Aug 072025
 


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

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.

 

 

 

 

 

Aug 062025
 


Pablo Picasso Interieur au Pot de Fleurs 1953

 

Your Wages Aren’t Rising By Accident. They’re Rising By Design (Nas)
Trump Rules Out Scott Bessent As Fed Chair (NYP)
Clintons, ex-AGs and FBI Directors Subpoenaed For Epstein Testimony (NYP)
Here Comes The Find Out Phase: Russia Collusion Hoax Grand Jury Is On (Taft)
DOJ To Present Russiagate Hoax To A Grand Jury For Criminal Charges (ZH)
The EU-US Deal Is Positive and the Only Realistic Alternative (Lacalle)
GOP Could Bring Down Adam Schiff and Letitia James with LETITIA Act (Margolis)
‘Biden’s DOJ Secretly Targeted Trump’s Inner Circle (Margolis)
Sanctions On Russia’s Partners ‘Obvious Next Step’ – US NATO Envoy (RT)
US ‘On Precipice’ Of Recession – Moody’s (RT)
Ukrainian Officials Busted In ‘Large-Scale’ Military Bribery Scheme (RT)
Europe’s Last Security Project Is Quietly Collapsing (Lukyanov)
Colonial Theft vs. Wartime Fundraising: The Double Standard of Western Museums (Sp.)
Thank God for Robert F. Kennedy (Paul Craig Roberts)
I Run The Country and The World”: Donald Trump (Paul Craig Roberts)
Is Trump Taking Us to War? (Paul Craig Roberts)
A Catastrophic War Seems Inevitable (Paul Craig Roberts)

 

 

16%
https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/1952716496523710784

Pelosi
https://twitter.com/TRUMP_ARMY_/status/1952699081832140896

2018

 

 

Ratcliffe: On July 31 2016, the FBI started an investigation into candidate Trump. 6 days before, Russian intelligence “predicted” that would happen. They didn’t guess. They had read the playbook.

 

 

 

 

I’m early today. Could have posted -most of- this last night. My timezone here is E(D)T+6. Maybe more later. A whole day ahead.

 

 

X thread.

The highest ranking US government official in history who’s -openly- gay.

Who was involved in breaking the Bank of England.

Nice interview.

Your Wages Aren’t Rising By Accident. They’re Rising By Design (Nas)

The numbers are staggering.Household income growth hit 0.7-0.8% in April alone. Real wages for hourly workers rose almost 2% in just 5 months. Bessent dropped this bombshell: “No president has done that before.” But here’s where it gets interesting… Blue-collar wage growth is at its highest level since Trump’s first term. Under Biden? It plummeted. Now it’s back up “just in a few months.” The reason is simple… Bessent revealed the hidden mechanism behind exploding wages: It’s not about minimum wage laws or government mandates. It’s about strategic displacement of cheap labor. “12 or 20 million illegal aliens coming out of the workforce” creates massive wage pressure upward. The manufacturing revolution is here.

Only 9% of Americans work in manufacturing. But here’s what they don’t tell you: Manufacturing jobs deliver “much stronger wage growth than the service economy.” Trump is rebuilding America’s industrial base by design. The negotiation strategy is working brilliantly. 75+ nations are bringing “their best offers” to Treasury. When Trump threatened 50% EU tariffs, European leaders called within hours. Tariffs aren’t just revenue. They’re leverage that gets results. Here’s the secret Wall Street doesn’t want you to know. For decades, they’ve had “a great run” while Main Street struggled. Bessent’s mission? “Now it’s Main Street’s turn to also participate.” The policy shift is already working… The economic data proves it: CPI: 0.1% (best since 2020) PPI: 0.1% (best since 2021)

Recession predictions: Dead wrong Reality: “Economy is very strong” But there’s a deeper story here… Bessent’s opened up about his backstory. His father went broke twice. Young Scott got his first job at age 9 – putting out beach umbrellas and busing tables. “That’s why I am so focused on the debt here and having responsible finances.” This isn’t just policy – it’s personal vendetta against financial recklessness. “We are not going to make the same mistakes my family did.” He’s treating America’s economy like he wished someone had treated his family’s finances. The Wall Street vs Main Street war is real. For years, coastal elites thrived while middle America got “hollowed out.” Bessent’s solution? Bring back strategic industries: steel, semiconductors, pharmaceuticals.

“We got to bring them back home.” Hamilton’s original tariff strategy had two purposes:
• Finance the treasury
• Protect nascent industries
Trump added the third leg: negotiation leverage. This is economic warfare disguised as trade policy. And it’s working. The results speak for themselves: Manufacturing emphasis + immigration control + tariff leverage = exploding wages. It’s not magic. It’s applied economics. And workers are seeing the benefits in real time. This is the economic revolution hiding in plain sight. While media focuses on political drama, actual policy is reshaping American prosperity. Your wages aren’t rising by accident. They’re rising by design.

Bessent

Read more …

Actually, he ruled himself out.

“I asked him just last night, ‘Is this something you want?’ [Bessent said], ’Nope, I want to stay where I am.’ He actually said, ‘I want to work with you.’ It’s such an honor’. I said, ‘That’s very nice. I appreciate that.’””

Trump Rules Out Scott Bessent As Fed Chair (NYP)

President Trump took Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent off his list of possible candidates to helm the Federal Reserve next year and joked about selecting CNBC anchors for roles with the central bank Tuesday. Trump, 79, claimed he has four finalists in mind to replace current Fed Chair Jerome Powell, whose term ends in May 2026. “I love Scott, but he wants to stay where he is,” Trump told “Squawk Box” of Bessent. “I asked him just last night, ‘Is this something you want?’ [Bessent said], ’Nope, I want to stay where I am.’ He actually said, ‘I want to work with you.’ It’s such an honor. I said, ‘That’s very nice. I appreciate that.’” Bessent’s name had been floated for weeks as a possible successor to Powell, with the Treasury secretary refraining from publicly ruling himself out.

Trump has long fumed at Powell for his reluctance to slash interest rates, bashing him as “too late” and “highly political.” Still, the president has denied that he will attempt to dismiss Powell before his term ends. Critics and legal experts have cast doubt on whether the president even has the authority to fire the Fed chair, who has reportedly insisted he will not resign despite the criticism. “In the end, there are numerous people that are qualified. Everyone on your phone right now, in terms of at your beautiful studio, would be very qualified in my opinion,” Trump quipped about replacing Powell. “You guys are better than most of the people that do it for a living.” During the wide-ranging interview, Trump riffed about two widely reported contenders to take over the Fed — National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett and former Fed board member Kevin Warsh.

Over the weekend, Hassett told NBC’s “Meet the Press” that he has the “best job in the world” and is “really well placed at the National Economic Council” but did not rule out accepting the job if Trump asked. Warsh, who served on the Fed’s Board of Governors from 2006 to 2011, was passed over by Trump in favor of Powell during his first term. “Both Kevin Warsh and Kevin Hassett are very good candidates for the Fed,” Trump said, before adding that “I have two other people” under consideration without specifying who those were. The president views Powell’s insistence on keeping interest rates elevated as undermining efforts to refinance the roughly $9 trillion in US debt. However, some economists have defended Powell, noting that the annual inflation rate remains above the Fed’s 2% goal.

During its meeting last week, the Fed’s Federal Open Market Committee, which makes interest rate decisions, opted to leave its benchmark rate between 4.25% and 4.5%. Trump is also dealing with the fallout from an underwhelming employment report, which found only 73,000 jobs were added in the month of July and revised the figures for May and June down by a whopping 258,000 jobs. Hours after the report came out, Trump dismissed Bureau of Labor Statistics Commissioner Erika McEntarfer, accusing her of fudging the numbers. “Squawk Box” co-host Joe Kernen noted to the president that the soft job market could hasten the Fed’s decision to lower interest rates. “It’s not what I want,” Trump shot back. “I don’t want that. I wanted it a year ago. I wanted it a long time ago. Jay Powell is highly political. And I think, you know, I call him ‘Too late.’”

Read more …

In both Epstein and Giuffre’s cases, it is reported non-stop that they committed suicide. In both cases, there are serious questions about that.

Clintons, ex-AGs and FBI Directors Subpoenaed For Epstein Testimony (NYP)

House Republicans subpoenaed nearly a dozen former federal officials and politicians — including Bill and Hillary Clinton — as well as records from the Department of Justice on Tuesday amid an expanding probe into the deceased pedophile Jeffrey Epstein. The officials — including former FBI Directors James Comey and Robert Mueller as well as six ex-US attorneys general — were compelled to testify before the House Oversight Committee. Oversight Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) announced the move less than two weeks after DOJ officials interviewed Epstein’s late accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell, who is serving a 20-year sentence in a federal prison for conspiring to sexually abuse young girls. “The facts and circumstances surrounding both Mr. Epstein and Ms. Maxwell’s cases have received immense public interest and scrutiny,” Comer wrote in all of the letters.

“While the Department undertakes efforts to uncover and publicly disclose additional information related to Mr. Epstein and Ms. Maxwell’s cases, it is imperative that Congress conduct oversight of the federal government’s enforcement of sex trafficking laws generally and specifically its handling of the investigation and prosecution of Mr. Epstein and Ms. Maxwell.” The investigation kicked off after President Trump faced backlash over a two-page memo, released by his DOJ and FBI July 6, that found a “systematic review” of evidence uncovered no Epstein “client list” of rich and well-connected associates implicated in his sickening crimes. Epstein, 66, committed suicide in his Manhattan jail cell Aug. 10, 2019, multiple federal and independent medical investigations determined, but his well-documented links to Hollywood stars, high-powered attorneys, politicians and influential business leaders have caused furious speculation for years.

Trump’s current attorney general, Pam Bondi, had indicated a client list was “sitting” on her desk for the review in February — and that the FBI’s New York Field Office was “in possession of thousands of pages of documents related to the investigation and indictment of Epstein.” But the July 6 memo said threre was “no credible evidence found that Epstein blackmailed prominent individuals as part of his actions” and no “evidence that could predicate an investigation against uncharged third parties.” The FBI-DOJ document also noted that Epstein’s crimes impacted “over one thousand victims.” On July 17, Trump posted on Truth Social: “Based on the ridiculous amount of publicity given to Jeffrey Epstein, I have asked Attorney General Pam Bondi to produce any and all pertinent Grand Jury testimony, subject to Court approval.” “This SCAM, perpetuated by the Democrats, should end, right now!” he added.

Trump also told reporters of the public’s right to previously undisclosed Epstein information: “Anything that’s credible, I would say, let them have it.” Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche interviewed Maxwell July 24 and 25 at the US attorney’s office in Tallahassee, Fla., before she was shuttled to a spacious correctional center in Bryan, Texas, last week. Maxwell — who was given limited immunity — answered every question about “100 different people,” according to her lawyer, Oscar David Markus. The discussions came amid speculation that the former Epstein associate’s legal team could be seeking clemency for their client, who was convicted in December 2021 and sentenced in June 2022. Her lawyers have already appealed her conviction to the US Supreme Court, arguing that she should have been off limits to prosecutors under a plea agreement reached when Epstein was first charged with sex crimes. The justices will consider her petition in late September.

The disgraced financier had to register as a sex offender after pleading guilty to Florida charges of soliciting sex from a minor in 2007, but went on to host lavish parties and enjoy professional relationships with associates like Prince Andrew and Microsoft founder Bill Gates. Bill Clinton rode on Epstein’s private jet abroad, nicknamed the “Lolita Express,” several times. Hillary Clinton has been asked to appear Oct. 9, while Bill Clinton was ordered to sit for his deposition on Oct. 14 Mueller’s deposition is scheduled for Sept. 2; Comey’s is scheduled for Oct. 7. Also summoned were former President Joe Biden’s AG Merrick Garland, Trump AGs Bill Barr and Jeff Sessions, former President Barack Obama’s AGs Loretta Lynch and Eric Holder as well as former President George W. Bush’s AG Alberto Gonzalez. Barr [..] is set to be deposed Aug. 18, Gonzales on Aug. 28, Lynch on Sept. 9, Holder on Sept. 30 and Garland on Oct. 2. The Justice Department has been given until Aug. 19 to turn over the “full, complete, unredacted Epstein Files.”

Read more …

“We believe that the right move is the grand jury, but not if it’s in DC. That’s felony dumb.”

“The sad situation is that no one remotely right of center would get a fair trial in Washington, D.C. That’s not just sad, it’s true—and it’s criminal..”

Here Comes The Find Out Phase: Russia Collusion Hoax Grand Jury Is On (Taft)

DOJ leaks reveal that U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi has green-lighted a grand jury to investigate the Russia Collusion hoax. I’d say that this is a BLOCKBUSTER! BAM! BREAKING story, and it IS a HUGE MOVE, but you read PJ Media to get context and insight, so there are questions. Here’s the nut of the exclusive report by Fox News on Monday evening: “EXCLUSIVE: Attorney General Pam Bondi directed her staff Monday to act on the criminal referral from Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard related to the alleged conspiracy to tie President Donald Trump to Russia, and the Department of Justice is now opening a grand jury investigation into the matter, Fox News Digital has learned. Bondi personally ordered an unnamed federal prosecutor to initiate legal proceedings and the prosecutor is expected to present department evidence to a grand jury, which would allow the department to secure a potential indictment, according to a letter from Bondi reviewed by Fox News Digital and a source familiar with the investigation. ”

Gabbard’s concerns are republic-shaking ones but not the only ones. Fox Digital reported: “The DOJ confirmed two weeks ago it received a criminal referral from Gabbard. The referral included a memorandum titled “Intelligence Community suppression of intelligence showing ‘Russian and criminal actors did not impact’ the 2016 presidential election via cyber-attacks on infrastructure” and asked that the DOJ open an investigation. Hmmm? While this skeletal report telegraphs a few clues, Bondi’s team has leaked that the AG’s team is acting on Gabbard’s criminal referrals, but there’s no word about the possibly even more concrete referrals from CIA Director and former U.S. federal prosecutor John Ratcliffe. Both sets of allegations are serious, but why leave Ratcliffe’s referrals out of the story?

Here are the allegations he referred to pertaining regarding John Brennan, James Comey, James Clapper, and Hillary Clinton:
• Lying under oath to Congress or federal investigators
• Abuse of office and politicization of intelligence by advancing unsubstantiated claims and manipulating intelligence

Gabbard’s referrals based on the documents she released underscored the conspiracy and its treachery. While that oversight could be because Bondi is caught up between the signal and the noise, what she could be doing is holding her powder. The reason behind that could be what constitutional lawyer and Fox News host Mark Levin said on Sunday Morning Futures with Maria Bartiromo–and it is important. Bartiromo asked, “How would you be handling this case?” And Levin held a clinic.

I’ll break down what Levin said. It makes sense to those who resist the urge to make the perfect the enemy of the good. “I think it doesn’t help us as to what laws might have been violated. Who cares? Right now, you need to dig in to find out who did what, then you’ll figure out what laws have been violated. We know laws were violated. You’re not bringing charges yet; you’re not bringing a bill of indictment yet. You have to conduct an investigation. I mean, I can think of laws that I haven’t even mentioned. What about federal campaign finance laws? What they did to Donald Trump in Manhattan is a ruse … really? Those are campaign violations. That[‘s] for another day.

What should happen now, for me, my view, the Department of Justice should be making a list of every potential witness or participant. They should immediately receive a letter that a criminal investigation has begun, and they are to preserve all records whether they are to preserve all records—whether they took public records with them—whether they took private records with them, and that includes the long list of texts and emails and on and on and on. What you’ll find, then, is that you are going to find a lot of collusion between the Department of Justice, the FBI, the CIA, the White House—the whole damned bunch of them—and the media.”

Levin is in the camp of preserving documents now and getting to the prosecution later. Sounds great to me. The other huge issue the announcement fails to address is WHERE this grand jury will be convened. Will this grand jury be convened in the Southern District of Florida, where the Mar-a-Lago raid took place, or in the lost land of Washington, D.C. where there is ZERO chance that ANY Democrat would be found GUILTY of any crime? The right answer is Florida. Monday night’s move was huge, but only if Bondi is as careful as a cat stalking a bird. Meow. I told you we wouldn’t punk you. We believe that the right move is the grand jury, but not if it’s in DC. That’s felony dumb. The sad situation is that no one remotely right of center would get a fair trial in Washington, D.C. That’s not just sad, it’s true—and it’s criminal.

Read more …

“The report said that then-President Barack Obama didn’t want Hillary’s scandal to taint his legacy..”

DOJ To Present Russiagate Hoax To A Grand Jury For Criminal Charges (ZH)

Attorney General Pam Bondi has directed that the Justice Department move forward with a probe into the origins of the Trump-Russia investigation, following the recent release of documents about collusion between the Obama administration and the 2016 Hillary Clinton campaign. Bondi has directed a prosecutor to present evidence to a grand jury after referrals from the Trump administration’s top intelligence official, a person familiar with the matter said Monday. Fox News first reported the development. It was not clear which former officials might be the target of any grand jury activity, where the grand jury that might ultimately hear evidence will be located or which prosecutors — whether career employees or political appointees — might be involved in pursuing the investigation.

It was also not clear what precise claims of misconduct Trump administration officials believe could form the basis of criminal charges, which a grand jury would have to sign off on for an indictment to be issued. In one batch of documents released last month, Gabbard disclosed emails showing that senior Obama administration officials were aware in 2016 that Russians had not hacked state election systems to manipulate the votes in Trump’s favor. Sen. Chuck Grassley, the Republican chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, also released a set of emails last week. The emails were part of a classified annex of a report issued in 2023 by John Durham, the special counsel who was appointed during the first Trump administration to hunt for any government misconduct during the Russia investigation.

According to the annex, an FBI informer identified as “TI” provided the bureau in 2016 with two intelligence reports, which described “confidential conversations” between then-Democratic National Committee Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz and two people at the George Soros-funded Open Society Foundation: Leonard Bernardo and Jeffrey Goldstein. The report said that then-President Barack Obama didn’t want Hillary’s scandal to taint his legacy. Accordingly, “To solve the problem, the President puts pressure on FBI Director James Comey through Attorney General Lynch, however, so far without concrete results.”

The same report also said that Comey favored Republicans, and that the FBI didn’t have any evidence against Clinton—because she deleted her emails. While the FBI informant’s intelligence wasn’t corroborated at the time, the FBI indeed closed its investigation into Clinton without recommending charges. Republicans have particularly focused on a July 27, 2016, email in Durham’s newly declassified annex that claimed that Hillary Clinton had approved a plan during the heat of the campaign to link Trump with Russia. Durham’s own report took pain to note that investigators had not corroborated the communications as authentic and said the best assessment was that the message was “a composites of several emails” the Russians had obtained from hacking.

Read more …

Possible. Still, it’s not about the outcome, but about the process. Did Ursula fight for Europeans? Looks like she didn’t raise a single finger.

The EU-US Deal Is Positive and the Only Realistic Alternative (Lacalle)

The agreements the United States has signed with its main trading partners are both positive and realistic. They demonstrate that, in 2024, the world was not a trade paradise of spontaneous cooperation among free-market companies as per David Ricardo’s ideal, but rather a statist system filled with barriers against US businesses and political efforts to pick winners and losers. The controversy surrounding the agreement between the United States and the European Union can only be explained for three reasons: animosity toward any achievements of the Trump administration, ignorance about the only realistic alternative, or because critics of the deal were genuinely satisfied with the protectionism and European barriers in place in 2024.

Critics of the deal must answer two questions: What was the only real alternative? The only real alternative was a collapse in European exports, a loss of competitiveness versus Japan, the United Kingdom, South Korea, and other partners, greater offshoring of companies, and, crucially, keeping existing European trade barriers. What would the critics have done? Critics must explain how they would have achieved supposedly better deals when global export leaders have signed agreements like that of the European Union. They need to share with us what essential information they have that the EU negotiators do not, reportedly enabling them to achieve better conditions than Japan, the United Kingdom, South Korea, Indonesia, Vietnam, the Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Australia, China, and others. Is it reasonable to think that EU negotiators were stupid or reckless and did not weigh all options to achieve a beneficial agreement?

Claiming that the agreement with the United States is detrimental is, inadvertently, to defend the trade barriers with Europe’s main global partner as if they were wonderful and should be preserved. It also stems from a fantastical vision of global trade, imagining that the US market could be replaced by others. What’s worse is that some seem to believe all of this is Trump’s fault—a favourite in today’s economic analysis—and that in four years, a Democratic president or a softer Republican will return everything to the way it was in 2024. This is a mistaken vision. Biden kept all the tariffs from the Trump and Obama administrations and increased several of them.

Why wasn’t there a significant outcry when the EU implemented substantial trade barriers or when Democratic presidents established tariffs? The outrage frequently conceals bias against Trump and conveniently overlooks Europe’s persistent imposition of new barriers on US products. Why wasn’t there an outcry over the EU’s tariffs on US chemicals, agriculture, livestock, automobiles, and manufacturing equipment – or over the 2030 Agenda, the New Green Deal, the CO2 tax, and all the constant excessive regulation? It took Draghi to remind us that the EU imposes more hidden tariffs on itself than the United States does.

Read more …

“Law Enforcement Tools to Interdict Troubling Investments in Abodes”.

GOP Could Bring Down Adam Schiff and Letitia James with LETITIA Act (Margolis)

It looks like Senate Republicans aren’t just talking tough on corruption—they’re laying the groundwork for real accountability, and Democrats like Sen. Adam Schiff and New York Attorney General Letitia James may finally have reason to worry. Sen. John Cornyn has introduced the Law Enforcement Tools to Interdict Troubling Investments in Abodes—or the LETITIA Act, pointedly named after the New York AG herself. But this isn’t just a symbolic jab. The bill represents a serious move to expand criminal liability and, more importantly, stiffen penalties for public officials who abuse their positions for personal gain—specifically through shady dealings like mortgage or tax fraud.

There’s no mistaking the intent behind this legislation. Letitia James is famous for her partisan pursuit of President Trump, yet she herself now entangled in a federal investigation over mortgage fraud. But the real intrigue emerges with the bill’s potential impact on Adam Schiff—the very same Schiff who for years cloaked himself in the language of integrity while leading partisan witch hunts against Trump and his allies. The tables may be turning. Details in the public record are damning. Housing authority Bill Pulte has accused Schiff of falsifying bank documents and misrepresenting primary residences across multiple states to secure more favorable mortgage terms. These aren’t garden-variety clerical mistakes—they’re deliberate moves that, under Cornyn’s proposal, would be subject to mandatory prison terms.

If signed into law, the LETITIA Act would slap public officials convicted of bank fraud, loan or mortgage fraud, or tax fraud with minimum sentences—one year for bank or loan fraud, six months for tax fraud—ratcheting up to five years for repeated patterns of abuse. No more tepid reprimands or backroom wrist-slaps for insiders who get caught. So, is this the moment where the Senate GOP draws a legal bullseye on Adam Schiff? Cornyn makes no effort to hide his intention to empower President Trump and authorities to finally “hold crooked politicians like New York’s Letitia James accountable for defrauding their constituents, violating their oath of office, and breaking the law.” The context leaves little doubt: this bill is meant not just as a warning to all but as a calibrated legislative knife aimed specifically at the likes of James and Schiff—high-ranking Democrats who have made a career out of prosecuting their rivals and hoisting the banner of unassailable virtue.

Adam Schiff, having cultivated an image as the tireless force against corruption and chaos, now finds that the same legal tripwires he spent years setting for others could be lying directly in his path. The Justice Department hasn’t pressed charges yet, but the bill puts a powerful tool in their hands—one designed to close the loopholes that have too long separated members of the political elite from real-world accountability.

When law’s hammer falls, it must strike without favoritism. The message from Senate Republicans is unmistakable: if Schiff is guilty of the mortgage fraud allegations leveled against him, he should face the same jail time and personal ruin the system eagerly imposes on anyone outside the Beltway. The LETITIA Act, if passed and enforced, tears down the shield of privilege, daring to answer the question: Will Adam Schiff finally be held legally accountable? The answer may come sooner rather than later. For now, the Senate GOP has set the stage. The only thing left is for the Justice Department to decide whether it will step up and bring the same intensity to prosecuting Schiff as he did to others.

Read more …

“Those who dared to challenge the regime were met not with due process, but with the full force of a weaponized federal machine.”

‘Biden’s DOJ Secretly Targeted Trump’s Inner Circle (Margolis)

There are new, disturbing revelations about the weaponization of the federal government against former Trump officials that demand attention. Just weeks before returning to the White House, officials who served President Donald Trump during his first term discovered they had been swept up in a politically charged dragnet under orders from the Biden administration. Google, following a legal process that the FBI triggered, quietly collected personal information from their accounts, only alerting the targets after the fact, and only because the court-imposed gag order had finally lifted. Dan Scavino, now White House Deputy Chief of Staff, received one of these anonymous yet chilling notifications from Google.

“Google received and responded to a legal process issued by the Federal Bureau of Investigation compelling the release of information related to your Google account. A court order previously prohibited Google from notifying you of the legal process…” The Orwellian undertone cannot be missed. Scavino described it as “Biden lawfare” in action, calling it “a small taste of the INSANITY that many of us went through—right here in the United States of America. LAWFARE at its finest. A Complete and Total Disgrace!!!!!” According to Fox News Digital, soon after Scavino’s post, Kash Patel, who now serves as FBI Director, revealed he too received one of these covert warnings. This wasn’t a one-off; this was a coordinated campaign of intimidation. Jeff Clark, acting administrator at the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, also stepped forward, stating he got a similar message.

“Indeed, a whole Jack Smith team was assigned to go through my emails after there was a privilege review.” Clark didn’t stop there; he exposed how the “group of lawyers ignored my religious pastor privilege, marital privilege, and other privileges and basically shipped all they could to Jack Smith. But it still cost me tens of thousands to try to protect my communications.” Smith, the former special counsel whom Merrick Garland handpicked, got the green light to relentlessly pursue Donald Trump and his allies through a series of politically charged investigations. His mandate? To criminalize Trump’s efforts to challenge the highly questionable 2020 election results and, later, to go after him over the possession of classified documents at Mar-a-Lago, despite a long history of former officials handling such matters without prosecution.

Smith’s team rolled through personal data with utter disregard for privacy and protected communication. “My medical records and other private communications had nothing to do with the 2020 election,” Clark said. “They were no one’s business. But it didn’t matter to these thugs with law degrees and the willingness to abuse government power.” This was vengeance dressed up in legal jargon. And once again, we’re staring down undeniable proof that under Biden’s watch, the law wasn’t blind; it was a weapon aimed squarely at his political enemies. The administration didn’t treat the Constitution as a safeguard but as an obstacle to ignore. Those who dared to challenge the regime were met not with due process, but with the full force of a weaponized federal machine. This is the legacy of the Left’s “justice”: intimidate, isolate, and destroy.

Read more …

The countries you seek to sanction will need oil regardless, but they will have to pay a higher price. That lifts global oil prices, so Russia gets paid more.

Sanctions On Russia’s Partners ‘Obvious Next Step’ – US NATO Envoy (RT)

Targeting Russia’s partners with sanctions and tariffs is the “obvious next step” in US efforts to mediate the Ukraine conflict, Washington’s ambassador to NATO, Matthew Whitaker, says. Moscow has stated that it is open to talks, holding three rounds of US-mediated negotiations with Kiev in the past two months that resulted in major prisoner swaps and settlement proposals. It views the conflict as a Western proxy war and has said the hostilities would end if Kiev accepts neutrality and demilitarization. US President Donald Trump has expressed frustration with delays in settlement efforts and threatened to place 100% tariffs and secondary sanctions on Russia’s trade partners if a deal is not reached by August 8.

“President Trump’s been clear that this war needs to end… And… is creating the environment that Russia will come to the table and negotiate a ceasefire,” Whitaker told Bloomberg TV on Monday.“Secondary sanctions and tariffs against those that are paying for this war, like China, India, and Brazil, by buying the oil that Russia is producing, is an obvious next step to try to bring this war to an end.” While Trump has acknowledged that new sanctions might prove ineffective, Whitaker said Washington sees targeting Russia’s oil trade as worth trying. “I think this is going to really hit them where it counts, and that is in their main revenue source, which is the sale of oil to these countries,” he stated.

On Monday, Trump threatened New Delhi with new tariffs unless it halts Russian oil purchases. India has refused to take part in the sanctions on Russia, calling its energy trade a matter of national interest. Moscow has faced waves of Western sanctions since the Ukraine conflict escalated in 2022. It has condemned them as illegal and counterproductive, adding that they have largely failed, as Russia redirected most of its trade to Asia, with China and India now its biggest energy buyers. Russian officials say the sanctions will not alter the course of the conflict and have downplayed Trump’s threats, adding that the country has built “immunity” after years of sanctions.

Read more …

I call BS on Moody’s. They appear to play politics.

Tariffs may influence where money flows in America, but the money stays in the country. Part is used to pay down the debt, part flows back to the people.

Likewise, fewer immigrant jobs means more American jobs. Maybe they get paid more, but that money, too, stays in the country.

How can this add up to a recession? There’s simply a shift in money flows.

US ‘On Precipice’ Of Recession – Moody’s (RT)

US President Donald Trump’s tariffs and immigration policy are pushing the economy toward a downturn, Moody’s chief analyst, Mark Zandi, has warned. He described the US as “on the precipice” of a recession.The warning followed a Bureau of Labor Statistics report showing the US added an average of just 35,000 jobs a month from May to July – less than a third of last year’s pace and the weakest since 2020. Experts say the slowdown signals weakening economic growth. Other indicators have also been bleak: June consumer spending rose only 0.1% after inflation, prices climbed 2.7% year-on-year – the highest since February – and factory activity contracted for the fourth straight month as orders and jobs fell.

“The economy is on the precipice of recession. That’s the clear takeaway from last week’s economic data dump,” Zandi wrote on X on Sunday. “Consumer spending has flatlined, construction and manufacturing are contracting, and employment is set to fall.”He warned that inflation above target leaves the Federal Reserve little room to revive growth, especially under Trump’s policies.“It’s no mystery why the economy is struggling; blame increasing US tariffs and highly restrictive immigration policy,” Zandi stated. “The tariffs are cutting increasingly deeply into the profits of American companies and the purchasing power of American households. Fewer immigrant workers means a smaller economy.”

Since returning to office, Trump has tightened restrictions on illegal immigration, planning to deport 4 million people over four years – a move many warn will trigger severe labor shortages. He has also imposed tariffs on hundreds of US trade partners, framing them as a “reciprocal” strategy to secure better trade terms, protect jobs, revive manufacturing, cut deficits, and fund tax relief. Zandi is not alone in warning of the risks. Fed Chair Jerome Powell has cautioned that tariffs could sharply raise both inflation and unemployment. The Economic Policy Institute estimated that Trump’s mass deportations plan could destroy nearly 6 million jobs. Trump’s alma mater, the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School, warned that deportations would shrink most worker paychecks, cut GDP, and further swell the already massive federal budget deficit.

Read more …

“..a contract for electronic warfare systems at an intentionally inflated price, with the group receiving illegal benefits worth 30% of the contract amount.”

Ukrainian Officials Busted In ‘Large-Scale’ Military Bribery Scheme (RT)

Several senior Ukrainian officials have been detained on suspicion of receiving up to 30% in kickbacks from military contracts, anti-corruption agencies have announced. The arrests came just days after Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky was forced to abandon his attempts to restrict the independence of the anti-graft agencies.In a statement on Saturday, the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO) said they had uncovered a “large-scale” corruption scheme involving contracts for the purchase of drones and electronic warfare systems for the Ukrainian army.

Ukrainian media has identified three of the four suspects – Aleksey Kuznetsov, an MP with Zelensky’s Servant of the People party, former Lugansk Governor Sergey Gayday, and Rubezhansky district head Andrey Yurchenko. Between 2024 and 2025, the group allegedly created a scheme to steal budget funds allocated by local governments for defense needs. One part of the scheme involved awarding a contract for electronic warfare systems at an intentionally inflated price, with the group receiving illegal benefits worth 30% of the contract amount.

A separate contract for FPV drones, worth around $240,000, was allegedly overpriced by around $80,000, with the company’s officials later handing over kickbacks to members of the group, the investigators said. The same day, Zelensky stated that he had met with the heads of NABU and SAPO to discuss the scandal, calling it “absolutely immoral” and thanked the agencies for their good work. Two weeks earlier Zelensky had attempted to bring both bodies under government control only for street protests to force him to sign off on their independence last week.

Read more …

“Europe is no longer the center of the world it once was. It has become a theater, not a director, of global affairs.”

Europe’s Last Security Project Is Quietly Collapsing (Lukyanov)

This week marks the 50th anniversary of a landmark event in European diplomacy. In 1975, the leaders of 35 countries, including the United States, Canada, and almost all of Europe, gathered in the Finnish capital Helsinki to sign the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE). The agreement capped years of negotiation over peaceful coexistence between two rival systems that had dominated world affairs since the end of the Second World War. At the time, many believed the Final Act would solidify the postwar status quo. It formally recognized existing borders – including those of Poland, the two Germanys, and the Soviet Union – and acknowledged the spheres of influence that had shaped Europe since 1945. More than just a diplomatic document, it was seen as a framework for managing ideological confrontation.

Fifty years later, the legacy of Helsinki is deeply paradoxical. On the one hand, the Final Act laid out a set of high-minded principles: mutual respect, non-intervention, peaceful dispute resolution, inviolable borders, and cooperation for mutual benefit. In many ways, it offered a vision of ideal interstate relations. Who could object to such goals? Yet these principles were not born in a vacuum. They were underpinned by a stable balance of power between the NATO and the Warsaw Pact. The Cold War, for all its dangers, provided a kind of structure. It was a continuation of the Second World War by other means – and its rules, however harsh, were understood and largely respected. That system no longer exists. The global order that emerged after 1945 has disintegrated, with no clear replacement.

The post-Cold War attempts to graft a Western-led system onto the rest of Europe succeeded only briefly. The OSCE, which evolved from the CSCE, became a vehicle for imposing Western norms on others – a role it can no longer credibly perform. Despite the growing need for cooperation in an unstable world, the OSCE today exists mostly in theory. The notion of ‘pan-European security’ that underpinned the Helsinki Process has become obsolete. Processes are now fragmented and asymmetric; rivals are unequal and numerous. There is no longer a shared framework to manage disagreements. That hasn’t stopped calls to revive the OSCE as a political mediator, particularly amid recent European crises. But can an institution forged in a bipolar world adapt to the multipolar disorder of today?

History suggests otherwise. Most institutions created in the mid-20th century have lost relevance in periods of upheaval. Even NATO and the EU, long considered pillars of the West, face mounting internal and external pressures. Whether they endure or give way to new, more flexible groupings remains to be seen. The fundamental problem is that the idea of European security itself has changed – or perhaps disappeared. Europe is no longer the center of the world it once was. It has become a theater, not a director, of global affairs. For Washington, Europe is increasingly a secondary concern, viewed through the lens of its rivalry with China. American strategic planning now sees Europe mainly as a market and an auxiliary partner, not a driver of global policy.

Read more …

“They use Ukrainian artifacts to raise money. With African artifacts, they just do business.”

Colonial Theft vs. Wartime Fundraising: The Double Standard of Western Museums (Sp.)

Europe’s museums and not just British ones hold artifacts stolen during colonial rule, forming part of Europe’s wealth, says Yamb Ntimba, political philosopher and founder of the Kheper think tank. These objects are displayed because Europe lacks its own heritage of such diversity, using others’ culture to fuel its economy and tourism. “But with Ukrainian artifacts, the situation is different. They are being used to stir sympathy among the public for Ukraine. That sympathy supports government actions to provide Ukraine with weapons and money.” African artifacts serve as trophies of conquest, displayed in Europe to showcase past dominance over Africa and reinforce a sense of superiority, the commentator believes.

“As for Ukrainian artifacts, I see it as manipulation. They manipulate the minds of their people to create an emotional basis for supporting Ukraine. They send weapons, give money, dispatch soldiers. This is an entirely different path. There are no parallels. It should be clear to everyone: Africa is not Ukraine, and Ukraine is not Africa,” he tells Sputnik. “The exhibition of Ukrainian artifacts is nothing but a fundraising operation. This will be special revenue used to support the war in Ukraine. But people should know that these museums, earning £3.4 billion, get at least 40% of it from African artifacts. That’s money Africa loses simply because our artifacts are there. They do not share these funds with Africa. They use Ukrainian artifacts to raise money. With African artifacts, they just do business.”

Read more …

4 Paul Craig Roberts aticles in a row. Oh well, let’s have it. He’s shifting away frrom blaming Trump and Putin for everything under the sun.

“..civilization has been replaced by a short-term agenda to maximize short-term profits regardless of cost.”

Thank God for Robert F. Kennedy (Paul Craig Roberts)

For at least two decades it has been an unassailable hard scientific fact that mercury in vaccines is highly toxic and responsible for serious injuries and child development problems. But campaign contributions from the criminal pharmaceutical industry to the whore US Congress and the whore American media living on Big Pharma advertisements put profits before health and life. Honest scientists were demonized as “anti-vaxers” and threatened with loss of employment. The scientifically ignorant American population was indoctrinated that vaccine critics, such as Robert F. Kennedy, were threats to the health and lives of their children.

Their own doctors, dumbshit shills of the pharmaceutical industry, told them that only 54 doses of vaccines filled with mercury could save their children, and the ignorant parents believed them. Consequently, a plethora of childhood afflictions never previously seen characterize the deceptively imposed vaccine era. Robert F. Kennedy, son and nephew of his CIA-murdered father and uncle, has used his authority as Secretary of Health to remove mercury from vaccines used in America. This accomplishment in itself justifies the Trump presidency. In my opinion, the pharmaceutical corporations comprise a criminal conspiracy against the American people in which profits come before health. The only solution is to nationalize the pharmaceutical industry and to get Big Pharma money out of health policy and health education.

