media class that suddenly found itself unsure how to eulogize its white knight without tarnishing the cause.

If you forgot, here’s a quick review of the Hatch Act. This act was created to prohibit executive branch officials, such as a special counsel, from using their authority to influence elections. In this case, Jack Smith didn’t simply toe the line; he ran past it with banners flying. According to Sen. Tom Cotton, Smith timed court filings, manipulated trial calendars, and played strategic legal chess just as the 2024 campaign heated up. Smith did his bloody best to jam President Trump into a courtroom the day before Super Tuesday. If that’s not election interference, what is? The Office of Special Counsel’s Hatch Act Unit has confirmed they’re investigating Smith! OMG! Let’s examine the sequence. Smith dropped the documents case right after Trump won; he asked for appeals to be paused just as political winds shifted, and his final report was buried like bad leftovers, with Volume Two indefinitely sealed.

People defending Smith are calling this a legal strategy. But to most Americans, it appears to be weaponized prosecution. You don’t have to be a lawyer, or even a devotee of “Law & Order,” to understand when a ref tosses flags only when one team is on offense. We only have to watch long enough to see the pattern. Each time Trump’s team looked into Smith’s motivations, the same robotic chorus emerged, “No one is above the law!” Except now, the left treats that mantra as if it were a rhetorical one-way street. If you want that phrase to mean anything, then apply it when the hammer swings in the other direction. When one of your own wears the badge: Apply it! If Jack Smith was truly one of the neutral professionals they claimed he was, not only should he welcome the investigations, but he should demand them.

I hate to be the one to burst your bubble, but Jack Smith wasn’t defending democracy. He was playing defense for a political establishment that couldn’t stomach losing to Trump. Twice. Smith’s job wasn’t about preserving the rule of law; it was about wrapping it in legalese, delivering it on cue, and timing it for maximum political damage, which was the legal equivalent of leaking a scandal the night before the election.Smith helped turn the DOJ into nothing but a smirking caricature, one that flinched when Hillary bleached servers and looked the other way when Hunter forgot about his illegal purchase of a gun, and suddenly found courage when Trump appeared on the docket.And now, shockingly, Smith is the story. Not his targets, but him.

We need to make one thing perfectly clear: Smith and his team were already on life support when their case collapsed in early 2025. Remember what was happening: Trump had just won the presidency, the Department of Justice had forbidden prosecuting a sitting president, and the classified documents case had fallen completely apart. When Smith finally filed his final report, it vanished behind a redacted curtain. Unfortunately for Jack Smith, Senator Tom Cotton had not forgotten. And the OSC, if it had any spine remaining, shouldn’t either. Because, quite simply, if Smith used his badge to tip the scales, it isn’t a partisan scandal, it’s a constitutional one.

Read more …

“Americans have seen behind the curtain, and no amount of op-ed space in The New York Times is going to let Brennan and Clapper gaslight the public into believing their actions were anything but politically motivated.”

• Brennan and Clapper Just Hit the Panic Button (Margolis)

With the Deep State’s lies about the Russia collusion hoax finally unraveling, panic is setting in, and some of the highest-ranking figures from the Obama administration, including Barack Obama himself, are now squarely in the Justice Department’s crosshairs. Two of the operation’s chief architects, former CIA Director John Brennan and former DNI James Clapper, just tried a last-ditch reputational rehab via a New York Times op-ed. But instead of saving face, they only reminded Americans why trust in the so-called “intelligence community” has collapsed to historic lows. Incredibly, their main defense against charges of politicizing intelligence was to point to the very thing they politicized: the January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment.

They cited it like gospel, as if repeating it enough times would erase the growing mountain of evidence that it was crafted under political pressure, built on cherry-picked intel, and propped up by the now-discredited Steele dossier. It’s the equivalent of using a forged check to prove you’re not guilty of fraud. According to Brennan and Clapper, the ICA was beyond reproach simply because it claimed that Vladimir Putin had a “clear preference” for Donald Trump and ran a multi-pronged operation to help him win via hacked emails, social media posts, and internet trolls. But what they left out, conveniently, is that they helped write the script and bullied analysts into signing off on it.

