Cy Twombly Shield of Achilles 1978
Welcome to the Eurasia Century. pic.twitter.com/lcotVl0hZY
— Pepe Escobar (@RealPepeEscobar) September 3, 2025
Europe will fall pic.twitter.com/IdCfGNzxVF
— Darth Powell (@VladTheInflator) September 1, 2025
https://twitter.com/Jingjing_Li/status/1963155920076316690
Finland defeated the USSR in the war, said Stubb.
Well, those victories are clearly visible on the map of Finland’s lost territory. This is apparently a hint for the drug clown in Kiev on how to explain his upcoming ‘victory.’ pic.twitter.com/Ea2kjoJwol— Dmitry Medvedev (@MedvedevRussiaE) September 2, 2025
List
https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1963251546386259984
The whole world – minus the collective west – in this picture pic.twitter.com/3SowKHpOik
— Lord Bebo (@MyLordBebo) September 3, 2025
“The Chinese nation is a great nation that is never intimidated by any bullies, and always values independence and forges ahead. Today, humanity again has to choose between peace and war, dialogue and confrontation, win-win cooperation and zero-sum game.”
Xi on Victory Day pic.twitter.com/39d5wy65FF
— Pepe Escobar (@RealPepeEscobar) September 3, 2025
pop
why are so many governments all over the west not only permitting but inviting things like this where muslims engage in street prayers right in front of the vatican in what can only be described as pure flex and provocation?
and yet at the same time, they arrest christians for… pic.twitter.com/M1KrqXTfgJ
— el gato malo (@boriquagato) September 3, 2025
100
https://twitter.com/mcafeenew/status/1963030553206096288
“Reagan and Gorbachev were unwitting midwives of the liberal order. Trump and Putin are its gravediggers. Where the earlier summits opened the Cold War’s endgame, today’s dialogue marks the close of the post-Cold War era.”
• Trump and Putin Are Closing The Era That Reagan and Gorbachev Began (Lukyanov)
“There won’t be a war, but the struggle for peace will be so intense that not a stone will be left standing.” This old Soviet joke, born in the 1980s, captured the absurdity of that final Cold War decade: endless ideological cannon fire, nuclear arsenals on hair-trigger alert, and proxy wars fought on the margins. Between détente in the early 1970s and perestroika in the late 1980s, the world lived in a state of permanent tension – half-theater, half-tragedy. The Soviet leadership was old and exhausted, barely able to maintain the status quo. Across the ocean, the White House was run by a former actor, blunt and self-confident, with a taste for gallows humor. When Ronald Reagan quipped during a sound check in 1984 that he had “signed legislation outlawing Russia forever” and that “bombing begins in five minutes,” the off-air joke was truer to the spirit of the times than any prepared speech.
The official Soviet slogan was “the struggle for peace.” In Russian, it carried a deliberate ambiguity – both a promise to preserve peace and an assertion of global control. By the 1980s it had lost all meaning, becoming a cliché mouthed without conviction. Yet history has a way of circling back. Today, the “struggle for peace” has returned – and this time the stakes are even greater. By the late 1980s, both superpowers were tired. The USSR was struggling to carry the burden; the US, shaken by the crises of the 1970s, was looking for renewal. Leadership changes in Moscow – above all, Mikhail Gorbachev’s rise – triggered the most dramatic shift in world affairs since 1945. Between Geneva in 1985 and Malta in 1989, Reagan and Gorbachev held summit after summit. Their aim was to end confrontation and build a “new world order.”
In reality, Washington and Moscow understood that phrase very differently. The Soviet Union’s growing internal weakness tilted the balance of power, leaving the United States and its allies to design the order in their own image. The result was the liberal international system that has dominated ever since. That struggle for peace was, in Western terms, a success: the military threat receded, the Cold War ended, and the United States emerged as global hegemon. Four decades later, the cycle has turned. The Alaska meeting between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin in August 2025 carried faint echoes of Reagan and Gorbachev’s first encounters. Then, as now, two leaders with little mutual understanding recognized the need to keep talking. Then, as now, the personal factor mattered – the chemistry between two men who respected each other’s strength.
But the differences outweigh the parallels. Reagan and Gorbachev were unwitting midwives of the liberal order. Trump and Putin are its gravediggers. Where the earlier summits opened the Cold War’s endgame, today’s dialogue marks the close of the post-Cold War era. The resemblance lies only in timing: both moments represent turns of the historical spiral. The 1980s saw exhaustion on both sides. Now it is the United States, not Russia, that shows fatigue with a world order it once dominated. The demand for change comes above all from within America itself, just as it came from Soviet society in the 1980s. Trump consciously borrows Reagan’s slogan of “peace through strength.” In English it is straightforward; in Russian the phrase can also mean “peace maintained reluctantly, against one’s will.” Both shades of meaning suit Trump.
He makes no secret of his obsession with winning the Nobel Peace Prize, a vanity project that nevertheless reflects a real instinct: his method of diplomacy is raw pressure, even threats, until a deal is struck. Reagan’s legacy was to put America on the neoliberal path and to preside over the Cold War’s end, unintentionally becoming the father of globalization. Trump’s ambition is to roll globalization back and replace it with what he sees as a stronger America – not isolationist, but a magnet pulling in advantage from all directions. To achieve that, he too needs a world order – different from Reagan’s, but just as central to his sense of national interest. Putin’s outlook is the mirror opposite. Where Trump sees America first, Putin sees the necessity of reshaping the global order itself – of ending the period of US dominance and forcing a multipolar settlement. To him, the issue of world order is not cosmetic but existential.
No, not Reagan and Gorbachev cont’d. Sundance is talking here about the walls that separate different parts (silo’s) of the intel communnity. There are many.