My “socialist” recommendation will shock free-market libertarians who continue to hold on to their naive faith that private business can do no wrong. As a life-time libertarian I have been taught by endless examples over the course of my long life of profit-driven private business totally failing every public interest, including, peace, health, and truth. Can any honest libertarian find any redemption in the privately owned media? Is there any example anywhere of a state controlled media worst than CNN, the New York Times, Bloomberg? Did Hitler or Stalin have a journalist worse than Jake Trapper?

The reason I think that Western civilization or its remnants will not survive much beyond my lifetime is that civilization has been replaced by a short-term agenda to maximize short-term profits regardless of cost. Corporations make decisions on short-run stock prices, Governments make decisions based on quarterly employment and GDP numbers which are so poorly calculated as to be worthless. Prosecutors make decisions based on maximizing their conviction rates. Judges make decisions based on clearing their court dockets. No one in the West makes decisions based on the relevant issues that confront us.

Justice demands that Big Pharma and its whore media accomplices be held accountable in class action law suits for negligence in exposing millions of Americans to unnecessary mercury injections. If I had to bet, I would bet that in the agreement Kennedy achieved to ban mercury from vaccines, there is a clause that Big Pharma admits nothing and cannot be sued. In America money is power, not truth, not justice. Money can only be overthrown by violence. Karl Marx said that violence is the only effective force in history. Was he correct?

Read more …

“Is Trump’s over-the-top confidence a guise to hide his submissiveness to Israel? Is Netanyahu the real boss?”

I Run The Country and The World”: Donald Trump (Paul Craig Roberts)

“I run the country and the world” Donald Trump says in Atlantic interview. The whore media is making much out of this. However, when you think about it, Trump’s over-lthe-top expression of confidence is easy to understand. He came back from, and triumphed over, the worst combination of political and personal blows imaginable.

Some Senate Rinos voted to convict him on the House impeachment charges; Republicans allowed Democrats to steal his re-election; Republicans supported the Democrats’ “insurrection” charges and the kangaroo trials of supporters who attended the January 6 rally; a corrupt New York court (are there any honest courts in NY?) tried to steal his NY properties; golf tournaments blacklisted his golf courses; a corrupt Justice (sic) Department, CIA, and FBI working with Hillary Clinton orchestrated a frame-up of Trump with the Russiagate hoax; corrupt Democrat prosecutors in NY and Georgia prosecuted him on false charges; week after week the whore media served the attacks on Trump, emphasizing the four indictments and speculating on his time in prison. From all of this and more, Trump came back, took control of the Republican Party, mobilized the electorate, and decisively defeated the Democrats.

Trump deserves his confidence. He has done good things. He has stopped the immigrant invasion whether or not the Men in Black allow him to deport the illegals. He has recalled the Democrats’ DEI policy of intentionally discriminating against white people, especially heterosexual males, whether or not the corrupt Democrat civil service abides by his ruling. He has enabled Health Secretary Robert Kennedy to chip away at Big Pharma’s control over health policy that puts profits before health. He has enabled his Director of National Intelligence to expose the criminal actions of the Obama Five who weaponized law against democracy.

Trump’s confidence has produced huge accomplishments for which we should be very appreciative. But Trump must not let his confidence get over-the-top in his dealings with Russia, China, and Iran. The ultimatum Trump delivered to Putin is both nonsensical and dangerous. It has probably convinced Russia that war is inevitable. If indications are reliable that Putin, finally, is equipping Iran with the S-400 air defense system, US and Israeli attacks on Iran are ceasing to be an option. And someone needs to tell Trump that his tariffs on China fall on the offshored production of US corporations. It is the offshored production of US firms that is the main cause of the US trade deficit with China. On this front the Trump administration seems to lack economic competence. His tariff threats to the entire world come across as bullying.

Before we get disillusioned with Trump, think about what it would be like under the Democrats: open borders, weaponized law, DEI discrimination against white people and merit, no limits on Big Pharma’s profits -before- health policy, persecutions of Christians. In effect, an all-out attack on what remains of American society. Trump’s biggest failure is on the Israel front. He has continued Washington’s policy of enabling Israel’s genocide of Palestine, military attacks on Iran, and absorption of parts of Syria into Greater Israel. The question is raised: Is Trump’s over-the-top confidence a guise to hide his submissiveness to Israel? Is Netanyahu the real boss?

Read more …

“Trump issues meaningless ultimatums that show that Trump is not sincere about ending tensions with Russia.”

Is Trump Taking Us to War? (Paul Craig Roberts)

I need to be more empathetic with Putin’s hopes. Sometimes I, too, let hopes run away with me. Yes, I was wrong to hope President Trump would normalize relations with Russia. Perhaps Trump intended to do so, until the men in black knocked on his door and told him that he was not allowed to takeaway the enemy that justified the power and profit of the military/security complex. In the era of nuclear weapons it makes perfect sense to be on good terms with other nuclear powers. Mutual suspicions and high tensions can result in catastrophic consequences. Russia has not threatened us and clearly has no territorial ambitions. Putin’s ambition is a mutual security agreement with the West.For some reason Trump won’t consider it. Perhaps the situation is one of armament profits taking precedence over life.

Trump doesn’t negotiate. He delivers ultimatums with punishments attached for non-compliance. Never during the Cold War did an American president issue an ultimatum to the Soviet leader. What is Putin supposed to comply with? Trump hasn’t told us or Putin. It seems that Trump intends for Putin to make a deal with Zelensky to end the conflict. But how can Putin do this when Zelensky has said that his terms are for Russia to give back Donbas, Crimea, and pay war reparations, when Zelensky is no longer officially the president and has no authority to negotiate for Ukraine, and when Zelensky is merely the proxy that Washington is using in its war with Russia?Trump says it is not his war. Perhaps, but it is Washington’s war, and Trump is the president in Washington. So it is Trump’s war.

Trump can stop the war by ending weapons delivery, financing, and diplomatic cover, but Trump has not done so. Trump can stop the conflict by sitting down with Putin, understanding what Putin means by “the root causes of the war,” and addressing these issues, but Trump has not done so. Instead, Trump issues meaningless ultimatums that show that Trump is not sincere about ending tensions with Russia. Clearly, ultimatums are not the way to normalize relations.

As far as I can tell, the media have not asked Trump what the agreement is or what parts of the agreement are unacceptable to the Russians. It is reckless to issue threats to Russia in an atmosphere so tense. Putin’s efforts to avoid real war have been misinterpreted as irresolution, thus resulting in more provocations. Putin’s avoidance of war is leading to a larger war. At some point the provocation will go too far. Maybe it will be the missiles that Trump and the Germans are talking about firing at Moscow. This is the dangerous situation that urgently needs to be resolved, not the conflict in Ukraine. If the root causes are addressed, the war goes away.

Read more …

“The principle goal of US foreign policy is to prevent the rise of any country that can serve as a constraint on US unilateralism.”

A Catastrophic War Seems Inevitable (Paul Craig Roberts)

Yesterday, August 4, Nima and I discussed on Dialogue Works the three iron constraints on the US government that seem to guarantee the world is heading into catastrophic war. https://www.youtube.com/live/AdnUdbcfp3U One constraint is the US foreign policy doctrine of US hegemony over the world, known as the Wolfowitz Doctrine: The principle goal of US foreign policy is to prevent the rise of any country that can serve as a constraint on US unilateralism. This doctrine targets Russia and China. As President Trump recently declared to the Atlantic magazine, ” I run the country and the world.” This is a statement of hegemony. Another constraint is the US military/security complex, a heavy political campaign contributor, which needs enemies, such as Russia, China, Iran, to justify its massive budget and power.

A third constraint is the blackmail power over the US and entire Western world of Epstein’s honey-trap Mossad operation that has films of members of the ruling class having sex with underaged persons. Wrapped up in these chains, no Western leader can undertake action to avoid war.Russian President Putin has contributed to the coming catastrophic war by his ignoring of provocations in the hope that in the end he would secure a mutual security agreement with Washington that would end the tensions that threaten both countries. Putin’s hopes were fruitless, because they ignored the Wolfowitz doctrine, the power of the US military-security complex, and Israel’s blackmail power over the government in America.

In A.P.J. Taylor’s history, The Origins of the Second World War, Taylor points out that the war, which no one intended, including Hitler, resulted from diplomatic blunders, the consequences of which no one understood.Today the same kind of blunders are being repeated, building tensions instead of reducing them. To these tensions Trump adds egomania, which is blinding. The failure of leadership will end in disastrous war.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

OK
https://twitter.com/NextNewsNetwork/status/1952523611631223064

RFK

Marik

Note

Box
https://twitter.com/buitengebieden/status/1952632263125995766

lizard

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Aug 032025
 


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

Candace

Big Price

Contribute

 

 

 

 

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.

 

 

 

 

 

Jul 302025
 


Edward Hopper Burly Cobb’s House, South Truro 1930-33

 

Trump Issues 10-Day Ultimatum To Russia (RT)
Kremlin Responds To Trump’s Ukraine Deadline Change (RT)
‘It’s Not For You Or Trump To Dictate’ – Medvedev To Lindsey Graham (RT)
US, UK Hold Talks on Replacing Zelensky – Russian Foreign Intel (Sp.)
EU Threatens Ukraine Aid Freeze – Media (RT)
EU Roads Not Ready For War – Transport Chief (RT)
Ukrainian Troops Face ‘Critical’ Attrition – CNN (RT)
Ukrainian Army To Recruit Pensioners (RT)
New Details Emerge on Obama’s Role in Russiagate Scandal (Victor Davis Hanson)
EU’s $750bn Energy Pledge To US Is ‘Fantasy’ – Politico (RT)
Sen. Kennedy Says ‘We Need More Idiot Control’ After NYC Shooting (Margolis)
Tesla Picks Taylor, Texas for Next Gen ‘Made in the USA AI Chips’ (PJM)
DOJ Files Complaint Over Judge’s Out-of-Court Statements (Rowland)
Israel Might Annex Gaza… All Because of France? (PJM)
Trump Says He Believes Epstein ‘Stole’ Virginia Giuffre From Mar-a-Lago (JTN)
Must Watch – Tucker Carlson Interviews Richard Werner (CTH)

 

 

 

 

ADAS
https://twitter.com/newstart_2024/status/1949891547744379254
poll

lose you

 

 

 

 

Trump rightfully runs with Tulsi Gabbard’s picture of Russiagate. But he fully ignores the influence it had -and has- on US-Russia relations. He should go talk to Putin first. And, as i said, apologize.

Trump Issues 10-Day Ultimatum To Russia (RT)

Washington will impose new sanctions against Moscow if it fails to reach a deal with Kiev to settle the Ukraine conflict within ten days, US President Donald Trump stated on Tuesday. His initial deadline was due to expire in early September. Trump announced his plans to reduce the time frame during a visit to the UK on Monday. When further pressed on the issue by journalists on his way back on Tuesday, the president said it would be “ten days from today.” “And then… we’re going to put on tariffs and stuff,” he added. The new sanctions are expected to include 100% tariffs on Russian imports and secondary sanctions on countries and companies that continue to trade with the nation.

Moscow has repeatedly said it is willing to negotiate but has maintained that any talks must account for the realities on the ground and the root causes of the conflict. Commenting on Trump’s statements on Monday, the Kremlin said his words were “taken into account.” Russia will still continue its military operation but it also remains “committed to the peace process to resolve the conflict around Ukraine and to ensure our interests in the course of this settlement,” according to Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov. On Tuesday, Trump admitted that he did not know if the new restrictions were going to work. It “may or may not affect them [Russia],” he said. Since entering office this year, Trump has repeatedly stated he wanted a quick diplomatic solution to the Ukraine conflict.

Trump has recently grown frustrated with what he described as the lack of progress and spoke about his “disappointment” with Russia, while threatening the country with sanctions. Moscow responded by calling such actions counterproductive. No new sanctions would prevent Moscow from continuing to “move along our independent, sovereign, and sustained path,” Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov stated earlier this month. Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said this week it was not up to Washington to “dictate” when Moscow and Kiev should negotiate. Any threat only marks “a step towards war” between Russia and the US, he warned.

Read more …

No ultimatum scares Russia. They’ve been preparing since 1991. This is from before the last ultimatum, btw.

Kremlin Responds To Trump’s Ukraine Deadline Change (RT)

Russia has taken note of US President Donald Trump’s decision to shorten the deadline for a peace deal in Ukraine and to issue new threats, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said. On Monday, Trump cut his previous 50-day deadline for a Ukraine peace deal to just 10-12 days, warning that Moscow could face sweeping sanctions if no agreement is reached. He has threatened 100% tariffs on Russia’s trading partners and said he no longer wishes to speak with President Vladimir Putin “just to talk.” “We have taken into account President Trump’s statement yesterday,” Peskov told reporters on Tuesday, while refraining from making any “judgments” about the remarks.

Peskov noted that while Russia’s military operation will continue, Moscow remains “committed to the peace process to resolve the conflict around Ukraine and to ensure our interests in the course of this settlement.” Regarding the possibility of a meeting between Trump and Putin, which has been widely anticipated in the media in recent months, Peskov reiterated that the issue has not been raised in practical terms and is still not on the agenda. He went on to say that Russia remains interested in rebuilding ties with the US, a process initiated after the two countries’ meeting in February, while acknowledging that progress has been slow.

“So far, the normalization process is proceeding sluggishly. We would like to see more momentum,” he said, adding that in order to “move forward, impulses are needed from both sides.” Since entering office this year, Trump has said he respects both Russia and Putin and wants to find a quick diplomatic solution to the Ukraine crisis. In recent weeks, however, he has increasingly expressed disappointment over the lack of progress in the peace process and has resorted to sanctions threats against Moscow. Russian officials have rejected ultimatums from Washington, warning that these threats only serve to prolong the war.

Read more …

“..negotiations would only end “when all the objectives of our military operation have been achieved.” “Work on America first, gramps!”

‘It’s Not For You Or Trump To Dictate’ – Medvedev To Lindsey Graham (RT)

It is not up to Washington to dictate when Moscow should negotiate a peace deal with Kiev, former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has told US Senator Lindsey Graham, urging him to focus on domestic issues instead. Medvedev’s comments follow US President Donald Trump’s decision on Monday to shorten his 50-day deadline for a ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine to just 10-12 days. Trump has threatened to impose additional sanctions on Moscow and 100% tariffs on its trading partners if no deal is reached. Medvedev, who serves as deputy chairman of the Russian Security Council, had cautioned Trump against issuing ultimatums. “Russia isn’t Israel or even Iran,” he wrote on X, warning that each threat marks “a step towards war” between the US and Russia.

Graham, a senior Republican and longtime war hawk, responded by claiming that Russia and its “customers” would “soon be sadly mistaken” and ordered Moscow to “get to the peace table.” Medvedev hit back on Tuesday, stating, “It’s not for you or Trump to dictate when to ‘get at the peace table.’” He added that negotiations would only end “when all the objectives of our military operation have been achieved.” “Work on America first, gramps!” Medvedev wrote. Graham, officially labeled a terrorist and extremist by the Russian government, receives major donations from US defense contractors and consistently supports US military action abroad, describing the Ukraine conflict as a proxy war between Washington and Moscow.

He has backed continued military aid to Kiev and unsuccessfully tried to push through a bill that would impose 500% tariffs on countries trading with Russia. While Trump had initially vowed to resolve the Ukraine conflict, in recent months he has grown frustrated with the lack of progress and resorted to threats of sanctions in an effort to push Moscow and Kiev toward the negotiating table. Russian officials have welcomed Trump’s peace efforts in principle but strongly opposed what they call the “language of ultimatums,” insisting any settlement must reflect battlefield realities and address the roots of the conflict.

Read more …

” So, a new president of your country was elected at an Alpine resort. Is this how you envisioned the triumph of Ukrainian ‘democracy, independence, and self-sufficiency’ that you have long dreamed of?”

US, UK Hold Talks on Replacing Zelensky – Russian Foreign Intel (Sp.)

The Americans and British announced their decision to nominate Zaluzhny for the post of Ukrainian president, with Yermak and Budanov* “saluting the decision.” Representatives from the US and UK, with the participation of Ukrainian Presidential Office Head Andriy Yermak, Ukrainian Military Intelligence Directorate Head Kyrylo Budanov, and Ukraine’s Ambassador to London Valery Zaluzhny, discussed the prospects of replacing Volodymyr Zelensky, according to the press service of Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR). “According to information received by the SVR, not long ago, representatives from the US and the UK organized a secret meeting in a resort area in the Alps, with the participation of Head of the Ukrainian President’s Office A. Yermak, Head of the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense’s Intelligence Directorate K. Budanov, and former commander-in-chief of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, Ukraine’s Ambassador to London V. Zaluzhny,” the statement said.

“The prospects of replacing V. Zelensky as the head of the Kiev regime were discussed,” the press service added. “The prospects of replacing Zelensky as the head of the Kiev regime were discussed. Zelensky’s replacement has, in essence, become a key condition for the ‘reset’ of relations between Kiev and Western partners, primarily Washington, and for the continuation of Western assistance to Ukraine in its confrontation with Russia,” the statement said.
Yermak and Budanov secured promises from the “Anglo-Saxon” countries to maintain their current positions after Zelensky’s replacement, the statement reads. Washington and London want to nominate Zaluzhny for the position of Ukrainian president. “The Americans and Brits have announced their decision to nominate Zaluzhny for the post of president of Ukraine. Yermak and Budanov ‘saluted the decision.’

They also secured promises from the Anglo-Saxons to maintain their current positions and to take their interests into account when making other personnel decisions,” the SVR statement said. The agreement reached in the Alps regarding the replacement of Volodymyr Zelensky sheds light on the underlying reasons for his recent attempt to limit the powers of Ukraine’s anti-corruption agencies, according to the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service. “The agreement reached in the Alps sheds light on the background of the recent scandalous attempt by the ‘president’ to limit the powers of local anti-corruption bodies. By clearing the political ‘field’ for Zaluzhny, Yermak ‘set up’ Zelensky – convincing him that such a move would not damage relations with Western partners, while in fact creating an opportunity for the West to begin a campaign to remove the ‘outdated’ leader from power as someone who ‘threatens democracy,'” the SVR noted.

On July 22, the Ukrainian parliament supported a bill that cancels the independence of two anti-corruption agencies: the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO). The bill was later signed by Zelensky. Several Ukrainian lawmakers viewed the bill as a move to dismantle the country’s anti-corruption structures. According to Ukrainian media reports, protests against the law, which stripped NABU and SAPO of their independence, took place across the country starting July 22.

On July 24, against the backdrop of mass protests across Ukraine, Zelensky claimed he had agreed on a draft law that would supposedly strengthen the independence of these agencies. According to documents on the Rada’s website, the bill was submitted on July 24. Previously, Ukrainian Parliament Speaker Ruslan Stefanchuk stated that the Rada would consider the bill on July 31, adding that he would propose adopting it in both the first and second readings and immediately sending it to Zelensky for signature. “The meeting that took place and its results give reason to address the citizens of Ukraine. So, a new president of your country was elected at an Alpine resort. Is this how you envisioned the triumph of Ukrainian ‘democracy, independence, and self-sufficiency’ that you have long dreamed of?” the SVR concludes.

Read more …

Zelensky is no longer Churchill.

EU Threatens Ukraine Aid Freeze – Media (RT)

Kiev is facing deeper cuts in EU financial support than it has publicly acknowledged, Ukrainian and German media have reported. Brussels reportedly views Ukraine’s crackdown on anti-corruption institutions as an attempt to shield an ally of Vladimir Zelensky. Last Friday, the European Commission said it would reduce support under the Ukraine Facility program from a €4.5 billion ($5.2 billion) installment to €3.05 billion ($3.5 billion), citing Kiev’s failure to meet commitments on anti-corruption reforms. However, Ukrainskaya Pravda has reported that the program has been de facto frozen, alongside another mechanism, ERA Loans, with a total of $60 billion at stake. On Monday, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (FAZ) reported on an EU letter to the Ukrainian government which threatened the suspension of aid.

The Ukrainian government has placed two departments established with Western support to address rampant graft in Ukraine – the National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) and the Special Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO) – under the authority of the country’s prosecutor general. However, following widespread Western rebukes, Zelensky promised to reverse the decision. Several of Zelensky’s close political supporters, particularly in the Defense Ministry, are in danger of becoming caught in the organization’s crosshairs. He claimed the move was an effort to eliminate “Russian influence” in the agencies, but EU experts reportedly found the explanation unconvincing.

According to an internal analysis cited by FAZ and shared with EU embassies in Kiev, the changes were described as “the largest interference in the affairs of the Ukrainian anti-corruption system since its inception.” The analysis also indicated that the action was likely prompted by NABU’s investigation into former Deputy Prime Minister Aleksey Chernyshov, a close political ally and personal friend of Zelensky. Ukraine’s security service (SBU) allegedly seized case files from NABU investigators, including the lead officer handling the probe, raising concerns about the admissibility of evidence and the integrity of the case. Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova claimed that Ukrainian bodies were designed not to combat corruption but to give Western governments leverage over Kiev.

Read more …

Nothing in Europe is ready. The people least of all.

EU Roads Not Ready For War – Transport Chief (RT)

The EU’s roads and railways are unprepared for war, the bloc’s transport chief has warned. In an interview with the Financial Times published on Tuesday, commissioner Apostolos Tzitzikostas said the transportation infrastructure, including bridges, railways, and tunnels, is incapable of moving tanks, troops, or military supplies in case of conflict. European officials have long warned of a possible conflict with Russia and pushed for militarization, despite Moscow denying it has any plans to attack. Tzitzikostas said defending the region would be impossible if armies cannot move quickly. He argued that if NATO tanks were needed to respond to an invasion, they would risk getting stuck in tunnels, collapsing bridges, and being delayed by border protocols.

“The reality today is that if we want to move military equipment and troops from the western side of Europe to the eastern side, it takes weeks and in some cases months,” he said. “We have old bridges that need to be upgraded, we have narrow bridges that need to be widened and we have nonexistent bridges to be built.” He explained that much of Europe’s infrastructure is not designed for heavy military transport. Trucks generally weigh up to 40 tons, while a tank can weigh up to 70. According to Tzitzikostas, Brussels is preparing a strategy to ensure troops can move swiftly. The plan includes upgrading 500 infrastructure projects along four military corridors and cutting bureaucratic red tape to ease border crossing.

The projects, identified with NATO, are classified, but are estimated to cost €17 billion ($19.7 billion). The strategy will be presented later this year. The initiative comes amid a push for greater militarization across the bloc over what officials describe as the ‘Russian threat’. Recent moves include the €800 billion ReArm Europe program and a pledge by European NATO members to raise defense spending to 5% of GDP. Moscow has dismissed the claims as “nonsense.” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said last month that the West uses Russia as a “monster” to justify growing military budgets. Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov accused Western leaders of pushing Europe toward direct confrontation.

Read more …

“We have a critical shortage of personnel. No one wants to fight. The war is over (for them)..”

“The old personnel are left, they are tired and want to be replaced, but no one is replacing them.”

Ukrainian Troops Face ‘Critical’ Attrition – CNN (RT)

Ukraine’s forces are exhausted and suffering from a “critical shortage of personnel,” with no recruits to replace them, CNN reported on Tuesday. With few volunteers, Kiev’s draft campaign has reportedly become more brutal and has drawn criticism for violence and abuse. Ukrainian troops deployed to Konstantinovka – a major logistics hub in Donetsk Region – have not seen reinforcements for eight months, the outlet wrote, citing a member of Ukraine’s 93rd Mechanized Brigade. The city is currently facing encirclement by Russia. “We have a critical shortage of personnel. No one wants to fight. The war is over (for them),” CNN cited the serviceman as saying. “The old personnel are left, they are tired and want to be replaced, but no one is replacing them.”

According to the soldier, Ukraine’s army doesn’t relay many of these frontline difficulties to the state, and Kiev “doesn’t communicate a lot of things to the people.” When we say that the situation is difficult, no one understands. You have to be in our shoes. We are tired. Everyone is tired of this war, and I believe that other countries are also tired of helping us. The remaining Ukrainian infantry hold positions around the city with as few as two people, CNN wrote. They are resupplied in the dark hours of dawn or dusk via the larger of Ukraine’s quadcopter models, as frontline positions are vulnerable to Russian UAVs.

Russia’s newer drone forces from the Rubicon unit are “well-trained and professional,” sometimes needing nothing but a thread hanging from a quadcopter to entangle the rotors of a Ukrainian drone to crash it, CNN cited their source as saying. Ukrainian troops in Konstantinovka are increasingly turning to fishing nets as anti-drone defenses to fight against the high-tech aerial threat, but some Russian drone operators exploit gaps to bypass them, according to CNN. Russian forces have gained control of key lines of communication on the city’s flanks, moving to encircle it. The Russian Defense Ministry reported on Tuesday that its southern army group has “improved its positions” around the key logistics hub.

Read more …

“Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova called the program “a one-way ticket,” suggesting that Ukraine is “annihilating” its youth..”

Ukrainian Army To Recruit Pensioners (RT)

Ukraine will start enlisting men over 60 for contract-based military service, according to a new law signed by Vladimir Zelensky on Tuesday. The measure appears aimed at addressing recruitment shortfalls in the country’s armed forces. The new law enables pension-eligible men to enlist for non-combat roles if they are deemed fit by military doctors and approved by a unit commander. Contracts will last for one year and may be renewed upon further approval. Originally introduced in April by a group of lawmakers, the bill passed its second reading in the Verkhovna Rada earlier this month. Under current Ukrainian law, 60 is the minimum retirement age for men.

The country announced a general mobilization in February 2022 under which most men between the age of 18 and 60 were barred from leaving the country. In 2024, faced with mounting losses, Kiev lowered the conscription age from 27 to 25 and tightened mobilization rules. The draft campaign has increasingly relied on coercion, sparking numerous violent confrontations between conscription officers and civilians. Reports of beatings, street detentions, and extortion have circulated widely, though Kiev has routinely dismissed such allegations as “Russian propaganda.” In a recent interview with Hungarian media, Zelensky admitted that mobilization remains a major challenge.

More than 213,000 registered cases of desertion have now been reported in Ukraine, with widespread corruption and extortion of combat pay by military commanders listed among the reasons Ukrainian soldiers abandon their units. Earlier this year, Kiev launched a voluntary military recruitment campaign targeting men aged 18 to 24. Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova called the program “a one-way ticket,” suggesting that Ukraine is “annihilating” its youth. Russian officials have long said that Kiev’s Western backers are ready to fight Moscow “until the last Ukrainian.”

Read more …

“You go back—we only have a few weeks left, I’m a lame-duck president—and bring me the right assessments.” And that’s exactly what they did..”

New Details Emerge on Obama’s Role in Russiagate Scandal (Victor Davis Hanson)

I’d like to talk about the ongoing melodrama of what former President Barack Obama knew or did not know in his involvement with Russian collusion, the hoax that plagued the Donald Trump 2016 campaign, tried to undermine his transition in 2016 and 2017, and ate up the first 22 months of his presidency in 2017 and 2018, and was found to be completely bogus. There are three blind mice involved in this tale: John Brennan, the former CIA director; James Clapper, the former director of national intelligence; and James Comey, the former FBI director. And they all have new manifestations of their untruthfulness.

Let’s start with John Brennan. He’s very angry right now because the trove that was released by National Intelligence Director Tulsi Gabbard of new documents and investigations may or may not have criminal referrals come out of them, and Attorney General Pam Bondi may file new charges. The problem that Brennan has is that he went to a meeting and he presented a false picture of CIA assessments. The so-called CIA heads of various divisions found no Russian collusion. They said to John Brennan, “There’s nothing there that we can see that Donald Trump colluded with the Russians.” He rejected that, cherry-picked four or five other analysts, and then presented a false picture to Barack Obama. Or did he? Or did Barack Obama request that he do that? It’ll be “he said, he said,” but it’s more likely that Barack Obama asked John Brennan to come up with the correct CIA assessments.

Sort of like Lavrentiy Beria, the head of the Soviet secret police during the Cold War and at the end of World War II. He said, “I have the criminal. You find me the crime.” So: “I have the criminal, Donald Trump. All I need is Russian collusion.” And that was the methodology that they proceeded by. The problem with Brennan, though, is, in the process of preparing this false assessment, he said again and again, both publicly but also under testimony, he didn’t know anything about the Steele dossier. Didn’t know anything about it. He didn’t read it. It didn’t compute into CIA assessment. That was a lie. We know now from other testimonies, especially from the trove, that he did draw on the fake Steele dossier. He referenced it to other people. And the problem with John Brennan is this isn’t the first time he’s misled us. He lied about the Senate staffer computers. That was under oath. He lied, remember, about Predator drones, when he said there was no collateral damage. And remember he lied also as one of the 51 intelligence authorities who tried to float that bogus idea that Hunter Biden’s laptop was cooked up in Russia.

Then we come to James Clapper. He was sitting at this meeting in December of 2016, where he gave a false assessment and he misrepresented what the 18 intelligence agencies under his direction had found. They had not found Russian collusion, and yet he participated in this. He went so far as later to thanking and giving credit to Barack Obama for demanding that they find Russian collusion. He said, “If he hadn’t have ordered us to do this, we wouldn’t have found it.” I.e., the subtext is, “There was no evidence in our intelligence agency for it, so we concocted it on the directive of Barack Obama.” But remember, he lied too. He swore under oath to the U.S. Congress that the National Security Agency had never spied on Americans. That was an abject lie. And he was part of the 51 intelligent authorities who also lied to the American people in 2020 on the eve of the second debate when Joe Biden denied that Hunter lied, Hunter Biden’s laptop was authentic. He quoted the 51 authorities. The FBI, remember, at that time, had it in its possession and had already authenticated it as genuine.

Then we come to James Comey. He also says that he had really nothing to do with the Steele dossier. The fact is, he was completely acquainted with it. He offered, his FBI offered a million dollars. They were so desperate to validate it. They said to Christopher Steele, “Just give us some proof. We can use this. We’ll give you a million dollars.” He couldn’t even come up with the substantive arguments to corroborate his own dossier, so he didn’t get the million dollars. More importantly, James Comey has a problem. He leaked, on an FBI device, a conversation he had memorialized to The New York Times via a third party. James Comey, remember, went before the House Oversight Committee, as I said earlier, and lied 245 times. If you say, “I don’t remember, I don’t recall, I don’t know,”—can you imagine an FBI director with all that knowledge at his fingertips saying, “I don’t remember, I don’t know,” about the most important investigation in recent history?

Let’s sum up these three blind mice. There’s new evidence that Barack Obama asked intelligence, investigatory heads—like John Brennan, like James Clapper and James Comey—to “find me evidence that you haven’t found yet so that we can continue the Russian collusion hoax after it was ineffective in the campaign, Hillary Clinton lost the election. Now we want to sabotage.” This is the subtext of the transition and his presidency. “You go back—we only have a few weeks left, I’m a lame-duck president—and bring me the right assessments.” And that’s exactly what they did, and that’s why they’re terrified that new information is coming forth that suggests to the American people what they did and how they were culpable.

Read more …

“The EU spent €76 billion on US energy last year – tripling that would require sidelining cheaper suppliers and diverting nearly all US oil and gas exports to Europe. “It’s just never going to happen.”

EU’s $750bn Energy Pledge To US Is ‘Fantasy’ – Politico (RT)

The EU’s pledge to buy $750 billion worth of American energy over three years to avert a trade war with Washington is “almost impossible” to honor, Politico reported Tuesday, citing analysts and officials. The EU and the US finalized a wide-ranging trade pact on Sunday, narrowly avoiding a transatlantic trade war. Under the agreement, most EU exports to the US will face a baseline tariff of 15%. Brussels also pledged to buy $750 billion in US energy and invest $600 billion into the US economy over three years. According to the outlet, limited US supply, technical obstacles, and the EU’s lack of control over import deals make hitting the targets extremely difficult.

The headline figure is “completely unrealistic,” Laura Page, senior analyst at commodities firm Kpler told the outlet. The EU spent €76 billion on US energy last year – tripling that would require sidelining cheaper suppliers and diverting nearly all US oil and gas exports to Europe. “It’s just never going to happen.” Despite European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen’s claim that the plan would boost energy security and reduce reliance on Russia, the numbers remain unconvincing, the outlet noted. While pipeline flows plunged after sanctions and the Nord Stream sabotage, Russian LNG surged, making up 17.5% of EU supply last year, second only to the US at 45.3%.

In 2024, the EU imported €23 billion in oil, gas, and nuclear fuel from Russia—too little to close the gap. EU refineries also have limited capacity to process American oil, capped around 14%, said Kpler’s Homayoun Falakshahi. “It really is a fantasy,” he said. A senior Commission official told the outlet the deal depends on having sufficient LNG infrastructure and US shipping capacity, which is not in place. The Commission also can’t make purchases itself – it relies on private companies. “This is not something the EU can guarantee,” one official said.

Read more …

“I don’t know why bad things happen to good people,” Kennedy said. “If I make it to heaven, I’m gonna ask.”

Sen. Kennedy Says ‘We Need More Idiot Control’ After NYC Shooting (Margolis)

Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) once again demonstrated why he’s among the most blunt voices on Capitol Hill as he threw cold water on the left’s knee-jerk fixation with gun control in the aftermath of Monday’s deadly Midtown Manhattan shooting that left five people dead, including an NYPD officer. Kennedy, appearing with Sean Hannity, directly called out what’s become a predictable routine from progressives: a fresh crime, and immediately, another chorus calling to shred the Second Amendment. Kennedy, who has long opposed additional gun control legislation, made it clear he expects Democrats to push for more restrictions in response to the attack. “On Capitol Hill, probably beginning in the morning, there’ll be the inevitable call by some of my colleagues for more gun control laws,” Kennedy predicted.

But, as he put it bluntly, “We’ve got hundreds of gun control laws, Sean, maybe thousands… We don’t need more gun control. We need more idiot control.” Kennedy was unwavering in his characterization of the shooter and the crime. “I believe there’s objective evil in this world,” he said. “And we saw it today.” He dismissed any anticipated sympathy for the shooter, saying, “I don’t want to hear anyone feeling sorry for this guy. ‘He was confused.’ ‘He was just sick.’ ‘His mom or daddy didn’t love him enough.’ All that may be true, but from the bottom of my heart, I don’t care.” The Louisiana senator also criticized the broader climate of hostility toward law enforcement in major cities like New York. “There are a lot of people in political leadership today who believe that cops are a bigger problem than criminals,” he said. “If a cop has to shoot a criminal, it’s always the cop’s fault. But if a criminal shoots a cop, it’s the gun’s fault.”

As New York City remains embroiled in debates over policing policies ranging from defunding the police to replacing officers with social workers, Kennedy warned against policies that undermine public safety. “Police aren’t perfect,” he said, “but they’re the only distance between us and whack jobs like this guy who killed these innocent people today.” He went further, calling for a return to more assertive policing measures. “New York’s gonna have to face the issue of whether we should bring back more aggressive stop and frisk,” Kennedy said, referring to the tactic ruled constitutional by the Supreme Court but later abandoned under former Mayor Bill de Blasio. “The crime went up as soon as he did.” Although there is little public information about the shooter at this stage, early reports indicate that the attack was not random. “It seems to be targeted,” Hannity noted. “He seemed to know exactly where he wanted to go.”

Kennedy’s remarks offered a stark reminder that evil is not just theoretical—it has consequences, and those consequences are now being felt by the families of the victims. “I don’t know why bad things happen to good people,” Kennedy said. “If I make it to heaven, I’m gonna ask.” Kennedy is absolutely right. The radical left seizes on every tragedy as an excuse to chip away at the constitutional rights of law-abiding Americans. They push the same tired agenda, demanding more gun control that punishes the innocent while doing nothing to stop the evil at the heart of the violence. This horrific act took place despite New York having among the strictest gun laws in the nation — proof, yet again, that oppressive laws fail to deliver their advertised safety. Not a single law they’ve passed or proposed would have prevented the carnage we saw yesterday.

Read more …

Should that be 1st gen? And can this bring Musk and Trump closer?

Tesla Picks Taylor, Texas for Next Gen ‘Made in the USA AI Chips’ (PJM)

Tesla has signed a $16.5 billion deal with Samsung Electronics to manufacture its new AI6 chips, the brains behind its next-generation autonomous vehicles, not in Taiwan or South Korea, but in Taylor, Texas. This news is fantastic on several levels. It’s more than simply a business deal; it’s a declaration that America is no longer outsourcing its tech future. As Elon Musk bluntly X’d:

For years following World War II, the world lived under the silent bottleneck pressure of Taiwan’s semiconductor industry. The chips used in defense systems, neural networks, and autonomous vehicles are advanced AI using materials found within a rock’s throw of Beijing. Suddenly, a significant business decision has a profound impact on our national security. At long last, this AI chip deal shifted the fulcrum. Samsung’s Taylor facility becomes a beachhead in the global chip war due to its $40 billion investment. These investments aren’t just about cars anymore; they’re about securing AI, data infrastructure, and laying the economic foundation of this century. What Taiwan is to the global chip supply, Texas has become a shining example of American self-reliance—a modern Silicon Alamo. This time, though, we’re not playing defense.

Tesla’s AI6 chips are vital for achieving Full Self-Driving ambitions. They’re not just processors; they’re the cornerstone for real-time decision-making, leveraging visual processing and paving the way for future autonomy. With production anchored in Texas, Tesla does more than improve logistics; it creates a closed-loop ecosystem with design, fabrication, testing, and deployment all on U.S. soil. When Apple launched its M-series chips, they sought the same control. The difference? Apple makes devices, while Tesla builds a nervous system for AI-driven mobility, robotics, and energy systems. Texas is on a roll! Its population isn’t the only thing growing; the state is expanding its relevance. This Samsung-Tesla deal creates thousands of high-tech jobs, helping to fabricate and reinforce a talent pipeline that elevates the Lone Star State into a global hub for next-gen chip production.