They also wave around the name of special counsel John Durham like a magic shield, claiming that he “found no evidence of an Obama administration conspiracy.” Translation: nothing to see here, move along; just ignore the political pressure, the manipulated assessments, the hidden sourcing, and the whistleblower now confirming everything conservatives have said for years. The special counsel John Durham, who was appointed during Mr. Trump’s first term to investigate how the Russia probe was conducted, similarly found no evidence of an Obama administration conspiracy against Mr. Trump. But he affirmed the findings of the special counsel Robert Mueller, who conducted a separate investigation into the allegations, which found ample evidence of Russian interference in the election.

More recently, the C.I.A.’s Mr. Ratcliffe ordered yet another review of the 2017 assessment, which determined that its “level of analytic rigor exceeded that of most [intelligence] assessments.” Their attempted defense, however, falls apart upon review of the evidence. The newly declassified Durham annex reveals that the Clinton campaign coordinated with George Soros’s Open Society Foundation to push the Trump-Russia collusion hoax during the 2016 election. Internal emails show Clinton approved a plan to link Trump to Russian hackers to distract from her own scandals, with help from Soros-connected operatives and DNC officials. They used cybersecurity firms like CrowdStrike to plant the narrative in the media, hoping the FBI would amplify it. Which, of course, they did.

Americans have seen behind the curtain, and no amount of op-ed space in The New York Times is going to let Brennan and Clapper gaslight the public into believing their actions were anything but politically motivated. The newly released documents confirm what many suspected all along: the Obama administration was unhappy that the original intel downplayed Russia’s impact in 2016, so it ordered up the infamous January 2017 ICA, laced it with Steele dossier garbage, and forced it through the system. Thanks to courageous whistleblowers, we now know that Brennan and his inner circle strong-armed analysts into backing conclusions that they didn’t actually support. There was pushback, and for good reason: Everyone knew the dossier was pure fiction, a political hit job dressed up as intelligence. Brennan and Clapper see what’s coming. With the walls closing in, they’re not offering clarity; they’re trying to cover their backsides.

Read more …

Victor Davis Hanson. Jay Powell is choking on his own ‘logic’.

• Experts Were Wrong. The Economy’s Strong—But the Fed Won’t Budge (VDH)

I’d like to talk about the economy here at the beginning of August. We’ve just finished July. We have some of the July reports, but mostly, they’re still from June. If you look at the three or four main categories that adjudicate the health or the malady of an economy, they’re pretty good. GDP came in at 3.0. That was not predicted to be that high. The inflation rate may have just come out for July. There are different reports, but it’s about 2.7%. It was 2.6% in May. January was 3.0%. For the year, it’s about 2.4%. So, inflation is still tolerable. It’s not growing—an annualized rate at 2.4%. So, you have a good GDP, you have a good inflation rate, you have a good jobs report. We’re at about 4.1% unemployment in the month of June. We picked up 150,000 new jobs—that wasn’t predicted.

As far as money coming into the Treasury and going out, we had a historical May. We’ll wait and see what June and July are like, but we actually had more money coming into the Treasury than the government spent. I want to gauge the reaction to this good news. Of course, we expect the Left to discount it. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said that these figures are all bogus, even though they’re from non-administration sources, government bureaucracies. We also had a member of Congress come on and say that Donald Trump fudged them. On the GDP, we had The Wall Street Journal say, that’s just because GDP is measured also by imports and exports, and we had fewer imports and more exports. But isn’t that good? But they said that was an aberration.

So, we’ve had people attack this. Most of the people said, as far as more money coming in than going out, that’s only because of May, and it will never be true again. Well, we’ve had Mays in 2024 or 2023, all the way back to 2017, the first year of the Trump administration. This was the only one in which we had more money coming in—a surplus. Then we get to the question of Jerome Powell. He’s the head of the Federal Reserve. Usually, the Fed cuts rates when they’re worried about political and economic instability, and that means, basically, a recession. Now, remember that The Wall Street Journal, New York Times, Washington Post, and our main media organs all told us in May when Donald Trump was talking about “art of the deal” tariffs, “I’m gonna announce a high tariff, then negotiate down to 10 or 15%,” which is precisely what he did.