• Mr. President, Tear Down These Walls (CTH)
How is it that an insignificant corner of the internet could predict the removal of the U.S. National Security Advisor, specifically as the first administration official to be removed, more than two months before Donald Trump was sworn in as President on January 20, 2025? To understand the complexity of the intelligence information flow, consider: The silo system is made up, in part, of:
The National Security Council (10+ desks, 15 staff/analysts per), the National Security Advisor to the Office of the President, the Dept of Justice National Security Division [DOJ-NSD (foreign review section, counterintelligence export control section, cyber section, counterterrorism section)], Central Intelligence Agency [(CIA), National Intelligence Council, Directorate of Analysis], Federal Bureau of Investigation [FBI (Counterintelligence, Counterterrorism, WMD Directorate, Directorate of Intelligence, Cyber)], the Office of the Director of National Intelligence [ODNI (Requirements, Analysis, Collection, National Counterterrorism Center, Mission Managers)], the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI), the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI), the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), the Dept of Defense [DoD, (Nuclear, Chemical, Biological, Industrial, International)], the National Security Agency [NSA (Operations, Technology, Cyber], and many more.
Each agency/office is a silo, with distinct sub-silos, each with equity stakes in the information they gather, review and analyze; ultimately attributing classification level and intersecting analysis with each other agency as mission aligned. Sound ridiculous? It probably is, yet we’ve merely scratched the surface of the networks and information flows that swirl around the Office of the President. How does President Trump frame his world view? Who organizes the information that is prioritized to reach his desk? It is very easy to say, “President Trump has to know about (fill_in_blank),” without contemplating the process by which President Trump would know about (fill_in_blank). The recent remarks by President Trump, surrounding COVID-19 vaccine efficacy, should put a spotlight on this consequential dynamic.
We were all very pleased to see President Trump announce the newly formed President’s Intelligence Advisory Board (PIAB), because for more than a decade we have watched how intelligence products were manipulated, shaped and constructed to create the illusion of something that was entirely false. However, we should note the same process of selecting the PIAB membership led to the previous issue of selecting former Congressman Mike Waltz as National Security Advisor. In that example, CTH predicted what would happen several months before it actually happened. There are issues of great DC interest that overlay all names and positions within the Trump administration. The subsequent behavior of NSA appointee Mike Waltz was a great reminder that sometimes those interests or judgements are not in alignment with the common MAGA priority.
Big international policy issues, like support for Israel, Ukraine support, NATO support and opinions on the threat Russia or China represents, are all part of the prism through which White House personnel references are traditionally made. When intended policy runs counter to personal ideology, conflicts arise. The policies of Wall St -vs- Main St, banking regulations, reciprocal tariffs, trade fairness, cryptocurrency and foundational economic nationalism can be challenging to align with the perspectives of the professional political class, in DC. The aspect of there being “trillions at stake” applies here, and being an outsider in DC generally comes down to financial interests and financial relationships. Then you run into the issues of the surveillance state, FISA (702) support, data collection and artificial intelligence.
In short, the interests of maintaining the status quo inside Washington DC, which may be interests carried by those in the orbit of President Trump, can stop information from reaching President Trump. As a consequence, cutting through the enmeshed interests with obvious, albeit painful truth, means delivering critical information in such a manner that, well, it cannot be refuted. We hope this is also the goal of those who have recently been outlining the background of Russiagate. However, given a history of inaction, and the stakes at hand, nothing should be taken for granted. What’s needed is a full spectrum outing of everything that took place throughout the targeting of President Trump.
“The desperate search for a “Russian footprint” in the murder of Ukrainian politician Andrey Parubiy is a symptom of terminal self-delusion.”
• The West Has A Big Problem: It Can’t Stop Lying. Even To Itself (Amar)
Power and truth are not natural allies. Indeed, every person and institution – be it a government, a company, a university, or a “think tank” – tends to lie more as they become more powerful. And those who stay weak – have no illusions – must lie, too. Otherwise they’d get trampled even worse by the powerful. The truth may well set us free, as Christ told us. But then, hardly anyone is free in this world. Yet there are real differences. Differences that matter. For instance, with regard to the question of who you can trust a little more or should trust even less. Not to speak of another, often crucial issue: Who can one support or be in solidarity with, even if usually only conditionally? One thing should be clear to anyone not perma-brainwashed out of their mind:
The worst – by far – spreader of propaganda, disinformation, fake news, call it what you wish, is the West. Easily, hands down, no contest. Examples to illustrate this simple fact so little acknowledged – in the West, that is – could be adduced ad infinitum and over centuries. From, say, selling the bloody sacking of a fellow Christian capital in 1204 as a “fourth crusade,” to spreading “free trade” and “civilization” by waging a campaign of war and opiate mass poisoning on the oldest empire and civilization around in the mid-nineteenth century, to “liberating” Libya from a functioning state, decent standards of living, and, really, a future in 2011. It makes sense that George Orwell was English and had served the British Empire as a lowly enforcer among its victims in what we now call the Global South: No one competes with the sheer, habitual, deeply ingrained “Orwellianism” of the West.
Its most recent – but certainly not the last – horrific peak performance is, of course, co-perpetrating the Gaza genocide with Israel and calling it yet another fight against “terror” or “self-defense,” while smearing those who resist as “antisemites” and “terrorists.” There is an aspect of this intense and unremitting Western addiction to lying that should not be overlooked because it plays a key role in making Western disinformation so persistently toxic: The West never acknowledges, corrects, or regrets its fake news, at least not while doing so would still make a difference. Bewailing, for instance, the “mistake” – really, enormous crime – of the Vietnam War? Maybe, a little, if there’s a self-pitying (Rambo I, Platoon, Full Metal Jacket) or squarely delusional (Rambo II) movie in it that sells.