We’re witnessing an industrial revolution covered with Texas barbecue and no state income tax. The deal again demonstrates how America is competing. No subsidies are lining the pockets of backroom board members who work to stifle innovation by engineering regulations. This was done the Smith-Barney way: They earned it by creating private-public partnerships, drawing investment, brains, and resolve. We need to give credit where it’s due: this deal wouldn’t have happened without the Trump administration’s aggressive CHIPS and Science Act reforms, which helped reshore critical manufacturing. Trump’s policies focus on the long game, emphasizing semiconductors, steel, and sovereignty. In contrast, the Biden administration didn’t simply slow-walk similar projects; instead, they scoffed while investing in green vanity projects. Thank God the grown-ups are back. There’s no denying the results we see nearly every week.

We can’t forget about China. They’re not sitting still; the CCP is racing to dominate chip fabrication by pouring billions into domestic fabs and luring Taiwan and South Korea with million-dollar paychecks. The West is relearning what Beijing has known for decades: Whoever controls the chips controls the future. The Samsung-Tesla alliance is making a loud and clear statement that the United States will no longer depend on hostile or unstable regions for the future’s machinery. The coalition serves as a counterpunch to the Belt and Road Initiative, TikTok’s spyware tentacles, and especially to the notion of America’s inevitable decline. If that message wasn’t enough, we’re sending one to NATO and its allies: America isn’t back in the game; it is THE GAME — not just militarily, but industrially, telling allies that if they want to remain competitive, they bloody well better follow our lead.

Samsung is taking a high-stakes gamble for its foundry. The Korean tech giant played second fiddle to the Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC) for years. It struggled with yields and volume in 3nm and 4nm nodes. With Musk’s vote of confidence and Tesla’s elite engineering standards, Samsung might finally have its breakout moment. Unlike a company still chasing relevance in AI chip production (Intel), Samsung has secured a front-row seat on the ship to our future. If it delivers, the ripple effects will stretch worldwide. Samsung’s partnership with Tesla is less about profit and more about positioning. For America, it’s a strong wedge between China and one of its most advanced neighbors. But for Musk, it’s a day ending in “Y.”

America doesn’t need to simply dominate every industry overnight. The long game helps us outlast, outthink, and out-invest every regime wanting to replace us. The best part? That starts by building, hiring, and anchoring our future right here. We can tell the World Economic Forum to pound sand, while expressing the iron resolve of American workers and American soil. Tesla’s deal with Samsung isn’t just a tech story; it’s a quiet return to national purpose. Wait one! Do you hear that? That noise sounds a lot like WINNING!

Read more …

“..@TheJusticeDept filed a misconduct complaint against U.S. District Court Chief Judge James Boasberg for making improper public comments about President Trump and his Administration,”

DOJ Files Complaint Over Judge’s Out-of-Court Statements (Rowland)

The Justice Department filed a complaint alleging misconduct by a federal judge overseeing several cases involving the Trump administration regarding out-of-court statements the judge made about President Donald Trump. The complaint, filed by Attorney General Pam Bondi’s chief of staff, Chad Mizelle, alleges Judge James Boasberg made improper public comments at a conference in March. Mizelle alleges Boasberg tried to influence Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts and other federal judges at the conference with comments that Trump would disregard court orders leading to a “a constitutional crisis.” “Although his comments would be inappropriate even if they had some basis, they were even worse because Judge Boasberg had no basis—the Trump Administration has always complied with all court orders,” Mizelle wrote in the complaint. “Within days of those statements, Judge Boasberg began acting on his preconceived belief that the Trump Administration would not follow court orders.”

“At my direction, @TheJusticeDept filed a misconduct complaint against U.S. District Court Chief Judge James Boasberg for making improper public comments about President Trump and his Administration,” Bondi wrote in a social media post. “These comments have undermined the integrity of the judiciary, and we will not stand for that.” Mizelle asked Chief Judge Sri Srinivasan to direct the complaint to a special investigative committee, reassignment of all related Trump cases to another judge, and to “impose appropriate disciplinary action.”

Boasberg was the judge in the Alien Enemies Act case, which was filed in mid-March when multiple deportation flights took off from the United States to El Salvador. During an emergency hearing, Boasberg ordered that any planes that were midair and bound for El Salvador return to the United States. Boasberg later initiated contempt proceedings to determine if the Trump administration willfully violated court orders. An appeals court paused the process, however. The Supreme Court ruled in April that a lower federal court doesn’t have jurisdiction in a lawsuit filed to prevent deportations of Venezuelan Tren de Aragua prison gang members illegally in the U.S. The White House has called for Boasberg to be impeached in March.

Read more …

France will recognize Palestine shortly. So will Britain. Holland refuses entry to Ben Gvir and Smotrich. Starvation is all over everyone’s tv screens.

Israel Might Annex Gaza… All Because of France? (PJM)

When Israel unilaterally withdrew from the Gaza Strip in 2005 — and some settlers had to be removed at gunpoint — it probably seemed unthinkable that Israel would ever again lay claim to the Strip. Various reports indicate that Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu is indeed thinking the unthinkable, and French President Emmanuel Macron is likely the accidental instigator. “Netanyahu is considering a plan to annex territories in Gaza if Hamas doesn’t agree to a ceasefire plan. This is one of several options,” an unnamed Israeli source told ABC News. The Israeli government has repeatedly told Hamas that the war can end immediately — all it has to do is release the remaining hostages. Or, probably more accurately, return their remains. Hamas refuses to do so, even though Israel has made clear that its war aim is the elimination of Hamas as both a military and political force.

Why would Hamas take such a suicidal risk? You can thank Western politicians like Macron for providing Hamas with the political cover the terrorist organization believes will allow it to survive any IDF onslaught. Just last Friday, Macron announced that his country will recognize a Palestinian state starting in September. Western recognition of the Palestinians — an imaginary people that the Soviets and Egyptian-born Yasser Arafat conjured up in the 1960s — would create a legal nest of vipers for Jerusalem. I’ll let the international law experts go into those details, but my GPT research served up a big, steaming bowl of “Not Good.” For America’s part, President Donald Trump brushed off Macron: “That statement doesn’t carry any weight.” Nor should it, for anyone interested in peace and in eliminating one of the world’s worst terrorist outfits — two inextricably intertwined and mutually reinforcing goals.

That recognition effort may have triggered far more than diplomatic friction. It could set the stage for a major and permanent shift in Israeli policy. Israel’s N12 news service analyst Amit Segal called the potential annexations “significant” because once Israel annexes territory, giving it back is nearly impossible.”While the military can simply relinquish any territory it controls, annexing parts of the strip is almost irreversible,” Segal explained this morning on X. “According to Israeli law, if the government wants to relinquish territory it has annexed, it has two options: the withdrawal can either be approved by 80 of the Knesset’s 120 members, or through a referendum.” As divisive as Israeli politics are, getting 80 votes on anything as contentious as giving up land seems highly unlikely. As horrible as Oct. 7 was, getting Israeli voters to approve of giving land back to Hamas seems even less likely.

Here’s the kicker: Annexation is hard to undo, but actually annexing new real estate requires nothing more than Netanyahu’s approval. What one man can do requires 80 to undo. Earlier this month, France’s National Court of Asylum “ruled that Palestinian nationals from Gaza who are not under the United Nations protection may be granted refugee status under the 1951 Geneva Convention.” That would presumably include any Gaza Arabs in lands occupied — or annexed — by Israel. If I were Netanyahu, I’d be thinking very hard about two things right now. The first, of course, is which parts of the Strip are essential to Israeli security and ripe for annexation. The second is how to play hardball with Macron. Maybe — just maybe! — Israel won’t flood France with Gazans they’re legally obligated to take in as refugees, so long as Macron backs away from recognition. Two can play this game. And should.

https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1950224020206465221?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1950224020206465221%7Ctwgr%5E403b0421a1ce3aafa21ef1b0c98241332b6404f5%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fgeopolitical%2Fstarmer-warns-uk-could-join-france-recognizing-palestinian-state

Read more …

“Giuffre, who committed suicide in April..”

After saying she never would.

Trump Says He Believes Epstein ‘Stole’ Virginia Giuffre From Mar-a-Lago (JTN)

President Donald Trump on Tuesday told reporters that he believes Jeffrey Epstein’s most prominent accuser, Virginia Giuffre, was among the former Mar-a-Lago employees that the late financier “stole” from his resort. Giuffre, who committed suicide in April, has been credited by other Epstein accusers with inspiring them to speak out about their own experiences with the convicted felon. Epstein died in prison in 2019, while awaiting trial on multiple sex-trafficking charges. Trump spoke out about his fallout with the late financier over the weekend as his administration faces blowback from lawmakers and supporters regarding its handling of Epstein’s alleged client list.

The president claimed the falling out was over Epstein stealing employees from his Florida resort. “He took people that worked for me. And I told him, ‘Don’t do it anymore.’ And he did it,” Trump said. “I said, ‘Stay the hell out of here.'” Trump confirmed that the employees were young women who worked in the club’s spa, including Giuffre. The accuser previously said she met Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell while working at the resort as a teenager, per NBC News.

“I told him, I said, ‘Listen, we don’t want you taking our people, whether it was spa or not spa.’ … And he was fine. And then not too long after that, he did it again,” Trump said. “I think [Giuffre] worked at the spa. I think so. I think that was one of the people. He stole her, and by the way, she had no complaints about us, as you know, none whatsoever.” The president’s comments are true that Giuffre has never accused Trump of wrongdoing, but she has sued Prince Andrew, alleging she was sexually abused by him when she was a teenager. The British prince has denied the allegations but settled the lawsuit in 2022.

Read more …

Ran this yesterday as a video with no context. Sundance’s enthousiasm for it makes me run it again.

Must Watch – Tucker Carlson Interviews Richard Werner (CTH)

This is one of those interviews that simply must be watched in its entirety. It’s long, almost 3 hours, but take the quiet time to watch and absorb the information provided by economist Professor Richard Werner. Werner discusses something absolutely vital to understand about the nature of economics and the banking system that underpins it. You have often heard me say “there are trillions at stake” when describing the elements aligned against President Trump. Well, Werner gives context to what lies behind those trillions. Nine years ago, as President Elect Trump won his first election, I wrote about the future of economics and the potential if a Main Street monetary and banking system was created. Richard Werner discusses the specific issue of how credit creation by regular banks actually creates money. He’s the first person I have seen speak who really gets it.

There are distinct differences between banks creating money for asset purchases (inflation), consumer purchases (inflation) and GDP growth (Main Street expansion). He simply nails it, and that is why he was put on the CIA radar. When Werner speaks of the need for two distinct banking systems as a solution to the “inflationary” impact of money created for asset purchases vs GDP growth, he is specifically highlighting the difference between Wall Street money and Main Street money. This, in the largest measure, is exactly why President Trump and Secretary Mnuchin created the dual banking system. This is what led to the global pandemic as a tool to stop President Trump.

I cannot recommend this interview enough. However, don’t sell yourself short. Find a quiet place, quiet time, and take notes as you listen to Richard Werner outline the true and unspoken nature of how money is created. When you understand what Werner is saying, everything the FED and Central Banks do starts to make sense. Behind what Werner is explaining you will find the motives to oppose President Trump. Werner doesn’t draw the connection to Trump’s policies, but when you hear him outline the history and the problem you will get it.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Makis

Fertility
https://twitter.com/pmarca/status/1949721049286738278

cell

pole
https://twitter.com/buitengebieden/status/1950065059020845390
malaka
https://twitter.com/FreshSummerWind/status/1950135110180667890

bull

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Jul 252025
 


Henri Matisse Harmony in red 1908

 

Trump Sends So-Called Experts Reeling After Historic First 6 Months (VDH)
DOJ Forms “Strike Force to Assess ODNI Evidence” (CTH)
Russiagate Was America’s Other Pearl Harbor – Ted Cruz (RT)
Epstein vs. Russiagate (J. Peder Zane)
Kirk To Tucker: Trump Only Has A Short Window To “Smash The Deep State” (MN)
We’re Close To The War Nobody Wants But Everyone’s Preparing For (Timofeev)
James Carville Slams Democrats’ ‘Cracked-Out Clown Car’ (Margolis)
DNI Tulsi Gabbard Holds a Press Conference (CTH)
Could Obama Be Prosecuted Over the Russian Hoax? A Look at the Law (Spakovsky)
‘Russiagate’, Revenge, and The Rotten Core Of US Power (Amar)
Deputy AG Blanche To Meet With Ghislaine Maxwell On Thursday (JTN)
“I Want Elon To THRIVE” Trump Says (ZH)
Candace Owens Responds To Macrons’ Lawsuit Over Transgender Allegations (RT)
Germany’s €450 Billion EU Tribute: Brussels Demands, Berlin Pays (Kolbe)
Europe Is Stuck in a Disastrous, Failing Marxist Trap (GI)

 

 

Jesse Tulsi

Powell
https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/1948206791449346162

Steele

Sydney Powell
https://twitter.com/Real_RobN/status/1948201594287472751

CNN

Subpoena
https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1948175505586315652

 

 

 

 

For some reason, a lot of longer overviews and assessments today. Let’s follow them. And start positive:

Victor Davis Hanson. Promises made. And more then kept.

Trump Sends So-Called Experts Reeling After Historic First 6 Months (VDH)

In this first six months of the Trump administration, we’ve entered unknown territory. I guess the best way to term it is there are a lot of known unknowns. We’re doing things we’ve never done before. And our experts think they can predict it, but they’ve been wrong. Let’s take some examples. Usually, tariffs are not a source of revenue because traditional economic orthodoxy says that whatever revenue they generate, they decrease gross domestic product by inflicting attacks on goods. But yet, we don’t know what the profit margin is in these countries. And perhaps the tariffs are not resulting in rising prices. At least they haven’t in May and June. Which suggests, again, that the Germans or the South Koreans or the Chinese were making so much money by exporting to the United States, while protecting their own industry and piling up surpluses, that they could pay tariffs and still remain in our market at a cost-competitive profit.

The result is that we’re getting $26 billion a month and higher. No one anticipated that. Scott Bessent, the treasury secretary, said, “In theory, the year could end with a third of a trillion dollars—$330 billion.” That’s almost 5% of our revenue is coming from tariffs, which we’d thought would be impossible. Another impossibility is usually we’re running a $2 trillion debt. That’s what we were usually told by people. But in the month of May, there were more federal revenues than there were debits. And that was a result of the Department of Government Efficiency cuts and the tariffs and the seasonal increase in federal revenues that come through taxation and other charges against the private sector.

Everybody said, “Well, May’s always a good month. It’s the one good month of the year.” But we haven’t had a surplus since 2017 in any month, which is kind of strange if we’re going to run this huge $2 trillion budget deficit. And while we’re discussing it, more money is coming in than going out. And we have this known unknown about tariffs. Then something’s up. And that something’s up is amplified. When we look at the foreign investment, we were told, $4 trillion, $6 trillion, $8 trillion. That’s a phenomenal number. Nobody has ever had $8 trillion of foreign investment in the United States in one year. The secretary of interior, Doug Burgum, says to us now that the actual income or amount or capital investment from foreign sources of various statuses could be $15 trillion. Economists have ratios for each billion dollars in foreign investment, depending on the nature of the foreign investment, the jobs created. If this were true, it’s a phenomenal number.

He also said something that was quite striking. That the value of U.S. assets that have been untapped—natural gas, coal, oil, timber, rare earth minerals—is somewhere between $100 trillion and $200 trillion. Now, we don’t want to exploit and plunder our countryside, but it’s something to think about, that if we were not buying rare earth minerals from China—and we probably may not be—or we had a mechanism to tap our coal and use it cleanly to help generate the electricity for artificial intelligence. This is unusual. This is crazy: $15 trillion of foreign investment, $200 trillion of unrealized assets. And remember that the $15 trillion is coming from people who were not willing to do that prior to President Donald Trump. They’re doing it in fear of tariffs.

There’s a couple of other things, and that is the military was short anywhere—depending on who you talked to—45,000 to 65,000 recruits. They could only get 50% of their benchmarks. A year ago, at this time, about 50%, only about half of the people were enlisting. But when they changed the ad campaigns, and they said they were no longer going to prejudice recruits for tenure promotion, enlistment, advancement, etc. by their race or gender, and they were going to stress battle efficacy, all of a sudden, recruitment soared.

Nobody thought you could do it in six months. But in less than six months, the military went from, “We’re short 50%. We don’t know what to do. Maybe it’s gangs. Maybe it’s tattoos. Maybe it’s drug use. Maybe it’s obesity. Maybe we’re competing—” to, “I don’t know what happened but all these people have enlisted.” And we all know what happened. They stress what the military is for in their ads and communications. And they got what they wanted. And there’s one other final thing that’s inexplicable. We were letting in up to 10,000 illegal immigrants a day for over a four-year period. It’s controversial how many in total came. But it could be from 8 million to 12 million.

So when Donald Trump said he was going to offer a self-deportation, you get a thousand dollars, you get your way paid for, and you can apply for legal immigration at some future date—if you don’t do this, you’re disqualified for 10 years. And then the “Big, Beautiful Bill” will continue the wall. He put pressure on Mexico to enforce its own borders, to stop this trek northward. We could go through all the things he has done. But we all thought that maybe he could reduce it from 10,000 to 2,000, maybe to 1,000. I thought maybe, “Wow. If he does all this, if he actually forces people and he creates a new deterrence, he might get only 500.” Some months, there’s nobody; 126 people I think it was in May. This is phenomenal. There is no illegal immigration right now, as we speak. That frees the Border Patrol and the new agents that’ll come online and the new Big, Beautiful Bill to round up the 10 million, starting with the 500,000 criminals that former President Joe Biden let in.

Add it all up and the orthodoxy, the conventional wisdom about tariffs, about foreign investment, about our assets that are unrealized, about military recruitment, about illegal immigration, they’ve all gone with the wind. We’re in new territory. All the perceived wisdom is ignorance. And nobody knows what is what, except we’re in a very exciting period. If $9 trillion represents the market capitalization of all of Silicon Valley, you can imagine what $10 trillion to $15 trillion would do to this country. It’s like bringing a new Silicon Valley—in total, one and a half of them—and plopping them down. And when you add in robotics and AI and the efficiency in government regulation, through these cuts and fast-tracking permits, we don’t know where we are, but we might be on the verge of an economic boom.

Read more …

“The DC intel silos are built so their lack of sharing creates a natural defense mechanism; there is no cross-reference capability..”

DOJ Forms “Strike Force to Assess ODNI Evidence” (CTH)

Main Justice has announced the formation of a DOJ strike force to assemble and assess the evidence provided by Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, against former intelligence and government officials. This will require the DOJ to take a new approach, extracting information from multiple silos and then overlaying context to the content therein. That’s essentially the new approach that DNI Gabbard has taken to break down the silo defenses, and this is the first time since I’ve been outlining how they self-protect that someone (DNI) has actually done the extracting and cross-referencing.

– Dept of Justice – WASHINGTON – “Today, the Department of Justice announced the formation of a Strike Force to assess the evidence publicized by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and investigate potential next legal steps which might stem from DNI Gabbard’s disclosures. This Department takes alleged weaponization of the intelligence community with the utmost seriousness. Upon the formation of the Strike Force, Attorney General Pamela Bondi stated: “The Department of Justice is proud to work with my friend Director Gabbard and we are grateful for her partnership in delivering accountability for the American people. We will investigate these troubling disclosures fully and leave no stone unturned to deliver justice.” Don’t underestimate how radical and challenging this type of an approach is going to be.

https://twitter.com/JesseBWatters/status/1948200092365992336

OIG Michael Horowitz never could attempt it (not authorized), SC John Durham was not permitted to do it (not authorized); the House Select Sub-Committee on Govt Weaponization ran away with hair on fire at even the suggestion of doing it (ask me how I know), and no modern internal investigative unit has ever been allowed to extract national security information from multiple IC institutions, and review it in context.

The DC intel silos are built so their lack of sharing creates a natural defense mechanism; there is no cross-reference capability. DNI Tulsi Gabbard has the unique ability -due to her position- of reaching into each IC silo regardless of their effort to stop her. That’s what has led to this point. If the DOJ is successful, things could change; but that’s a very big ‘if’. The entire mechanism of the USIC, led by defenses from the Senate Intel Committee (Cotton), will do everything to stop any internal extraction and review of their silo information. “National security” claims will run rampant. This will be a heavy lift requiring Executive Office support and coordination at every level.

https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/1948198774779568451

Read more …

“..a moment of “infamy” in American political history..”

Russiagate Was America’s Other Pearl Harbor – Ted Cruz (RT)

US Senator Ted Cruz has compared the launch of the Trump-Russia investigation to the 1941 Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, calling it a moment of “infamy” in American political history. The Texas Republican made the remark on Fox News on Wednesday, accusing former President Barack Obama’s administration of lying to the public and using federal agencies to undermine Donald Trump’s presidency. ”December 9 should be a day that lives in infamy,” Cruz said, referencing the date in 2016 when the FBI opened its inquiry and the famous wording Franklin D. Roosevelt used in a speech following a surprise Japanese attack on the US naval base in Hawaii. “That’s a moment when senior members of our government decided to lie to the American people and sabotage President Donald Trump.”

During a meeting on December 9, 2016, then President Obama ordered National Security Council officials to discard intelligence assessments that found no Russian involvement in Trump’s campaign and replace them with claims blaming Moscow based on fabricated data, according to declassified documents released by US National Intelligence Director Tulsi Gabbard last week. Trump had defeated Democratic rival Hillary Clinton in the presidential election that November.

The scandal led to the years-long Trump-Russia probe known as ‘Russiagate’. It severely damaged relations between Moscow and Washington, leading to sanctions, asset seizures, and a breakdown in normal diplomacy. Russia has not yet commented on Gabbard’s revelations. It has however consistently denied allegations that it interfered in the 2016 US election. The Kremlin has described the Russiagate affair as a politically motivated smear campaign intended to justify sanctions and worsen relations with Moscow.

Read more …

I’ve mentioned this a few times: the MSM have revived Epstein -after a 4-year silence- so they have a counterweight to Tulsi’s accusations. When will we start calling it Epsteingate?

Epstein vs. Russiagate (J. Peder Zane)

It’s a tale of two stories. The first concerns President Trump’s back-peddling on pledges to release government files connected to the long-dead pervert Jeffrey Epstein. The second involves the growing evidence that President Obama and his top officials spread the false narrative casting Trump as a treasonous agent of Russia, one that hobbled his first term. While the Epstein saga is a tawdry kerfuffle with no larger significance, the new revelations about the Russia hoax provide scorching detail on one of the biggest political scandals in American history. Guess which one the legacy media is running with? Which one is it trying to bury? The answer is obvious. If only stating that was enough, and we could just laugh away the legacy media’s predictable and partisan coverage.

They are not serious people. Unfortunately, they are deadly serious in their continuing efforts to malign Trump while covering up their own malfeasance. The contrasting coverage of the Epstein and Russiagate stories is just the latest example of a media that has lost its way. First, Epstein. During the last few weeks the legacy media has covered that story as if it were Watergate. The New York Times, for example, published more than 50 articles and opinion pieces on Epstein and Trump between July 16 and July 23. Much of the rest of the legacy media has followed suit. Except for a salacious, if inconsequential, story spoon-fed to the Wall Street Journal – that Trump may have contributed a bawdy letter to a birthday book for Epstein 23 years ago – none of them broke news or advanced the story.

The last blockbuster article written about Epstein was Lee Fang’s May 21 piece for RealClearInvestigations revealing how officials in the U.S. Virgin Islands – including Democratic Rep. Stacey Plaskett – appear to have benefitted from and shielded Epstein, who brought young girls to a private island he owned there. Yes, the Epstein saga is a legitimate story. Despite legacy media claims to the contrary, there was a cabal of wealthy and influential men who cavorted with Epstein – and almost certainly some of them had sex with young girls. But it is unlikely that proof of such criminal acts is detailed in material in the government’s possession. Nevertheless, the Trump administration should release what it has and let the chips fall where they may for these amoral folks who tied themselves to a disgusting person.

Or Trump should forthrightly explain why that is a bad idea. A full account may be hard, given a Florida federal judge’s ruling yesterday that the law “does not permit” the release of secret Epstein grand jury testimony as requested by the DOJ. It is telling that the recent wall-to-wall coverage focuses so much on Trump. The irony is that he appears to be one of the few stand-up guys in the Epstein story. The two men were apparently friends at one time, – though probably not all that close given the lack of articles linking the two men before Trump ran for office. We do know that Trump was one of the few people who distanced himself from Epstein long before the financier pleaded guilty to sex crimes in 2008. Trump barred Epstein from Mar-a-Lago before his arrest, supposedly because of his creepy behavior toward a minor.

There are also reports that Trump may have been the one who alerted the authorities to Epstein’s predations – not, perhaps, out of conscience but because of a real estate dispute. While the legacy news organizations pile on to the Epstein story, they are downplaying the recent revelations detailing the Obama administration’s efforts to push the Trump/Russia hoax. In their telling, his administration declassified a batch of new documents to distract from the Epstein scandal and to seek retribution against his perceived enemies. Whatever Trump’s motivations, the newly disclosed documents are significant. As Aaron Maté reported this week for RealClearInvestigations, they show that the official “confirmation” of the Russiagate hoax – the Intelligence Community Assessment completed in the January 2017 and reports by Special Counsel Robert Mueller and the Senate committee investigating the issue – “all excluded the intelligence community’s own secretly identified doubts and evidentiary gaps on the core allegation of Russian meddling.”

The intricate timeline of events Maté details makes this point abundantly clear: Suspicions that Russia interfered in the 2016 election were repackaged as purported facts after Trump’s stunning win. We do know that emails stolen from the Democratic National Committee were published in the summer and fall of 2016 by Wikileaks. But, Maté notes, a September 2016 intelligence assessment reportedly “had no hard evidence that Putin ordered the theft of Democratic Party material as part of an influence campaign to help Trump.” Maté’s previous reporting for RCI has also shown that there is still no proof that Russia removed any emails from the DNC servers or passed them along to anyone else. That assessment was ignored after Trump’s victory in November. It is also clear that President Obama was a key player in advancing the false narrative of Russian interference.

Obama – who had been briefed that summer about Hillary Clinton’s plans to falsely cast Trump as a Kremlin stooge to deflect from her email scandal – requested a new intelligence assessment in December 2016. It was to be a rush job he wanted to get out before leaving office. That report, crafted largely by CIA Director John Brennan, suppressed FBI and NSA doubts about Russian interference. Obama went further. On Jan. 5, 2017, he held an Oval Office meeting with various figures, including FBI Director James Comey. Two days later, Comey briefed President-elect Trump about the Steele dossier – a phony and sloppy bit of opposition research paid for by Clinton’s campaign that suggested Trump and his associates had been compromised by the Russians. That briefing became the news hook anti-Trump media needed to quickly report on the bogus dossier, launching the Russiagate probes.

Two points: First, Russia probably did try to interfere in the 2016 election. But the actual facts we know – that they purchased a handful of ads on social media, and that they probably hacked into the DNC servers, albeit without proof that they removed emails published by Wikileaks – do not support the Mueller Report’s famous claim regarding a “sweeping and systematic” effort. More importantly, Democrats and the legacy media are trying to pretend that we spent three years debating Russian meddling. In fact, their efforts were aimed at painting Trump and his associates as treasonous allies of a foreign enemy. It was never about interference, but collusion.

I believe this was the worst scandal in American history because unlike Watergate – where wrongdoing was largely confined to the White House – Russiagate’s cancer metastasized from the White House to the CIA, the FBI, and the legacy media. The lack of accountability for these actions gave Democrats and their media allies a sense of impunity. It is why they felt free to lie so brazenly about other things, including Hunter Biden’s laptop and Joe Biden’s mental acuity. Those forces are so invested in hiding their own duplicity that they can never admit the truth. While the Russiagate and Epstein stories are clearly of different orders, Democrats and the legacy media insistently push a mirror image of the news, claiming the new revelations about corruption at the highest reaches of the government are simply Trump’s effort to “deflect” from Epstein. You can’t make this up – except they can.

Read more …

“I know what the grassroots want. I know what President Trump wants. We need perp walks. We need arrests..”

Kirk To Tucker: Trump Only Has A Short Window To “Smash The Deep State” (MN)

Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk believes that President Trump only has a short timeframe to take decisive action and score a meaningful victory over the Deep State before it’s too late.Kirk told Tucker Carlson that the clock is ticking and “We need accountability. If we do not smash the administrative state and the deep state in the coming six to 12 months, then we’re actually not going to.” “I know what the grassroots want. I know what President Trump wants. We need perp walks. We need arrests,” Kirk further urged.

Referring to the bombshell documents on Obama’s role in the Russia hoax dropped by Tulsi Gabbard last week, Kirk noted “I believe that all roads lead back to the intel agencies on all this stuff. And so Tulsi is now getting under the hood.”“This revelation of Russiagate is massive. It’s huge. God bless her for doing this,” Kirk contiuned, adding “I know the president cares about it personally, as he should, because how much of his life and his energy was just spent defending against a fabrication? Not a fabrication of the Chinese Communist Party, by the way. Not a fabrication of our adversaries, [but] a fabrication of our own government.”

“That’s what makes this so sinister, is that our own government was turned against the duly elected president. So here we are now in the year of our Lord 2025. Who’s running the United States government?” Kirk continued adding “President Trump, he is now the hunter. He was the hunted back in the first term.” However, Kirk warned that if progress is not rapidly made then “We’re not going to bring this entire intelligence apparatus to heel,” asserting “We have to lance the boil because it’s gone so out of control.”

“I can tell you, they are deeply fearful of this movement. They know that we are aware. They notice that they know that we are noticing things, that we’re seeing patterns, that we know how powerful the intelligence agencies have become,” Kirk further urged. “So that’s why I think Russiagate really matters, is that it’s a way to hold them accountable to see how dark and honestly demonic their activities have become,” he emphasised. Kirk described the remaining months of 2025 as “Hopefully an opportunity to fulfill a mandate that President Trump ran on I still know [he] believes to this day, which is to bring the deep state to hopefully smash it or, [at] the very least, bring it back into balance.”

Read more …

A one-on-one result of Russiagate.

We’re Close To The War Nobody Wants But Everyone’s Preparing For (Timofeev)

US President Donald Trump’s recent push for peace in Ukraine highlights a troubling reality: the options for resolving the conflict are narrowing. Kiev continues to rely on NATO military support, while member states are ramping up defense spending and bolstering their arms industries. The Ukraine war may yet spark a broader confrontation between Russia and NATO. For now, the chances remain low – thanks, in large part, to nuclear deterrence. But how strong is that deterrent today? It’s difficult to gauge the role of nuclear weapons in modern warfare. Their only combat use – the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 – occurred under vastly different political and technological conditions. Nonetheless, most international relations experts agree that nuclear weapons serve as powerful deterrents.

Even a small nuclear arsenal is seen as a shield against invasion: the cost of aggression becomes unthinkable. By this logic, Russia, as a nuclear superpower, should be nearly immune to external military threats. The use of nuclear weapons has become a political and moral taboo – though military planners still quietly game out scenarios. The dominant belief holds that nuclear weapons are unusable – and that no rational actor would challenge a nuclear-armed state. But is that belief grounded in reality? For Russia, this is becoming an increasingly urgent question as the risk of direct confrontation with NATO – or individual NATO members – grows, especially in the context of Ukraine. There are political flashpoints aplenty. Both Russia and NATO have made their grievances known.

Whether these tensions erupt into conflict will depend not just on intent, but on military-industrial capacity and force readiness. And these are changing fast. Russia has expanded defense production since 2022. NATO countries, too, are rearming – and their collective industrial base may soon surpass Russia’s conventional strength. With that shift could come a more assertive posture – military pressure backed by material power. Several pathways could lead to a NATO–Russia war. One scenario involves direct NATO intervention in Ukraine. Another could stem from a crisis in the Baltics or elsewhere along NATO’s eastern flank. Such crises can escalate rapidly. Drone strikes, missile attacks, and cross-border incursions are now routine. In time, NATO regulars – not just volunteers – could be drawn in.

Could nuclear deterrence stop that? At first glance, yes. In a direct clash, Russia would likely begin with conventional strikes. But the war in Ukraine has shown that conventional weapons, even when effective, rarely force capitulation. NATO possesses Ukraine’s defensive tools – but at greater scale. Its societies are less prepared to endure casualties, but that could change with sufficient political mobilization and media messaging. Russia has amassed significant military experience – especially in defensive operations – but NATO remains a formidable opponent.

Read more …

“Constipated. Leaderless. Confused. A cracked-out clown car. Divided. These are the words I hear my fellow Democrats using to describe our party as of late. The truth is they’re not wrong..”

James Carville Slams Democrats’ ‘Cracked-Out Clown Car’ (Margolis)

Let’s be honest here: The Democratic Party is a train wreck, and famed party strategist James Carville is screaming it from the rooftops. I’ve given him a lot of flak for torching his credibility by confidently predicting a Kamala Harris victory—but credit where it’s due; this time, he’s not wrong. In a scathing New York Times op-ed, Carville called his party a “cracked-out clown car”—and let’s face it, he hit the nail on the head. The Democrats are bleeding voters, hemorrhaging credibility, and spiraling into irrelevance with no clear leader or message. Carville’s attempt to patch this sinking ship is bold but delusional, and it’s a perfect snapshot of a party too broken to fix itself. Buckle up, because this is a masterclass in liberal denial.

Carville’s diagnosis is spot-on: “Constipated. Leaderless. Confused. A cracked-out clown car. Divided. These are the words I hear my fellow Democrats using to describe our party as of late. The truth is they’re not wrong: The Democratic Party is in shambles.” His evidence? Well, he points to the shocking nomination of Zohran Mamdani, a far-left socialist, for New York City mayor as proof of the party’s problems. Mamdani’s win isn’t just a fluke; it’s a symptom of a deeper rot—generational and ideological divides that have Democrats eating their own. Older and more pragmatic party members like Carville see pie-in-the-sky promises of economic utopias as undeliverable, while the younger, radical wing demands fealty to woke causes like defunding Israel over Gaza. Good luck uniting that mess.

But here’s where Carville’s plan goes off the rails. He thinks the Democrats need a “savior” to swoop in and save the day, like Barack Obama in 2008 or Bill Clinton in 1992. The Democratic Party is steamrolling toward a civilized civil war. It’s necessary to have it. It’s even more necessary to delay it. The only thing that can save us now is an actual savior, because a new party can be delivered only by a person — see Barack Obama in 2008 and Bill Clinton in 1992. No matter how many podcasts or influencer streams our candidates go on, our new leader won’t arrive until the day after the midterms in November 2026, which marks the unofficial-yet-official beginning of the 2028 presidential primary contest. No new party or candidate has a chance for a breakthrough until that day.

Really? A knight in shining armor to rescue a party that’s alienated half the country with open borders, skyrocketing prices, and identity politics on steroids? Carville’s banking on a mythical figure to emerge after the 2026 midterms. That’s not a strategy; that’s wishful thinking combined with the admission that he believes nobody on the theoretical Democrat Party bench for 2028 has a prayer of winning. So yes, he’s right about one thing: The party’s in shambles. But his solution—waiting for a political unicorn—isn’t just delusional, it’s an insult to voters who are fed up with Democrat overreach. While they wait for a fairy tale comeback, President Trump is getting real results—securing the border, growing the economy, and leading with strength.

Read more …

I’ve hinted at Trump apologizing to Putin over Russiagate.

“The timing does not appear to be accidental. President Trump gives Russia 50 days to come to the negotiation table and end the conflict in Ukraine. A few days later, DNI Tulsi Gabbard begins releasing information that shows both President Trump and President Putin being framed by the U.S. Intelligence Community.”

DNI Tulsi Gabbard Holds a Press Conference (CTH)

Today, Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Tulsi Gabbard declassified and released the 2020 House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence report (HPSCI), that outlines their investigation into the Intelligence Community Joint Analysis Report (JAR) of 2016 and the Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) that followed. I know that’s a lot of acronyms, however, the key element of Director Tulsi Gabbard’s release today is to underscore just how fraudulent the JAR/ICA created in 2016 and 2017 was. The JAR/ICA report was fabricated by the CIA and Intelligence Community to give the appearance of Russia interfering in the election. The declassified HPSCI report takes that fraudulent intelligence analysis apart, step by step.

The JAR/ICA was also used to justify President Obama expelling Russian diplomats, confiscating Russian property, targeting Russian officials for sanctions, and imposing a series of sanctions against various Russian entities, individuals, groups and organizations. All of the Obama’s Russian targeting effort was part of an enhanced IC op to give additional patina of credibility to the fraudulent premise. In many ways, Russia was collateral damage created by a domestic USA political intelligence operation run by Obama allies in order to attempt to destabilize the incoming administration of President Donald Trump. The framing of both Donald Trump and Russia is going to be a key facet to accept as time moves forward on this story. Tulsi Gabbard gives a press conference. WATCH:

I will have more on the Tulsi release of the HPSCI report shortly. In the interim… The timing does not appear to be accidental. President Trump gives Russia 50 days to come to the negotiation table and end the conflict in Ukraine. A few days later, DNI Tulsi Gabbard begins releasing information that shows both President Trump and President Putin being framed by the U.S. Intelligence Community. It would appear that President Trump is setting a new baseline for a relationship with Russia. However, first the tables need to be cleared of the historic manipulation and targeting that structurally, and fraudulently, set the course of conflict and antagonism in U.S-Russia relations.

Read more …

It’s not so easy. Presidents are well protected. Since the recent Supreme Court involvements in Trump cases, probably more than ever.

Could Obama Be Prosecuted Over the Russian Hoax? A Look at the Law (Spakovsky)

Can former federal officials be prosecuted in the Russia-Trump collusion hoax? That is the question arising from the recent actions of Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard. Gabbard has released declassified documents over what she says was a “treasonous conspiracy” that was “directed by President [Barack] Obama” to provide “manufactured intelligence” that “Russia had helped Donald Trump get elected.” This was in the face of contradictory intelligence analyses that said the exact opposite: that “Russia had neither the intent nor the capability to try to ‘hack the United States election.’” Gabbard says she is sending these documents to both the FBI and the Justice Department with the hope that they will criminally prosecute those involved in this hoax. That includes, in addition to Obama, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, former CIA Director John Brennan, former FBI Director James Comey, and former national security adviser Susan Rice.