But nevertheless, they said at the beginning of August, midsummer, we were going to have high inflation or stagflation, bad job growth, static GDP, and a trade war along with a Wall Street collapse. Basically, a recession. Well, Wall Street stock prices are at historical highs. Every one of those predictions was wrong. So, if they were wrong and the economy is not booming but strong, why would Powell keep interest rates at that 4.5% fed rate that translates into almost over 6% and near 7% 30-year mortgages? After all, the Fed is supposed to lower rates when we have recession. With all this recessionary talk, you thought that he would lower rates. Now, he says he’s looking at the economy and he’s not lowering rates because he doesn’t yet see a recession?

But he’s been told that he was worried about the economy. If he’s worried about a trade war and tariffs and soft job growth—which was predicted but didn’t happen—why doesn’t he lower interest rates? And the fact is, that if you look at the interest rates that he did cut right before the 2024 election and his all-over-the-map attitude toward interest rates today, there is no logic. So, now he’s rejected the earlier prognosis that we were in a recession. It makes no sense. Why is this important? Why is this important when the Washington Post says that the numbers are rigged or we’re really not as strong as we think we are with GDP, or Powell can’t be consistent and adjudicate rates going up or down based on recession or boom?

We’re paying $3 billion a day in interest. A day. Our defense budget costs less—that trillion-dollar defense budget—than the interest payments, per year. Donald Trump is trying to cut taxes and deregulate and grow the economy without increasing the deficit he inherited at about $2 trillion. He thinks that eventually, an expanded economy will bring in new revenue—sort of supply-side economics—but in the short-term, he does not want to grow that deficit by giving tax cuts. So, what is he doing? He thinks the tariffs will bring in—without hurting GDP here or abroad—about a third of a trillion dollars. He thinks if he can decrease the interest rate by a point or a point and a half, he might get another third of a trillion—maybe cut the interest cost by $1 billion a day down to $2 billion from $3 billion. So, you’re about one-third of the way to cut the deficit. That’s pretty good when you had tax cuts.

That won’t happen if the interest rates stay high and the economy stays solid and doesn’t give you any reason or worry over an inflationary spiral, which it hasn’t so far. Bottom line, things are going very well. All of the experts were wrong, and yet the experts do not admit they were wrong. They say, “We were wrong,” privately, “but we’re going to be proved right because either we hope or we expect the economy to do poorly.” My guess is, even if the economy cools down and does poorly, Powell will not cut interest rates. He has a personal stake in this. He feels aggrieved. He feels he has to be vindicated and he’s stubborn and he will not show the same flexibility he did during the campaign year 2024.

Read more …

US has no hypersonics, and no defense against the ones Russia has. Where they just started mass producing Oreshniks.

• ‘No Defense Against’ Russia’s Oreshnik Missile – Ex-Pentagon Analyst (RT)

Neither Ukraine nor its Western backers have any means to counter Russia’s newly deployed intermediate-range Oreshnik missile, Michael Maloof, a former senior Pentagon security analyst, told RT in an interview on Friday. Maloof noted that the Oreshnik could “easily shift the balance of power overwhelmingly in favor” of Russia in any conflict, including the ongoing hostilities with Ukraine. “Having a hypersonic [missile] for which there’s no defense currently… is astonishing. It absolutely alters that balance of power dramatically, for which the Ukrainians have no defense,” he said. He noted that while the US is working to adapt missile defense systems such as THAAD to counter hypersonic threats, these programs remain under development.

“There’s no operational ability at this point to deal with a hypersonic missile,” Maloof said, adding that the Oreshnik could reach its targets within mere minutes. The former analyst added that the missile also travels at a speed of over 7,000 miles (11,000km) an hour. “There’s no defense against that,” he said. The missile system, Maloof stated, has already been tested successfully in Ukraine in battlefield conditions. He was referring to a strike on Ukraine’s Yuzhmash military industrial facility in the city of Dnepr in November 2024. Russian President Vladimir Putin said afterward that the missile’s warheads flew at speeds exceeding Mach 10 and could not be intercepted by existing air defenses.