Admitting, on the other hand, that the “Maidan Sniper Massacre” of 2014 was a mass-murderous false-flag operation conducted by ruthless Ukrainian nationalists and fascists, such as, prominently, the recently assassinated Andrey Parubiy? Definitely not. Never mind the painstakingly detailed, conclusive studies of Ukrainian-Canadian scholar Ivan Katchanovski, which are easily available as an open-access book from one of the world’s most reputable academic publishers. Because if the West were to recognize this fact, a keystone of the edifice of lies erected to justify its cynical and devastating use of Ukraine in a failed proxy war against Russia would crumble: the silly conceit that the regime change operation of 2014 was “democratic,” “from below,” and soaked in national “dignity.”
Instead we’d have to face the reality of subversion, manipulation, and the betrayal of a nation to the West’s geopolitics, which is mercilessly cruel as well as bunglingly incompetent. And then, what next: Admitting that Russia was indeed provoked, for over three decades? That the Ukrainian far right is powerful and dangerous: a hotchpotch of white supremacists, neo-Nazis, and assorted other fascists which the West has “normalized” and armed beyond their wildest dreams? That Ukraine’s leader Vladimir Zelensky is a corrupt authoritarian with a dependency problem?
“A thunder shock is needed to break down the wall of lies that surrounds the framework of plausible deniability.”
• The Russiagate Problem (CTH)
According to John Solomon speaking with Devin Nunes recently, there is likely nothing much left from the files of Kash Patel at the FBI to disclose to the public, perhaps moving to the Mueller information will be the next steps.nFor most of us, bringing this storyline to the point of accountability is fraught with frustration. Here are some of the issues as they present.
The Big Problem Within Russiagate – Special Counsel John Durham previously indicted Hillary Clinton lawyer Michael Sussmann. Durham said Sussmann misled FBI investigators. The case against Sussmann resulted in an acquittal. During the trial of the Perkins Coie lawyer, depositions and testimony were given by the Clinton campaign. Campaign Manager Robby Mook admitted the Trump-Russia storyline was a false political hit constructed by the Clinton campaign and launched with the full knowledge of Hillary Clinton. Durham’s case against Sussmann was predicated on a baseline that the Clinton campaign duped the FBI into opening an investigation. This was the core of the Sussmann trial; that Michael Sussmann lied to and misled the FBI. Anyone who researched the issues already knew the FBI was not “duped” or “misled” by the information; instead, the FBI were active participants.
However, to make a case against Perkins Coie, Sussmann and Clinton, the Durham prosecution needed to pretend they didn’t know. The jury saw through the pretense and Sussmann was acquitted. At the time of the trial a few of us noted the motive presented by Durham (ie. FBI duped) had ramifications. This predicate claim essentially quashed any later criminal conspiracy as the court records highlighting how the FBI were duped would preclude any reversal of motive toward any other participant. If the FBI were duped, how could the FBI participants be criminally negligent? The Clinton team were direct. Yes, they manufactured a political smear about Trump/Russia, and yes it was all political. The people who manufactured the false claim admitted Trump-Russia was optics and false narratives. So, what? That’s politics.
The fact that the MSM did not emphasize the Clinton campaign admissions does not negate the Clinton campaign admissions, and the Durham framing of motive toward duping the FBI gave the FBI people the ‘out’. The recently released Durham annex showed the Russians were aware of the Clinton operation. The Clinton team admitted the operation, and the jury acquittal of Sussmann highlighted their opinion the FBI were not duped. That was/is the status.Against the backdrop of Clinton team essentially saying, ‘yeah, we did it’ – where is the conspiracy? From the govt perspective, the FBI investigated the political matter, then handed it to Robert Mueller who affirmed there was no Trump-Russia collusion – again, where’s the conspiracy? Boil it down. This is the factual reality facing any current effort by Main Justice to bring the narrative engineers to a position of legal accountability.
Was there criminal activity? I would argue, yes. In both the leaking of classified information to media (McCabe, Comey, Wolfe, McCord) and in the lying to the FISA court (Carter Page warrant). However, the FISA court doesn’t seem to care about the lying (for a host of reasons), including the wrist-slap to Kevin Clinesmith, and every time the leaking to the media was made an issue the DOJ declined to prosecute.The Mueller probe was used to give a patina of credibility to the false premise of Russiagate while they pursued an unspoken obstruction effort against President Trump. Weissmann wanted President Trump to obstruct a criminal investigation of Trump that was not going to find criminal activity done by Trump.
Like Clinton’s Russiagate, the Mueller investigation was built upon fraud. When asked by congress why Mueller never identified Clinton as the origin of the Russiagate matter, Robert Mueller said “it was not in my purview” to investigate Clinton’s activity. We all watched it unfold live. Everything about the Russiagate narrative and subsequent Mueller probe was built on a foundation of lies and DC corruption, and worse yet – a significant portion of the American people bought into the fraud which is still maintained because a duplicitous corporate media apparatus refuses to admit it. In many ways the Donald Trump political targeting had a similar outcome to the targeting of George Zimmerman. Both were/are transparently innocent of the accusations against them. Both were framed by false narratives sold for political benefit. However, approximately half of the American people still believe the lies despite the clear and convincing evidence to the contrary.
I strongly doubt anything can change the minds of those who believe Trayvon Martin was a teenage victim walking in the rain for Skittles and tea. Leaders in government participated in selling that lie, just like the govt participated in selling the lie of Trump-Russia collusion. Additional messaging, information releases, granular rehashing of details etc. is not going to change the dynamic. A thunder shock is needed to break down the wall of lies that surrounds the framework of plausible deniability. The cornerstone upon which Russiagate was built, was a system of surveillance and spying exploited by a corrupt President Obama administration. If we truly want to confront “Russiagate”, we need to strike directly at the heart of why Obama supported it. More very soon…
“These conditions were spelled out in Ukraine’s 1990 Declaration of Independence, and Russia and the international community used them to recognize Ukrainian statehood..”