If we assume, just for the sake of argument, that what Gabbard is saying is correct and that the internal, formerly classified communications and perhaps other evidence support those claims, what federal criminal statutes might cover what is alleged to have occurred? Two things should be kept in mind. First, a very thorough, intensive investigation is required to ensure that all the relevant facts and possible evidence pertaining to this claim are uncovered. Second, there is no point in federal prosecutors going forward with a prosecution unless they are confident they have a reasonable chance of obtaining a conviction. Despite Gabbard’s understandable language about a “treasonous conspiracy,” the federal treason statute, 18 U.S.C. § 2381, seems like a pretty far stretch.

As bad as the allegations are—the misuse of federal power to target a political opponent and eventual president—the statute only applies to someone who “levies war against” the country or “adheres to [its] enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere.” What about the sedition statute, 18 U.S.C. § 2384? That criminal statute applies to “two or more persons” who “conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States … or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States.” Again, even if we assume the truth of these allegations, there was no force involved in what happened. On the other hand, what are the statutes that former special counsel Jack Smith attempted to use against Trump?

He indicted Trump under 18 U.S.C. § 371 (Conspiracy to Defraud the United States); 18 U.S.C. § 1512(k) (Conspiracy to Obstruct an Official Proceeding); 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2) (Obstruction of and Attempt to Obstruct an Official Proceeding); and 18 U.S.C. § 241 (Conspiracy Against Rights). The description Smith gives in the original grand jury indictment to justify using these particular federal criminal statutes seems to fit Gabbard’s description very aptly. Here is that description—just substitute Clapper, Brennan, and company for Trump as the defendants (changes are in brackets): So for more than two months following election day on November [8, 2016], the Defendant[s] spread lies that there had been outcome-determinative fraud in the election [by the Russian government in conspiracy with the Trump campaign] and that [Hillary Clinton] had actually won.

Those claims were false, and Defendant[s] knew that they were false. But the Defendant[s] repeated and widely disseminated them anyway—to make [their] knowingly false claims appear legitimate, create an intense national atmosphere of mistrust and anger, and erode public faith in the administration of the election [and the legitimacy of the Trump presidency]. Remarkable resemblance to Gabbard’s allegations, isn’t it? Were the alleged conspirators obstructing an official proceeding? Last year in Fisher v. U.S., the Supreme Court held that prosecution under that statute requires showing that a defendant impaired the availability or integrity of documents used in an official proceeding, which includes creating false evidence. That could apply here if official intelligence reports were falsified as is alleged and that became part of the official investigation.

The federal fraud statute Smith was using is very general and applies to those conspiring to defraud the United States “in any manner or for any purpose.” But the use of this fraud statute by Smith was very questionable. As my colleague John Malcolm has pointed out, in recent cases “the Supreme Court has taken a dim view of more amorphous theories of what constitutes fraud against the United States.” In a unanimous opinion in 2023 in Ciminelli v. U.S., the court held that “Federal fraud statutes criminalize only schemes to deprive people of traditional property rights,” like money or property. They don’t “vest a general power” in the federal government to enforce its view of “integrity in broad swaths of state and local policymaking.” The serious misbehavior here doesn’t seem to meet that requirement.

And a “Conspiracy Against Rights?” That statute covers conspirators who “injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person … in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same.” This statute was part of the Enforcement Act of 1871, also known as the Ku Klux Klan Act, and was designed to stop the violence against newly freed blacks in the South. Applying it to Trump for merely questioning the outcome of the 2020 election was a gross misuse of the statute. Could it be applied to the actions of Brennan, Clapper, and other alleged conspirators? Perhaps. But the statute had never been applied in this manner before Smith tried to misuse it.

Finally, to the extent any of these alleged conspirators lied about what they did when they were testifying before Congress, that is a potential violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1621. This federal statute makes it a crime for an individual under oath to “testify, declare, depose, or certify truly … any material matter which he does not believe to be true.” The biggest problem any investigation conducted by the Justice Department faces is the federal statute of limitations. All of this is alleged to have happened at the end of 2016 and in 2017, more than five years ago. That is significant because the general federal statute of limitations for most crimes, 18 U.S.C. § 3282, is five years.

There are exceptions. There is no statute of limitations on treason, espionage, or capital crimes such as murder, but that is not the situation here. Additionally, for those hoping that the evidence would be sufficient to prosecute Obama, that also is highly unlikely to happen. Recall that last year, the Supreme Court held in Trump v. U.S. that presidents have absolute immunity from federal criminal prosecutions for actions taken within the scope of their official duties while president. If all the facts alleged are true, was Obama acting within the scope of his constitutional authority as president? Maybe not but trying to prove that in a court of law in order to overcome the Supreme Court’s holding of his presumptive immunity would be an almost impossible task.

Read more …

“Just ask that crackhead, porn addict, and shady “businessman” from an infamous clan, who is currently not in prison but giving expletive-laden interviews instead.”

‘Russiagate’, Revenge, and The Rotten Core Of US Power (Amar)

Be real: It is not hard to see that America – as it really exists, not the ‘dream’ version – is neither a democracy nor a country with genuine rule of law. That’s because democracy worth the label is impossible, for starters, with elections awash in private money and a bizarre Electoral College making sure that Americans do not, actually, have votes of even numerically equal weight when electing their single most powerful official, the president. The rule of law can only exist where citizens are equal before laws that apply to everyone in the same, just manner. This is a challenge everywhere, but the US is an almost comically egregious case of legal bias, obscurantism (masquerading as limitlessly re-interpretable case law), and inequality by status, wealth, ethnicity, and skin color. Just ask that crackhead, porn addict, and shady “businessman” from an infamous clan, who is currently not in prison but giving expletive-laden interviews instead.

The US, simply put, does not operate the way it claims to operate. It takes an extraordinary amount of naivete – on the scale of believing in Santa Claus or an honest Vladimir Zelensky – not to notice that much. What is more difficult to figure out is how politics and power actually do work in America and, most of all, who is really in charge. We have, for example, recently witnessed a presidency in which a severely senescent Joe Biden claimed to be but clearly could not be in command. So, who was? And who is in general? That, ultimately, is perhaps the single most disturbing question raised by recent developments around the rotting corpse of “Russiagate” (aka Russia Rage). In its heyday – between 2016 and about 2020 – “Russiagate” was the shorthand for a conspiracy theory that dominated US politics and mainstream media, causing mass hysteria.

Its details were exceedingly complicated but its core was extremely simple: the claims that Russia had manipulated the American presidential elections of 2016, that it had done so to facilitate the first victory of Donald Trump, and finally that Donald Trump’s team had colluded with Russia. The power of this preponderantly factually false and entirely misleading narrative was such that it overshadowed much of Donald Trump’s first presidency and contributed greatly to a catastrophic and very dangerous decline in the always challenging relationship with Russia. Indeed, there even is a plausible connection to be made between the mass madness of “Russiagate” and the reckless policy of provoking and waging a proxy war against Russia in Ukraine. Now, Trump is back for a second term and bent on revenge against his detractors not only but especially over “Russiagate.”

In his usual refreshingly candid style, he has announced that “it is time to go after people,” fingered former president Barrack Obama for “treason,” and gleefully shared an AI-generated video showing Obama being arrested in the White House. Just before that typical Trump outburst, his Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, released a freshly declassified report – produced in early 2017 by the intelligence committee of the House of Representatives – that addresses what really happened in 2016 when “Russiagate” was initially invented. This release was clearly meant to be a sensation: Gabbard accompanied it with press statements and a detailed thread of X posts bringing out its most explosive aspects. Among them, the key finding is that Russia did not work to make Trump president. Boom: the basis of “Russiagate” gone, just like that.

And who was to blame? Gabbard made clear that “Russiagate” was not a cluster-fiasco born of mere incompetence but a monster intentionally produced and carefully nurtured. She accused “top national security officials,” including FBI Director James Comey, CIA Director John Brennan, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper as well as Obama himself of deliberately creating and spreading the impression of Russian election meddling in favor of Trump by manipulating the actual, contradictory findings of the intelligence agencies. Gabbard used strong language: a “coup” against Trump, the “weaponization of intelligence,” a “treasonous conspiracy,” and a “betrayal concerning every American.” Those mainstream media, such as the New York Times, that are among the worst offenders in spreading the “Russiagate” hoax have already pounced on this language to, in essence, pooh-pooing Gabbard’s charges as hyperbolical.

Don’t fall for that deflection. Gabbard’s way of presenting her case does have a political edge. Of course it does. Duh. And if they wish, the old “Russiagaters” can nitpick over her terms to their heart’s content. But that makes no difference to the fact that what has happened is an enormous blight on US politics, implicating the intelligence services as well as other state agencies, the media, and, indeed, former President Obama. Gabbard may be laying it on a little thick (or not, actually), but even without any embellishment, the fabrication of “Russiagate” was the real, humungous scandal. And it must be dealt with at long last.

Read more …

Another meeting today. After that he’ll talk to the press I’m sure.

Deputy AG Blanche To Meet With Ghislaine Maxwell On Thursday (JTN)

Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche is set to meet Thursday with Jeffrey Epstein accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell, according to a news report. Blanche will meet Maxwell in Tallahassee, Fla., where she is serving a 20-year sentence for child sex trafficking and related offenses, anonymous sources told ABC News. The reported meeting comes amid bipartisan furor over the Trump Justice Department effectively shutting down any further investigations related to Epstein, a financier and convicted sex offender who died in prison amid more charges related to additional sex crimes. Among the lingering questions who were Epstein’s close, powerful friends and-or on his purported “client list.” President Trump was friends with Epstein before he was convicted in 2005 in Florida of sex crimes.

Maxwell helped find women, some of them minors, for Epstein. “I anticipate meeting with Ms. Maxwell in the coming days,” Blanche said Tuesday. “Until now, no administration on behalf of the department had inquired about her willingness to meet with the government. “President Trump has told us to release all credible evidence. If Ghislane Maxwell has information about anyone who has committed crimes against victims, the FBI and the DOJ will hear what she has to say,” the deputy attorney general explained.

Maxwell’s lawyer, David Oscar Markus, said Tuesday, “I can confirm that we are in discussions with the government and that Ghislaine will always testify truthfully. We are grateful to President Trump for his commitment to uncovering the truth in this case.” House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer on Wednesday subpoenaed Maxwell to sit for a deposition at the Federal Correctional Institution Tallahassee on Aug. 11.

Read more …

Of course he does. Elon went off the rails, and his rocker, but he’s still a unique asset. It’s just that Trump has an entire country to run, and that’s too large of a picture for Musk.

“I Want Elon To THRIVE” Trump Says (ZH)

Today former President Donald Trump denied accusations that he plans to harm Elon Musk’s companies, such as Tesla and SpaceX, by cutting off federal support. Responding to recent speculation, Trump posted on Truth Social: “Everyone is stating that I will destroy Elon’s companies by taking away some, if not all, of the large scale subsidies he receives from the U.S. Government. This is not so!” He added, “I want Elon, and all businesses within our Country, to THRIVE, in fact, THRIVE like never before! The better they do, the better the USA does, and that’s good for all of us.” “We are setting records every day and I want to keep it that way” Trump added.Though Trump had previously threatened to revoke billions in government subsidies to Musk’s ventures, his recent statements mark a softer stance.

The two have had a turbulent relationship in recent weeks, with tensions rising after Musk’s departure from the Department of Government Efficiency. Despite their past alliance, Trump emphasized his broader commitment to American business success. It was reported over the past week that President Trump had expressed a willingness to harm Musk’s companies by targeting their federal funding and contracts. Following a public feud between the two men—intensified after Musk left his government advisory role—Trump reportedly suggested he could retaliate by canceling contracts with Musk’s businesses, including SpaceX.WSJ reported that after tensions between President Trump and Elon Musk escalated in early June 2025, the Trump administration began reviewing SpaceX’s multibillion-dollar government contracts to assess potential waste and whether any could be canceled.

This move followed Trump’s public suggestion that terminating Musk’s federal deals would be an effective cost-cutting measure. The General Services Administration asked several agencies, including the Defense Department and NASA, to compile detailed spreadsheets—known as “scorecards”—on SpaceX’s active contracts, evaluating their financial value and whether any competitors could fulfill the same roles. However, after reviewing the data, officials concluded that most of the contracts were essential to national security and space exploration, making them difficult to terminate.

SpaceX’s dominance in the launch and satellite sectors left the government with few viable alternatives. Despite ongoing frustrations and scrutiny, the company continued securing major contracts, including a $5.9 billion Pentagon deal for 28 national-security launches. SpaceX’s proven track record, reusable rocket technology, and critical role in programs like Crew Dragon and Starlink have solidified its position as a cornerstone of U.S. space and defense operations—even amid political friction. Most recently, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said she did not believe Trump supported federal agencies contracting with Musk’s AI company, xAI, which had just secured a $200 million deal with the Department of Defense.

Read more …

The Fench president can’t win in a French court, but thinks he can in a US court?

Candace Owens Responds To Macrons’ Lawsuit Over Transgender Allegations (RT)

American commentator Candace Owens has vowed to fight a defamation lawsuit filed by French President Emmanuel Macron and his wife Brigitte, after the conservative Youtuber repeatedly claimed the first lady was transgender. The lawsuit, filed earlier this week in a US court, accuses Owens of spreading “false and defamatory claims” – including that Brigitte Macron was born male, that the couple are blood relatives, and that Emmanuel Macron is a product of a CIA mind control program. According to the filing, the allegations were made “to promote her independent platform, gain notoriety, and make money,” and amounted to “relentless bullying on a worldwide scale.”

In a video posted to her YouTube channel on Wednesday, Owens shared a message intended for Brigitte Macron with her 4.5 million subscribers: “You were born a man and you’ll die a man,” adding that she is “fully prepared to take on this battle on behalf of the entire world” and that she will see the French president’s spouse in court. The Macrons filed a 219-page lawsuit in the US state of Delaware earlier in the day, alleging 22 counts of defamation against Owens. The complaint includes 99 pages of factual claims and evidence such as Brigitte Macron’s childhood photos, birth records, and documentation of her three children with her first husband. The document says Owens has turned the couple’s life “into fodder for profit-driven lies.”

Suing the podcaster was “the last resort,” as she ignored all requests to stop her activities, Macron’s lead counsel Tom Clare told CNN. Owens has repeatedly attacked Mrs. Macron on social media. In 2024, she posted a video titled “Is France’s First Lady a Man?” Earlier this year, she shared an investigation called “Becoming Brigitte.” The rumors about Brigitte date back to 2021, when Amandine Roy and Natacha Rey posted a four-hour video alleging she was born a man. However, this July, the Paris Appeals Court overturned the fines put on the bloggers following Mrs. Macron’s 2022 lawsuit. The court ruled out the women acted in “good faith” and that their allegations were an expression of belief.

Read more …

Europe will be much poorer than anyone today can imagine. Simply because of their politics. Totally preventable.

Germany’s €450 Billion EU Tribute: Brussels Demands, Berlin Pays (Kolbe)

Political centralism doesn’t come free of charge. On the path toward the United States of Europe, Brussels is entangling itself in a web of overreach, control mania, and interventionism. The invoice for this arrogance is being handed down to the outposts of Eurocracy. Celebration in Berlin. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz proudly presented what he called a comeback for Germany’s depression-plagued economy this Monday. Under the deeply original (read: painfully clichéd) slogan “Made for Germany”, 60 of the country’s top corporations showcased their already planned investments as a kind of aggregated act of economic liberation. “Germany is back,” Merz posted on X – grandiose, juvenile, and more cringe-inducing than inspiring. The reality of the German economy paints a different picture.

The labor market has already tipped into decline, with more than 100,000 industrial jobs set to be eliminated this year. A record wave of bankruptcies and a dramatic capital flight round out the portrait of an economic policy in freefall. How far Merz’s corporate pep rally strays from the economic facts is made clear by the country’s net direct investment figures: In 2024, Germany saw €64.5 billion in net capital leave the country. In 2023, it was €67.3 billion; in 2022, a staggering €112.2 billion. Germany is bleeding. And the real scandal is this: the country’s political leadership and, for practical purposes, let’s call them its “economic elite,” refuse to speak about the true causes of this collapse. A summit truly “Made for Germany” would call for an exit from the suicidal green policy agenda.

It would advocate a drastic reduction in bureaucracy and regulatory coercion, a return to affordable Russian gas, and the revival of nuclear power – the pillars of any serious industrial policy. Contrast this PR stunt with the hard numbers, and it becomes obvious why the event faded into oblivion – uninspired, flat, and quickly archived as another placebo moment of postmodern politics. Merz, for his part, was likely already preoccupied with another headache. While he toasted in Berlin, half of Europe was reacting to the ballooning budget proposal by his party colleague, EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. She had just introduced her draft for the EU’s Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) for 2028 to 2034: a whopping €1.82 trillion.

No one can accuse Brussels of lacking ambition. €100 billion is earmarked to keep the proxy war in Ukraine afloat, while another €650 billion is slated for the EU’s green subsidy machine – a lifeline for its artificial eco-economy. The proposed budget would increase by €750 billion, or nearly 50%. Unlike China’s five-year plans, the EU dreams in seven-year cycles. A true central planner’s paradise. If enacted, this mega-budget would trigger a massive increase in member-state contributions – with Germany, as usual, stuck with the lion’s share. Based on its economic size, Germany would be expected to contribute around 25% of the total, or approximately €450 billion.For comparison: Germany currently pays around €30 billion annually into the EU budget and receives €14 billion in return – a net loss of €16 billion per year.

Under the new framework, Berlin’s net contribution could rise to as much as €50 billion per year – more than triple today’s level. Cynics might argue that Germany could absorb the extra debt without much fuss. After all, Berlin is planning to borrow €90 billion next year anyway – what’s another €26 billion? Relative to GDP, it’s just a 0.6% bump in spending. A small price to pay for stabilizing Europe’s central authority. In the lingo of German politics: a Democracy Tax.And since no one in Brussels or Berlin seems to care about the Maastricht debt rules anymore, the path is clear for another round of debt-financed Euro-socialism.Merz, together with von der Leyen and French President Emmanuel Macron, is united in the belief that consolidating power within Brussels is the only way to keep Europe geopolitically relevant.

Merz is increasingly revealing himself as a committed central planner. With him, there will be no market-based reset – no return to constitutional economics. The German government’s current budget plan shows that Berlin is on board. The crisis will be “managed” through massive borrowing and state-directed investment of fictitious capital. To resolve Brussels’ budget dilemma, we can expect a two-pronged solution: new EU taxes and increased national contributions. I’ll go ahead and predict what’s coming: in the next few months, we will see a coordinated push to eliminate the veto rights of individual EU member states in budget negotiations.

Let Viktor Orbán stomp his feet in Budapest all he wants – the advance of European-style socialism won’t be stopped by ox or donkey. One imagines CDU members quietly humming The Internationale under their breath. Once that veto hurdle is cleared, national debts could be pooled under the umbrella of the EU Commission, monetized via the European Central Bank, and camouflaged by a digital Euro – all in an effort to halt the economic hemorrhaging of the Eurozone. The Ukraine conflict serves as the ideal justification for this massive wave of public credit creation.

Read more …

“..seem destined to diverge ever more sharply. By 2023, US GDP per capita had climbed to $82,770, exactly double the EU’s $41,420..”

Europe Is Stuck in a Disastrous, Failing Marxist Trap (GI)

In a world where shifting economic forces are redrawing the global balance of power, the trajectories of the United States and the European Union over the coming decade (2025-2035) seem destined to diverge ever more sharply. By 2023, US GDP per capita had climbed to $82,770, exactly double the EU’s $41,420. America’s lead rested on average annual real GDP growth of 2.2% between 2010 and 2023; productivity gains of roughly 14%, and research-and-development spending equal to 3.4% of GDP. Add to that a remarkably flexible labor market, modest demographic growth (0.5% per year) and, since 2019, energy self-sufficiency. The EU tells a different story: average annual real GDP growth of barely 1.3%, a mere 7% rise in hourly productivity, a working-age population that shrinks by about one million a year, and an energy-dependence rate still hovering around 58%.

“Ah, but….” retort the socialists of every political hue — and in Europe they exist in every political party — “you cite average income, not median income.” Median income, the point at which 50% earn less and 50% earn more, is indeed lower than the mean in the United States. Inequality is more pronounced in the US than in Europe. Yet their reply, presented as though it settled the debate, is itself part of Europe’s predicament. In Europe, inequality is generally treated as an evil, a moral abomination; therefore material equality, even if it means, as in the former Soviet Union, that no one (except senior party members) has anything, is elevated to the status of an ideal good. At 17, as first-year law student, I had the opportunity to interview André Molitor, former chief of staff to King Baudouin of Belgium. Molitor, a gracious left-wing Catholic, confided that the single thing he truly despised was inequality; his dream was for “fewer rich and fewer poor.”

True material equality is a myth. The “real equality” championed by communists and socialists of every stripe has simply never existed. Hand every European €100,000 today, and by tomorrow there would already be a handful of tycoons — perhaps even an Elon Musk or two — alongside those who squandered everything, with the vast majority scattered somewhere in between. Equality, as a moral value, has served largely as a pretext for socialism — take from Peter and give to Paul — all while funding a sprawling, parasitic apparatus of “redistribution” that provides little opportunity or incentive to succeed or to keep what one has earned. Europe’s elevation of material equality may well be its most disastrous bequest to itself. With ironclad consistency, the continent advances toward greater equality — in increasing misery and squalor.

The baseline projection for 2035 at current growth rates shows that if current trajectories persist — 2% annual growth in the United States versus 1% in Europe — the average American income will exceed $100,000 by 2035, while Europe’s will remain around $50,000. Carriage drivers in New York’s Central Park or dog-walkers in Beverly Hills will soon earn more than French physicians and German engineers — not metaphorically, but in cold cash. Even taking into account the differences in inflation and purchasing power between Europe and the US — the cost of living is lower in Europe — the transatlantic gap is immense and growing.

Under alternative scenarios — a European technological renaissance, or conversely a severe geopolitical shock for the United States, the ratio rarely falls below 2:1. America’s productivity growth, energy production and R&D investment remain decisive. Plainly stated: absent a political sea-change, Europe is on a path of swift decline, notwithstanding genuine strengths such as longer life expectancy. Per-capita GDP — imperfect yet inescapable — crystallizes a transatlantic chasm. Europe is becoming to the USA what Greece was to Rome: a charming open-air museum. Is it inevitable? Hauling Europe out of the mire of socialism, in all its guises, would demand two transformations so radical they verge on the unimaginable.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Power bill


Optimus

Scott

Bean
https://twitter.com/HJB_News__/status/1948384161107972544

Balance impossibile

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Jul 212025
 


Saul Leiter Harlem 1960

 

Tulsi Gabbard To Release More Obama Russiagate Files (ZH)
DNI Gabbard on Obama’s Effort to ‘Subvert the American People’s Will’ (Hoge)
Director Gabbard Explains Her Motive (CTH)
Tulsi Gabbard Releases Background Information of Trump-Russia Op (CTH)
Tulsi Gabbard Expands Power of DNI Office – Now Comes the Counter Attack (CTH)
Trump Endorses Gabbard’s ‘Russiagate’ Coup Claims (RT)
Kremlin Rules Out Imminent Putin-Trump Meeting (RT)
Russiagate Only Tip pf Iceberg In Western Demonization of Russia (RT)
EU Working Hard To Portray Russia As ‘Devil Incarnate’ – Kremlin (RT)
Putin Did Better Job Than Any German Leader – Tucker Carlson (RT)
Full Assault On The Media Machine: Trump Slashes USAID (Kolbe)
Judge Orders Trump Admin To Restore Funding To US Propaganda Outlet (RT)
Ukraine Unlikely To Join EU In The Near Term – Merz (RT)
German General Urges Ukraine To Strike Russian Airfields (RT)
France Wants To Nuke Holidays To Fund A Fantasy War With Russia (Marsden)
Europe’s Online Censorship Laws Could Restrict Americans Too (ET)
EU Hatching Secret Electric Car Plan – Bild (RT)
Banning Alternative für Deutschland: A Nightmare Scenario (Eugyppius)

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/Real_RobN/status/1946748695921496150

Nunes

Flynn

farage
https://twitter.com/newstart_2024/status/1946572812350787858

Benz Brazil
https://twitter.com/Real_RobN/status/1946696591173390593

Bibi


https://twitter.com/DD_Geopolitics/status/1946966643382591578

Sachs

 

 

 

 

Inevitably, a lot of Tulsi and Obamagate today. Watched some CNN yesterday, and it hasn’t dawned there yet. It will. Much of our coverage here comes from Sundance, at Conservative Tree House/The Last Refuge, who has ben focusing on Tulsi and her DNI post for a long time, because he saw the potential. The Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) was established years ago to bring info from agencies such as FBI AND CIA together, but these agencies have protected their “turf” of course. Tulsi is the first to put ODNI in a position where it oversees the other intel offices, instead of being some sort of subsidiary to them. Plus, obviously, they were all involved in Obamagate. They were integal parts of the treasonous conspiracy.

Tulsi Gabbard To Release More Obama Russiagate Files (ZH)

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard says she’ll release more information next week to follow up on her bombshell declassification of documents that show “overwhelming evidence” of the Obama administration laid the groundwork for the years-long Trump-Russia collusion investigation after President Trump won the 2016 election. “We will be releasing more detailed information about how exactly this took place, and the extent to which this information was sought to be hidden from the American people, hidden from officials who would be in a position to do something about it,” Gabbard told Fox News’ Maria Bartiromo. “Accountability is essential for the future of our country, for the American people to have any sense of trust in the integrity of our democratic republic.”

“Accountability, action, prosecution, indictments for those who are responsible for trying to steal our democracy is essential for us to make sure that this never happens to our country again,” Gabbard continued. Gabbard told host Maria Bartiromo; “I really cannot fathom” how special counsels Robert Mueller and John Durham missed evidence of this “years-long coup against President Trump.” “There is no rational or logical explanation for why they failed,” she said, adding “The only logical conclusion that I can draw in this … is that there was direct intent to cover up the truth about what occurred and who was responsible and the broad network of how this seditious conspiracy was concocted and who exactly was responsible for carrying it out.”

Among other things, Gabbard’s team unearthed a Sept. 12, 2016 intelligence community assessment that “foreign adversaries do not have and will probably not obtain the capabilities to successfully execute widespread and undetected cyber attacks” on election systems. At the time, Russia was being accused of setting up troll farms and hacking the DNC email servers (Seth who?). And of course, once legitimized by the Obama administration, a steady stream of leaks suggesting that Russia was behind Trump’s 2016 victory started appearing in the Washington Post and other outlets in “sweeping and systemic fashion.”

Mueller, of course, found ‘insufficient evidence’ that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia, while Durham – appointed by Bill Barr (son of the guy who hired Jeffrey Epstein for a teaching job & then oversaw Epstein’s death as AG) – accomplished nothing more than a strongly worded letter about the FBI’s handling of the Trump-Russia probe. “I don’t know what excuse there is for those who supposedly investigated this previously, whether it was Durham or others, that they were not able to put together the dots and ultimately show the truth to the American people,” said Gabbard, who then stressed that AG Pam Bondi and FBI Director Kash Patel will need to now gather up evidence and decide whether to press charges. (lol. lmao even)

“There must be indictments of those responsible, no matter how powerful they are and were at that time, no matter who was involved in creating this treasonous conspiracy against the American people. They all must be held accountable,” Gabbard continued. “For the American people to have any sense of trust in the integrity of our democratic republic, accountability, action, prosecution, [and] indictments for those who are responsible for trying to steal our democracy is essential for us to make sure that this never happens to our country again.”

Jeffrey Who?

Read more …

“..it’s still stunning to hear her directly accuse former President Obama of what some would call treason..”

DNI Gabbard on Obama’s Effort to ‘Subvert the American People’s Will’ (Hoge)

We’ve been reading about it for years, listened to countless segments on cable news and talk radio, and yet in a way, some people have almost become inured to it. Nothing will ever happen, they say. No one will ever be held to account. I’m talking about the Deep State’s multi-year effort to take down Donald Trump, of course. As we reported, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard dropped bombshell claims Friday and issued a criminal referral to the Department of Justice, saying that former president Barack Obama and miscreants in his intelligence circle tried to subvert the will of the American people and in effect stage a coup in 2016 and beyond. The DNI appeared on Fox News’ “Hannity” on Friday night, and although some of what she had to say is similar to her Friday statement which our Susie Moore reported on, it’s still stunning to hear her directly accuse former President Obama of what some would call treason:

“This is such an important issue, and I just want to start by saying that this is an issue that is important to every single one of us as Americans. This is not a partisan issue. It has to do with the integrity and the strength of our Democratic Republic, and it [her report] lays out this over 100 documents that you’re referencing that I released—declassified and released—spells out in great detail exactly what happens when you have some of the most powerful people in our country, directly, leading at the helm, President Obama and his senior most national security cabinet, James Comey, John Brennan, James Clapper, and Susan Rice and others, essentially making a very intentional decision to create this manufactured politicized piece of intelligence with the objective of subverting the will of the American people…”

https://twitter.com/SaveUSAKitty/status/1946385400664084717?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1946385400664084717%7Ctwgr%5E9750053197695824b9a9850d5fac65fd53735614%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fredstate.com%2Fbobhoge%2F2025%2F07%2F20%2Fdni-gabbard-details-jaw-dopping-info-detailing-obamas-effort-to-subvert-the-american-peoples-will-n2191863

Gabbard’s boss Donald Trump has been appreciative of her efforts:

In another post on Truth Social, the president wrote, “Congratulations to Tulsi Gabbard. Keep it coming!!!” In a Saturday appearance on “Fox and Friends,” she called the efforts a “treasonous conspiracy.” In her “Hannity” segment, meanwhile, she flat-out accused Obama and Co. of attempting what was essentially a coup: “Their goal was to essentially not accept the decision of the American people, and to use this manufactured politicized intelligence as a means to enact what would become essentially a years-long coup against President Trump.”She went to describe how Obama told his intelligence folks to jump, and they said, “How high?”

“Then DNI James Clapper took the lead on what President Obama wanted done, and which was essentially create a document that tells us not if, but how Russia interfered with the election. President Obama delivered the conclusion that he wanted the Intelligence Community to reach, and directed them to find and essentially create and manufacture the intelligence to support the conclusion that President Obama wanted to deliver to the American people.” Once they reached their desired conclusion, the Deep State and their lackeys in the media leapt into action, she said, and the rest is history (impeachments, special counsel reports, FISA warrants, increased tensions with Russia… the list goes on). Asked if she thought there were prosecutable crimes in evidence here, Gabbard had a one-word answer. “Yes.” But she did elaborate: “I’m referring all of these documents that we have that we have found and uncovered, referring them to the Department of Justice for further investigation, accountability and action, not just investigation, but action.

Accountability has to take place. The American people’s ability to have faith and trust in the integrity of our Democratic Republic is literally what’s at stake, and therefore the future of our ability to exist as the country that we know it.” Even after all this time, it’s still amazing to me that this went on in our own country—and that many who rely on the nation’s corrupt media for their information are hearing about it for the first time. The “Hannity” clip is a little over eight minutes, but I encourage you to listen to the whole thing and soak in what Tulsi has to say. Questions remain: Will Obama respond? Will Adam Schiff suddenly appear with the Russia-collusion evidence he’s been promising for so many years now? What are the DOJ’s next steps? Things are likely to get very interesting indeed in the months ahead.

Read more …

“Many in Washington DC do not like Tulsi Gabbard for exactly the reasons she explains in this interview. Her motives to release all the information are the opposite of former AG Bill Barr who wanted to see it remain hidden.”

Director Gabbard Explains Her Motive (CTH)

Tulsi Gabbard does an excellent job explaining exactly why the information about who constructed the Trump-Russia collusion narrative needs to be in the spotlight. In this interview DNI Tulsi Gabbard outlines how damaging it is to our constitutional republic when we allow systemic corruption to go unaddressed. Many in Washington DC do not like Tulsi Gabbard for exactly the reasons she explains in this interview. Her motives to release all the information are the opposite of former AG Bill Barr who wanted to see it remain hidden. Bound by no other agenda, DNI Tulsi Gabbard is doing something very few people have the fortitude to continue doing. Listen carefully to her words because they have been backed up by action. What people do speaks so loudly, often we cannot hear a word they are saying. In this example, her words and actions are exactly the same. Let’s hope Attorney General Pam Bondi is influenced by Tulsi Gabbard.

Read more …

“Tulsi Gabbard is not under any restriction on her review. That’s the difference. Where Durham was not permitted to go, DNI Tulsi Gabbard is going. Her release of the information is specifically because she is empowered to look at this information and release it..”

Tulsi Gabbard Releases Background Information of Trump-Russia Op (CTH)

The Trump-Russia collusion story was always a targeted false smear intended to generate a special counsel and hamstring the surprising winner from the 2016 election, Donald Trump. The Russia-Collusion narrative was always an Intelligence Community op against Donald TRump. Yesterday, Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard released a tranche of background information, [114 pages of information], showing how the Obama administration intentionally and with great purpose fabricated the entire story. Staying focused on the trail of evidence held deep within the ODNI office, is why Tulsi Gabbard has been targeted for removal over the past several weeks. Kudos to Tulsi Gabbard for staying on mission – Great job.

What the evidence shows is a focused targeting operation intended to fabricate a false premise by the United States Intelligence Community, through the Office of former DNI James Clapper. The op was green-lighted by Barack Obama as a way to impede the agenda of incoming President Donald Trump. All three branches of government collaborated on the scheme. WASHINGTON, D.C. – On Friday, Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Tulsi Gabbard revealed overwhelming evidence that demonstrates how, after President Trump won the 2016 election against Hillary Clinton, President Obama and his national security cabinet members manufactured and politicized intelligence to lay the groundwork for what was essentially a years-long coup against President Trump.

• In the months leading up to the November 2016 election, the Intelligence Community (IC) consistently assessed that Russia is “probably not trying … to influence the election by using cyber means.”
• On December 7, 2016, after the election, talking points were prepared for DNI James Clapper stating, “Foreign adversaries did not use cyberattacks on election infrastructure to alter the US Presidential election outcome.”
• On December 9, 2016, President Obama’s White House gathered top National Security Council Principals for a meeting that included James Clapper, John Brennan, Susan Rice, John Kerry, Loretta Lynch, Andrew McCabe and others, to discuss Russia.
• After the meeting, DNI Clapper’s Executive Assistant sent an email to IC leaders tasking them with creating a new IC assessment “per the President’s request” that details the “tools Moscow used and actions it took to influence the 2016 election.” It went on to say, “ODNI will lead this effort with participation from CIA, FBI, NSA, and DHS.”
• Obama officials leaked false statements to media outlets, including The Washington Post, claiming, “Russia has attempted through cyber means to interfere in, if not actively influence, the outcome of an election.”
• On January 6, 2017, a new Intelligence Community Assessment was released that directly contradicted the IC assessments that were made throughout the previous six months.

After months of investigation into this matter, the facts reveal this new assessment was based on information that was known by those involved to be manufactured i.e. the Steele Dossier or deemed as not credible. This was politicized intelligence that was used as the basis for countless smears seeking to delegitimize President Trump’s victory, the years-long Mueller investigation, two Congressional impeachments, high level officials being investigated, arrested, and thrown in jail, heightened US-Russia tensions, and more. “The issue I am raising is not a partisan issue. It is one that concerns every American. The information we are releasing today clearly shows there was a treasonous conspiracy in 2016 committed by officials at the highest level of our government.

Their goal was to subvert the will of the American people and enact what was essentially a years-long coup with the objective of trying to usurp the President from fulfilling the mandate bestowed upon him by the American people,” said DNI Tulsi Gabbard. “Their egregious abuse of power and blatant rejection of our Constitution threatens the very foundation and integrity of our democratic republic. No matter how powerful, every person involved in this conspiracy must be investigated and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, to ensure nothing like this ever happens again. The American people’s faith and trust in our democratic republic and therefore the future of our nation depends on it. As such, I am providing all documents to the Department of Justice to deliver the accountability that President Trump, his family, and the American people deserve.”

Is there new information within the release? Yes and No. All of the outlined activity, the release of the emails and communication within the scheme team, is not new. However, the new part is the evidence. The facts now public to support all previous claims made here and by others, this time with greater detail that cannot be refuted. If you have been reading here for a while THE DOCUMENTS tell a story that is well known. We were able to piece this together even without knowing how the corrupt actors were talking to each other about their specific roles, responsibilities and motives. The documents provided by Tulsi Gabbard are the evidence of a serious coup against incoming President Trump by actors within government. The end of their IC effort culminated in the Robert Mueller investigation. Tulsi is providing the path to the avatar Mueller represented and all of the actors who participated with him.

Some will ask why John Durham never found this information, and/or shared it publicly. The answer to that question is not hard to understand. John Durham was NEVER allowed to look at the government actors in the Trump-Russia narrative. Durham was not allowed to look at how the U.S. Intelligence Community participated. Durham was ham-strung from the outset of his review and investigation, by Attorney General Bill Barr. Bill Barr never let John Durham focus on the govt side of the Trump-Russia collusion story. Tulsi Gabbard is not under any restriction on her review. That’s the difference. Where Durham was not permitted to go, DNI Tulsi Gabbard is going. Her release of the information is specifically because she is empowered to look at this information and release it. Special Counsel John Durham never had that authority. Gabbard provides a top cover memo on Page #67 that highlights who were the “Principal” actors in the scheme: This list of names is key.