The missile could also carry conventional and nuclear payloads and travel up to several thousand kilometers. According to Putin, the Oreshnik strike on Ukraine was a response to the country’s decision to use Western-supplied long-range missiles for attacks deep into Russia. On Friday, the Russian president said that the first serially produced Oreshnik missile system had entered service with the armed forces. He also noted that the question of supplying the weapons to Belarus, Russia’s key ally, will likely be resolved by the end of the year.

Read more …

“Russian troops are pushing north in Zaporhyzhia, moving south through Sumy and Kharkiv, and advancing to the west, having already taken territory in Dniepropetrovsk. No pressure from Washington or Europe will alter this reality.”

• 10 or 12 Days, Then What? (Larry Johnson)

Donald Trump made another move in his feckless game of global checkers today in Scotland, with the announcement that he is giving Russia a new, much shorter deadline of ten days to end the war in Ukraine. Trump warned that if President Vladimir Putin does not reach a deal by around August 7–9, the US will impose new sanctions and “severe tariffs” on Russia and countries supporting its war effort. Trump’s new deadline elicited a collective yawn in Moscow. Since the start of the Special Military Operation (SMO), trade between the US and Russia has shrunk dramatically. In 2021, US exports to Russia totaled approximately $6.4 billion and US imports from Russia totaled about $29.7 billion. This resulted in a US trade deficit with Russia of about $23.3 billion for that year. In 2024, total trade in goods between the United States and Russia declined sharply due to ongoing sanctions, war-related restrictions, and other political measures.

US exports to Russia in 2024: bApproximately $526 million, marking a decrease of over 12% compared to 2023. Major U.S. exports included medical/technical equipment, pharmaceuticals, machinery, and some food and chemical products. U.S. imports from Russia in 2024: About $3.0–$3.27 billion, down more than 34% compared to 2023 and down over 75% from pre-war levels in 2021–2022. Key Russian exports to the U.S. were fertilizers (about $1.3 billion), precious metals (about $878 million), and inorganic chemicals (about $683 million). Energy imports have almost entirely ceased. Trump’s threat of new sanctions is just a blowhard bloviating… Ending shipments of fertilizers and precious metals is not going to hurt the Russian economy one bit. Thanks to the sanctions Biden levied in 2022, Russia’s economy grew to be the fourth largest in the world as measured by purchasing power parity.

Western propaganda that the Russian economy is failing–citing current growth of 1.4%–ignores the fiscal policies that the Russian central bank put in place in 2024 to cool inflation. But those measures were only temporary, with the central bank announcing a two percent cut in interest rates late last week. That means that Trump, if he is serious, will impose bone-crunching tariffs on China and India. Both countries appear unfazed by Trump’s bullying bluster. China in particular holds some very strong cards… Rare-earth minerals desperately needed by the US military industrial complex. I think this will be another Trump nothing-burger.

So why did Trump whittle down the deadline? One possible explanation concerns the rapid deterioration of the military situation for Ukraine. Russia is making rapid advances all along the line of contact and even Ukrainian media and social media outlets are expressing alarm. Is that what sparked Trump’s decision to shorten the time for Russia to agree to a ceasefire? Fifty day or 12 days, it does not matter. Trump has no leverage to compel Russia to agree to the ceasefire that the US and Europe want to be imposed. Russia is going to continue with its offensive and will take more territory in the coming weeks. Russian troops are pushing north in Zaporhyzhia, moving south through Sumy and Kharkiv, and advancing to the west, having already taken territory in Dniepropetrovsk. No pressure from Washington or Europe will alter this reality.

Read more …

“Democrats aren’t just dragging their feet—they’re torching decades of Senate norms in a blatant attempt to kneecap Trump’s presidency. They don’t care about tradition. They care about power.”

• Are Senate Democrats Finally Going to Get the Payback They Deserve? (Margolis)

After weeks of stonewalling from Democrats, the GOP is demanding action on dozens of President Trump’s pending nominees—and they’re signaling they’re ready to play hardball if they don’t get it. With the Senate set to leave town for a long recess, Republicans say enough is enough. Emerging from a closed-door lunch on Saturday, Republican senators made it clear they want the nomination backlog resolved by the end of the day. If Democrats won’t cooperate, they’re prepared to force the issue. “The immediate concern right now is can we figure something out,” Majority Leader John Thune told reporters. “If we can’t, then we will have to resort to other options, and we’ve got a lot of support for doing that.”