• Lavrov Demands International Recognition Of Russia’s New Regions (RT)
Ukraine must recognize its territorial losses, guarantee the rights of the Russian-speaking population, and agree to a security arrangement that poses no threat to Moscow, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said. In an interview with the Indonesian newspaper Kompas released on Wednesday, Lavrov signaled that Russia is open to talks with Ukraine, but noted that a “durable peace” is only possible if Moscow’s territorial gains — including Crimea, the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics, Kherson Region and Zaporozhye Region — are “recognized and formalized in an international legal manner.” The regions overwhelmingly voted to join Russia in public referendums in 2014 and 2022. Lavrov further asserted that peace hinges on “eradicating the underlying cause” of the conflict, which stems from NATO’s expansion and “attempts to drag Ukraine into this aggressive military bloc.”
“Ukraine’s neutral, non-aligned, and nuclear-free status must be ensured. These conditions were spelled out in Ukraine’s 1990 Declaration of Independence, and Russia and the international community used them to recognize Ukrainian statehood,” the foreign minister said. Another cornerstone of a potential settlement is Kiev’s promise to ensure human rights. At present, Kiev “is exterminating everything connected with Russia, Russians, and Russian-speaking people, including the Russian language, culture, traditions, canonical Orthodoxy, and Russian-language media,” he said. He added that Ukraine “is the only country where the use of the language spoken by a significant portion of the population has been outlawed.”
Since the Western-backed coup in Kiev in 2014, Ukraine has taken steps to sever centuries-old cultural ties with its larger neighbor through legislation outlawing statues and symbolism associated with the country’s past and by phasing out the Russian language in all spheres of life. Kiev is also cracking down on the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (UOC), the largest Christian denomination in the country, which it accuses of maintaining links to Moscow, despite the church declaring a break with Russia in 2022. Ukraine has also rejected any territorial concessions to Russia and continues to pursue its aspiration of joining NATO.
“Each side presented its perspective on the prerequisites for ending the conflict. The heads of the delegations remain in direct contact. We expect the negotiations to continue..”
For now, this is only about “prisoner exchanges and the repatriation of the bodies of dead soldiers.”.
• Russia and Ukraine ‘In Direct Contact’ – Lavrov (RT)
Moscow and Kiev maintain “direct contact,” and the Kremlin is open to continued negotiations to resolve the conflict, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said. In an interview with the Indonesian newspaper Kompas released on Wednesday, Lavrov confirmed that Moscow’s top priority remains settling the crisis via peaceful means, adding that it is taking concrete steps to achieve that goal. Lavrov recalled that Moscow initiated the resumption of direct Russia-Ukraine talks this spring, resulting in three rounds of direct negotiations in Istanbul, Türkiye. He noted that the sides reached “certain progress,” including prisoner exchanges and the repatriation of the bodies of dead soldiers.
“Each side presented its perspective on the prerequisites for ending the conflict. The heads of the delegations remain in direct contact. We expect the negotiations to continue,” Lavrov added, without providing details regarding when the next round of talks could be expected, or what issues would be on the agenda. The foreign minister also noted that Russia and Ukraine had held talks early on in the conflict, which led to preliminary agreements on ending the hostilities, “but then the Kiev regime, following the advice of its Western handlers, walked away from a peace treaty, choosing instead to continue the war.” Moscow earlier accused then-UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson of derailing the peace process by advising Kiev to keep fighting. Johnson has denied the claim.
Lavrov stressed, however, that a durable peace between Moscow and Kiev “is impossible without eradicating the underlying causes of the conflict,” most notably the threats posed to Russia’s security by “NATO’s expansion and attempts to drag Ukraine into this aggressive military bloc.” “These threats must be eliminated, and a new system of security guarantees for Russia and Ukraine must be formed,” the minister said. Moscow earlier did not rule out Western security guarantees for Kiev, but on condition that they should not be “one-sided” and aimed at containing Russia. Russia has, in particular, opposed the deployment of Western troops to Ukraine under any pretext, arguing that this would be tantamount to moving NATO’s bases towards its borders.
“I have no message to President Putin. He knows where I stand, and he’ll make his decision one way or the other…”
• Trump Announces Call With Zelensky (RT)
Editor’s note: a previous report stated that President Trump would hold a call with President Putin. US President Donald Trump will hold a phone call with Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky, the White House has said, clarifying earlier remarks that suggested Trump was referring to his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin.Asked by reporters on Wednesday about the two-week deadline Trump gave Putin to meet with Zelensky, the US leader said he would hold talks “with him” in the coming days to discuss steps toward resolving the Ukraine conflict.“I’m having a conversation with him very shortly and I’ll know pretty much what we’re going to be doing,” Trump stated. A White House official later told AFP that Trump was referring to Zelensky. “They will be speaking tomorrow,” the official said.
Zelensky and European leaders said earlier in the day that they expected a call from Trump on Thursday. “We’ve already taken strong action, as you know, and in other ways as well. I’ll be talking to him in the coming days, and we’ll see what comes out of it,” Trump added. Trump has sought to end the Ukraine conflict since returning to the White House earlier this year. He held a summit with Putin in Alaska last month. The three-hour talks marked a diplomatic breakthrough, though they produced neither a ceasefire nor a formal peace deal. Trump later met with Zelensky and several European leaders, urging direct talks between Putin and Zelensky. He warned he could impose sanctions and tariffs on both Moscow and Kiev if no progress is made in resolving hostilities.