Many of them will be familiar to you from all of the research we have poured into the Trump-Russia conspiracy. I would draw attention to the “Justice” participants. Main Justice Attorney General Loretta Lynch and DOJ-NSD head Mary McCord. Again, confirmation that Mary McCord was one of the key participants. McCord is still one of the Lawfare leads against Trump with her friend, Norm Eisen. Interestingly, Deputy AG Sally Yates was not a participant. Instead it was left to AG Loretta Lynch and more importantly Mary McCord. I would also draw attention to the “Chair” of the organization, Susan Rice. This memo released by DNI Gabbard outlining Rice’s participation as Principal and Chair of the op, in combination with her infamous Jan 5, 2017, memo, puts context to Rice’s legal exposure.


Why do I say legal exposure, because Susan Rice is on record saying she was not a participant and never heard of the FBI investigation underpinning the Trump-Russia collusion narrative. Obviously everything above is now a provable lie. Look at that highlighted box from Susan Rice’s lawyer, Kathryn Ruemmler, and remember in his March 20, 2017, testimony Comey said, “The White House was informed through the National Security Council,” (the NSC).FBI Director James Comey was protecting himself against the spygate surveillance of Trump, by leveraging his prior notification to the White House. Comey was signaling, ‘you cant get me for spying on Trump without getting Susan Rice and Barack Obama’, who knew about it.

Does the January 20, 2017, Susan Rice memo look different now? I would also draw attention to the “FBI” lead on the Trump-Russia collusion meeting, former Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe. McCabe was entrenched in Crossfire Hurricane, and it makes sense for him to lead the Trump-Russia collusion story as a cover for the prior fraudulent investigation.Factually, everyone listed in that participation memo for their various agencies (silos) is a co-conspirator in the scheme; an intelligence operation to manufacture a false premise, a Trump-Russia collusion story.Tulsi Gabbard deserves appreciation for her efforts on releasing these background documents. However, information without accountability should not be the objective. Attorney General Pam Bondi needs to put some teeth into these findings.

Read more …

“..the DNI *CAN BE* deployed like a super strong cross-silo inspector general’s office. Force the other IC silos to comply with the demands of the DNI. This has never been done. But the DNI has this unique power..”

Tulsi Gabbard Expands Power of DNI Office – Now Comes the Counter Attack (CTH)

Many people are questioning why Tulsi Gabbard is able to discover and expose activity by the Obama administration and the Intelligence Community, yet prior office holders did not. Last year, when asked for approaches that could assist a Trump Term-2, I outlined the possibilities for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI). What we are seeing today is running in direct parallel to that original outline. As our conversation expands, and we await the counter attack against her, perhaps it is worth a revisit. I will explain the predictable counter attack at the end.

August, 2024 – The ODNI was created as an outcome of the 9-11 Commission recommendations. In the era shortly after 9/11, the DC national security apparatus was constructed to preserve continuity of government and simultaneously view all Americans as potential threats. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) were created specifically for this purpose. Washington DC created the modern national security apparatus immediately and hurriedly after 9/11/01. DHS came along in 2002, and within the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 the ODNI was formed. When Barack Obama and Eric Holder arrived a few years later, those newly formed institutions were viewed as opportunities to create a very specific national security apparatus that would focus almost exclusively against their political opposition.

Here is the weird part. The ODNI was formed in 2004, with the intent for the office to be the pivot point of a national security radar. The DNI was intended to provide information to domestic agencies about foreign terror networks that would prevent something like 9-11 from happening again. However, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence has never, not for one day, operated on this intent. This is why they are such a critical position from my perspective. The office was new, not established yet as a functioning silo, when Barack Obama and Eric Holder arrived in 2009. They quickly dispatched an idiot, James Clapper, into the operation so they could weaponize around the offices’ fulcrum point. Prior to the DNI office existing, the CIA radar would sweep externally and then report to the Office of the President.

The DNI was intended to take external radar sweep (CIA) and make it a full 360° circle, adding a sweep inside the USA that would be handled by the Dept of Homeland Security. The DHS sweep and the CIA sweep would then be combined into a central collection hub called the ODNI. Everyone with responsibility for “national security” could access the ODNI material. Essentially and presumably, post 9-11 nothing like jihadists practicing to fly airplanes would be missed again; at least that was the intent. The weird part is that because the DNI was immediately weaponized, the office has never functioned to the purpose of its intent. No one truly knows what the office possibilities consist of, because no one has ever seen anyone try to functionally control the hub. If you think I’m joking about the intent of Obama and John Brennan using the DNI, watch this video. This is before Brennan became CIA Director; this is when Brennan was helping Barack Obama put the pillars into place.

For the intents of this outline, the takeaway is how the DNI office has never been used for good. In a strategic way, that can be used to our advantage if you are talking about leveraging silos against each other. Example: The DNI can assemble material from any silo. Meaning the DNI can reach into any IC silo and extract anything they want. Under the original authorities given to the DNI, this authority exists. So, let’s spread the wings on this office and do exactly what it is permitted to do, only this time extract for the purpose of showing the President what is happening in every silo. In essence, the DNI *CAN BE* deployed like a super strong cross-silo inspector general’s office. Force the other IC silos to comply with the demands of the DNI. This has never been done. But the DNI has this unique power.

The DNI can make the FBI, DOJ, DOJ-NSD, DoD, DoS and CIA provide anything and everything they demand. Instead of the other silos using blocks and threats against the office of the President, use the authority of the DNI to get them without confrontation. Then use the DNI to declassify the documents (if requested by POTUS), instead of the originating silo. Can you see how the DNI office can be repurposed to be a seriously strong weapon in the toolbox of the President, against the schemes of those inside the various IC silos? The DNI becomes much more important than the CIA Director, NSA Director, FBI Director, Attorney General, etc, because the DNI can just show up and say, “give me this.” That’s the whole functional purpose of the DNI office that has never been exerted; let’s flippin’ use it.

Let’s use the office of the DNI as the central information hub that takes information from inside the corrupt silos, then provides that information to the President who puts sunlight upon it. Each corrupt silo penetrated with disinfectant. This could begin a process to pull down the shadow operations and let the American public see what has been happening inside our IC apparatus. To accomplish this approach, the National Security Advisor to the President (NSA), would be the person who tells the DNI exactly what they are looking for.

Read more …

“Trump hailed Gabbard and her team as “fantastic on prosecuting Obama and the ‘thugs’ who have just been unequivocally exposed on highest level Election Fraud.”

Trump Endorses Gabbard’s ‘Russiagate’ Coup Claims (RT)

US President Donald Trump has praised National Intelligence Director Tulsi Gabbard for “exposing” a coup plot against him by the administration of former President Barack Obama. On Friday, Gabbard unveiled over 100 pages of newly declassified documents detailing what she described as a coordinated effort by senior Obama-era officials – spearheaded by Obama himself – to politicize intelligence and falsely accuse Trump of colluding with Russia to win the 2016 election. The operation led to the launch of the years-long Trump-Russia collusion probe known as ‘Russiagate,’ which Gabbard described as “a years-long coup against [Trump].” In a Truth Social post on Saturday, Trump hailed Gabbard and her team as “fantastic on prosecuting Obama and the ‘thugs’ who have just been unequivocally exposed on highest level Election Fraud.”

Trump, who has long rejected allegations of Russian ties as fake and unproven, congratulated Gabbard and urged her to “keep it coming!!!” Gabbard’s disclosures include documents indicating Obama ordered officials to discard prior intelligence assessments that found no evidence of Russian involvement in Trump’s campaign or victory and replace them with new claims blaming Russia that were based on discredited sources and fabricated data. She said these false claims were then leaked to the media. The result, she argued, led to the two-year probe by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, which found evidence of Russian interference but did not establish a criminal conspiracy between Trump’s team and Moscow, as well as Trump’s impeachments, indictments, and escalating tensions with Russia.

White House deputy press secretary and presidential aide Harrison Fields said on Fox News the documents were the “predicate” for a decade of attacks on Trump. He labeled the Obama presidency “the most corrupt we’ve ever seen” and criticized the mainstream media for pushing the Russiagate story. Fields noted that Gabbard’s announcement coincides with an ongoing probe into the Russiagate hoax but declined to elaborate. The documents name several officials Gabbard alleges participated in the “conspiracy,” and she vowed to hand all evidence to the Justice Department, warning that “no matter how powerful, every person involved… must be investigated and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.”

Read more …

“..it is possible, and in time it will definitely happen. It is essential.”

Trump will have to profoundly apologize to Putin for 10 years of fake US accusations.

Kremlin Rules Out Imminent Putin-Trump Meeting (RT)

A face-to-face meeting between Russian President Vladimir Putin and his US counterpart, Donald Trump, will definitely happen, but the time has not yet come, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said. The Times reported earlier this week that a trilateral meeting between Putin, Trump, and Chinese President Xi Jinping could take place in September during a military parade in Beijing, marking the 80th anniversary of victory over imperial Japan in World War II. The Russian president has already confirmed that he will attend. The Kremlin, however, said it has no knowledge of a potential meeting between the leaders. Speaking about potential talks between Putin and Trump in a clip from an interview with journalist Pavel Zarubin released on Sunday, Peskov said, “it is possible, and in time it will definitely happen. It is essential.”

A meeting might be necessary “for signing some major agreements that will be reached over time after a huge amount of work has been done. But this time has not yet come, this work still needs to be done,” he stated. The two leaders have talked on the phone several times in recent months, mainly focusing on ways to resolve the Ukraine conflict, with Trump saying earlier this month that he is “unhappy” and “disappointed” in Putin. Regarding Trump’s comments about Putin, Peskov said, “everybody has already gotten used to his rather tough and straightforward rhetoric. At the same time, he confirms his intentions to continue to do everything possible to facilitate a peaceful settlement” between Russia and Ukraine.

“In fact, President Putin has repeatedly spoken about his desire to switch the Ukrainian settlement onto a peaceful path as quickly as possible. This is a long process; it requires effort and it is not easy, and apparently in Washington there is an increasing understanding of this.” The Kremlin has said the third round of Russia-Ukraine negotiations will likely take place in Istanbul, though a date has not yet been set.

Read more …

“..to “fully comprehend” Russiagate, it must be viewed as only a small part of a broader Western campaign to demonize Russia, “that goes decades back.”

Russiagate Only Tip of Iceberg In Western Demonization of Russia (RT)

US National Intelligence Director Tulsi Gabbard’s revelations about the role of former President Barack Obama’s administration in the Russiagate scandal are “shocking,” but they expose only the surface of a broader Western anti-Russia campaign, Professor Oliver Boyd-Barrett has told RT. On Friday, Gabbard released newly declassified documents describing a coordinated effort by senior Obama-era officials – led by Obama himself – to falsely accuse Donald Trump of colluding with Russia during the 2016 election. The documents indicate that Obama ordered officials to discard intelligence assessments that found no Russian involvement in Trump’s campaign and replace them with claims blaming Moscow based on fabricated data.

The scandal led to the years-long Trump-Russia probe known as ‘Russiagate.’ “This is an extraordinary moment, that the head of intelligence in the US has made such a bold, in some ways shocking, statement of the truth,” Boyd-Barrett, a professor at Bowling Green State University and author of an in-depth study of Russiagate, said on Saturday. He noted the moment was especially striking as Gabbard called for prosecution of those involved in what she described as a “coup” attempt. Boyd-Barrett, however, emphasized that to “fully comprehend” Russiagate, it must be viewed as only a small part of a broader Western campaign to demonize Russia, “that goes decades back.”

“It’s part of a much deeper agenda – we’re talking Russia narrative… the broader context of an anti-Russian campaign that was stoked artificially around the time of the late 90s when the West had so clearly decided that NATO was going to move eastwards regardless of whatever anyone in Russia or anyone in the US had to say,” he said. He also warned against reducing Russiagate to a personal political ploy, noting that blaming it solely on Obama or Hillary Clinton’s election anxiety is “too simple an explanation.” Moscow has repeatedly denied interfering in the US electoral process.

Read more …

Brussels is no fan of Tulsi.

EU Working Hard To Portray Russia As ‘Devil Incarnate’ – Kremlin (RT)

The EU is demonizing Russia in order to keep the Ukraine conflict running as Brussels still has not given up hope of suppressing Moscow, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said. In May, the EU adopted the €150 billion Security Action for Europe (SAFE) instrument to support members that are willing to invest in defense. The move came as part of a larger military buildup drive that began in the bloc after the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022 with the goal of countering what it perceives as the ‘Russian threat’. Moscow has dismissed claims that it intends to attack NATO countries as “nonsense,” saying that Western politicians are seeking to scare their populations to justify increased military spending.

In an interview with journalist Pavel Zarubin released on Sunday, Peskov said the EU “is creating an enemy for itself, doing focused, professional work both in their own society and abroad in order to portray Russia as the devil incarnate… in order to ensure the continuation of the conflict, in order to suppress Russia.” The Kremlin spokesman added that there are discussions underway in the EU “about who will be paying for the feast.” Earlier this week, several EU countries rejected a plan proposed by US President Donald Trump for European NATO member states to buy American weapons for Ukraine. “Thank God the anti-Russian and militaristic ecstasy does not have universal backing” in the bloc, Peskov said.

Moscow has warned against supplying Western weapons to Ukraine, arguing that they only prolong the conflict and increase the risk of a direct clash between Russia and NATO. In the interview, Peskov noted that Russian President Vladimir Putin “has repeatedly spoken about his desire to bring the Ukrainian settlement on to a peaceful path as quickly as possible.” Russia has stated that it is ready to negotiate peace with Ukraine, though it has accused Kiev and its Western backers of not being interested in finding a long-term solution that addresses the root causes of the conflict.

Read more …

“Your country is a mess because your leaders suck..”

Putin Did Better Job Than Any German Leader – Tucker Carlson (RT)

The German people should be angry at their own government that ruined their country rather than at Russian President Vladimir Putin, US journalist Tucker Carlson has told the Berlin-based newspaper Bild. A large portion of the two hour interview released on Saturday was devoted to Carlson’s interview with Putin from February 2024. During the exchange, the US journalist repeatedly curbed Bild deputy editor-in-chief Paul Ronzheimer’s attempts to condemn the Russian leader over the Ukraine conflict. After Ronzheimer referred to Putin as a “criminal,” Carlson replied: “I am not defending Putin, who I think has done a great job for Russia. Much better job than any German leader. That is for sure.”

“Your country is going down, Russia is going up. You should be mad at your own leaders. You are mad at Putin instead,” he argued. According to Carlson, Angela Merkel – who served as German chancellor from 2005 to 2021 – was far more deserving of being branded a “criminal” because “she wrecked your country through mass migration… It will not recover in your lifetime or mine.” Carlson suggested that the current authorities in Berlin are attacking Putin and Russia in order to distract the public from migration and economic problems in Germany, which is expected to end 2025 in recession for the third year in a row. Your country is a mess because your leaders suck. That is the fact. You are mad about that. So, they take your anger and they are like: ‘Oh no, it is Putin’s fault. It is Putin’s fault.’ Ok, got it,” he said.

Earlier this month, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said that Germany was becoming “dangerous again” for Russia, after German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius stated that Bundeswehr troops must be prepared to “kill” Russian soldiers if necessary. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said earlier that by supporting Kiev in the conflict with Moscow “Germany is sliding down the same slippery slope it already followed a couple of times in the last century – down toward its own collapse,” referring to the defeats suffered by the country in the First and Second World Wars.

Read more …

“Driven by the spirit of liberty, future citizens will demand the return of what defines sovereign individuals: the right to property, to free expression, to personal autonomy. ”

“Trump’s government is also dismantling its overseas media empire. That includes defunding over 1,000 journalism-related NGOs worldwide that previously received USAID support. In the U.S. alone, up to 19,500 USAID employees and contractors could lose their job..”

Full Assault On The Media Machine: Trump Slashes USAID (Kolbe)

After fierce internal disputes and the resignation of Elon Musk as a government advisor, the United States has now entered a new phase of fiscal consolidation. On Friday, the House of Representatives cleared the way for the first major round of budget cuts. And it’s a heavy hitter. If you believe the steady drumbeat of European media coverage, the U.S. is on the verge of sovereign default. At first glance, the numbers do indeed resemble a fiscal horror show: After the devastating Biden years, federal debt has ballooned to 120 percent of GDP. The current deficit stands at a glaring 6.5 percent. In the coming months, $9 billion in outstanding debt must be refinanced—Washington has little room to maneuver. What’s routinely omitted in media coverage, however, is the fact that the U.S. remains the issuer of the world’s reserve currency, and can, if necessary, print its way out of the mess.

Europe’s hope for a premature American collapse—as both a justification for its own policy failures and a welcome distraction—will likely end in bitter disappointment. At first glance, it might seem odd that President Trump prioritized sweeping tax cuts over budget discipline. But look more closely, and the move reveals itself as part of a deliberate offensive strategy. In Trump’s America, the motto is: green light for the private sector first, then clean house in the bureaucratic stables. Anyone seriously doubting that Americans are capable of implementing fiscal cuts has not yet grasped the political force of the Trump administration. Even Elon Musk—the founder of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), created to deepen budget reform efforts—lost patience with the slow grind of bureaucracy and quit in frustration. But in the bigger picture, that’s a mere footnote.

Because now, it gets serious. Building on DOGE’s groundwork, the first multi-billion-dollar rescission package is now being deployed: NPR reports that $9.4 billion in spending will be slashed with the stroke of a pen. Trump’s first real punch in the fight over federal expenditures goes straight to the heart of the left’s media apparatus—USAID. Though nominally a humanitarian agency funding foreign aid projects, USAID has functioned in practice as a massive subsidy engine for the progressive media ecosystem operating worldwide. That era now appears to be over. This propaganda leviathan stretched its tentacles across the globe, reinforcing and exporting the globalist green-left agenda that Europeans know as the Green Deal, the “green transformation,” or the politics of open borders.

Like in Europe, paternalistic structures have gradually taken hold in America—but better camouflaged, given the poor reputation of state control in the land of liberty. Media outlets bankrolled by USAID opened the floodgates to government messaging, constructing a vast machine to manipulate public opinion. How else could the American public be kept in the dark for four years about Joe Biden’s mental decline? Such a sustained deception requires close coordination between political and media actors, with the latter willingly co-opted into state control. That Trump is starting his fiscal consolidation by targeting the beating heart of this media leviathan is no coincidence. Trump 2.0 is not a mere replay of 2016. Inside the White House, they’ve got the enemy and its structures clearly in their sights.

The intensity of the trade battles with Brussels shows Trump has identified the core of green-socialist globalism exactly where many suspected: Brussels, London, and Davos. And Trump appeals to those yearning for freedom, for open markets—including in the media—with steadfast resolve. With the stroke of his pen, The Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB)—America’s equivalent of ARD and ZDF—has been stripped of its $1.1 billion in federal funding. The blow to PBS and NPR is severe. A historic day for freedom of speech—and a precedent Germany can only dream of. In Germany, a self-absorbed, taxpayer-funded media aristocracy holds the reins—merged with political power into a unified cartel of opinion. In contrast, in the U.S., a single signature is enough to start dismantling media manipulation, climate-hysteria weather maps, and perverse woke pedagogy—as if the madness had never happened.

Future generations will ask how it was possible that taxpayers funded such a cynical, parasitic opposition with their own money—day after day—broadcast into their homes, where they were lectured with hypermoralistic fervor. But those same generations will also hold in their hands a manual of libertarian reform—a playbook for liberation from neo-feudal control. In the offices of the statists and central planners—in Brussels, Paris, and Berlin—this development is being watched with alarm. Once the message of Milei’s success in Argentina or Trump’s reforms in the U.S. spreads, it will trigger a wave of uncomfortable questions. Driven by the spirit of liberty, future citizens will demand the return of what defines sovereign individuals: the right to property, to free expression, to personal autonomy.

They will demand a lean state—a mere administrator of essentials—that neither educates nor intrudes upon individual lives. That’s the dream. But on the road to the Isles of the Blessed, hard work lies ahead. Budget reform will require a lumberjack’s resolve. And the axe is already swinging in the White House. The cuts don’t stop at domestic public media. Trump’s government is also dismantling its overseas media empire. That includes defunding over 1,000 journalism-related NGOs worldwide that previously received USAID support. In the U.S. alone, up to 19,500 USAID employees and contractors could lose their jobs. These are the days of reckoning.

Read more …

There’s always a judge out there somewhere willing to play Preident.

Judge Orders Trump Admin To Restore Funding To US Propaganda Outlet (RT)

A federal judge has ordered the administration of US President Donald Trump to restore funding for state-run Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL), ruling that the decision to stop the support was “unprecedented” and lacked any basis. RFE/RL was a key tool for spreading Western propaganda in the Soviet bloc during the Cold War and was funded by the CIA. The outlet currently receives nearly all of its funding from Congress. The Trump administration has sought to cut funding for RFE/RL and several other state-linked outlets. It has denounced the United States Agency for Global Media (USAGM), the body that oversees state-funded media, saying it is “not salvageable,” while indulging in “obscene overspending.” The administration also claimed it is crawling with “spies and terrorist sympathizers.”

Consequently, the USAGM essentially froze funding for RFE/RL and refused to enter into a new contract with the outlet after the previous agreement expired in March. This led to staff furloughs and programming cuts, though the EU stepped in to fill the budgetary gap. On Friday, Judge Royce C. Lamberth of the US District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that the Trump administration lacks the legal authority to refuse Congress-approved funding of more than $70 million, arguing that they provided no clear basis for the move. ”It is unprecedented for an agency to demand that entirely new terms govern its decades-old working relationship with a grantee entity,” he wrote.

He went on to rebuke the USAGM for a lack of responses to RFE/RL to negotiate a new agreement, describing it as “stonewalling” and adding that the agency went dark for days or even weeks. The “USAGM’s flagrant disregard for its funding responsibilities” caused RFE/RL to suffer “mass furloughs, cancelation of programming, and inevitable damage to the global influence that RFE/RL has built over decades,” the ruling said. RFE/RL President and CEO Stephen Capus welcomed the court’s decision. “This victory provides our journalists with the momentum necessary to continue reaching the nearly 47 million people each week… With this ruling, RFE/RL can continue to advance US national security interests.”

Read more …

Next 10 years.

Ukraine Unlikely To Join EU In The Near Term – Merz (RT)

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz has downplayed the prospect of Ukraine joining the EU in the near future, saying it is unlikely to happen during the bloc’s current budget cycle, which runs through 2034. Some EU officials had suggested the country could become a member much earlier. Ukraine made EU accession a national priority in 2019, formally applying in 2022 shortly after the escalation of the conflict with Russia. It was granted candidate status later that year, with the European Commission suggesting Kiev could join by 2030 if it made sufficient progress in areas such as political and judicial reforms, as well as in combating organized crime and corruption. Merz made the remarks on Friday during a press conference with Romanian President Nicusor Dan in Berlin.

“For us, the absolute top priority is, first and foremost, to do everything possible to end this war,” he said, adding, “then we’ll talk about the reconstruction of Ukraine.” That process, he said, would take “a number of years” and likely fall outside the EU’s current medium-term financial outlook. EU membership requires the unanimous approval of all 27 member states. While Brussels supports Kiev’s bid, some of the bloc’s nations – including Hungary, Slovakia, and Poland – remain opposed, arguing that Ukraine’s institutions and economy are unprepared and that membership would place an unbearable financial strain on the union. Moscow strongly opposes Ukraine’s NATO ambitions, but initially took a neutral stance on EU membership. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said in March that Kiev had the “sovereign right” to join, as long as the bloc remained focused on economics.

However, amid a broader drive among European NATO states to boost their militaries, Russian officials have grown more critical. In June, the EU redirected approximately €335 billion ($390 billion) in Covid relief funds towards military uses. The month before that, Brussels introduced a €150 billion debt and loan instrument to back its members’ armed forces and military industrial sector. The funding will also be made available to Kiev. Russia has condemned those steps, accusing both NATO and the EU of “rabid militarization.” Former President Dmitry Medvedev said the EU now poses “no less of a threat” to Russia than US-led NATO.

Read more …

10 years too late.

German General Urges Ukraine To Strike Russian Airfields (RT)

Ukraine should consider striking Russian airfields and weapons factories deep inside the country to alleviate pressure on the front, a senior German general has suggested. Speaking during a Bundeswehr podcast on Saturday, Major General Christian Freuding, who oversees Germany’s military assistance to Ukraine, gave Kiev advice on weakening Russia’s offensive power.“You can also indirectly affect the offensive potential of Russian strike forces before they are deployed,” Freuding said. “Use long-range air warfare assets to strike aircraft and airfields before they are used. Also, target weapons production facilities.” Freuding also lamented that despite Western sanctions, Russia has increased its production of drones, cruise missiles, and ballistic systems.

“We must reconsider whether our economic measures have been sufficient and where we can apply further pressure, particularly to limit Russian production capabilities,” he said. The general also pointed to the limitations of US-made Patriot air defense missiles against waves of Russian drones. “It [a drone] costs around €30,000-50,000 ($34,000–58,000) depending on the model. It’s wasteful to shoot it down with a Patriot missile costing over €5 million. We need countermeasures that cost €2,000–€4,000, especially as Russia aims to further increase its production capacity,” he explained. Last year, the administration of former US President Joe Biden authorized Ukraine to use American long-range weapons to strike inside Russia, though with significant restrictions on range and target selection. Media reports at the time indicated that Kiev was not allowed to hit major Russian airfields.

Meanwhile, Freuding confirmed earlier this month that Ukraine would receive the first batch of long-range missiles financed by Berlin before the end of July. Germany, however, has been reluctant to send Taurus long-range missiles due to escalation concerns. Earlier this month, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov stated that Germany was becoming “dangerous again,” after German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius said that Bundeswehr troops must be prepared to “kill” Russian soldiers if necessary. Moscow also accused the German leadership of supporting “confrontation” and pursuing an “aggressive mobilization of Europe against Russia.”

Read more …

France is (going) bankrupt.

France Wants To Nuke Holidays To Fund A Fantasy War With Russia (Marsden)

The day after French President Emmanuel Macron said that, in the year 2027 alone, he would blow another roughly €60 billion on weapons for some fantasy war with Russia that France isn’t even in, the French prime minister proposed axing some statutory holidays in an effort to balance the books.Dude just hit a third rail and electrocuted his political career. There are two things the French hold sacred. The first is their sprawling social safety net, which they fund with sky-high taxes and from which they get diminishing returns. And the other is their numerous beloved paid vacation days. Macron’s handpicked prime minister, longtime establishment centrist fixture François Bayrou, has chosen to mess with the one thing that unites the nation more than even football: their time off.

Why would he want to do that? So the French can work more. So the activity generated can be taxed. Because the government is super broke. Bayrou says that he has to find another €44 billion in the state’s couch cushions to keep France’s ballooning debt and borrowing costs from setting off more investor panic and bond-dumping. Normally, the government doesn’t even touch the budget until September, when legislators return from their sacred summer break, which of course they’re not being asked to sacrifice in the interests of austerity. But Bayrou says that he wants to get a head start because the public needs time to digest his ‘let’s cancel holidays’ pitch.

Or maybe he just needs a running start at the cliff that he’s about to hurl himself off. Because both the anti-establishment right and left will almost certainly vote non on his holiday cuts, possibly triggering a no-confidence vote. Or rather, another one. He’s survived eight so far. But with a proposal so ludicrously unpopular, this cat’s ninth political life may be about to bite the dust. It’s been a year since the last election, so France could legally have another one anytime now. Which would make it three elections in as many years. And it’s not like those are free either, by the way.

So here he is, Prime Minister Bayrou, waxing all poetic about national sacrifice, while at the same time proposing to axe the Easter Monday state holiday in April, and the one that falls on France’s WWII Victory Day on May 8: “I think this is the last station before the cliff and the crushing by the debt. We must call it by its name. It is a mortal danger for a country,” Bayrou said. Hear that, Frenchies? Accept his proposal or the country gets fatally knifed. No mention of cutting anything else from the budget, huh? Not a whiff of trimming that €170-billion deficit from any of the other more glaring bloated line items? He said that he has zero interest in messing with Macron’s new 5% of GDP for NATO defense spending, despite France not actually being in a war.

“We planned to double the budget by 2030, we are actually going to double it by 2027,” Macron had just announced. “To this end, a review of the military planning law will be presented in the autumn. And I call on the National Assembly to vote on it,” he said. Look, I’m no Inspector Clouseau, but I think I just may have an idea of where they can find a super big line item so they don’t have to keep nickel and diming French workers.As one might imagine, this is going over like canned Cheez Whiz with the average French citizen who depends on those clustered April-May-June holidays to build “bridges” from midweek days off to weekends – or maybe even use them to dig full-blown “tunnels” under entire work weeks.

The government is now asking ordinary people to surrender rest so it can look fiscally responsible without touching bloated defense budgets or elite entitlements. It has decided that its taxpayers’ time, and ultimately, their lives are less valuable than its agenda. And what does it say about a country when it kills a peace holiday commemorating the end of a world war to pay for hypothetical ones? France isn’t under siege, but its leadership is acting like it is. “Since 1945, freedom has never been so threatened, and never so seriously,” Macron told French soldiers in a speech around the Bastille Day national holiday. “To be free in this world, we must be feared. To be feared, we must be powerful,” he said.

Read more …

This is where tariff threats may come in handy.

Europe’s Online Censorship Laws Could Restrict Americans Too (ET)

For many Americans, talk of a crackdown in Europe on “hate speech” and “misinformation” may seem a faraway issue, but legal experts say that Europe’s online censorship laws could affect Americans, too. Starting July 1, social media companies and internet service providers operating within the EU that do not comply with laws that ban content deemed illegal there could be fined up to 6 percent of their global revenue, according to the EU’s Digital Services Act (DSA). The European Commission states that the DSA, originally passed in 2022, “protects consumers and their fundamental rights online by setting clear and proportionate rules.”

On July 1, the DSA integrated its Code of Conduct into the act, requiring online platforms and search engines to comply with the censorship laws of all member states or face punitive fines. Proponents of the DSA state that the law was passed in response to escalating cases of anti-Semitism and anti-Muslim statements in Europe. Meanwhile, critics, like Virginie Joron, a French member of the European Parliament, have called it a “Trojan horse for surveillance and control.” “What was sold as the Digital Services Act is increasingly functioning as a Digital Surveillance Act,” Joron told attendees at a May conference hosted by the Alliance Defending Freedom. Joron accused the European Commission and some parliamentarians of having “seized upon the DSA as a political tool to control speech, particularly targeting platforms like X, Facebook, and Telegram.”

The concern among policy experts is that Europe’s speech laws could compel online platforms to institute restrictive policies worldwide, in order to comply. “The DSA generally cannot directly compel technology companies to censor American speech, but it creates an incentive to do so,” David Inserra, a fellow for free expression and technology at the Cato Institute, told The Epoch Times. “At some point, companies may find it easier just to change their policies to align with more restrictive laws, thus having American speech effectively regulated by Brussels—thus the name the ‘Brussels effect.’” Legal analysts say that the Digital Services Act is open to political manipulation because of its imprecise language regarding what is illegal for people to say, as well as a complex and ever-changing array of online speech prohibitions.

“Through very vague and loose definitions of illegal content and ‘hate speech’ and ‘misinformation,’ this becomes a blueprint for restricting speech online,” Adina Portaru, senior counsel for ADF International, told The Epoch Times. “If you take the narrow definition of ‘hate speech—incitement to hatred—then you realize that, once again, whoever has the power to define ‘hatred’ is the one who defines if you are breaching the law or not.” According to a September 2024 analysis by Therese Enarsson, a European attorney, “the DSA provides a very broad legal definition for illegal content,” which it defines as speech that does not comply with the laws of the EU or any member state. “Similarly to illegal content, the DSA does not attempt to define what constitutes hate speech,” Enarsson states. “This is unfortunate, seeing that platforms must adapt their systems to combat such speech.”

This means that content posted by someone in Romania would have to be taken down if it conflicts with speech laws in France, creating a lowest-common-denominator threshold for suppressing content. The DSA also states that it “specifically recognises the role of trusted flaggers to identify and flag hate speech online and to allow action against it”—a role that’s analogous to the collaboration between “fact-checkers” and social media companies in the United States to police online speech. “We’re speaking about Europe, but of course we can also speak of situations whereby you have an American citizen posting something here in the U.S. and with the internet being an online environment globally, somebody can flag that in Europe, and according to the DSA, that speech will be removed from the entire platform,” Portaru said.

In addition, this process of flagging and fact-checking often includes a left-leaning bias, studies show. A 2023 survey of 150 “experts on misinformation” published in the Harvard Kennedy School Misinformation Review found that nearly 85 percent of the respondents were on the political left.

Read more …

WE will decide what you can drive..

EU Hatching Secret Electric Car Plan – Bild (RT)

The EU is drafting legislation that could force rental and corporate fleets to switch to electric vehicles (EVs) by 2030, Bild reported on Saturday, citing sources in Brussels. The directive is reportedly being quietly discussed by the European Commission and could be unveiled as early as late summer before going to the European Parliament. The regulation is seen as a backdoor to accelerate the green transition and enforce the bloc’s combustion-engine ban, which mandates a 100% cut in CO2 emissions from new cars by 2035, effectively outlawing gasoline and diesel vehicles. Car manufacturers have criticized the plan as too costly and requiring full conversions of production lines.

The new rules will reportedly apply to all rental companies and businesses with car fleets across the bloc. If approved, such entities will only be allowed to purchase EVs, thus impacting around 60% of new car sales, Bild said. A Commission spokesperson confirmed that work is underway on such a plan but declined to provide details. Lawmakers warn the measure could harm Europe’s rental sector: companies such as Enterprise, Hertz, and Sixt already scaled back EV fleets in 2024, citing poor charging infrastructure, high repair costs, and weak resale values. EU MP Markus Ferber urged the Commission to drop the plan, calling it “unrealistic.” Sixt CEO Nico Gabriel agreed, warning that few vacationers rent EVs and that mandatory electrification would drive up rental costs due to charging infrastructure needs.

Critics say Europe’s green push is straining its auto industry and wider economy. Carmakers face penalties if they fail to boost EV sales and must spend heavily on new production lines, batteries, chargers, and grid upgrades. The transition also threatens jobs: automaker Stellantis warned this month it could close plants if it fails to meet EU deadlines. Former EU commissioner Thierry Breton warned the shift to EVs could cost 600,000 jobs. Manufacturers have called for subsidies and state support to avoid losing more market share to rivals in China and the US. Other sectors face similar problems, especially as Brussels phases out Russian energy, imports of which have dropped sharply in light of Ukraine-related sanctions. Russian officials have warned that rejecting its supplies will force the EU to rely on costlier alternatives or rerouted Russian energy via intermediaries.

Read more …

But also done in France, and almost the US.

Banning Alternative für Deutschland: A Nightmare Scenario (Eugyppius)

As all of my readers know, the Social Democrats (SPD) are fighting hard to force two hard-left justices onto the Federal Constitutional Court in Karlsruhe. Although the vote failed last week because Friedrich Merz messed it up, the SPD remain determined to give Frauke Brosius-Gersdorf and Ann-Katrin Kaufhold the red robes. They might still succeed. This matters because Brosius-Gersdorf and Kaufhold have both argued in favour of ban proceedings against Alternative für Deutschland. What is more, both candidates would be appointed to the second senate of the Constitutional Court, which is the division responsible for banning political parties. And as if that were not enough, the SPD nominated both candidates in the wake of their party congress, where SPD chairman Lars Klingbeil said that banning the AfD was his party’s “historical duty.”

Many have therefore concluded that the SPD are trying to stack the court in advance of an application to prohibit Germany’s second-strongest political party, banish all of its elected politicians and seize all of its assets.I’m far from a sensationalist, and I’ve repeatedly discounted the likelihood of an AfD ban – not least because the German establishment and the left in particular have good reasons to keep the AfD around. Lately, however, I’ve begun to appreciate that there are deeper, systemic forces working against the AfD in this case. These forces are beyond anybody’s control and if nobody does anything, they may well end in political catastrophe that is much bigger than any single party.

Since the end of the Merkel era, the German left has become thematically scattered, and so they have retreated to the only coordinating issue the German left has ever had, which is hating the right. As climatism started to fade, the social welfare state exceeded its limits and mass migration went sour, AfD bashing became the sole unifying principle for much of the SPD, Die Linke and the Greens. Hating the right is particularly important because it keeps leftist politicians and their activist class on the same page. Without a crusade against the right, a great chasm opens between the antifa thugs who want to smash the state and destroy capitalism on the one hand and the schoolmarm leftoid establishment functionaries in the Bundestag who want to mandate gender-neutral language for the civil service on the other hand. What is more, the firewall against the AfD splits the right and keeps the shrinking left in government. It is a win-win for leftoids everywhere.

Recent events, however, show why things cannot continue as they are now indefinitely. Over time, our Constitutional Court will begin to fill with leftist justices supported by the left parties, who like the rest of the left will also want to ban the AfD. Brosius-Gersdorf and Kaufhold are omens here. Right now the system is held in perfect balance; the left talks a big game about wanting to stamp out the AfD, but they can always justify their hesitation by saying the outcome of ban proceedings is too uncertain. When the necessary judicial majority for an AfD ban is finally secured in Karlsruhe, everything changes. At that point, there will be no excuse for not proceeding with a ban. The activists and the NGOs will take to the streets if their political masters in Berlin don’t begin the process. The CDU will be brought around by media smear campaigns and antifa intimidation.