Translation? Republicans are done playing games. They’re ready to blow up Senate procedure if that’s what it takes to break the Democrat blockade on Trump’s nominees. Since January, not a single nominee has been confirmed by voice vote or unanimous consent—a complete break from tradition. As Sen. Tom Cotton highlighted, 57% of Biden’s nominees got in without opposition. Even Trump’s first term saw 65% sail through. This time? Zero. Democrats are obstructing for the sake of “resisting” Trump—and the GOP’s finally had enough. This isn’t just gridlock—it’s deliberate sabotage. What we’re witnessing now is an unprecedented campaign of partisan obstruction. Democrats aren’t just dragging their feet—they’re torching decades of Senate norms in a blatant attempt to kneecap Trump’s presidency. They don’t care about tradition. They care about power.

Republicans are running out of patience—and fast. According to Politico, GOP senators are once again eyeing the so-called “nuclear option,” as Democrats continue to grind Trump’s nominees to a halt. While leadership originally expected any rules fight to come later in the fall, frustrations have boiled over as Republicans remain stuck in Washington with no resolution in sight. “We prefer to strike a deal,” Sen. Markwayne Mullin said, but he added that if Democrats won’t budge, Republicans are prepared to change the rules. Naturally, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer defended the Democrats’ obstruction, accusing Trump’s nominees of being uniquely “flawed” and “unqualified”—a laughable claim from the same party that gave us people such as Xavier Becerra, Pete Buttigieg, Ketanji Brown Jackson, and a bunch of judicial nominees who didn’t seem to know anything about the law.

But at this point, Republicans know the game, and they may finally be ready to stop playing by the Democrats’ rules. As much as I believe in the idea of preserving tradition, Democrats have shown a willingness to rewrite the rules to suit their needs, and Republicans need to show they’re willing to fight fire with fire. Staff for Thune and Schumer are now quietly negotiating. Schumer made a counteroffer Friday night. But if you think that’s a sign Democrats are taking the threat seriously, think again. The deal they offered was a joke.

They offered to confirm a small batch of nominees now in exchange for unfreezing some funding, with another batch later—unless the administration submits another spending clawback. The whole thing would require unanimous consent on the Senate floor. Republicans shouldn’t bite. Democrats are offering crumbs while demanding the GOP surrender leverage on spending. It’s absurd. Republicans already have the power to jam these nominees through—no need to trade it away. Yes, preserving Senate norms is ideal. But Democrats burned that bridge long ago—nuking filibusters, gutting procedures, and tossing precedent out the window. They won’t honor any deal once they’re back in power.

Read more …

“..praising the genes of a blond-haired, blue-eyed woman with an hourglass figure is somehow an ode to the Third Reich.”

• Cleavage In a Bored Country (Ben Shapiro)

Some countries have true, serious problems. Then there are countries that have national discussions over a buxom young white woman in a jeans commercial. This week, the internet—and the media more generally—exploded over a commercial starring actress Sydney Sweeney for American Eagle. The spot features Sweeney, lying seductively on the ground as she buttons her jeans, stating, “Genes are passed down from parents to offspring, often determining traits like hair color, personality and even eye color. My jeans are blue.” The ad concludes with the tagline: “Sydney Sweeney has great jeans.” According to those who apparently have far too much time on their hands, this ad is reminiscent of Nazism. Washington Post fashion critic Rachel Tashjian lamented that the ad felt “regressive.”

A wide variety of colorfully haired and bewilderingly pierced TikTok users labeled the ad a “Nazi dog whistle,” presumably based on the idea that praising the genes of a blond-haired, blue-eyed woman with an hourglass figure is somehow an ode to the Third Reich. Charlie Warzel of The Atlantic wrote, “(Sweeney’s) image has been co-opted by the Right, accurately or not, in part because of where she’s from (the Mountain West) and some of her hobbies (fixing cars). Even her figure has become a cultural stand-in for the idea, pushed by conservative commentators, that Americans should be free to love boobs.” Yes, we have now reached the point in American life that it is controversial to suggest that men like breasts; it is now apparently “right-coded.” This is patently insane.