Asked on Wednesday if he had a message for Putin, Trump replied: “I have no message to President Putin. He knows where I stand, and he’ll make his decision one way or the other…” Trump said he has good relations with the Russian president, and that they would find out how strong their relationship is “over the next week or two.” Putin said on Wednesday he sees “a light at the end of the tunnel” in efforts to resolve the conflict. “We’ll see how the situation develops,” he told reporters in Beijing. The Russian leader added he is ready to host Zelensky in Moscow, but noted that the latter’s presidential term had long expired and said the Ukrainian constitution provides no mechanism for extending his powers.
“Moscow has expressed skepticism that the West is capable of causing any such outcome.”
“One would think they would not do this or that thing to avoid self-harm. But those dimwits do, pardon my words. Leading world economies are going into a recession just to spite us.”
• Germany’s Merz Demands ‘Economic Exhaustion’ of Russia (RT)
Ukraine’s Western backers should accept that military efforts against Russia are failing and should instead focus on undermining its economy, including by sanctioning its trade partners, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said Tuesday. Germany remains one of Ukraine’s largest arms suppliers and has pledged long-term backing for Kiev. Despite that support, Russian forces continue to make frontline advances, Merz told the ProSiebenSat.1 media outlet. He argued that the priority should now shift toward intensifying sanctions. “We must ensure that this country, Russia, is no longer able to maintain its war economy,” he said. “In this context, I’m talking about economic exhaustion, which we must help bring about. For example, through tariffs on those who still trade diligently with Russia.”
Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova dismissed the comments on Wednesday, writing on Telegram: “Your exhausting rod is not long enough, Herr Merz.” Moscow has touted its resilience to Western sanctions as a hallmark of Russian economic sovereignty and has questioned the logic of politicians who pursue such policies. “Many of the things they do harm themselves,” President Vladimir Putin remarked at a business forum in May. “One would think they would not do this or that thing to avoid self-harm. But those dimwits do, pardon my words. Leading world economies are going into a recession just to spite us.”
Merz’s government plans to cut welfare spending and rely on credit in order to sustain Ukraine aid and increase German military expenditure. The European Union’s biggest economy has shown little growth for years, with no major improvements expected anytime soon. The rejection of Russian pipeline natural gas in an attempt to punish Moscow over the Ukraine conflict has been cited as a major factor in the decline of the competitiveness of German businesses.
7 deaths in 2 weeks, and no statement from the AfD?!
• German Elections Thrown Into ‘Immense Chaos’ After AfD Deaths Rise To 7 (ZH)
German elections in the western state of North Rhine-Westphalia have been thrown into chaos ahead of a Sept. 14 election – after a spate of candidates for Germany’s right-wing AfD have died in recent weeks – with the total now at seven. And while local authorities say there is no evidence of foul play, officials are now scrambling to shred and reprint ballots as campaigns for the deceased have been suspended. According to Welt, Hans-Joachim Kind, 80, a direct candidate in the Kremenholl district, died of natural causes. There has been no cause of death disclosed for four other candidates in the region that has a population of 18 million – as police told Germany’s DPA news agency that the initial four were either from natural causes, or were not being divulged for over privacy concerns.
Ummmm what’s happening in Germany? pic.twitter.com/Y5wBfm6hDo
— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) September 3, 2025
Two reserve candidates died following the initial four, followed by the death of Kind. The reserve candidates were René Herford, who had a pre-existing liver condition and died of kidney failure, and Patrick Tietze, who committed suicide. Now, ballots must be reprinted and successors appointed, causing what WELT described as “immense chaos.” AfD co-leader Alice Weidel reposted a claim by retired economist Stefan Homburg that the number of candidates’ deaths was “statistically almost impossible.” AfD deputy state chairman in North Rhine-Westphalia, Kay Gottschalk, told WELT, that “We will, of course, investigate these cases with the necessary sensitivity and care,” however there is “no indication” that this is “murder or anything similar,” as some of the deceased had “pre-existing medical conditions.”
The party – which Germany’s domestic spy agency classified as a ‘right-wing extremist organization’ in May, grew to Germany’s second-largest in February’s federal elections, before pausing that description due to an appeal pending in court. In 2022, AfD polled at just 5.4% in a region that’s home to Germany’s industrial base in the Ruhr valley – and which has suffered steep job losses. Now, the party polled at 16.8% in state federal elections last February, while more recent polls suggest the party could nearly match that today. “Either Germany votes AfD, or it is the end of Germany,” said tech billionaire Elon Musk, who threw his support behind AfD in recent days.
“.. the private economy is contracting at 4–5%. Calling this a recession would be euphemistic — we are in a depression.”
• EU Accelerating Toward Collapse (Kolbe)
The Chancellor seems to have collided with reality during the summer break. Merz sees the German social system in deep crisis. Meanwhile, his political allies in Brussels are calling for an increase in the very dose of poison that is making Europe sick. Let’s be blunt: Large parts of the political elite have a fractured relationship with reality. This applies equally to the economic decay of Germany and the EU, as well as to the public communication of strategic political goals, which are systematically obscured. Open criticism of the course could cause the political fairy tale to collapse faster than reality seeps into public opinion.All the more remarkable are the warning words of Chancellor Friedrich Merz during his Saturday appearance at the CDU state party conference in Lower Saxony. “I am not satisfied with what we have achieved so far – it must be more, it must be better.”