Keep in mind that this is not about the AfD, but about imperatives within the left itself. No amount of moderation, polite messaging or triangulation on the part of the AfD can get the left to stop or pursue other goals. Unless some exogenous force introduces a new unifying obsession for the left parties and their activists, they will never stop gnawing on this particular chew toy. Practically, this probably means that the AfD has an expiration date. If they can’t get into government at the federal level and if nothing else changes, they will find themselves facing ban proceedings before a court stacked with leftists who hate them in the next 10 or 15 years. The federal elections in 2029 seem like the last opportunity to normalise the AfD before this final escalation.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

60 minutes

US debt

gazelle

Cucsumber
https://twitter.com/Cat5SMASHICANE/status/1946671107739680959

Desert

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Jul 032025
 


Pablo Picasso Olga in a hat with feather 1920

 

Trumpworld Rages At GOP Holdouts After Tax Bill Stalls In House (ZH)
The Big Beautiful Bill Now Back in The House (CTH)
A Big Beautiful Bill for the Military-Industrial Complex (Ron Paul)
Coalition of Democrat Senators Challenge Layoffs As Rubio Shutters USAID (JTN)
President Trump Firm, No More Tariff Extensions Beyond July 8th (CTH)
Everywhere There Is Talk of War (Paul Craig Roberts)
The Keys to Trump’s Middle East Triumph (Joecks)
What Means ‘Winning’? (Alastair Crooke)
Biden’s Energy Department Disbursed $42 Billion in Its Final Hours (Varney)
Russiagate Was A Ploy To ‘Screw Trump’ – CIA Boss (RT)
NATO Chief ‘Totally Understands’ US Cutting Off Weapons For Ukraine (RT)
Halt To US Military Aid Could Spell Doom For Kiev – Bild (RT)
Polish President Approves Memorial Day For Victims Of Ukrainian Nazis (RT)
Women’s Sports Just Scored a Massive Win Against the Trans Agenda (Margolis)
Putin-Backed Effort Saves Siberian Tiger From Extinction (RT)

 

 

CNN

Bannon

Scott

 

 

 

 

A 940-page bill is not supposed to be easy.

“.. July 4th looks like a pipe dream from here – then again, we’ve seen these grifting gasbags shake a tail like nobody’s business when vacation is on the line.”

Trumpworld Rages At GOP Holdouts After Tax Bill Stalls In House (ZH)

Update (0018ET): Wednesday night came and went without the House GOP advancing the ‘Big Beautiful Bill Act’ to the floor for debate, after roughly a dozen Republicans stood their ground. As such, things have officially gotten ugly – with longtime Trump aides Jason Miller and Chris LaCivita telling the holdouts that they can either vote with Trump, “or you can vote with the Democrats.” “Buckle the fuck up,” said Miller, adding It’s a binary choice”. Top White House aide Stephen Miller, meanwhile, demanded that Republicans “stand with Trump” to show loyalty to the man who had peen persecuted by “the communist left.” Earlier in the evening, a procedural vote on adopting the rule for floor consideration of the Big Beautiful Bill was open for more than 2.5 hours, as Speaker Mike Johnson scrambled convince the holdouts to vote yes.

Colorado Rep. Lauren Boebert indicated she’s sticking with her fellow Freedom Caucus members on any rule vote. “Not tonight,” she said, before several of the hard-liners huddled again, this time in Johnson’s office. -Politico Rep. Thomas Massie told the NY Times that he switched his vote to ‘no’ on the rule because if it ends up being the only vote on the BBB, he doesn’t want to be on record as having voted for it. “If it goes down, I can’t be a yes,” said Massie, who’s been a hard ‘no’ on the bill for weeks. That said, his comments seem to indicate that if his party is able to advance the procedural measure, he’d switch back and support bringing up the bill. Needless to say, July 4th looks like a pipe dream from here – then again, we’ve seen these grifting gasbags shake a tail like nobody’s business when vacation is on the line.

Update (2300ET): A dramatic scene is unfolding on the House floor, as four Republicans have voted ‘nay’ on the Senate-revised version of the ‘Big Beautiful Bill’ – when House Speaker Mike Johnson could only afford three. According to Fox News’ Chad Pergram; ‘A 216-216 tie loses by rule. Dems got all of their members there and stuck together GOP needs to flip 1 mbr so long as other Republicans don’t vote no.’ So now the question is; will someone flip?

* * *
Update (1450ET): Are we having fun yet? Major divisions within the House threaten to derail the Big Beautiful Bill, with Speaker Mike Johnson struggling to overcome resistance by fiscal conservatives. Earlier in the day the House appeared ready to hold a test vote, however several conservative Republicans raised objections – suggesting that Johnson might not have the votes to move forward, given that he can only afford a handful of defections on the measure. As of midday, at least two Republicans were a hard ‘no’ on the bill in its current form. Meanwhile Rep. Thomas Massie says he has the votes to block it…

President Trump, meanwhile, met with holdouts at the White House as Democrats and Republicans argued over the merits of the bill on the House floor. At the end of the day, Johnson has little room for maneuvering – as any changes to the bill would send it back to the Senate for further deliberation that could drag on for weeks. Members of the House Freedom Caucus are livid over measures added to the Senate that increases costs. “The Senate doesn’t get to be the final say on everything. We’ve got to work this out,” said Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX) Wednesday morning, adding that there are enough Republicans “right now” who wanted to reopen the bill and don’t care about the July 4 recess deadline. More moderate Republicans objected to Medicaid cuts approved by the Senate that went deeper than the House’s May iteration.

Read more …

“As they say, Trump’s been right about everything, and this is the easiest of them all to predict..”

The Big Beautiful Bill Now Back in The House (CTH)

With the BBB back in the House of Representatives, Speaker Mike Johnson now has the difficult job to push the bill to a final floor vote and get it to President Trump’s desk. Anticipating pushback and refusal of support from the House Freedom Caucus, earlier this morning President Trump sent a message via Truth Social drawing attention to the objective of the bill to generate economic growth:

PRESIDENT TRUMP – “Nobody wants to talk about GROWTH, which will be the primary reason that the Big, Beautiful Bill will be one of the most successful pieces of legislation ever passed. THIS GROWTH has already begun at levels never seen before. Trillions of Dollars are now being invested into the USA, more than ever before. Likewise, hundreds of Billions of Dollars in Tariffs are filling up the coffers of Treasury. The Tariff money has already arrived and is setting new records! We are growing our way out of the Sleepy Joe Biden MESS that he and the Democrats left us, and it is happening much faster than anyone thought possible. ”

“Our Country will make a fortune this year, more than any of our competitors, but only if the Big, Beautiful Bill is PASSED! As they say, Trump’s been right about everything, and this is the easiest of them all to predict. Republicans, don’t let the Radical Left Democrats push you around. We’ve got all the cards, and we are going to use them. Last year America was a “DEAD” Nation, with no hope for the future, and now it’s the “HOTTEST NATION IN THE WORLD!” MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!”

Meanwhile, as noted by Politico: “House Freedom Caucus members like Reps. Chip Roy (R-Texas) and Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) blasted the Senate’s bill Tuesday for adding to the deficit and softening clean energy tax credits. Roy and Norman both voted against the bill in the Rules Committee overnight.” Speaker Johnson has to navigate the timing of the BBB reaching the floor, and in an effort to dissuade the concerns of the professional republican naysayers he is informing them of possible alternatives to changes in the current bill. “In an interview on Fox News on Tuesday night, Johnson said the House will plan to do two more reconciliation bills during this session of Congress, which ends in 2026.”

Read more …

“..America should return to the Founders’ vision of a country that, in the words of John Quincy Adams, does not go “abroad in search of monsters to destroy”..”

A Big Beautiful Bill for the Military-Industrial Complex (Ron Paul)

The US Senate worked through the weekend on the “Big Beautiful Bill.” The goal was to pass it quickly to ensure the House will then pass it and send it to President Trump’s desk before the July 4th holiday. However, disagreements among Republican Senators over reductions in spending on programs including Medicaid and food stamps as well as language in the bill eliminating “clean energy” tax credits were preventing Senate Republican leadership from getting enough votes to pass the bill. Also, some Republicans disagree with other Republicans in both the House and Senate on increasing the state and local tax (SALT) deduction. Many conservatives see this income tax deduction as encouraging states to maintain high taxes to fund big governments.

One item in the BBB that few Republicans are objecting to is the bill’s increase in military spending. The House version of the BBB added 150 billion dollars to the Pentagon’s already bloated budget. The Senate bill gave the military-industrial complex 156 billion dollars. Increasing military spending contradicts President Trump’s promise to stop wasting money on endless wars that have nothing to do with ensuring the security of the American people. Some of the BBB’s military spending will be used to put troops on the border. I support strengthening border security. However, I do not support using the military for domestic law enforcement, which includes enforcing immigration laws. Soldiers are trained to view people as potential enemies, not as innocent civilians to be protected. Introducing this mindset into domestic law enforcement will lead to abuses of liberty.

Increasing spending on militarism while cutting spending on programs that help low-income Americans is bad politics and bad policy. Polls show that the majority of Americans, including many Republicans, do not support overseas intervention. The growing opposition to our hyper-interventionist foreign policy is easy to understand. The US has engaged in numerous military actions in many countries including Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria since the beginning of the 21st century. The American people pay for this militarism in several ways. One is the “inflation tax” imposed by the Federal Reserve in order to monetize the debt incurred by the US government for endless wars. President Trump has turned his back on his antiwar supporters by bombing Iran and by increasing military spending to over a trillion dollars.

The Republican insistence on increasing military spending is the main reason Congress cannot cut taxes without increasing the debt, making cuts in domestic welfare programs, or both. If the Republicans want to be the Make America Great Again party, they need to embrace a true America First foreign policy. This means no more regime change wars or US taxpayer supported “color revolutions.” Instead, America should return to the Founders’ vision of a country that, in the words of John Quincy Adams, does not go “abroad in search of monsters to destroy” and instead is “the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all” while “the champion and vindicator only of her own.” A return to a noninterventionist foreign policy is the only way we will be able to begin to pay down the national debt and restore a government that adheres to the constitutional limits on its powers and respects all the people’s rights all the time.

Read more …

A lot of corruption at USAID has been uncovered. Something must obviously change. Are these senators just trying to keep the graft vehicle in place so the money keeps flowing?

Coalition of Democrat Senators Challenge Layoffs As Rubio Shutters USAID (JTN)

A coalition of Democratic senators introduced legislation Tuesday to combat reductions-in-force within the State Department as Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced the shuttering of the U.S. Agency for International Development. “This legislation is crucial to protecting America’s ability to respond to global threats,” said Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H., a sponsor of the bill. The legislation specifically targets an agency’s ability to conduct a reduction-in-force, where it can lay off large numbers of employees for budgetary reasons. Large-scale RIFs across the federal government marked the early days of the Trump administration, prompting a flurry of legal action against the government. The Senate legislation specifically targets RIFs against employees at the State Department and the now-shuttered U.S. Agency for International Development.

“The Trump administration is systematically dismantling our diplomatic institutions and weakening the workforce we depend on to advance U.S. interests, respond to crises, and out-compete adversaries like the People’s Republic of China,” Shaheen said. Rubio criticized USAID for its practices in distributing assistance across the globe. “The era of government-sanctioned inefficiency is OVER,” Rubio wrote in a social media post. “From now on, our foreign assistance programs will be accountable to the American taxpayer.” The state department secretary said USAID’s assistance functions will be absorbed by his agency. The bill contains four provisions that would limit the timeline and effectiveness of RIFs within the State Department.

First, the bill requires an agency to report RIFs involving more than 50 people to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee 20 days in advance of the planned layoff. The layoff must be accompanied by an explanation of the reduction that includes alternatives considered, whether the RIF complies with associated laws and how the RIF affects the agency’s mission. Second, the legislation extends protection for foreign service officers by only allowing them to be included in RIFs only based on job performance, rather than budget needs. This would include considering employment tenure, language capabilities and military preference before laying off a foreign service officer. The bill also requires a minimum 120 days’ notice for foreign service officers and 60 days for civil service employees included in RIFs.

Lastly, the bill requires the State Department to provide at least 30 days’ advance notice before making changes to RIF procedures. The bill will likely not pass in the Republican-controlled Senate. Additionally, Rubio’s dismantling of USAID further cemented the agency’s desire to cut spending across its operations. “Americans will not pay taxes to fund failed governments in faraway lands,” Rubio said. “Moving forward, our assistance will be targeted and time limited.” It is estimated USAID spent $715 billion over several decades in its operation. “We will favor those nations that have demonstrated both the ability and willingness to help themselves and will target our resources to areas where they can have a multiplier effect and catalyze a durable private sector, including American companies, and global investment,” Rubio said. Rubio said he would implement a 15% cut in the State Department on July 1 but appeared to delay while nationwide injunctions held up the layoffs in court.

Read more …

“This firm date is why India has extended their negotiation team in Washington DC, and is also the reason why Europe is coming Thursday..”

President Trump Firm, No More Tariff Extensions Beyond July 8th (CTH)

There is some interesting information within the video of President Trump aboard AF-1 as he returns from Florida. However, one of the more interesting aspects comes around 05:39 when asked if he was thinking about extending the tariff pause beyond July 8, 2025. As noted by President Trump, very firmly, no. There is no reason to extend the deadline for reciprocal tariffs beyond July 8th for any country not in direct negotiations as of that date. Trump intends to just send them a letter outlining the applied tariff rate and that’s it. Done is done. WATCH:

This firm date is why India has extended their negotiation team in Washington DC, and is also the reason why Europe is coming Thursday. The baseline tariffs are done, everyone pays 10% regardless of a FTA or not. The reciprocal tariff rate will be applied to those without an FTA effective July 9th. [The EU (who wants a trade deal now) is eventually going to align with Canada (who will need a trade deal later). This factors into the current trade dynamic and looms over the decision making.] Post July 9th, President Trump moves on to other important geopolitical matters with the tariffs as an ancillary weapon for adherence to the new international trade alignment.

Those who want to benefit commit to the U.S. dollar as the trade currency (that’s the reason for India’s announcement today), and trade preferences are then used to shake up the geopolitical alignments. Watch for how this plays out with Trump’s planned UK visit. From there, and after the gnashing of teeth settles down, later in the summer President Trump then triggers the USMCA renegotiation phase with Mexico and Canada. President Trump is essentially ambivalent to the pleas from nations who want to continue their trade imbalance. This sequencing and outline appears clear; but let’s watch and see what happens.

Read more …

“What percentage of the Western population understands that the Kremlin was forced to intervene in the Russian provinces in Ukraine in order to prevent a Gaza-type destruction of Russian people?”

Everywhere There Is Talk of War (Paul Craig Roberts)

Pundits are debating when the Israel-Iran war will resume. They are debating the West’s use of its Ukraine proxy in the war with Russia. They are debating when and how the US conflict with China will flare up. But no one is asking what is the point of the wars. What are they about? This is the most relevant question, especially when four of the parties to the conflicts have nuclear weapons. The answer to the question is the wars are about hegemony. Israel wants hegemony over the Muslim Middle East, and so does Washington. And Washington wants hegemony over Russia and China. Israel’s war with Iran is about eliminating an opponent to Israel’s hegemony as expressed by the Zionist aspiration of Greater Israel–from the Nile to the Euphrates, recently expanded to include half of Saudi Arabia and all of Pakistan.

Washington’s war with Russia and China is based on the Wolfowitz doctrine that declares US hegemony over the world as the principle goal of American foreign policy. No American president has yet repudiated this doctrine. So the wars are about nothing but the selfish aspirations of Israel for regional hegemony and Washington for world hegemony. Be sure you comprehend that it is nothing but the selfish aspirations of two countries that are the cause of millions of dead, maimed, and dislocated peoples, for the destruction of entire countries in the Middle East –Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Syria, Palestine, and Lebanon, with Iran a current target and with Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Turkey waiting in the wings. The US is responsible for massive deaths, injuries, displacement, and destruction in Ukraine (and Palestine) and for provocations of Russia, such as the attack on the Russian strategic triad that eventually will result in nuclear war, with China waiting in the wings.

The US currently is increasing the pressure on Russia by fomenting color revolutions in former Central Asian provinces of the Soviet Union. Washington’s intent is to create more Ukraines on Russia’s borders in hopes of destabilizing the Russian government. As the American military/security complex sees it, the more proxy wars Washington can get going on Russia’s borders, the quicker the Russian state will be overcome. Foreign policy commentary pretends that the West is defensively resisting Russian aggression that otherwise will spread beyond Ukraine into the EU. The proxy war against Russia that Washington initiated by overthrowing the democratically elected government in Ukraine and installing a neo-Nazi American puppet and siccing US trained Ukrainian forces on the break-away former Russian provinces in Ukraine is presented as defending Ukraine against a Russian invasion. This transparent lie is treated as truth in Western foreign affairs commentary.

What percentage of the Western population understands that the Kremlin was forced to intervene in the Russian provinces in Ukraine in order to prevent a Gaza-type destruction of Russian people? How many know that Putin refused the request of the Donbas Russians to be reunited with Russia when Crimea was? How many know that instead Putin relied on the Minsk Agreement, which the West used for eight years to deceive Putin while building up a large and well equipped Ukrainian army to invade the Donbas and slaughter the Russian population? How many understand that it was only after the Biden regime, NATO, and the EU cold-shouldered Putin and Lavrov’s frantic efforts to achieve a mutual defense agreement with the West during December 2021-February 2022 when the Ukrainian army was poised to attack Donbas that Putin was forced to intervene for which Russia was unprepared as Putin, averse to war, had relied on negotiations.

What has Iran done to us? Iran has not assassinated our leaders, sanctioned us, bombed us or stolen our bank reserves. All lran has done is to refuse to submit to Israel. Why is that a cause for an American war with Iran? None of these facts are part of the foreign policy discussion. Those of us who insist on facts are labeled “Russian agent/dupe” and demonized as spreaders of disinformation. Who is it that wants war so badly that facts are unacceptable? Alas, the Western World has no media to investigate, no congressional and parliamentary committees to investigate, and no one but a few of us demonized souls to hold liars accountable. This is the sad state of affairs in the Western World.

As one of a diminishing number who defends Western Civilization for its achievement of embedding values in society and its mores, law, and politics that raised humans from barbarity into civilization–values such as respect for truth over power, of forgiveness over vengeance, of empathy over unconcern, of love over hate, of integrity and self-respect over material gain, I wonder at times whether I am defending an entity that no longer exists. Perhaps a society whose values have eroded away brings itself to its end in self-destruction. The weapons for the end of life on earth exist in abundance. It only takes one mistake, and we live in a world where human mistakes are the ruling hallmark of humanity, a world that has succumbed to evil.

What excuse is there for the Genocide of Palestine, for the world to stand aside while a people and their country are exterminated? What did Palestinians ever do to anyone? Why did Americans provide Satan’s Chosen People with the means to destroy a people who never harmed anyone, a people who submitted for 78 years to Israel stealing their country from them village by village, all the while demonizing them as terrorists? When one looks honestly at the West today and its Israeli appendage, is its survival morally justified? How can Western Civilization be renewed? Who can do it? Where are the leaders? All are busy feathering their nests as Western Civilization collapses.

Yesterday I described how President Trump could end the war in the Middle East and Washington’s war with Russia. That would be a beginning, but is it a bridge too far for a civilization that has been loosened from its moorage? Can Western Civilization renew itself when its universities and pubic schools teach its failures and not its successes? Can America be made great again when law schools do not believe in the US Constitution, which they designate as a “racist document,” when journalism schools teach that service to liberal-left agendas, not to truth, is the function of journalists, when governments at every level are accountable to the self-interest of interest groups who supply their campaign funds, not to voters, when decades of open borders have replaced an American population with a tower of babel? What is left for Trump to work with?

Trump needs to come home from the world stage to America. He should turn off the money and diplomatic protection to Israel and Ukraine and focus on trying to save America and Western Civilization. He will get little, if any help, from Europe and Canada, whose politicians have already delivered their ethnicities to The Camp of the Saints. But possibly America could be saved. It is a long shot, but worth a try. People should lay off Trump. Give him a chance to understand the real challenge. Perhaps he will undertake the challenge. Perhaps he will succeed. What other chance do we have?

Read more …

Meet the fanclub.

The Keys to Trump’s Middle East Triumph (Joecks)

If you blinked, you just missed World War III. President Donald Trump on June 23 announced a ceasefire between Israel and Iran. That came two days after Trump sent B-2 stealth bombers to drop bunker-buster bombs on the Fordow nuclear enrichment plant. Only the United States had the capability to obliterate the deeply buried site. U.S. submarines also launched 30 Tomahawk missiles against two other Iranian nuclear sites in Natanz and Isfahan. Despite some initial attempts to test its boundaries, the agreement has held up as of this writing. According to some of the loudest voices on the Left and Right, it wasn’t supposed to end this way. Shortly after it happened, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., declared that Trump’s decision to bomb Iran was “disastrous.”

“He has impulsively risked launching a war that may ensnare us for generations,” she wrote on X. “It is absolutely and clearly grounds for impeachment.” For months, Tucker Carlson has railed against attacking Iran. “It’s worth pointing out that a strike on the Iranian nuclear sites will almost certainly result in thousands of American deaths at bases throughout the Middle East,” he wrote on the social media platform X in March. He continued, “A bombing campaign against Iran will set off a war.” AOC and Carlson may not agree on much, but they now have this in common. They were both spectacularly wrong. It’s worth looking at what Trump understood, which they didn’t.

First, he rejected the false dichotomy of doing nothing or a regime-change war. This tactic is common in politics. It involves claiming that someone either supports your position or endorses an extremely unpopular position. In complicated policy issues, there are usually many options. Those opposed to Trump attacking Iran rushed out this line of attack. After the United States bombed Iran, Geraldo Rivera wrote on X that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu “suckered Trump (and the USA!) into another forever war with Iran.” On June 23, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., posted on X, “Only 6 months in and we are back into foreign wars, regime change, and World War 3.” As Trump showed, there was another option. He destroyed Iran’s ability to make nuclear weapons and left the fate of the Iranian regime to the Iranian people.

Next, Trump exhibited moral clarity. There are many on the Left and some on the Right who are vocally anti-Israel. They attacked Israel as it fought Hamas after the Oct. 7, 2023, massacre. They attacked Israel for Operation Grim Beeper, which neutralized thousands of Hezbollah fighters. They attacked Israel for bombing Iran. But here’s the key point Trump understands. Some violent acts are morally good. In Michigan recently, a church member spotted a would-be mass shooter and ran into him with his pickup. An armed security guard then killed the gunman. Intentionally ramming someone with a car or shooting someone else is a violent act. In this circumstance, it was morally justified. Similarly, Israel acts violently to kill terrorists and foreign officials who plot to kill its civilians. That’s not morally equivalent to Iran and its terrorist proxies targeting Israeli civilians. Trump made that distinction.

Finally, Trump showed courage. It isn’t enough to have the world’s strongest military in theory. The country needs a leader with the internal fortitude to exercise that power. Just look at former President Joe Biden’s surrender in Afghanistan in 2021. Since Bill Clinton, every U.S. president has said that Iran can’t be allowed to obtain a nuclear weapon. At the opportune moment, Trump had the guts to ensure it won’t any time soon. Unless the Iranian people overthrow it, the Iranian regime will remain America’s enemy. But by depriving it of access to nuclear weapons, Trump has made it a much less threatening one. Bravo.

Read more …

“..the Israeli promise of an ‘Iran ready to implode, Syria-style’ – an ‘Epic’ transformation to a ‘New Middle East’ – must have been alluring enough for Trump to brusquely sweep aside Tulsi Gabbard’s assertion that Iran had no nuclear weapon.”

What Means ‘Winning’? (Alastair Crooke)

At one level, Iran plainly ‘won’. Trump had wanted to be regaled with a reality-TV style, splendid ‘Victory’. Sunday’s attack on the three nuclear sites indeed was loudly proclaimed by Trump and Hegseth as such – having ‘obliterated’ Iran’s nuclear enrichment programme, they claimed. ‘Destroyed it completely’, they insist. Only … it didn’t: The strike caused superficial surface damage, perhaps. And seemingly was co-ordinated in advance with Iran via intermediaries to be a ‘once and done’ affair. This is a habitual Trump pattern (advance co-ordination). It was the mode in Syria, Yemen and even with Trump’s assassination of Qasem Soleimani – all intended to give Trump a quick media ‘victory’.

The so-called ‘ceasefire’ that rapidly followed the U.S. strikes – albeit not without some hiccoughs – was a hastily assembled ‘cessation of hostilities’ (and no ceasefire – as no terms were agreed). It was a ‘stop-gap’. What this means is that the negotiating impasse between Iran and Witkoff remains unresolved. The Supreme Leader has forcefully laid down Iran’s position: ‘No surrender’; Enrichment proceeds; and the U.S. should quit the region and keep its nose out of Iranian affairs. So, on the positive side of cost-benefit analysis, Iran likely has enough centrifuges and 450 kg of highly enriched uranium – and nobody (except Iran) now knows where the stash is hidden. Iran will resume processing. A second plus for Iran is that the IAEA and its Director-General Grossi have been so egregiously subversive of Iranian sovereignty that the Agency most likely will be expelled from Iran.

The Agency failed in its basic responsibility to safeguard sites at which enriched uranium was present. The U.S. and European intelligence services thus will lose their ‘eyes’ on the ground – as well as forego the IAEA’s Artificial Intelligence data collection (on which Israel’s identification of targets likely was heavily dependent). On the cost side, militarily, Iran of course suffered physical damage, but retains its missile potency. The U.S.-Israeli narrative of Iranian skies as ‘open wide’ to Israeli aircraft is yet another deception contrived to support the ‘winning narrative’: As Simplicius notes: “There remains not a single shred of proof that Israeli (or American, for that matter) planes ever significantly overflew Iran at any time.

Claims of ‘total air superiority’ have no grounds. [Footage] up until the final day shows Israel continued relying on their heavy UCAVs [large surveillance and strike drone aircraft] to strike Iranian ground targets”. Furthermore, drop tanks from Israeli planes were recorded washing up on Iran’s northernmost Caspian shores, suggesting rather, stand-off missile launches were being mounted by Israel’s Air Force from the north (i.e. from Azerbaijani airspace). Up a level in the cost-benefit analysis, one must move to the bigger picture: That the destruction of the nuclear programme was pretext, yet not the main objective. The Israelis themselves say that the decision to attack the Iranian State was taken last September/October (2024).

Israel’s intricate, costly and sophisticated plan (de-capitation, targeted assassinations, cyber-attack and the infiltration of drone-equipped sabotage cells) that unfolded during the 13 June sneak attack was focussed on one immediate aim: the implosion of the Iranian state, paving the path to chaos and ‘regime change’. Did Trump believe in the Israeli delusion that Iran was on the brink of imminent collapse? Very likely, he did. Did he believe the Israeli story (reportedly concocted by the IAEA Mosaic programme) that Iran was speeding ‘towards a nuclear weapon’? It seems possible that Trump was suckered – or more likely, was willing prey – to the Israeli and U.S. Israeli-Firster narrative building. As the Ukraine issue has proved more intractable than Trump expected, the Israeli promise of an ‘Iran ready to implode, Syria-style’ – an ‘Epic’ transformation to a ‘New Middle East’ – must have been alluring enough for Trump to brusquely sweep aside Tulsi Gabbard’s assertion that Iran had no nuclear weapon.

So, has the Iranian military response and the massive popular rallying to the flag been a ‘big win’ for Iran? Well, it is certainly a ‘win’ over the ‘brink of regime change’ pedlars; yet perhaps the ‘win’ needs refining? It is not a ‘forever win’. Iran cannot afford to let its guard down. ‘Iranian unconditional surrender’ is, of course, now off the cards. But the point here is that the Israel establishment, the pro-Israeli lobby in the U.S. (and possibly Trump too), will continue to believe that the only way to guarantee that Iran never moves toward threshold weapon status – is not through intrusive inspections and monitoring, but precisely via ‘regime change’ and the installation of a purely western puppet in Tehran.

Read more …

“..a sum that exceeded the total amount its Loan Programs Office (LPO) had put out in the past decade.”

Biden’s Energy Department Disbursed $42 Billion in Its Final Hours (Varney)

In its last two working days, the Biden administration’s Energy Department signed off on nearly $42 billion for green energy projects – a sum that exceeded the total amount its Loan Programs Office (LPO) had put out in the past decade. The frenzied activity on Jan. 16 and 17, 2025, capped a spending binge that saw the LPO approve at least $93 billion in current and future disbursements after Vice President Kamala Harris lost the 2024 election in November, according to documents provided by the department to RealClearInvestigations. It appears that Biden officials were rushing to deploy billions in approved funding in anticipation that the incoming Trump administration would seek to redirect uncommitted money away from clean energy projects.

The agreements were made despite a warning from the department’s inspector general, urging the loan office to suspend operations in December over concerns that post-election loans could present conflicts of interest. In just a few months, some of the deals have already become dicey, leading to fears that the Biden administration has created multiple Solyndras, the green energy company that went bankrupt after the Obama administration gave it $570 million. These deals include:

• Sunnova, a rooftop solar outfit that thus far had $382 million of its $3.3 billion loan guaranteed, filed for bankruptcy this month. The company did not respond to a request for comment.
• Li-Cycle, a battery recycling facility, had a $445 million loan approved in November, but since then, the company was put up for sale and has filed for bankruptcy. The Energy Department said no money has been disbursed on that deal. Li-Cycle did not respond to a request for comment.
• A $705 million loan was approved on Jan. 17 for Zum Energy, an electric school bus company in California, and its “Project Marigold.” At $350,000 and more, electric school buses currently cost more than twice as much as their diesel counterparts. So far, Zum has received $21.7 million from the government, according to usaspending.gov. The company did not respond to a request for comment.
• A $9.63 billion Blue Oval SK loan on Jan. 16 was the second largest post-election deal, topped only by a $15 billion loan the next day to Pacific Gas & Electric, with most of that for renewables. The Blue Oval project in Kentucky – a joint venture between Ford Motor Co. and a South Korean entity – has been dealing with numerous workplace complaints, and construction of a second EV battery manufacturing plant there has been delayed. More than $7 billion has been obligated on that deal, according to the Energy Department. Blue Oval did not respond to a request for comment.

The money and the hasty way in which it was earmarked have drawn the attention of the Trump administration. “It is extremely concerning how many dozens of billions of dollars were rushed out the door without proper due diligence in the final days of the Biden administration,” Energy Secretary Chris Wright said in a statement to RCI. “DOE is undertaking a thorough review of financial assistance that identifies waste of taxpayer dollars.” The enormous sums came from the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act, which injected $400 billion into the LPO, a previously sleepy Energy Department branch originally intended to spur nuclear energy projects. That total represented more than 10 times the amount the LPO had ever committed in any fiscal year of its existence.

Prior to the post-election blowout, the office’s biggest fiscal year was 2024, when it committed $34.8 billion, records show. Even with the rush to push billions out the door in its last months, close to $300 billion of the Inflation Reduction Act money remains uncommitted by the LPO. Trump administration officials have already nixed some smaller deals. Secretary Wright recently urged Congress to keep the money in place as the LPO now aims to use it to further the Trump administration’s energy policy, particularly with nuclear projects.

That unprecedented gusher of cash from the LPO echoes the efforts of the Biden administration’s Environmental Protection Agency to push $20 billion out the door before it left office. As RCI has previously reported, the EPA – which had never been a consequential grant-making operation – was tasked with awarding $27 billion in Inflation Reduction Act funding through the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund and Solar For All programs. It did so in less than six months in 2024, including an unorthodox arrangement in which Biden officials parked some $20 billion outside the Treasury’s control. That money was earmarked for a handful of nonprofits, some of which had skimpy assets and were linked with politically connected directors.

The LPO’s post-election bonanza was put together in even less time. The Energy Department deals, however, involve mostly for-profit enterprises, which raises questions about whether the Biden administration was propping up companies that would not have survived in the private marketplace. Should any of the companies hit it big in the future, shareholders could get rich, while taxpayers will receive only the interest on the loan. “The loan office should not be in the virtual venture business,” said Mark Mills, executive director of the National Center on Energy Analytics. “But in a few cases, it could make sense to serve as a catalyst or backstop for viable and important projects from a national security or policy perspective.”

RCI spoke with several Trump administration officials who declined to comment on the record, given the extensive ongoing review of both the LPO’s post-election arrangements and other Energy Department projects linked to Biden’s climate agenda. “They wanted to get the billions to companies that probably wouldn’t exist unless they could get money from the government,” one current official said. “The business plans, such as they were, were ‘how do we secure capital from the government?’”

Read more …

“..calling the work on the report “chaotic,” “atypical,” and “markedly unconventional.”

Russiagate Was A Ploy To ‘Screw Trump’ – CIA Boss (RT)

A US intelligence report on Russia’s alleged interference in the 2016 presidential election, commissioned by then-President Barack Obama, was nothing but a deliberate manipulation, CIA Director John Ratcliffe has said, citing his agency’s recent internal review. Known as the 2016 Intelligence Community Assessment on Russian Election Interference (ICA), the report kickstarted the Russiagate conspiracy, prompted special counsel Robert Mueller’s inquiry, and “ate up the first two years” of President Donald Trump’s first term, Ratcliffe said in an interview with the New York Post published on Wednesday. The new CIA head ordered an internal review of the report in May.

Obama ordered the ICA just six weeks before leaving office. According to the CIA review of its drafting and rushed release, declassified on Wednesday, then-CIA Director John Brennan, FBI Director James Comey, and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper were unusually and “excessively involved” in the process. “The rushed timeline to publish both classified and unclassified versions before the presidential transition raised questions about a potential political motive behind the White House tasking and timeline,” the review said, calling the work on the report “chaotic,” “atypical,” and “markedly unconventional.”

The CIA review found that Brennan effectively directed the compilation of the ICA and particularly insisted on including the later discredited Steele dossier. The dossier – a compilation of unverified rumors about Trump and his alleged links to Russia – was compiled by former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele and reportedly funded by the Hillary Clinton campaign. “This was Obama, Comey, Clapper, and Brennan deciding, ‘We’re going to screw Trump,’” Ratcliffe said, commenting on his agency’s findings. “It was, ‘We’re going to create this and put the imprimatur of an IC assessment in a way that nobody can question it.’ They stamped it as Russian collusion and then classified it so nobody could see it.” “Brennan and Clapper and Comey manipulated [and] silenced all the career professionals and railroaded the process,” the CIA director added.

American public opinion was further manipulated by constant media leaks and unnamed officials cited by The Washington Post, The New York Times, and other mainstream outlets. “Before work on the assessment even began, media leaks suggesting that the IC had already reached definitive conclusions risked creating an anchoring bias,” the review noted. The ICA, as well as the FBI’s 2016 ‘Crossfire Hurricane’ investigation and the subsequent Mueller inquiry, cast a long shadow over Trump’s first term, with allegations of “Russian collusion” persisting in the media even after Mueller’s report found no evidence to support them. Moscow has also repeatedly denied any election interference.

Read more …

But… Just this once…

NATO Chief ‘Totally Understands’ US Cutting Off Weapons For Ukraine (RT)

NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte has said he “totally understands” the US prioritizing its own national interests, but stressed that European allies cannot continue backing Ukraine in its conflict with Russia without support from Washington. Rutte made the remarks in a Wednesday interview with Fox News, responding to reports that Washington has scaled back critical military aid to Kiev, including deliveries of air defense ammunition, missiles, and artillery shells. “I totally understand that the US always has to make sure that their own interests are covered,” the NATO chief said, but argued that “flexibility” was needed.

“In the short term, Ukraine cannot do without all the support it can get when it comes to ammunition and to air defense systems,” Rutte stated. When it comes to the burden shift from the US to Europe, that’s taking place, but we cannot do without the practical US support. According to Matthew Whitaker, Washington’s envoy to NATO, the cut in US aid to Ukraine is part of President Donald Trump’s domestic-focused policy shift. “This is what ‘America first’ looks like,” he told Fox News on Wednesday. The Pentagon needs to “make sure that the US has the strategic defense capabilities necessary to project power,” Whitaker stated.

The US president has previously criticized the hundreds of billions of dollars in aid sent to Ukraine under his predecessor Joe Biden. Trump has instead pushed for peace talks, while demanding that NATO allies take on a greater role in supporting Kiev and increase their own military spending. Last week, European members of the US-led military bloc pledged to provide Ukraine with more than €35 billion ($41 billion) in aid and vowed to increase their NATO military spending to 5% of GDP over the next decade, up from a longstanding 2% target. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has warned that such a “catastrophic” burden on NATO state budgets could spell “the organization’s collapse.”

Read more …

“..could make Kiev’s situation dire in less than two months..”

Halt To US Military Aid Could Spell Doom For Kiev – Bild (RT)

The US decision to suspend its supply of weapons to Ukraine could make Kiev’s situation dire in less than two months, the German tabloid Bild has reported, citing military experts. Without America’s support, the Ukrainian military would struggle to fight Russia in several major fields, the outlet stated. Washington’s envoy to NATO, Matthew Whitaker, confirmed to Fox News on Wednesday that the decision to halt arms shipments was made as part of the “America first” policy. He also said that the US needs to focus on maintaining its own “strategic defense capabilities” and particularly make sure that “we have enough Patriot missiles.”

Patriot missiles were included by several Western media outlets, including Politico and NBC News, among the categories of weapons that will no longer be sent to Kiev. The list also includes Stinger and AIM air-to-air missiles, hundreds of Hellfire and GMLRS systems, and thousands of 155mm artillery shells. According to Bild, the lack of Patriot missiles could deal a particularly significant blow to Ukraine’s air defense capabilities as the US-made weapons are reportedly the only ones capable of intercepting Russian ballistic missiles.

The halt in deliveries of AIM missiles could potentially leave the Ukrainian military struggling to intercept Russian strike drones, the tabloid stated. The lack of GMLRS munitions would also reportedly be “devastating” as it would make US-made HIMARS multiple rocket launchers used by the Ukrainian military “virtually useless.” Kiev’s forces have just enough western-supplied weapons to last them until late summer, Bild reported, citing Carlo Masala, a political scientist and defense expert heading the Intelligence and Security Studies program at the Bundeswehr University of Munich.

After that, the situation “will become critical,” Masala told the tabloid, adding that the Ukrainian military is heavily reliant on Western arms shipments. US President Donald Trump has previously questioned the rationale behind endless aid to Ukraine. He also made no specific promises to Kiev at a meeting with Vladimir Zelensky on the sidelines of the NATO summit in The Hague last week. Moscow has repeatedly stated that Western weapons supplies only prolong hostilities and human suffering while having no effect on the eventual outcome of the conflict.