But perhaps the insanity isn’t just a sign of a culture infected with terrible ideas, ranging from the mutability of gender to the evisceration of beauty standards to the willfully ridiculous attempt to treat the male sex drive as uniquely evil. Perhaps it’s a sign of a culture that has lost touch with actual, real problems in the world. A culture that is out of touch not just with reality, but with threat. For a while, such cultures can survive. After all, America is uniquely placed in the world: thousands of miles from any direct foreign policy threat, blessed by natural resources beyond those of any other country, heir to a robust tradition of Anglo-American law and custom that have generated an unprecedented level of economic prosperity.

But reality has a funny way of clocking such cultures back into reality. It turns out that history never stops moving, that threats never stop militating. And what’s more, a self-obsessed and shallow culture that worries about whether boobs in jeans ads are a return to Hitler makes itself uniquely vulnerable to such threats. A people who imbibe the stupidity that trauma amounts to taking mild offense at a dumb pun in an advertisement is a people utterly unprepared for the return of reality. The great German leader Otto von Bismarck once remarked, “There is a Providence that protects idiots, drunkards, children and the United States of America.” We can only pray that Providence continues to protect us from our own idiocy as we sink ever deeper into social media reveries of borderline psychopathy.

Read more …

Water or land? I think you’ll need both in today’s world. Hoe about skies?

• Building Eurasia’s New Fortress (Ring)

For over a century, two dead advisors have shaped the way great powers view the world. On one side, we have Alfred Thayer Mahan—the American naval officer who believed sea power determined global supremacy. According to Mahan, controlling the oceans means controlling trade. If you control trade, you control wealth. If you control wealth… well, you get the picture. On the other side is Halford Mackinder, the British geographer who argued the exact opposite. Forget the seas, he said. Whoever controls the “World Island”—Eurasia—controls the world. Railways, rivers, pipelines, and land empires are what count. Not frigates and aircraft carriers. Mahan and Mackinder are no longer with us, but their ideas continue to influence the world today. And we’re watching it unfold.

It’s Mahan’s World… For Now. The United States and the United Kingdom—Mahan’s spiritual children—have long benefited from an ocean-based order. Ruling the waves built their prosperity and power. The British Empire’s reach was maritime. The U.S. Navy now patrols every major sea lane. The dollar reigns supreme because oil, commodities, and trade settle in greenbacks. That world—the Mahan world—is why Americans live like kings while land powers like Russia and China have spent decades playing catch-up. But Mahan’s world has limits. Especially when you try to keep your rivals bottled up in theirs. That’s precisely what the U.S. has tried to do with China. The First and Second Island Chains—stretching from Japan through Taiwan and the Philippines to Guam and Indonesia—are like maritime prison bars hemming China in.

They prevent Beijing from turning its navy into a global force and restrict its access to the open Pacific. And that’s no accident. It’s U.S. policy. So what did China do? Simple: they pivoted landward. Hence, the Belt and Road Initiative. If the Americans and their allies can dominate the seas, the Chinese reasoned, then the answer lies in dominating the land. Ports, railways, roads, pipelines, dry docks, fiber optic cables, and power grids. Not just in Asia, but across Eurasia, the Middle East, Africa, and even into Europe. What Mackinder once called the “Heartland” is now becoming a Chinese-funded construction site. And then there’s Russia. After the 2022 invasion of Ukraine, the West slapped Moscow with every sanction it could think of. No dollars. No euros. No Swift. No tank parts. No semiconductor chips. No comfy Davos forums.

In effect, the West attempted to sever Russia’s ties to the global economy. Cut it off from the ocean-based system. And how did Russia respond? They doubled down on Mackinder. On land power. On rivers, specifically. If you watch the YouTube video How Russia Plans to Rule Eurasia by River—and I strongly suggest you do—it outlines Moscow’s plan to build out an internal network of rivers, ports, and rail links that integrate the entire Eurasian landmass. The Volga. The Don. The Ob. The Lena. Not names we normally associate with global trade, but maybe we should.