Hear that! A faint tremor of self-criticism from the Chancellor. Rare, indeed. Yet the statement raises the question: what exactly does Merz mean by “achievements”? Is he referring to the so-called investment booster, supposedly providing marginal relief to the German economy while it teeters on collapse? Or does he mean the massive debt packages and widening financing gaps, most likely to be closed with tax hikes? In his speech in Osnabrück, Merz later spoke unusually clearly about the state of the welfare system: “The welfare state, as we have it today, is no longer financially sustainable given what we can deliver economically.” A blunt diagnosis, leaving little to be desired in clarity. There was, however, no mention of a market-oriented turn, trust in individual solutions, personal responsibility, or rapid bureaucratic reduction. The message seems to be: stay the course.
Merz also spoke unequivocally about citizen welfare payments: it cannot continue like this. 5.6 million people receive the payments. Many could work but do not, he said. A reality that politics usually avoids. A tentative attempt to openly name the precarious state of German social insurance. In times when political sugar-coating is routine, it’s almost a stroke of luck when a leading politician at least partially acknowledges economic realities. Have the latest economic data perhaps shaken Merz and his colleagues in Berlin? GDP shrank again in the second quarter, and the outlook remains bleak. With the state intervening via massive credit programs and new debt hitting about 3.5% this year, the private economy is contracting at 4–5%. Calling this a recession would be euphemistic — we are in a depression.
Hard to see the Supreme Court take sides against Trump, but this looks vague enough: “..a 1977 law that authorizes the president to impose necessary economic sanctions during an emergency to combat an “unusual and extraordinary threat..”
• Trump Escalates Tariff Fight To Supreme Court, Seeks Expedited Review (ZH)
President Trump has asked the Supreme Court to maintain his tariffs after a lower court invalidated them. “The Federal Circuit’s decision casts doubt upon the President’s most significant economic and foreign-affairs policy—a policy that implicates sensitive, ongoing foreign negotiations and urgent national-security concerns,” wrote Solicitor General D. John Sauer in the DOJ’s Supreme Court petition, which has yet to be publicly docketed but was obtained by The Hill. Last week the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit struck down most of Trump’s tariffs in a 7-4 decision – finding that the president can’t use emergency powers to enact levies on various trading partners.
The admin has asked the SCOTUS to expedite their review – and has asked for an announcement by next Wednesday as to whether the highest court in the land will take up the dispute and schedule oral arguments for the first week in November. Several small businesses and Democratic-led states who filed the lawsuit in question say they have no problem with the Supremes taking up the case or the expedited schedule. The tariffs will remain in place until the Supreme Court decides. Trump slapped various significant tariffs on countries around the world – largely doing so by invoking the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), a 1977 law that authorizes the president to impose necessary economic sanctions during an emergency to combat an “unusual and extraordinary threat,” The Hill notes.
Citing an emergency over fentanyl, Trump has imposed a series of tariffs on China, Canada and Mexico dating back to February. He later invoked the law for his “Liberation Day” tariffs, citing an emergency over trade deficits to issue levies on goods from dozens of countries. Trump’s tariffs face roughly a dozen lawsuits across the country. The battle at the Supreme Court comes in response to two underlying cases filed by a group of small businesses and Democratic state attorneys general. “Both federal courts that considered the issue agreed that IEEPA does not give the President unchecked tariff authority,” said Liberty Justice Center senior counsel, Jeffrey Schwab, an attorney on the case. “We are confident that our legal arguments against the so- called “Liberation Day” tariffs will ultimately prevail.”
“These unlawful tariffs are inflicting serious harm on small businesses and jeopardizing their survival. We hope for a prompt resolution of this case for our clients.” The Trump administration, meanwhile, has warned the courts not to second-guess his decision as it will undermine his ability to use tariffs as leverage in negotiating trade deals.
“..we’ll be interested in seeing whether the Treasury market comes under any further pressure if the US has to hand back already received tariff revenues..”
• White House Has Backup Strategy If Trump’s Tariffs Are Overturned: Bessent (ET)
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the White House has plenty of tools at its disposal to implement President Donald Trump’s global tariffs if the Supreme Court does not uphold his use of a 1977 emergency powers law. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled 7–4 on Aug. 29 against the current administration’s decision to invoke the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) as justification for levies on foreign goods unveiled in April. The court’s decision does not take effect until Oct. 14, allowing the White House ample time to appeal the decision to the Supreme Court. The IEEPA grants the president broad authority to regulate international economic transactions—regulating imports and exports, freezing foreign assets, or halting financial transactions—after declaring a national emergency.
In a Labor Day interview with Reuters, Bessent stated that while he is confident the high court will uphold the president’s reciprocal tariff agenda, the administration has various options available. “I’m confident the Supreme Court … will uphold the president’s authority to use IEEPA. And there are lots of other authorities that can be used—not as efficient, not as powerful,” Bessent said. He referred to Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930, also known as the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act. It contains a trade provision that authorizes the president to impose new tariffs or additional duties of up to 50 percent on foreign products entering the United States for a period of five months if they are determined to threaten domestic commerce.
Bessent said he is planning a legal brief for the U.S. Solicitor General to highlight the urgency of stopping the flow of fentanyl into the country. Pointing to the approximately 70,000 fentanyl-linked deaths per year in the United States, he questioned what would be considered an emergency. “If this is not a national emergency, what is?“ he said. ”When can you use IEEPA if not for fentanyl?”
The senior administration official also intends to argue that persistent trade imbalances will ultimately reach a critical threshold, triggering more immense consequences for the U.S. economy.“We’ve had these trade deficits for years, but they keep getting bigger and bigger,” he said. “We are approaching a tipping point … so preventing a calamity is an emergency.” The last time the United States registered a trade surplus was in 1975. In July, the U.S. goods trade deficit widened by $18.7 billion to $103.6 billion, the largest gap in four months. Imports rose by more than 7 percent to $281.5 billion while exports dipped 0.1 percent to $178 billion.