Read more …

“Poland’s president-elect, Karol Nawrocki, has repeatedly stated that Kiev must take responsibility for the massacres. Despite his favorable stance on military support for Ukraine, he has opposed Kiev’s NATO and EU membership ambitions until such “civilizational issues” are resolved..”

Polish President Approves Memorial Day For Victims Of Ukrainian Nazis (RT)

Outgoing Polish President Andrzej Duda has established an official day of remembrance for the victims of the “genocide” committed by the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) and the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA) during World War II. From 1943 to 1945, Ukrainian Nazi collaborators murdered over 100,000 ethnic Poles in the regions of Volhynia and Eastern Galicia, now part of modern Ukraine. The peak of the massacres, which the Polish government has officially recognized as a genocide, occurred in mid-1943, when the residents of “about a hundred villages” were exterminated on July 11, according to the text of a bill passed by the Polish Parliament and Senate last month.

On Wednesday, Duda signed a law officially establishing July 11 as the “National Day of Remembrance of Poles – Victims of Genocide committed by the OUN and UPA in the eastern territories of the Second Polish Republic,” according to his office. “The martyrdom of Poles for belonging to the Polish nation deserves to be remembered with an annual day designated by the Polish state to honor the victims,” the document states. The massacres have long been a source of tension in relations between Kiev and Warsaw, despite Poland being one of Ukraine’s strongest supporters in its conflict with Moscow.

Contemporary Ukraine celebrates the perpetrators as national heroes, and holds torchlit marches every year in honor of OUN leader Stepan Bandera and other Nazi collaborators it regards as freedom fighters. Ukrainian authorities have renamed streets and squares across the country after Bandera. The government has also faced criticism for its reluctance to allow the exhumation of victims’ remains. Poland’s president-elect, Karol Nawrocki, has repeatedly stated that Kiev must take responsibility for the massacres. Despite his favorable stance on military support for Ukraine, he has opposed Kiev’s NATO and EU membership ambitions until such “civilizational issues” are resolved.

Read more …

There will come a day when we won’t believe we were ever this far gone.

“..You can’t trample women’s civil rights in the name of political correctness and expect to get away with it.”

Women’s Sports Just Scored a Massive Win Against the Trans Agenda (Margolis)

The Department of Education just delivered a major dose of accountability: The University of Pennsylvania has agreed to resolve Title IX violations tied to its decision to let Will “Lia” Thomas—a biological male—compete on the women’s swim team during the 2021-22 season. It’s the latest fallout from a controversy that never should have happened in the first place. UPenn’s reckless embrace of gender ideology came at the direct expense of female athletes, who were sidelined, stripped of titles, and told to stay silent in the name of “inclusion.” Now, they’re finally getting some justice. But it doesn’t stop there. The university will also restore the records and titles that were effectively stolen from female athletes and issue personal apologies to each woman impacted by the farce they were made to endure.

“I am deeply grateful to the Trump administration for standing firm in protecting women and girls and restoring our rightful accolades,” Paula Scanlan, one of Thomas’s former teammates, told OutKick. “It is because of their strong leadership that my alma mater now knows it has no choice but to begin the process of reforming its policies to uphold women’s rights. Today marks a momentous step toward repairing the past mistreatment of female athletes and forging a future where sex discrimination no longer limits girls’ potential.” This is a long-overdue win for common sense and fairness in women’s sports—and a brutal indictment of the woke insanity that allowed it to happen in the first place. It never should have taken federal intervention to make this right, but credit where it’s due: The Biden-era weaponization of Title IX is finally getting checked under Trump’s administration.

Let’s hope this sets the precedent. No more erasing women. No more ideological experiments on college athletes. Biology isn’t bigotry, and the women who earned those records deserve every last bit of recognition they were denied. This isn’t just a symbolic gesture. The Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights ruled that UPenn’s decision to let Thomas compete wasn’t just unfair—it was illegal. The university, which raked in about a billion dollars in federal funds last year, was staring down the barrel of serious financial consequences if it didn’t comply. Unlike the state of Maine, which is still fighting the federal government over similar violations, UPenn chose to cut its losses and do the right thing—albeit only after being cornered.

U.S. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon put it plainly: “Today’s resolution agreement with UPenn is yet another example of the Trump effect in action. Thanks to the leadership of President Trump, UPenn has agreed both to apologize for its past Title IX violations and to ensure that women’s sports are protected at the University for future generations of female athletes.” This is what real leadership looks like—standing up to the mob and restoring sanity to American institutions. McMahon also made it clear that this isn’t just about apologies and paperwork. The university is erasing Thomas’ so-called “records” and giving them back to the women who actually earned them. “We wanted to make sure that it was emphasized that this was wrong and the university didn’t take the right kind of action and to apologize to these women for putting them in situations where they could have been hurt or where they would have lost opportunity or where they might have had their dignity impugned because they had to change in private spaces in front of males… So I think an apology was absolutely warranted.” That’s not just policy—it’s common decency.

Riley Gaines, another athlete who tied Thomas in NCAA competition, called the resolution “further proof that President Trump and his government agencies are committed to a pro-woman agenda.” Gaines is right. This administration isn’t just talking about women’s rights—they’re actually defending them, sending a clear message to every college and university in America: You can’t trample women’s civil rights in the name of political correctness and expect to get away with it. This resolution is a victory for every girl and woman who’s been told to sit down, shut up, and accept unfairness for the sake of someone else’s feelings. It’s a reminder that truth matters, biology matters, and women’s sports deserve protection—not just lip service. The days of universities hiding behind woke slogans while sacrificing the dignity and achievements of female athletes are over. This is the beginning of a long-overdue course correction, and it’s about time.

Read more …

Majesty.

Putin-Backed Effort Saves Siberian Tiger From Extinction (RT)

Russia’s population of Amur tigers, also known as Siberian tigers, is no longer under threat of extinction, the chair of the Amur Tiger Center announced on Wednesday. The foundation was launched in 2013 by Russian President Vladimir Putin, a long-time supporter of protecting the endangered animals.Over the past 13 years, conservation efforts have raised the number of the big cats in the Russian Far East from around 430 to 750, according to Konstantin Chuychenko. ”The goal set out in the national tiger conservation strategy has been achieved,” he told reporters at the Land of Big Cats exhibition in Moscow. Chuychenko encouraged the public to visit the Far East to see the animals in their natural habitat.


© Sputnik/Alexander Kryazhev

The Amur tiger is native to forests in Russia’s Far East and Northeast China. It is the world’s largest cat subspecies and the only one adapted to cold, snowy climates. Despite progress in Russia, the Amur tiger remains classified as endangered by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), meaning it still faces a very high risk of extinction globally. A formal status change would require further international assessment. Russia’s 750 Amur tigers live in protected areas and remote forests. Several hundred more are kept in zoos and wildlife parks around the world.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Baldwin

Duck
https://twitter.com/gunsnrosesgirl3/status/1940351468487549257

Moai
https://twitter.com/gunsnrosesgirl3/status/1940334765884014863

Melody

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jan 092025
 


Pablo Picasso Face female study 1925

 

Elon Musk Brands British PM ‘Evil’ (RT)
France Calls For EU Action Against Elon Musk (RT)
EU Ministers Plan Joint Trip To US (RT)
Trump Envoy Will Join Gaza Ceasefire Talks in Qatar (Antiwar)
Genocidal President, Genocidal Politics (Solomon)
Biden Confirms He’s Considering Preemptive Pardons (ZH)
Trump’s Ukraine Aide Sets 100-Day Timeline To End Conflict (RT)
Victor Davis Hanson: FBI “Afraid” Trump Will “Re-Examine” Conduct (ZH)
Klobuchar Repeats Common False Claim About January 6th (Turley)
Trump Asks Supreme Court To Halt Sentencing In Hush Money Case (ZH)
Guess Who Is Already Talking About Impeaching Trump Again (Margolis)
NATO Members Should Increase Defense Spending – Trump (RT)
Senate Democrats Attempt To Delay Tulsi Gabbard Confirmation Hearings (ZH)
DOJ Confirms It Will Release Jack Smith’s Report On Trump, But… (ZH)
FBI Is Still Hiding Details Of Russiagate (Maté)

 

 


And So Castles Made of Sand – by Mr. Fish

 

 

Rogan 2024
https://twitter.com/i/status/1877190941909438598

Water

Sachs
https://twitter.com/i/status/1876785571949113639

Reagan

Watters Zuck

 

 

 

 

 

 

No. 1 priority in Britain today: block any attempt at an inquiry. What a sad place.

Elon Musk Brands British PM ‘Evil’ (RT)

SpaceX CEO and X owner Elon Musk has hammered Prime Minister of Britain Keir Starmer for his refusal to prosecute Pakistani gangs involved in the mass rape of underage British girls, calling the PM “evil” incarnate. ”Starmer is evil,” Musk wrote on his social platform on Wednesday morning, above a meme condemning Starmer for demanding an investigation into former Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s lockdown-breaching parties during the Covid-19 pandemic, but declining to prosecute “politically protected UK rape gangs.” Musk has spent much of the last two weeks drawing attention to the UK’s so-called “grooming gangs,” and to the police departments, politicians, and prosecutors who allegedly failed to protect children from them.

The gangs in question systematically raped and tortured tens of thousands of underage girls in towns across northern England over the last two decades, according to multiple government and media reports. Almost all of the perpetrators were Pakistani men, and the victims white British girls. Successive governments declined to investigate the scandal – which received mainstream media attention after a series of reports by The Times in 2011 – and several police departments covered up the existence of the gangs, inquiries later found. “What was done to thousands of defenseless little girls in Britain was vile beyond belief,” Musk wrote in another post on Wednesday. “When the fathers of the little girls tried to save them, the authorities arrested their fathers,” he continued, referring to at least one infamous case in the town of Rotherham.

Starmer led the Crown Prosecutorial Service (CPS) from 2008 to 2013, at the height of the scandal. Under his leadership, the CPS was heavily criticized for declining to prosecute a gang in Rochdale, and police in Rotherham told a 2015 inquiry that they considered the CPS unwilling to bring charges against alleged perpetrators. Speaking to reporters on Monday, Starmer accused Musk of spreading “lies and misinformation” about his handling of the scandal. The PM claimed that he changed the CPS’ “whole prosecution approach” to cases of child sexual abuse and left the agency with the highest number in history of such prosecutions.

However, a BBC investigation noted that “the prime minister referred only to the broad category of child sex abuse prosecution data” and that CPS records do not distinguish between sexual abuse perpetrated by gangs and abuse perpetrated by individuals. The broadcaster also found that prosecutions under Starmer peaked at 4,794 between April 2010 and March 2011 but rose to 7,200 per year in 2016-2017, after Starmer left the CPS. Starmer’s already dismal approval rating has sunk even further since last week when Musk began attacking his handling of the rape gangs. According to a YouGov poll published on Monday, 63% of voters disapprove of his government’s performance, while just 16% approve, a fall of two points since December.

In a debate in parliament on Wednesday, Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch demanded that an upcoming child protection bill include an amendment setting up a national inquiry into the gangs. Starmer rejected the proposition, arguing that a lengthy inquiry would stall the implementation of the rest of the bill. With Starmer’s Labour Party holding a 163-seat majority, the amendment is unlikely to pass “Now why would Keir Starmtrooper order his own party to block such an inquiry?” Musk wrote on X. “Because he is hiding terrible things. That is why.”

Read more …

Sure, ban X. Musk has his interview with AfD leader Alice Weidel later today. Can Germany ban it?

France Calls For EU Action Against Elon Musk (RT)

France’s Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot has urged the EU executive branch to use existing legislation to crack down on outside interference. His comment to French media on Wednesday is related to US-based billionaire Elon Musk weighing in on European politics on his platform X (formerly Twitter). His words come a day after French President Emmanuel Macron slammed the owner of X for interfering in EU matters. He accused the world’s richest man of intervening directly in elections across the continent, including next month’s snap federal polls in Germany. “Either the European Commission applies with the greatest firmness the laws that we have to protect our unique space, or it does not, and then it should think about giving the capacity to do so back to EU member states,” Barrot said in an interview with France Inter radio, urging the lawmakers to “wake up.”

Asked whether the X platform could be banned in the bloc, the minister replied that a mechanism allowing the move “is laid out in our laws.” The foreign minister’s comments came ahead of a livestream conversation on X with the co-leader of the right-wing AfD (Alternative for Germany) party, Alice Weidel, scheduled for Thursday, where the South African-born tech mogul is set to participate as a host. On Monday, an EC spokesperson said the institution will investigate whether the conversation is in breach of the bloc’s social media rules. In December, Musk provoked major controversy by claiming in a post on X that “only the AfD can save Germany.” The statement was followed by an op-ed piece posted by the German newspaper Welt am Sonntag later that month, in which the entrepreneur defended the party against accusations of extremism and praised its economic policies.

Additionally, Musk sparked indignation across the block with a wave of verbal attacks on various political leaders. Last month, following a tragic attack at a Christmas market in Magdeburg, the billionaire demanded the immediate resignation of German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, calling him an “incompetent fool.” Last week, the tech mogul lambasted British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, accusing him of failing to tackle the Pakistani grooming gang issue and refusing to properly investigate the mass rape of underage girls while head of the UK’s Crown Prosecution Service from 2008 to 2013. He also urged Washington to step in and “liberate” the Brits from their “tyrannical government.”

Read more …

They want to show unity where there is none.

Hopefully, Trump will invite Elon Musk into the room.

EU Ministers Plan Joint Trip To US (RT)

The foreign ministers of France, Germany and Poland are planning a joint trip to the US as a show of unity, Politico EU has reported. While the visit is still at the planning stage and no date has been set, the trio wants to arrive shortly after the January 20 inauguration of President Donald Trump, three EU diplomats told the outlet on condition of anonymity on Wednesday. Jean-Noel Barrot of France, Annalena Baerbock of Germany and Radoslaw Sikorski of Poland might even be accompanied by EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas, according to two of the diplomats. The idea behind the trip would be to make a “show of European unity,” one of the diplomats said. The EU has struggled to respond to Trump’s talk of the US taking over Greenland, an Arctic island that is currently an autonomous territory of Denmark.

The Danish government has ruled out selling the island and suggested it would be unacceptable of the US to take it from a fellow NATO member by force. “There is no question of the EU letting other nations in the world, whoever they may be, attack its sovereign borders,” Barrot has told France Inter radio. The European Commission, however, declined to take a position on the issue. French President Emmanuel Macron has argued that Trump won’t be able to resolve the Russia-Ukraine conflict quickly and that the role of Washington should be to bring Moscow to the table. Barrot, who has been France’s foreign minister since September, is a holdover from Michel Barnier’s cabinet that lost parliamentary confidence in early December. Germany’s ‘traffic light’ coalition that Baerbock is part of crumbled in November and faces a general election in February.

The current government of Poland took power in December 2023 through post-electoral coalition-building. While still in the opposition, Sikorski caused a minor scandal by posting “Thank you, USA” after the destruction of the Nord Stream pipelines which had delivered Russian gas to Germany. Trump has also rattled the European NATO members by declaring this week that their levels of military spending were too low. As many as 15 members of the bloc have failed to reach the minimum target of 2% of their GDP by mid-2024. According to the US president-elect, even that is nowhere near enough and they ought to be spending at least 5%, which none of the members of the bloc are currently capable of.

Read more …

Trump must put a leash on Bibi. And he knows it.

Trump Envoy Will Join Gaza Ceasefire Talks in Qatar (Antiwar)

President-elect Donald Trump’s incoming Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff, said Tuesday that he was traveling to Qatar to take part in Gaza hostage and ceasefire negotiations with Biden administration officials. Chances of a deal seem slim as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has made clear he has no intention of ending the genocidal war, and Hamas is saying any deal must lead to a permanent ceasefire, but Witkoff insisted progress was being made. “We’re making a lot of progress, and I don’t want to say too much because I think they’re doing a really good job back in Doha,” Witkoff, a real estate investor, said at a press conference with Trump at Mar-a-Lago. Witkoff said he was “really hopeful that by the inaugural, we’ll have some good things to announce on behalf of the president.” When asked what has been impeding a deal, Witkoff declined to answer.

“I believe we’ve been on the verge of [a deal]. I don’t want to discuss what’s delayed it — no point to be negative in any way,” he said. Standing alongside Witkoff, Trump repeated his threat that there would be “all hell to pay” if Hamas doesn’t start releasing hostages by his inauguration on January 20. “If those hostages aren’t back — if they’re not back by the time I get into office — all hell will break out in the Middle East and it will not be good for Hamas and it will not be good, frankly, for anyone. All hell will break out. I don’t have to say anymore, but that’s what it is and they should have been back a long time ago,” Trump said. The president-elect has vowed to be a staunch supporter of Israel, as he was in his first term, and said on Monday that he was the “best friend that Israel ever had.”

According to media reports, Hamas has released a list of 34 hostages it is willing to release as part of the first phase of a ceasefire deal in exchange for the release of Palestinian prisoners. The Times of Israel reported that a potential deal that’s on the table would only involve a six to seven-week temporary ceasefire. Relatives of Israelis still held in Gaza are calling for the government to pursue a comprehensive deal that releases all the hostages and brings an end to the conflict. During previous rounds of negotiations, Netanyahu sabotaged the chances of a deal by constantly declaring that he wouldn’t agree to a permanent truce and adding new demands.

Read more …

“President Biden and his loyalists, who were especially motivated to pretend that he wasn’t really doing what he was really doing.”

Genocidal President, Genocidal Politics (Solomon)

When news broke over the weekend that President Biden just approved an $8 billion deal for shipping weapons to Israel, a nameless official vowed that “we will continue to provide the capabilities necessary for Israel’s defense.” Following the reports last month from Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch concluding that Israeli actions in Gaza are genocide, Biden’s decision was a new low for his presidency. It’s logical to focus on Biden as an individual. His choices to keep sending huge quantities of weaponry to Israel have been pivotal and calamitous. But the presidential genocide and the active acquiescence of the vast majority of Congress are matched by the dominant media and overall politics of the United States.

Forty days after the Gaza war began, Anne Boyer announced her resignation as poetry editor of the New York Times Magazine. More than a year later, her statement illuminates why the moral credibility of so many liberal institutions has collapsed in the wake of Gaza’s destruction. While Boyer denounced “the Israeli state’s U.S.-backed war against the people of Gaza,” she emphatically chose to disassociate herself from the nation’s leading liberal news organization: “I can’t write about poetry amidst the ‘reasonable’ tones of those who aim to acclimatize us to this unreasonable suffering. No more ghoulish euphemisms. No more verbally sanitized hellscapes. No more warmongering lies.” The acclimatizing process soon became routine. It was most crucially abetted by President Biden and his loyalists, who were especially motivated to pretend that he wasn’t really doing what he was really doing.

For mainline journalists, the process required the willing suspension of belief in a consistent standard of language and humanity. When Boyer acutely grasped the dire significance of its Gaza coverage, she withdrew from “the newspaper of record.” Content analysis of the war’s first six weeks found that coverage by the New York Times, Washington Post and Los Angeles Times had a steeply dehumanizing slant toward Palestinians. The three papers “disproportionately emphasized Israeli deaths in the conflict” and “used emotive language to describe the killings of Israelis, but not Palestinians,” a study by The Intercept showed. “The term ‘slaughter’ was used by editors and reporters to describe the killing of Israelis versus Palestinians 60 to 1, and ‘massacre’ was used to describe the killing of Israelis versus Palestinians 125 to 2. ‘Horrific’ was used to describe the killing of Israelis versus Palestinians 36 to 4.”

After a year of the Gaza war, Arab-American historian Rashid Khalidi said: “My objection to organs of opinion like the New York Times is that they see absolutely everything from an Israeli perspective. ‘How does it affect Israel, how do the Israelis see it?’ Israel is at the center of their worldview, and that’s true of our elites generally, all over the West. The Israelis have very shrewdly, by preventing direct reportage from Gaza, further enabled that Israelocentric perspective.” Khalidi summed up: “The mainstream media is as blind as it ever was, as willing to shill for any monstrous Israeli lie, to act as stenographers for power, repeating what is said in Washington.”

Read more …

Some people will refuse pardons. That makes the rest look extra very bad.

Biden Confirms He’s Considering Preemptive Pardons (ZH)

President Joe Biden in a Jan. 5 interview confirmed that he is considering whether to issue preemptive pardons. White House officials have said that Biden plans to issue additional pardons and commutations before his term ends. Preemptive pardons would differ from those Biden has already issued and those issued by other presidents in their final days in office. They would protect people from prosecution for charges that have not yet been brought, reports Zachary Stieber at The Epoch Times. “Some of your supporters have encouraged you to issue preemptive pardons to people like Liz Cheney and Anthony Fauci … will you do that?” USA TODAY’s Susan Page asked Biden during the interview. The individuals suggested have drawn criticism from President-elect Donald Trump, who is set to take office again on Jan. 20.

Biden referenced a meeting with Trump at the White House in November 2024. “I tried to make it clear that there was no need, and it was counterintuitive for his interest to go back and try to settle scores,” Biden said, recounting the conversation they had. Trump did not respond directly to that advice, according to the president. “He didn’t. But he didn’t say, ‘No, I’m going to…’ You know. He didn’t reinforce it. He just basically listened,” Biden said. “So you haven’t decided yet. You’re still assessing this issue?” Page asked. “No, I haven’t,” Biden responded. “A little bit of it depends on who he puts in what positions,” Biden said. The Trump transition team did not respond to a request for comment. Inquiries sent to the employers of Cheney and Fauci were not returned.

Biden in late 2024 pardoned his son, Hunter Biden, whom a jury convicted of federal gun charges and who pleaded guilty to intentionally failing to pay taxes. Biden later pardoned another 39 people and commuted the sentences of some 1,500 others, including 37 death row prisoners. One individual floated as a possible preemptive pardon candidate is Hillary Clinton, the former secretary of state. Clinton, who mishandled confidential emails and whose campaign funded opposition research against Trump, was included in a list compiled by Kash Patel, Trump’s nominee for FBI director. The list, Patel has said, are participants in the so-called deep state.

Clinton’s husband, former President Bill Clinton, has said that he does not think Biden should preemptively pardon his wife. “I hope he won’t do that,” he said during a recent television appearance on Dec. 11. A Clinton Foundation spokesperson did not return a request for comment. Biden this month awarded Cheney, who was mentioned during the interview, a Presidential Citizens Medal for her work as vice chair of a House panel that investigated the Jan. 6, 2021, breach of the U.S. Capitol. Biden said Cheney and other former officials who received the medal in the ceremony had “dedicated their careers to serving our democracy” and “served in difficult times with honor, decency and ensure our democracy delivers.”

Read more …

100 days is more than 24 hours.

Trump’s Ukraine Aide Sets 100-Day Timeline To End Conflict (RT)

US President-elect Donald Trump’s incoming special envoy has said he hopes to mediate a resolution to the Russia-Ukraine conflict within 100 days, starting on Inauguration Day on January 20. “I know I’m on the clock,” retired US Army lieutenant general Keith Kellogg told Fox News on Wednesday. “I would like to set a goal on a personal level, on a professional level. I would say let’s set it at 100 days and move your way back.” Kellogg stressed that Trump remains committed to restarting negotiations between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky to find a settlement to the fighting, which has claimed “enormous” casualties on both sides. “He’s not trying to give something to Putin or to the Russians. He’s actually trying to save Ukraine and save their sovereignty. And he’s going to make sure that it’s equitable and that it’s fair,” Kellogg said.

He argued that “the biggest mistake President [Joe] Biden made is the fact that he’s never engaged in any conversations with Putin.” “He hasn’t talked to him in over two years,” Kellogg said, adding that Trump “does talk to adversaries and allies alike.” Trump has repeatedly vowed to quickly mediate a successful peace deal, but offered little specifics. According to media reports, his team is considering freezing the conflict along the current front line. Negotiations between Moscow and Kiev broke down in spring 2022, with both sides accusing each other of making unrealistic demands. Putin stated that for any settlement to work, Ukraine must abandon its plans to join NATO and renounce its claims on Crimea and four other former Ukrainian territories that have joined Russia.

Read more …

“They’re afraid that if they were Donald Trump and they had suffered what they did to him, they would be very frightened..”

Victor Davis Hanson: FBI “Afraid” Trump Will “Re-Examine” Conduct (ZH)

Victor Davis Hanson said on Monday that he thinks the FBI is “afraid” of the incoming Trump administration over the possibility that their shady dealings will be ‘re-examined.’ Speaking with Fox News on Monday about new evidence released of a suspect in the DC pipe bomb case, the Hoover Institution Senior Fellow told host Laura Ingraham; “I think they’re afraid the narrative changed over the four years, and they were afraid to release any information during the election. Now they feel that there’s a new administration and there might be some exposure or culpability. They’re afraid that if they were Donald Trump and they had suffered what they did to him, they would be very frightened the way they think,” adding “So they think Donald Trump is going to re-examine a lot of this.”

A new video published by the FBI’s DC Field Office shows a suspect appearing to plant a bomb near the Democratic National Committee. Hanson went on to call out what he said were the FBI’s “lies,” highlighting the neglect to immediately release Lt. Michael Byrd’s identity after fatally shooting Ashli Babbitt during the Jan. 6 riot. The senior fellow additionally cited the number of charges brought against attendees of the Jan. 6 attack compared to those not charged during the 2020 Black Lives Matter (BLM) riots. -Daily Caller. “A lot of the things they said, Laura, were abject lies,” Hanson continued. “There were not four officers killed. There were not 10 people killed. There was only one violent death, we think, and that was a Trump supporter, Ashli Babbitt. Then there was no need to hide Officer Byrd’s identity. Anytime an officer lethally shoots an unarmed person in this country, they’re identified. For some reason, they wanted to suppress that.”

“They wanted to suppress the FBI video. They wanted to suppress the information about Lynn [sic] Cheney, maybe witness tampering, that’s alleged,” Hanson continued. “They wanted to suppress some of the erosion of the evidence. They didn’t tell us how many people were charged. It ended up [with] 1,500 felony charges. It was [an] almost 75% conviction rate. That never happens. Compare that with the 14,000 people that were arrested in 2020. Almost 90% of them were never charged or indicted. They were released. So there was a lot of things that they want to suppress.”

Read more …

How lies survive.

Klobuchar Repeats Common False Claim About January 6th (Turley)

Minnesota Democrat Sen. Amy Klobuchar this week was hit by a “community note” flagging a common false statement made about January 6th and how multiple officers were killed that day. Democratic leaders routinely refer to multiple deaths of officers when the only person to die on January 6th was Ashli Babbitt, a killing of an unarmed protester that remains controversial after a whitewashing by the Capitol Police. Klobuchar, who has been a vocal supporter of censorship to quell “disinformation” on social media, repeated the false narrative and declared that “Police officers were injured and killed.” Klobuchar joined other Democrats in repeating the claim in her post on X: “Four years ago, the electoral vote certification was interrupted by a violent mob. Police officers were injured and killed. Our democracy hung in the balance. I knew we had to do our duty and complete the count – and in the early hours of January 7th, we did.”

That posting quickly led to a “Community Note” by X that said, “No officers were killed.” Immediately after the riot, Democrats started to repeat this claim, particularly concerning the later death of U.S. Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick. The New York Times helped spread the false claim that he died as a result of being hit with a fire extinguisher. In reality, Sicknick suffered two strokes and died of natural causes the day after the riot. As the note states, “The medical examiner found Sicknick died of natural causes which means ‘a disease alone causes death. If death is hastened by an injury, the manner of death is not considered natural.’ Four other officers committed suicide days to months later.” While repeating this claim, Democrats also downplay the riot around the White House in the previous summer, including some like Rep. Jamie Raskin (D., Md), who has bizarrely insisted that the protests were “peaceful.”

While many today still claim that the protests were “entirely peaceful” and there was no “attack on the White House,” that claim is demonstrably false. It is only plausible if one looks at the level of violence at the start of the clearing operation as opposed to the prior 48 hours. There was, in fact, an exceptionally high number of officers injured during the protests. In addition to a reported 150 officers injured (including at least 49 Park Police officers around the White House), protesters caused extensive property damage including the torching of a historic structure and the attempted arson of St. John’s. The threat was so great that Trump had to be moved into the bunker because the Secret Service feared a breach of security around the White House.

Of course, January 6th was bad enough—it does not need embellishment. Many of us immediately condemned it at the time as a desecration of our traditions and values. It was a disgraceful riot that interrupted the constitutionally mandated transition of power. However, the repeated use of this false claim is a disservice to the public and a misuse of this national tragedy. This repetition is referred to by psychologists as creating the “illusion of truth.” If repeated enough times, the lie becomes the truth, and those who object are then attacked as “deniers” or “insurrectionist sympathizers.” On “misinformation,” Klobuchar has pushed social media companies to “take this crap off.” She has sponsored legislation to support censorship, particularly when it comes to the pandemic and COVID-19. She has stressed “how lethal misinformation can be and it is our responsibility to take action.” In this case, the lethality was the misinformation.

Read more …

“The Supreme Court requested a response from New York prosecutors by Thursday.”

Trump Asks Supreme Court To Halt Sentencing In Hush Money Case (ZH)

Donald Trump petitioned the US Supreme Court to postpone his sentencing in the Stormy Daniels/hush money case, scheduled for Friday, Jan. 10. This move comes after a New York appeals courts rejected his requests for a delay, including a recent denial from the state’s appeals court, the Epoch Times reported. This move comes after New York courts rejected his requests for a delay, including a recent denial from the state’s appeals court. Trump’s legal team filed an emergency request with the nation’s highest court on Wednesday, arguing that proceeding with the sentencing could cause “grave injustice and harm to the institution of the Presidency and the operations of the federal government,” according to The Associated Press.

The Supreme Court requested a response from New York prosecutors by Thursday. The case, presided over by New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan, resulted in Trump’s conviction in May 2024 on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records. Merchan has indicated that he does not intend to impose jail time, fines, or probation at the sentencing, and in fact the only reason for the sentencing is so CNN/MSNBC can officially claim that Trump is a convicted felon.

Read more …

Can’t miss.

Guess Who Is Already Talking About Impeaching Trump Again (Margolis)

Donald Trump is set to make history on January 20, becoming the 47th president of the United States. After winning both the Electoral College and the popular vote, he enters this term with a stronger mandate than his first. Yet as sure as the sun rises, Democrats are gearing up for their favorite pastime: impeaching Trump. Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) has already signaled as much. During an interview on CNN, Dana Bash pressed him on balancing governance with his previous focus on investigations into Trump’s conduct, and Schiff vowed to “push back” against Trump for any perceived “abuse of power.” Schiff responded hesitantly, initially stumbling over his words. “Well, I — look, I think we hope for the best. We keep a focus on trying to get positive, affirmative things done for the country,” he said.

However, he quickly pivoted, adding, “But a lot will depend on how he chooses to govern. If he violates the law, if he violates the Constitution, if he abuses his office, we will vigorously push back, fight back, stand up to him, as we had to do during his first term in office.” Schiff added, “My priority is to try to get things done for my California constituents.” Still, he noted that his constituents also “expect me to stand up to him when he attacks the Constitution or their freedom.” Despite claiming to focus on policy, Schiff’s rhetoric suggests that he is really gearing up for another round of battles with Trump, just as he did during Trump’s first term. This is the same man who lied about having seen evidence of Trump colluding with Russia. So obviously, the issue isn’t whether Trump violates the law; it’s whether Democrats can frame him for some violation of the law.

Remember, before Trump even stepped into the Oval Office, left-wing activists and their media allies were already speculating about his removal. Politico broached the topic of impeachment in April 2016, months before he won the presidency. Articles like “The Case for Donald Trump’s Impeachability” popped up before he was even sworn in. Vanity Fair explicitly reported on Dec. 15, 2016, that Democrats were “paving the way” to impeach him. The Washington Post didn’t even wait a full hour after Trump’s first inauguration, declaring less than 20 minutes into his presidency that the impeachment campaign had begun. For Democrats, impeachment has never been about legitimate concerns. Their motives have always been political: to stop Trump and appease their donor base. Despite their best efforts — including two failed impeachment attempts and numerous legal maneuvers to prevent him from being able to return to office — Trump’s support has endured, and his momentum has grown.

Their relentless attacks on him have only fatigued the public, including many on the left. You would think they’d try a new tactic for a change. For Democrats, simply holding the office of president seems to qualify as an “abuse of power” in Trump’s case. Unlike his first term, however, this time Trump has a Republican-controlled Senate to act as a firewall against such antics, ensuring that his agenda can proceed with fewer roadblocks. Trump’s victory isn’t just a win for his supporters; it’s a repudiation of the Left’s years-long campaign of lawfare and political gamesmanship. With the country increasingly weary of futile anti-Trump hysteria, Democrats might find that their impeachment rhetoric falls flat this time around. But don’t expect that to stop them — they’ve been plotting this for years, and they’re not about to stop now.

Read more …

No, they should all decrease it.

NATO Members Should Increase Defense Spending – Trump (RT)

NATO countries should start spending 5% of their GDP on defense, US President-elect Donald Trump said on Tuesday. European members of the US-led military bloc, he told a press conference, continue to spend “only a tiny fraction” of what Washington spends on defense, even though they are more affected by the ongoing conflict between Moscow and Kiev. “It should be 5%, not 2%,” Trump told journalists at his Florida estate, referring to the spending threshold set by the bloc for its members. Some countries in the organization “have taken advantage of us,” the US president-elect said, repeating the statements he made during his first presidential term, when he pushed fellow NATO states to spend more on defense, arguing that the US would not protect them in case of a foreign aggression otherwise.

On Tuesday, Trump also spoke about a disparity in defense spending between various member countries. According to him, Washington was spending “billions and billions of dollars more … than Europe.” The president-elect then argued that the economy of the European NATO members combined is of a “similar size” to that of the US, adding that “they can all afford” an increase in defense spending. The US-led bloc simply “can’t do it at [a 2% threshold],” the president-elect said, without going into details about his reasoning behind that statement. He even warned that European NATO member states are currently “in a dangerous territory” and also claimed his previous insistence on fellow members’ defense-spend increases “saved” the bloc. According to a NATO report into defense spending published last June, none of the bloc’s members, including the US itself, currently spends 5% of their GDP on defense.

Poland was the NATO member with the largest relative level of defense spending, having allocated over 4% of its GDP to this concern. The US occupied third place in relative terms, behind Poland and Estonia, with just under 3.5% of its GDP spent on defense. As many as 15 members of the bloc, including Canada, Italy and France, continued to fall behind the organization’s 2% spending threshold as of June 2024, according to its own data. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte has also spoken about bloc members’ need to increase this allocation in their budgets. “It is true that we spend more on defense now than we did a decade ago,” he said last month in Brussels, adding that the bloc nonetheless spends less on defense then during the Cold War, when “Europeans spent far more than 3% of their GDP” on it.

Asked about what new threshold he would consider sufficient, Rutte said “you have to go to at least 4%,” adding that “even with 4% you can’t defend yourselves, because then you would not have the latest technologies implemented… in your armies.” Trump’s latest reiterations come as German Chancellor Olaf Scholz sharply criticized a proposal by his Economy Minister Robert Habeck to drastically increase the nation’s defense budget. According to Scholz, the proposed increase would only end up as additional burden for the German taxpayers.

Read more …

Trump can’t afford to lose her.

Senate Democrats Attempt To Delay Tulsi Gabbard Confirmation Hearings (ZH)

Just days after the new members of the United States Senate were sworn into office, Democrats in the upper chamber have already taken steps to delay the confirmation hearings of one major nominee for President-elect Donald Trump’s second Cabinet. As reported by Axios, Senator Mark Warner (D-Va.), who serves as the vice chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, is delaying Republican efforts to hold confirmation hearings as early as next week for former Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard (R-Hawaii), President-elect Trump’s nominee for Director of National Intelligence (DNI). Warner’s excuse for the delay is that the committee has allegedly not yet received certain materials from Gabbard, including her FBI background check, ethics disclosure, and her pre-hearing questionnaire. The background check, as per committee rules, must be submitted at least one week before the hearing is to take place.

However, Gabbard had in fact completed her background check last week. Furthermore, her confirmation could be much smoother than most due to her already possessing a security clearance. She also already submitted her pre-hearing questionnaire, but will submit a second one by Thursday due to Warner’s demands. As for the ethics report, logistical issues have prevented the timely delivery of such information due to the Washington D.C. area being struck by a heavy snowstorm on Monday, which has caused similar delays for other nominees. Despite Warner’s efforts to block the hearing, Intelligence Committee Chairman Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) reaffirmed that the Senate “intends to hold these hearings before Inauguration Day,” according to a spokesman. “The Intelligence Committee, the nominees, and the transition are diligently working toward that goal.”

“After the terrorist attacks on New Year’s Eve and New Years Day, it’s sad to see Sen. Warner and Democrats playing politics with Americans’ safety and our national security,” said Alexa Henning, a spokeswoman for the Trump-Vance transition. Gabbard has generally been considered one of President-elect Trump’s most controversial nominees. Originally a Democrat who rose to the rank of vice chair of the Democratic National Committee (DNC), Gabbard came to be at odds with her own party over its deliberate suppression of the presidential campaigns of Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) in 2016 and 2020. She left the House to run for President herself in 2020, then left the Democratic Party and switched to Independent. She became a vocal supporter of President Trump’s comeback bid in 2024, and switched her party affiliation to Republican shortly after his victory in November.

Fetterman
https://twitter.com/i/status/1876810906140565763

Read more …

Some logic:

“DOJ lawyers said in the new filing that whether Smith was unconstitutionally appointed is irrelevant because the issue at hand is how Garland handles Smith’s report..”

You mean the report that the Constitution says shouldn’t have existed?