What’s emerging is a strategic marriage between Chinese capital and Russian geography.One has money and ambition. The other has territory, rivers, and a pressing need to stay relevant. Together, they’re laying the foundation for a new continental infrastructure—one that’s largely immune to the U.S. Navy, the EU’s bureaucracy, or whatever sanctions the White House dreams up next. Think about what that means. New trade corridors will be built from China to Europe, bypassing the Strait of Malacca and the Suez Canal. Russian river ports will feed Chinese rail lines into Kazakhstan, Iran, and Turkey. They’ll have pipelines that carrier groups can’t blockade. Their digital infrastructure routed through friendly capitals, not Silicon Valley or Brussels. A Mackinder world. Built in plain sight.

Read more …

Penalties will be prohibitive if you try it alone.

• Everyone Should Leave EU – AfD Head Weidel On “Openly Corrupt” Brussels (RMX)

Alice Weidel, co-leader of the Alternative for Germany (AfD) party, says Germany is digging its own grave. Her words came during an interview Weidel gave to Hungary’s Patriot Extra program, covered by Mandiner. According to the nationalist politician, the European Union has “completely degenerated,” does not represent nation states or sovereign peoples, and has now become a machine run by overpaid bureaucrats that only causes harm. Weidel says Germany’s economic decline is rooted in domestic decisions. High energy prices, the green transition, and the phase-out of nuclear power have made German industry uncompetitive, especially the automotive industry, which she says is being deliberately destroyed by Brussels regulations.

“All the bad rules were made in Brussels,” she said, emphasizing that the ban on internal combustion engines and environmental sanctions benefit China and American companies, not European workers. According to Weidel, Germany and Europe need a free market where everyone can produce and buy what they want. Weidel also said the German government was playing politics against the population, lying to people, and doing the opposite of what it promised. On Angela Merkel, the AfD leader said that she was “the first Green Chancellor, not the conservative leader of the CDU.” She also called current Chancellor Friedrich Merz a representative of the “losing side.” Weidel contrasted Germany with Hungary, praising Viktor Orbán for his “common sense” and as a role model for national sovereignists. “I can only congratulate Viktor Orbán, Hungary is doing much better,” she said.

“Hungary is the only one that clearly stands out and says: this cannot be done with us,” she said. According to Weidel, in Germany, on the other hand, there is an unstable government that is deliberately worsening the financial situation of the population in order to make people vulnerable. Weidel further stated that she believes Hungarians live relatively better than Germans, compared to the country’s economic performance. According to Weidel, “Everyone should leave the EU.” Weidel claimed Brussels is trying to build an “artificially created political product” against Viktor Orbán in the person of opposition leader Péter Magyar to interfere in Hungary’s internal affairs. However, Péter Magyar, supported by green and woke politicians and whom Ursula von der Leyen is feeding from the palm of his hand, is doomed to failure, she said, stating that Orbán will emerge from this fight stronger.

She sees similar interventions from Brussels in Romania and Germany, where the AfD is openly persecuted and even faces a potential ban. Weidel was particularly critical of European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, whom she called “openly corrupt,” specifically commenting on the SMS agreements made for Pfizer vaccine purchases during Covid. “I wonder where the commissions went?” she asked, adding that Von der Leyen and the Brussels elite were “only working to line their own pockets” and that the EU’s institutional system could not be reformed but must be completely rebuilt. In the interview, Weidel outlined what reforms an AfD government would introduce: immediate border closure and mass deportations; social benefits reform, i.e., only those who have paid into the system would receive support; tax cuts for workers; the return of nuclear energy and cheap energy sources; lifting the ban on internal combustion engines; radical reduction of bureaucracy.

“The whole Brussels superstructure is impoverishing us all,” she stressed, adding that the German people are increasingly angry because instead of a “brave new world,” they have been given a more expensive, poorer, and more vulnerable life. Weidel said Germany should return to the ideal of a strong, independent middle class, which Hungary represents in Europe today. According to Weidel, the European elections and the processes in Germany also show that people are fed up with globalist, centralized power. He believes that the restoration of national sovereignty, a strong middle class, and the free market are inevitable, even in the face of Brussels. “The question is whether Germany can still change or will it be completely absorbed by the Brussels deep state,” she told viewers.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

RFK

Yeadon

Gates

Engineer

Calf

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 Older Entries  Newer Entries