Long-term U.S. Treasury yields popped on Sept. 2, driven by concerns that the federal government will be forced to repay tariff income and forego potentially trillions of dollars in tariff revenues. Yields on the 20- and 30-year government bonds surged about 5 basis points to around 4.92 percent and 4.98 percent, respectively. “Global trading partners will no doubt find it premature to be celebrating just yet, but we’ll be interested in seeing whether the Treasury market comes under any further pressure if the US has to hand back already received tariff revenues,” ING economists said in a Sept. 1 note. In this fiscal year, the federal government has collected $183.1 billion in tariff revenues, including $31 billion in August.
He sees a way to win.
• Farage Vows Mass Deportations in UK (Salgado)
Nigel Farage, who aims to be the prime minister of Great Britain, has promised to deport all of the illegal aliens in the UK if he comes to power. “I will deport every single one of them, and that’ll win me the election,” the British politician, head of Reform UK, declared on American television. Unfortunately, because Britain has a parliamentary system, it is even more difficult to vote bad people out of office and good people into power there than it is in America. Farage cannot simply win an election to become prime minister the same way Americans elect their president. However, if Farage does somehow succeed in taking power, he has some ambitious plans for reclaiming his country from the waves of mass migration that threaten to overwhelm it.
Farage went on Sean Hannity’s show on Fox News to discuss his goals and strategies for winning elections. And he is certain that mass deportations are a winning message for British voters tired of taking a backseat to violent foreigners. Hannity asked Farage, “One of the biggest issues you are debating is one that Donald Trump ran on here, and he has followed through on. He has secured our southern border. He is deporting criminal aliens. Over a million and a half illegal immigrants have left the country since he’s become president. Tell me what your platform would be on immigration, and do you believe that is the winning formula for you to be the next prime minister and live at 10 Downing Street?”
Farage immediately answered, “Young men come into our country on small dinghies across the English Channel. They throw their passports and iPhones into the sea when they reach the 12 mile line, they come in. They get put in four star hotels. They get three meals a day. And you know what? We don’t know who they are. They pose a threat to our national security. I will deport every single one of them, and that’ll win me the election, oh yes.” Unfortunately, the current UK government just won its court appeal to allow a horde of asylum seekers — that is, unvetted illegal aliens — to remain in an infamous Epping hotel at taxpayer expense. The hotel became a focal point of protests after one of the supposed “asylum seekers” faced accusations of sexually assaulting a 14-year-old girl. Slogans at the protest, which drew thousands of people, included “save our kids” and “send them home.”
Labour Member of Parliament Bridget Phillipson responded to a question as to whether she thought the supposed rights of the illegal aliens were more important than the rights of the local citizens in Epping, and said, “Yes, of course we do.” I suppose she gets points for honesty, but not for anything else. Unfortunately, most of the rest of the UK government seems to agree with her. Hopefully, Farage can indeed successfully inspire such a popular movement in Britain that he and his party will ride to victory in the next election.
“..as the Speaker said, there are 34,000 pages — we’re doing everything we can to get those uploaded. We want those to be public as soon as possible.”
• Epstein Files Drop: The Left’s Trump Smear Campaign Just Collapsed (Margolis)
Democrats and Republicans have spent weeks demanding the release of the Epstein files. Well, now they’ve got them. House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer confirmed that the long-awaited document dump is officially underway, pledging unprecedented transparency and accountability. “Just to give a quick update: I think everyone knows who we’ve subpoenaed thus far in the initial batch,” Comer said. “We subpoenaed six former Attorneys General as well as Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton.” Comer confirmed that the scope has since expanded to include former Labor Secretary Alex Acosta, who oversaw a controversial plea deal for Epstein years ago. “Acosta is coming in, I believe, September the 16th or 19th,” Comer said. “We’ve got that date down. I know that we’ll have a lot of questions for him with respect to an earlier Epstein prosecution that he was involved in when he was U.S. Attorney.”
The chairman also revealed that tens of thousands of pages of records are now in the committee’s possession. “We have the documents — the initial batch that had been sent by the White House. As you know, we also subpoenaed Pam Bondi for those documents. The White House is working with us — I want to publicly thank the White House for turning over so many documents thus far,” he explained. “We’re in the process of uploading those documents for full transparency, so everyone in America can see them,” Comer said. “As quick as we can get them uploaded — as the Speaker said, there are 34,000 pages — we’re doing everything we can to get those uploaded. We want those to be public as soon as possible.” Those pages have since been released.
Comer stressed that the investigation is far from over. “We’re gonna continue to bring in more people. We learned of some additional names today. We’re gonna do everything we can to give the American public the transparency they seek, as well as provide accountability in memory of the victims who have already passed away, as well as those that were in the room, and many others who haven’t come forward.”Comer noted that the committee’s most recent session was remarkably unified. “This was a two-and-half hour discussion. It was as bipartisan as anything I’ve seen in the nine years I’ve been here,” he said. “I appreciate the Speaker for giving us the authority to seek out everything that I think you all want, and the people that I talk to, as I travel America, want. We’re going to do everything we can to get the answers and to do it as soon as possible.”
For years, Democrats quietly hoped they could weaponize the Epstein saga into a Trump scandal, and have failed repeatedly. But with Comer’s committee now unloading tens of thousands of pages for the world to see, that narrative is dead on arrival. Democrats never released the files when they controlled Congress or the White House. Why not? Let’s face it, for the left, this document dump is a gut punch. The smears collapse in the daylight, and the only people with reason to sweat now are the Democrats’ longtime allies connected to Epstein.
A press conference to -not- talk about what they’ve been barred from talking about.
• Epstein Victims Hold a Strange Press Conference in Washington, DC (CTH)
Twice the Trump DOJ has asked the courts to permit the release of names associated with the case against Jeffrey Epstein and the victims of sex trafficking therein. Twice the courts have denied the Trump administration the ability to release the sealed Grand Jury records. [August 20th] and [July 23rd] Most of the various victims of Jeffrey Epstein’s sex trafficking operation have previously been paid victim compensation amid various lawsuits including a substantial $290 million financial settlement from JPMorgan Bank in 2023, one of the financial institutions used by Epstein. These lawsuits resulted in what has been reported as ‘various non-disclosure agreements’ (NDAs), which the victims signed.
After the DOJ and congress has released all of the available files, and with various courts refusing to break the seals on names and files within grand jury records, and against the background of multiple victims receiving considerable previous compensation, a group of Epstein victims held a press conference in Washington, DC today demanding the sealed names and NDA covered names be released. The victims would not, most likely because they legally cannot, discuss the names; but they did say they would compile another private list of names of the people to whom they were trafficked. What the purpose of that private list would be is unknown. The entire thing now seems really weird. WATCH:
Some have claimed a comprehensive list of the names in grand jury files or prior lawsuits would include Donald Trump. However, it seems ridiculous to make that assertion given the profile of President Trump in 2016 and 2024. If there was any risk to President Trump, the Clinton campaign would have exploited that vulnerability during the height of the MeToo movement in 2016. Assuredly, even without Clinton, the Kamala Harris campaign would have used that narrative in 2024. Neither political opposition effort ever engaged in such a claim. The Occam’s Razor review of the current state of Epstein victims’ status, is one that points toward extortion. The victims having previously signed agreements, would be at legal risk to violate their various NDAs. However, for the purposes of structuring a political narrative, there are likely revenue sources willing to fund an ongoing victim narrative.
I suspect the lawyers representing the victims in the video (press conference) are likely compensated by the same entities who fund large domestic political operations. The “Republicans” who align with the intention of the efforts, seem to hold a commonality with the same financial interests behind former Republican candidate Ron DeSantis. The victims now seem more akin to political operatives looking for some kind of secondary payday by maintaining a story they are not legally permitted to advance in specific ways. The victim group continually says they will not name the people to whom they were trafficked, which is strange considering the high visibility of their performance and their obvious demand to release grand jury names that could be settled by their own statements releasing names.
Additionally, their claims of imminent fear do not resonate truthfully against the backdrop of their quite happy presentation. The DC event seems like a leverage game of sorts, with some financial benefit as the goal for the victims. For the DC politicians, perhaps a construct to position themselves for some electoral benefit. All of it rather unseemly. There also appears to be a media management operation happening with the group. MSNBC appearance below:
Tulsi risks her public record becoming a broken record. At some point, people want more than “Clapper and Brennan are baddies” every day. They want them indicted.
• Gabbard Unloads With Both Barrels on Brennan and Clapper (Adams)
Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard on Wednesday again decried those working within the government “who believe that they have the right to undermine the duly elected president of the United States because they disagree with his positions or his policies, and that they know better.” In a speech at the National Conservatism Conference in Washington, Gabbard argued that government officials’ “sole focus must be on serving the American people and upholding the Constitution.” In her remarks, Gabbard criticized by name one of her predecessors as director of national intelligence, James Clapper, and former CIA Director John Brennan.
“For me to be here as the eighth director of national intelligence and uncover how James Clapper and others like John Brennan manufactured intelligence to try to undermine President [Donald] Trump’s administration and presidency, and the voices of the American people, and then go back to the founding of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence that came about as a result of the terrorist attack on 9/11 and the manufacturing of intelligence to support the regime-change war in Iraq that George Bush led is an interesting bookend,” the former congresswoman from Hawaii said. Gabbard also decried parts of the surveillance state perpetrated on the American people, contending it was abused by some federal officials. “We’ve seen other examples—those that we know of, there are many others that I believe we don’t yet know of—how leaders in the intelligence community and the FBI knowingly use false information to gain FISA warrants to illegally spy on American citizens,” the ODNI chief said.
“These are just a few of, unfortunately, what is a long list of known examples of politicization and weaponization that all point to the truth that many of us here in this room know, which is that the rot runs deep, and it’s not just in the intelligence community,” she said. “I’ve seen examples of this across almost every federal agency, and so it requires us all to confront the uncomfortable truth that we have these conspiracy conspirators, these traitors to the Constitution, who are working within our government, who dangerously believe that they are not only above the law, but that they are above the Constitution and the Bill of Rights,” Gabbard continued. Gabbard, 44, a former Democrat-turned-Republican, argued that these rogue government employees are hurting the American form of government.
“It undermines our Constitution, our democratic republic, if we have people within our government who are not the president of the United States, who are not elected by the American people, taking it upon themselves to undermine, ultimately, the American people and the Constitution,” she said. The intelligence chief urged a reorientation of American life and governance to pursuing truth. “I’m grateful to serve in this position, grateful to President Trump for entrusting me with this mission to truly seek the truth, find the truth and tell the truth to the American people, so that true accountability and true change, lasting change can come about,” she explained. “You shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free,” Gabbard concluded, quoting John 8:32 from the Bible.
Box
https://twitter.com/buitengebieden/status/1963165423739732163
Spoonbill
Roseate Spoonbill bird in flight pic.twitter.com/xvlCfWRoMX
— Science girl (@gunsnrosesgirl3) September 2, 2025
Donkey
The donkey comes to its owner in the morning to hug him. pic.twitter.com/KGZ1kWG4Uc
— The Figen (@TheFigen_) September 3, 2025
Pigs
https://twitter.com/Natie2Natie/status/1963041473945076194
Support the Automatic Earth in wartime with Paypal, Bitcoin and Patreon.