DOJ Confirms It Will Release Jack Smith’s Report On Trump, But… (ZH)

Attorney General Merrick Garland plans to release only the volume of special counsel Jack Smith’s report dealing with Donald Trump’s plans to subvert the transfer of power after his loss in the 2020 election, holding back on sharing the Mar-a-Lago report while the president-elect’s two co-defendants still face trial. Garland’s decision all but assures the public will never see Smith’s report reviewing Trump’s mishandling of classified records at his Palm Beach, Fla., resort. However, the filing says the top members of the House and Senate Judiciary committees will be able to review the Mar-a-Lago report at the Department of Justice (DOJ)… so don’t be surprised when the leaks start.

As Zachary Stieber reports for The Epoch Times, DOJ officials said in a court filing to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit that AG Garland intends to release part one of the report, which deals with Trump, “in furtherance of the public interest in informing a co-equal branch and the public regarding this significant matter.” Smith has already transmitted the report to Garland, officials said. U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon on Tuesday had ordered the department not to release the report until the 11th Circuit reviewed a motion by Walt Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira, Trump’s co-defendants in a federal case. While prosecutors dropped charges against Trump following his November 2024 election win, they are still pursuing Nauta, a former Trump aide, and De Oliveira, a manager at Trump’s resort in Florida.

Nauta and De Oliveira say Smith should be fired and that his report should not be released to the public, given he was found by Cannon to be unconstitutionally appointed. DOJ lawyers said in the new filing that whether Smith was unconstitutionally appointed is irrelevant because the issue at hand is how Garland handles Smith’s report. They also argued that Nauta and De Oliveira have no interest in part one, and do not have standing to block the publication of that part. “There is also no valid basis for this Court to pretermit the Attorney General’s discretion with respect to Volume One,” they wrote. Officials said that while part two of the report will not be made available to the public, a redacted version will be available for certain lawmakers to view in camera as long as the lawmakers agree not to publicly release any of the report’s contents.

Read more …

Enter Kash Patel.

FBI Is Still Hiding Details Of Russiagate (Maté)

Just two days before McCabe opened the May 2017 probe, the FBI, via Justice Department official Bruce Ohr, renewed contact with dossier author Christopher Steele despite having terminated him as a source back in November 2016. As RCI’s Paul Sperry has previously reported, this sudden outreach to Steele right before the opening of a new Trump-Russia conspiracy investigation indicated that the FBI was seeking to re-engage the Clinton-funded British operative to help it build a case against the president for espionage and obstruction of justice. At the time, the FBI was still relying on Steele’s fabrications for its surveillance warrants against Trump campaign volunteer Carter Page. The following month, the FBI filed the last of its four FISA court warrants based on Steele’s material. The Justice Department has since invalidated two of those warrants on the grounds that they were based on “material misstatements.”

The FBI re-enlisted Steele despite possessing information that thoroughly discredited him. Five months before it newly sought Steele’s help to investigate the sitting president, the FBI interviewed Igor Danchenko, whom Steele had used as his dossier’s key “sub-source.” In that January 2017 meeting, Danchenko told FBI agents that corroboration for the dossier’s claims was “zero”; that he had “no idea” where claims sourced to him came from; and that the Russia-Trump rumors he passed along to Steele came from alcohol-fueled “word of mouth and hearsay.” The FBI had also been unable to corroborate any of Steele’s incendiary claims.

A previously disclosed document also shows that former CIA Director John Brennan – who insistently advanced the Trump/Russia conspiracy theory – informed then-president Barack Obama in July 2016 that the Clinton campaign was planning to tie Trump to Russia in order to distract attention from the controversy over Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server while serving as secretary of state. By that point, the Clinton campaign was already paying for the fabricated reports produced by Steele, who made contact with the FBI as early as July 5.

Although the newly declassified document attempts to suggest that the FBI had actionable intelligence to suspect Trump of being a Russian agent, McCabe’s subsequent comments indicate that there was no such evidence on offer. Instead, McCabe has said his counterintelligence probe of Trump was primarily motivated by the president’s firing of Comey. In a February 2019 interview with CBS News, McCabe explained his thinking as follows: “[T]he idea is, if the president committed obstruction of justice, fired the director of the of the FBI to negatively impact or to shut down our investigation of Russia’s malign activity and possibly in support of his campaign, as a counter intelligence investigator you have to ask yourself, ‘Why would a president of the United States do that?’ So all those same sorts of facts cause us to wonder is there an inappropriate relationship, a connection between this president and our most fearsome enemy, the government of Russia.”

McCabe therefore had no evidence that Trump had a “connection” to Russia, and in fact could only “wonder” if there was one. Yet because Trump had fired Comey, whose FBI was already investigating Trump’s campaign for Russia ties and relying on the Clinton-funded Steele dossier in the process, McCabe decided that he had grounds to order an espionage investigation of the commander in chief. With the official predicate for that May 2017 investigation still redacted by the FBI, McCabe’s public statements offer the only insider window into why it was opened. In all of the investigations related to alleged Russian interference to date, the Justice Department has pointedly avoided the question.

Despite inheriting McCabe’s probe – and debunking claims of a Trump-Russia conspiracy related to the 2016 election – Special Counsel Mueller made no mention of the Trump as Russian agent theory in his final report of March 2019. Without informing the public, the FBI closed down the Trump counterintelligence investigation the following month. The case’s closing Electronic Communication, which has previously been declassified in redacted form, states that the McCabe probe “was transferred to FBI personnel assisting” the Mueller team, and entailed the use of “a variety of investigative techniques.” An inquiry led by Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz of the FBI’s conduct during Crossfire Hurricane also ignored McCabe’s decision to investigate Trump as an agent of Russia.

And in a footnote in his final report of May 2023, John Durham – the Special Counsel appointed to launch a sweeping review of the Russia investigation – claimed that McCabe’s May 2017 probe was outside of his purview. By contrast, when it comes to Crossfire Hurricane, Durham’s report concluded that the FBI did not have a legitimate basis to launch that investigation, repeatedly ignored exculpatory evidence, and buried warnings that Clinton’s campaign was trying to frame Trump as a Russian conspirator. While the original Trump-Russia investigation has been discredited, the public remains in the dark about why the FBI launched a follow-up counterintelligence probe that targeted Trump while he was newly in the White House – and what ends it took to pursue it.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Panama
https://twitter.com/i/status/1876988453205746021

 

 

Stay at home dog
https://twitter.com/i/status/1876904648981831764

 

 

Eagle

 

 

Parrots

 

 

Street art

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Jul 112024
 


Henri Matisse Window at Tangiers 1912

 

Orban Is What Zelensky Should Have Been (Amar)
Merkel Would Have Prevented Ukraine Conflict – Orban (RT)
Trump Issues Fresh Challenge To Biden (RT)
Dem Senator Says Trump Could Beat Biden In “Landslide” (ZH)
MSM Launches ‘Muh Russia’ Election Narrative (ZH)
NATO Preparing For ‘Protracted Wars’ – Pentagon (RT)
EU Members Up Defense Spending by 30% Over Last 3 Years – Borrell (Sp.)
New UK Prime Minister Pledges Sharp Rise In Military Spending (RT)
‘Russia Will Not Prevail’ – Biden to NATO (RT)
Kiev Can ‘Never’ Get Enough Weapons – Zelensky (RT)
US Bodycount 35 KIA After Russian Missile Strike (Helmer)
Ukraine Timing Tragedies To Coincide With Important Events – Kremlin (RT)
West to Supply Ukraine With ‘Squadrons’ of F-16 Fighter Jets (Sp.)
High-Tech Western Weapons ‘Useless’ In Ukraine Conflict – WSJ (RT)
We Were “Deceived & Gaslit For Years” (Alastair Crooke)
NC Democrats Vote to Block 3rd-Party Candidates from Ballots (Turley)

 

 


Anti-Trump rally in New York City, June 3, 2017 © AFP / Eduardo Munoz Alvarez

 

 

Trump Kamala
https://twitter.com/i/status/1810845245065810156

 

 

 

 

Buffett

 

 

 

 

“..Hungary’s leader does not speak for the European Union, even if his country holds the rotating presidency of the Council of the EU. That is true, but to be frank, uninteresting. What is intriguing instead is the compulsive need to keep saying it.”

Orban Is What Zelensky Should Have Been (Amar)

When your enfant terrible is also (almost) the only adult in the room, then something is very wrong with your room. For “the room” read the EU – and the West more broadly – and, for both the enfant terrible and the adult in the room, Viktor Orbán, prime minister of Hungary, and there you have it: the shortest possible description of what the big brouhaha about his recent trips to first Kiev, then Moscow and Beijing is really all about. The EU, in reality, has no policy worthy of the name to address the single most urgent issue in Europe at this point, namely, how to end the war in and over Ukraine. As Orbán himself has correctly pointed out in an interview with the German newspaper Die Welt, all the EU does is copy America’s “policy of war.” In other words, Brussels, like Washington, has ruled out diplomacy and compromise to end the war.

Indeed, if the US and EU had engaged in genuine diplomacy, then the war could have been prevented or ended quickly, in spring 2022. Orbán may be putting too much weight on – and too much trust in – a single Western leader, but that is his larger point when he claims that the large-scale war would not have happened if Angela Merkel had still been in office as chancellor of Germany. Against this backdrop of EU non- or, really – anti-diplomacy, Orbán has dared stand out by going on what, using social media to great effect, he has loudly announced as his “peace mission.” That appeal to public opinion has, of course, angered his detractors even more: Not only has he dared speak to “the autocrats” out there, he has also addressed the masses at home in the West. Perish the “populism”!

Yet it is a traditional and legitimate move among politicians worth their salt: Before practicing the art of – back then – radio reach-out to perfection in World War II, no lesser a leader than young Charles de Gaulle, in his ‘The Edge of the Sword’, recognized the absolute need to “dominate opinion,” since “nothing is possible” without that true “sovereign.” Yet Orbán’s “populism” is not even the main problem this time. That rather has to do with the fact that he has turned his own initiative into a foil against which the EU’s mainstream’s lack of imagination, rigidity, and, last but not least, complete subservience to the US are glaringly obvious. In the EU it is now going “rogue” to do what is not only obvious but reasonable and urgently needed: seek at least dialogue instead of stonewalling. That reflects badly on the EU.

So does the fact that the Hungarian leader has a habit of realism where the EU establishment prefers fictions maintained by – aggressively enforced – group think. Orbán has no time for the silly idea that Russia is a threat to European states inside NATO, he observes – rightly – that Russian policy is rational, and he recognizes the fact that Russia cannot be defeated in Ukraine. All of this is true, and all of it is taboo in Brussels. To complete his register of sin and heresy, the Hungarian prime minister also has the temerity to cultivate a memory and a sense of history. In a Newsweek editorial, he has just reminded NATO of two essential facts: that the alliance was founded for defensive purposes (to which it has badly failed to stick) and that the recent habit of treating a future war with “the world’s other geopolitical power centers,” that is, Russia and China, as de facto inevitable can turn into a “self-fulfilling prophecy.”

When you are thin on substance, rely instead on formalities and, if need be, legalism. Much of the EU elites’ response to Orbán’s initiatives has taken that self-revealing form. As soon as Orbán dared go to Moscow, leading EU cadres, such as Josep Borrell, Ursula von der Leyen, and Charles Michel could hardly stop falling over themselves with denunciations and reminders that Hungary’s leader does not speak for the European Union, even if his country holds the rotating presidency of the Council of the EU. That is true, but to be frank, uninteresting. What is intriguing instead is the compulsive need to keep saying it.

Read more …

Likely.

Merkel Would Have Prevented Ukraine Conflict – Orban (RT)

The Ukraine conflict would not have escalated into an “international war” if former German Chancellor Angela Merkel were still in power, according to Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban. He accused current EU leaders of lacking vision in an interview with Die Welt published on Monday. A vocal proponent of a diplomatic solution for Ukraine, Orban last week embarked on a “peace mission” to some of the countries he says are the “five main actors” to the conflict – Ukraine, Russia, China, the EU, and the US.Orban’s first stop was Germany, where he spoke to Chancellor Olaf Scholz. The Hungarian leader said “there was hardly any agreement” between the pair regarding the resolution of the conflict, noting that he “always” misses Scholz’s predecessor, Merkel, due to her practical approach. According to Orban, if Merkel were still in power, the Russia-Ukraine conflict in its current form “would never have happened.”

“She had the ability, the understanding and the skills to isolate the conflicts that are bad for Europe. We made the mistake of allowing there to be a conflict, of allowing there to be a war. And instead of isolating it, we escalated it and made it international,” he stated. Orban recalled the failed Minsk peace accords, brokered by France and Germany, which ostensibly sought to resolve the dispute in Donbass in 2014 that preceded the current conflict. The path to peace would be much easier for all parties today if similar agreements were in place, the Hungarian prime minister argued. “If you believe that a political agreement like Minsk can solve all problems, then Minsk is of course a failure. But if you see that there is a situation that is bad and needs to be resolved somehow, then the only relevant reference point is not how can it be made better, but how it can be prevented from getting even worse,” Orban stated.

“Peace does not come by itself,” he added, stating that it has to be brokered by global leaders who want it, and claiming that “unfortunately we lack those.” Orban has often criticized the West’s approach to the Ukraine conflict, calling for a diplomatic settlement through negotiations. However, his ceasefire overture to Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky earlier this month was rejected, while his EU peers criticized him for his later visit to Russia. Several diplomatic sources told Politico earlier this week that the bloc could even revoke Hungary’s rotating EU presidency, which it assumed last month.

Read more …

“Trump said he wanted to give Biden a “chance to redeem himself.”

Trump Issues Fresh Challenge To Biden (RT)

Former US President Donald Trump has challenged Joe Biden to a “no-holds-barred” debate and an 18-hole game of golf so that the incumbent leader can prove he is still fit for office. The 81-year-old Biden is facing growing calls from his fellow Democrats to drop out of the 2024 presidential race over concerns about his mental health, following his disastrous performance during a debate with Trump last month. Speaking at a rally in Miami on Tuesday, Trump said he wanted to give Biden a “chance to redeem himself.” “Let’s do another debate this week so ‘Sleepy’ Joe Biden can prove to everyone all over the world that he has what it takes to be president. But this time it will be man to man, no moderators, no holds barred,” Trump said, calling on Biden to “name the place, anytime, anywhere.”

Trump also recalled that during their CNN-hosted debate, Biden had declared that he would be willing to test his skills and stamina against his rival on the golf course. “Can you believe this? Did you ever see him swing?” Trump told his supporters, announcing that he is “officially challenging ‘Crooked Joe’ to an 18-hole golf match right here.” The presumptive Republican candidate promised that if Biden won, he would donate $1 million to any charity of his opponent’s choice. However, Trump doubted that Biden would accept his challenge “because he is all talk.” Biden campaign spokesman James Singer responded to the challenge on Wednesday by claiming that the US president “doesn’t have time for Donald Trump’s weird antics – he’s busy leading America and defending the free world.” He also dismissed Trump as a “liar, a convict, and a fraud only out for himself.”

Biden himself has unequivocally stressed that he is “firmly committed” to staying in the presidential race, while White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre has insisted that the incumbent is determined to serve out his full second term in office if reelected. At the same time, calls for Biden to drop out of the election have continued to grow, with many senior Democrats and party donors urging him to “do the right thing” and quit, fearing he would not be able to beat Trump. A survey conducted by CBS News/YouGov in the wake of last month’s presidential debate also found that 72% of registered voters do not believe that Biden has the “mental and cognitive health necessary to serve as president.”

Read more …

“The White House, in the time since that disastrous debate, I think, has done nothing to really demonstrate that they have a plan to win this election..”

Dem Senator Says Trump Could Beat Biden In “Landslide” (ZH)

Sen. Michael Bennett (D-CO) on Tuesday became the first Democratic senator to publicly cast doubt on President Joe Biden’s chances against Donald Trump in November. “Donald Trump is on track, I think, to win this election, and maybe win it by a landslide, and take with him the Senate and the House,” Bennett told CNN’s Kaitlan Collins on Tuesday – after telling colleagues the same in private. “So for me, this isn’t a question about polling. It’s not a question about politics. It’s a moral question about the future of our country.” “The White House, in the time since that disastrous debate, I think, has done nothing to really demonstrate that they have a plan to win this election,” he continued.

Bennet’s comments echo those of a growing number of congressional Democrats who say Biden’s reelection bid could hurt the entire party in down-ballot races this fall. As CNN reports, “Democrats, including those inside the administration, view this week as critical to Biden’s political survival, and lawmakers on Capitol Hill gathered privately for their weekly meetings on Tuesday.” “The stakes could not be higher,” said Bennett, who says his voters have “deep concerns” over whether Biden can win. Punchbowl News had a sobering take on the state of affairs for Democrats in their Wednesday AM newsletter, saying Biden has “made a mess of the Democratic party.” Senate Democrats were far from united about whether Biden is the best person to defeat Trump. Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) told us that Biden needs to “continue to aggressively make his case” to his fellow Democratic senators in order to “earn full support.”

New Jersey Democratic Rep. Mikie Sherrill issued a statement Tuesday afternoon calling on Biden to step aside in favor of another Democratic candidate. “[B]ecause I know President Biden cares deeply about the future of our country, I am asking that he declare that he won’t run for reelection and will help lead us through a process toward a new nominee.” Fellow New Jersey Democratic Rep. Andy Kim — who’s running for Senate — walked right up the line of whether Biden should get out. “What steps can we actually take right now [to replace Biden.] That’s where some of the confusion is. Especially with all the talk of what are the actual deadlines. It’s hard to kind of make a decision without fully understanding that. We need to get a better grasp on it,” said Kim.

Meanwhile, House Democratic leaders met privately on Tuesday morning with some of their most vulnerable members, for a conversation that was “honest, brutal and intense,” and left some members crying, according to sources with knowledge of the meeting. ABC News anchor George Stephanopoulos, meanwhile, told TMZ that he doesn’t think Biden can serve another four years. The 63-year-old Stephanopoulos sat down for a closely-watched interview with Biden last week following the president’s disastrous debate performance last month against Donald Trump. “Do you think Biden should step down?” the TMZ journalist asked the “Good Morning America” co-host and moderator of “This Week.” “I don’t think he can serve four more years,” replied Stephanopoulos after a pause.

Read more …

Russiagate 3.0.

MSM Launches ‘Muh Russia’ Election Narrative (ZH)

While the Democratic party melts down over Joe Biden’s cognitive decline – an obvious risk to US national security, the 2024 election wouldn’t be complete without a Trump-Russia narrative. To that end, the Wall Street Journal reports that the Russian government has launched a ‘whole-of-government” effort to influence the US presidential election in favor of Donald Trump – who, for some reason, Russia held off on invading Ukraine while he was president (and ostensibly wouldn’t have sent $175 billion and counting in US aid to combat). Citing unnamed ‘senior US intelligence officials,’ the Journal writes: The officials didn’t mention Trump by name, but said that Russia’s current activity—described as covert social-media use and other online propaganda efforts—mirrored the 2020 and 2016 election cycles, when Moscow also favored Trump and sought to undermine Democratic candidates, according to U.S. intelligence agencies.

Of course, Russia’s 2016 ‘influence campaign’ amounted to roughly $100,000 in Facebook ads, which “didn’t reference any specific presidential candidate, or even the election itself,” largely targeting BLM members and ‘Pokemon Go’ aficionados. Insidious. That said, the officials say that the activity witnessed so far this election cycle “isn’t on the scale or scope seen in 2016, when Russia’s actions included a hack-and-leak of Democratic Party emails, rudimentary cyber-probing of some state election systems and other actions intended to undermine Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton’s campaign.” Hacked emails, you say? Edit: And as ZeroHedge reader ‘The Wolverine’ notes in the comments below: ‘Remember that time Adam Schiff interviewed the President of CrowdStrike and refused to release the transcript for months and months?’

According to the new report, Russia is seeking to influence specific voting groups, including those in swing states, and promote divisive narratives while denigrating specific politicians, the anonymous US intelligence officials told reporters, without mentioning the specific voters or politicians who have been allegedly targeted. But wait, there’s more! The Kremlin “is also working to influence members of Congress and is broadly seeking to undermine U.S. support for Ukraine in its war with Russia,” according to the anonymous officials – one of whom said that Russia was the “pre-eminent threat” to the election, while Iran was a ‘lesser threat at the moment,’ and aims to be a ‘chaos agent’ by exacerbating social tensions. “We have observed actors tied to Iran’s government posing as activists online, seeking to encourage protests, and even providing financial support to protesters,” said Avril Haines, the director of national intelligence, in a separate Tuesday statement.

Read more …

Neverending. And we are all hostages.

NATO Preparing For ‘Protracted Wars’ – Pentagon (RT)

The US and its allies are planning to continue ramping up defense spending, which will ensure long-term demand for weapons, US Deputy Defense Secretary Kathleen Hicks told a gathering of arms manufacturers during a NATO event on Tuesday. Speaking at the NATO Summit Defense Industry Forum, the official praised NATO members for boosting their military budgets since the initial flare-up of the Ukraine conflict in 2014, and particularly after the open hostilities between Ukraine and Russia erupted in 2022. Over the past decade, the average annual increase in spending was 72%, adjusted for inflation, she said. That reversed a period when “defense industries across the Atlantic were affected by decades of inconsistent funding and blinkered demand signals,” she said. She said the current thinking is: “Production matters. Production is deterrence.”

Western arms manufacturers have the ability “not just to compete, but to out-compete and prevail” over Russia and other nations that the US considers its rivals, including China, North Korea and Iran. “That includes ensuring we are prepared for the possibility of protracted war, which every ally must be prepared for – and not just in Europe, either,” Hicks warned. Developing the manufacturing base on both sides of the Atlantic in a way that combines “information-age ingenuity and industrial-era capacity” will benefit US allies in the Pacific, such as Australia, Japan and South Korea, the official said. She claimed that Western political systems are inherently beneficial for building “arsenals of democracy,” since they foster innovation and transnational cooperation. On the other hand, “autocracies,” according to her reasoning, can’t move beyond “just landing at each other’s airfields, or sailing ships alongside each other for a few days at a time.”

The Pentagon is looking for ways “to be a better customer,” Hicks said, by streamlining its internal processes, delivering targeted investments in the defense sector, and providing security services to weapons businesses. Russian officials have described NATO as a tool of US geopolitical ambition and a way to secure a permanent market for American weapons in Europe. Moscow has cited Washington’s pledge that Ukraine will eventually join the bloc together with NATO’s increased presence in Ukraine since 2014 as among the key triggers of the ongoing conflict. Beijing has accused the US of being stuck in a “Cold War mentality” and playing “zero-sum games” with non-Western nations, including China.

Read more …

Yay!

EU Members Up Defense Spending by 30% Over Last 3 Years – Borrell (Sp.)

EU member states have increased their joint defense spending by 30% in the last three years, while in 2024, the bloc’s defense spending is expected to reach approximately 2% of GDP, EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell said on Wednesday. “In the last three years, the total expenditure [in the defense sector] in Europe … has increased by 30% and this year we will be reaching almost an average all together of 2% [of GDP], it is not enough, but is much better and it is growing,” the high-ranked EU official said during his speech at the 75th NATO Anniversary Summit in Washington. The NATO summit kicked off in Washington on Tuesday and will run through July 11. In late June, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said the European Union needed to invest 500 billion euros ($535 billion) in defense in the next 10 years.

The European Union “regrets” that people are dying in Ukraine, but it will continue to supply weapons to Kiev to counter Russia’s actions, EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell said on Wednesday. “We certainly regret that people are dying, but Ukrainian soldiers are fighting and dying because they are defending their country,” Borrell said during a speech at the fifth NATO Anniversary Summit in Washington. The EU will continue to support Ukraine, Borrell added. “I am happy to have heard [US] President Biden a moment ago to say that Russia cannot prevail, for that we have to increase our [military] industrial capacity, putting more money on the table, more technological development,” Borrell said.

Read more …

“..not prepared to fight in an armed conflict of “any scale” and would run out of ammunition rapidly..”

New UK Prime Minister Pledges Sharp Rise In Military Spending (RT)

The UK is set to boost its military capabilities and plans to gradually increase defense spending to 2.5% of its GDP, new Prime Minister Keir Starmer said on Tuesday as he departed for a NATO summit in Washington. Starmer has pledged to publish a roadmap for defense expenditure following calls from both the UK military and NATO states to clarify his policy, his office has said. “I am committed to that 2.5% [of gross domestic product] within our fiscal rules, but that strategic review needs to come first,” he told Reuters ahead of the NATO summit. His predecessor Rishi Sunak had promised earlier this year that London would reach this target by 2030. According to Starmer’s office, the government will launch a strategic review next week to “determine the future defense posture” of the UK and the military capabilities it needs. The timeline for the review or when the spending goal might be achieved has not been specified, however.

Many NATO states have for years struggled to reach an agreed threshold of 2% of GDP for defense spending, but the push has gained momentum since the start of the Ukraine crisis in 2014 and especially after the launch of Russia’s military operation in 2022. Starmer, who became the UK prime minister after his party’s landslide victory in the general election last week, reiterated that London’s commitment to Kiev remains unchanged. Britain has been one of Ukraine’s biggest backers in the conflict with Russia, pledging £12.5 billion (around $16 billion) in support for Kiev, including £7.6 billion (around $9.7 billion) in military aid, since February 2022. Meanwhile, recent military research revealed that Britain’s armed forces are in such a poor state that they are barely able to defend the country, with deficiencies spread across its various branches. Rob Johnson, director of the Oxford Changing Character of War Center, told the FT last week that the UK was not prepared to fight in an armed conflict of “any scale” and would run out of ammunition rapidly.

Read more …

“According to Reuters, Biden delivered his remarks without a teleprompter in an explicit and clear-cut manner..”

‘Russia Will Not Prevail’ – Biden to NATO (RT)

US President Joe Biden has delivered a forceful speech to NATO members in a bid to reassure them that Ukraine can still prevail in its conflict against Russia. However, several Western diplomats told Reuters that the US leader’s better-than-expected stage performance failed to make up for his disastrous debate with Republican presidential frontrunner Donald Trump. In the keynote speech at the opening of the NATO summit in Washington on Tuesday, Biden touted the bloc as “the bulwark of global security” and reiterated its intention to support Ukraine with military aid, including new deliveries of air defense systems. “We know [Russian President Vladimir] Putin won’t stop at Ukraine. But make no mistake, Ukraine can and will stop Putin… When this senseless war began, Ukraine was a free country. Today, it is still a free country, and the war will end with Ukraine remaining a free and independent country,” he declared. “Russia will not prevail. Ukraine will prevail.”

Russia has repeatedly condemned Western arms shipments to Ukraine, arguing they only prolong the conflict. It has also called NATO a “hostile” bloc directly involved in the conflict between Kiev and Moscow. According to Reuters, Biden delivered his remarks without a teleprompter in an explicit and clear-cut manner, in sharp contrast to his performance at the debate with Republican rival Trump last month. The 81-year-old president’s performance was described as “fumbling” and “incoherent,” with numerous media reports claiming that the debate disaster led to prominent Democrats urging him to drop out of the race. Several unnamed Western diplomats told Reuters that Biden’s NATO speech failed to erase the damage to his public image done by the recent debacle. “We don’t see how he can come back after the debate,” one European diplomat noted, adding that the president’s remarks were scripted and could not be seen as evidence of his endurance.

“I can’t imagine him being at helm of the US and NATO for four more years,” he remarked. Meanwhile, Biden has insisted he is “not going anywhere” and intends to beat Trump in the November election. On Tuesday, the GOP candidate challenged his rival to another face-off, calling it a “chance [for Biden] to redeem himself in front of the entire world,” and suggesting that the debate should be held without moderators. Biden and Trump are already scheduled to hold another debate, which will be moderated by ABC, on September 10.

Read more …

So why give him any?

Kiev Can ‘Never’ Get Enough Weapons – Zelensky (RT)

Virtually no quantity of weapons that the US and its allies supply to Kiev for its fight with Russia will be enough, Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky has said. The Ukrainian leader is visiting the US this week as the heads of NATO states hold a summit in Washington DC. Zelensky called for more arms deliveries at the Ronald Reagan Institute on Tuesday, where he participated in an event alongside US Senator Mitch McConnell. While he highlighted his determination to continue hostilities with Russia, he stressed on several occasions the disparity in military strength between the two sides in the conflict. ”It’s not enough. It’s never enough,” he said, referring to the five additional Patriot missile systems, which US President Joe Biden pledged the same day to Kiev on behalf of his nation, Germany, Romania and others.

Asked about the fate of the 31 Abrams main battle tanks supplied by the US last year, Zelensky said the number was too low to “change the situation on the battlefield.”He went on to say the number of F-16 fighter jets pledged by Western donors has been insufficient. Russia uses some 300 jets in the Ukraine conflict, while Kiev would only be able to field 10 to 20 F-16s anytime soon, he said. ”Even if we will have 50 it’s nothing. They have 300,” Zelensky said. Being on the defense, Ukraine would need a fleet of 128 F-16s for parity with Russia, he stated.

Zelensky urged the US to lift all restrictions on using American-provided weapons against targets deep inside Russia and to provide Kiev with better long-range strike capability. In late May, the Biden administration revised its policy restricting the use of American weapons inside what the US recognizes as Russian territory, but would not allow long-range strikes, according to media reports and statements by officials. Russian President Vladimir Putin has warned that his country may supply weapons similar to those that Ukraine gets from the West to parties hostile to the donors elsewhere in the world in case of further escalation. Moscow has described the Ukraine conflict as part of a US-led proxy war against Russia, in which NATO members take part in virtually every aspect except by sending their own troops to the battlefield.

Read more …

“Should Moscow conclude that it is now Washington policy to fight Russia, not just to the last Ukrainian, but to the last American?”

US Bodycount 35 KIA After Russian Missile Strike (Helmer)

The latest Russian Defense Ministry daily bulletin was issued on Tuesday afternoon, July 9. Since then the Pentagon and the White House have been as silent as the tomb. Make that thirty-five American tombs. “During the day [July 9],” said the Defense Ministry briefer in Moscow, “the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation carried out a group strike with high-precision weapons on American HIMARS multiple launch rocket systems prepared for strikes on the territory of Crimea, as well as the venue of an official meeting of the AFU [Armed Forces of the Ukraine] command staff. The objectives of the strike have been achieved. Four US-made HIMARS MLRS launchers were destroyed, as well as up to 35 foreign specialists who serviced them.” Several hours later, the Pentagon briefer, Major General Pat Ryder, announced “a great kickoff to NATO summit events this week.”

General Ryder wasn’t referring to the largest number of US battlefield deaths ever recorded under hostile Russian fire. He had nothing to say about the Ukraine battlefield action, and the reporters attending failed to ask him about it. At the White House briefing which followed the Pentagon, the lead announcement was President Joseph Biden’s telephone calls to officials in Texas dealing with Hurricane Beryl; his plan to meet on Thursday with Vladimir Zelensky; and an assurance that “Russia’s aggression against Ukraine poses a threat to transatlantic security. That’s what it does. And it shows how critical the NATO Alliance is and how important it is to continue to make sure that it is strong, and that’s what the president has been able to do.” Reporters did not ask about US combat deaths in the Ukraine.

The New York Times also blacked out the report of the Russian strike on the HIMARS batteries, focusing instead on the Kiev targets of the day, and on claims by anonymous US intelligence and other officials that “Russia is unlikely to make significant territorial gains in Ukraine in the coming months as its poorly trained forces struggle to break through Ukrainian defenses that are now reinforced with Western munitions.” “You’d think in an election year,” comments a NATO veteran with Afghanistan war service, “that dead American ‘specialists’ would be an issue. This tells that they [the Biden Administration] are as committed to ‘victory’, or hiding an American defeat, as their [Trump campaign] opponents are. They are also loath to get into the role they played in getting things to this point.” That said, what interpretation can President Vladimir Putin and the Russian General Staff give after the 35 US battlefield deaths have been concealed by US officials? Should Moscow conclude that it is now Washington policy to fight Russia, not just to the last Ukrainian, but to the last American?

Read more …

“..if a Russian missile had struck the hospital, there would be “nothing left of the building”

Ukraine Timing Tragedies To Coincide With Important Events – Kremlin (RT)

Kiev is deliberately using tragedies for publicity ahead of important international events, such as this week’s NATO summit in Washington, so that Vladimir Zelensky can push for more support from the West, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has claimed. In an interview with journalist Pavel Zarubin, Peskov suggested that Ukrainian authorities are effectively organizing PR campaigns “on blood,” referring to Monday’s deadly tragedy at the Okhmatdet children’s hospital in Kiev, where a missile killed two people and injured dozens more. Kiev and its backers have blamed Russia for the incident. Moscow has denied the allegations, insisting that it has never targeted civilian facilities. Instead, it claims that the hospital was struck by a Ukrainian air-defense missile. Peskov claimed that such tragedies in Ukraine often occur right before international events that are important for relations between Kiev and the West.

“I believe that there are no coincidences in this regard,” the spokesman said, suggesting that the Okhmatdet incident had been another “PR operation.” “This is truly a tragedy, but it is being deliberately used to create a backdrop that would accompany Zelensky’s participation in the NATO summit,” Peskov said, adding that Kiev’s methodology is “quite unclean, jesuitical, well-known, and has been repeated many times.” The Kremlin spokesman also noted that it was “very difficult” for Russia to get its point across to Western audiences regarding such incidents. “They do not want to hear anything,” Peskov said, adding that the “hysteria” in Western newspapers and TV channels “is likely due to the monopolistic dominance of Anglo-Saxon media there.” Nevertheless, Peskov said Russia would continue to “tell the truth about what has happened, both domestically and in countries where the audience is ready to hear us and where we have technical means to reach them.”

Meanwhile, Russia’s permanent representative to the UN, Vasily Nebenzia, has also insisted that Moscow had no involvement in the Okmatdet incident. Speaking at the UN Security Council on Tuesday, he suggested that if a Russian missile had struck the hospital, there would be “nothing left of the building” and that “children and adults would have died rather than being injured.” Nebenzia explained that Russia had, in fact, been targeting the Artemov missile plant in Kiev, which is located approximately 2km from the Okhmatdet hospital. “There is every reason to believe that the Ukrainian air-defense missile that hit it was intended for a Russian missile that hit the plant,” he said, noting that the tragedy could have been avoided if Ukraine hadn’t deployed air defense in residential areas.

Read more …

“..Russian pilots and air defense personnel “will have new stars on their fuselages and new medals on their chests.”

West to Supply Ukraine With ‘Squadrons’ of F-16 Fighter Jets (Sp.)

Western allies intend to supply Ukraine with entire “squadrons” of modern American-made F-16 fighter jets, according to a joint statement from the leaders of the US, Netherlands, and Denmark. They announced that the transfer of the first of these aircraft has already begun, allowing Ukrainian forces to start using them this summer. “We are committed to further enhancing Ukraine’s air capabilities, which will include squadrons of modern fourth generation F-16 multi-role aircraft,” US President Joe Biden said in a joint statement with Dutch Prime Minister Dick Schoof and Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen at the NATO summit in Washington. The coalition, according to the leaders, intends to assist with the maintenance, armament, and pilot training for these jets. US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, in turn, announced that a transfer of F-16 fighter jets was currently underway from Europe to Ukraine.

“I’m also pleased to announce that as we speak, the transfer of F-16 jets is underway, coming from Denmark, coming from the Netherlands, and those jets will be flying in the skies of Ukraine this summer to make sure that Ukraine can continue to effectively defend itself against the Russian aggression,” Blinken said at the NATO Public Forum. Commenting on the development, Andrey Kartapolov, head of the State Duma Defense Committee told Sputnik that the transfer of F-16 fighter jets to Ukraine will not affect the course of the special operation and will change nothing. “We have known for a long time that they would give them something by the end of the summer; they have nothing else left but the F-16. Now they will be giving them, perhaps a dozen or so, but it will not change anything at all. We have been expecting them for a long time, and we have been preparing. It will not affect the course of the special operation,” said Kartapolov. He noted that after the transfer of F-16s to Ukraine, Russian pilots and air defense personnel “will have new stars on their fuselages and new medals on their chests.”

Read more …

“The Russians have gotten really, really good” at interfering with guided munitions..”

High-Tech Western Weapons ‘Useless’ In Ukraine Conflict – WSJ (RT)

Russia’s electronic warfare capabilities have rendered precision-guided Western munitions “useless” in the Ukraine conflict, the Wall Street Journal reported on Wednesday. With their guidance systems scrambled, some of these weapons have reportedly been retired within weeks of hitting the battlefield. When the US announced the delivery of GPS-guided Excalibur artillery shells to Ukraine in 2022, pro-Kiev outlets predicted that the $100,000-per-shot projectiles would make “Ukrainian artillery a whole lot more accurate” and “cause Russia a world of pain.” However, the Russian military adapted within weeks, Ukrainian commanders told the Wall Street Journal. Russian signal-jamming equipment was used to feed false coordinates to the shells and interfere with their fuses, causing them to veer off course or fall to the ground as duds.

“By the middle of last year, the M982 Excalibur munitions, developed by RTX and BAE Systems, became essentially useless and are no longer employed,” the newspaper stated, paraphrasing the Ukrainian commanders. The Soviet Union invested heavily in electronic warfare (EW) during the 1980s, viewing jamming technology as a crucial bulwark against the guided missiles and shells that the US was beginning to develop at the time. While weapons such as the 1990s-era Excalibur shells were used by the US to devastating effect in Iraq and Afghanistan, officials and analysts in Washington have since concluded that they are far less effective against a peer-level opponent like Russia. “The Russians have gotten really, really good” at interfering with guided munitions, US Deputy Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment William LaPlante told the WSJ.

Retired US General Ben Hodges, who once predicted that Western weapons would help Ukraine seize Crimea by last winter, told the newspaper that “we probably made some bad assumptions because over the last 20 years we were launching precision weapons against people that could not do anything about it… and Russia and China do have these capabilities.” Some of NATO’s most advanced weapons systems have met a similar fate in Ukraine. The newly-developed Ground-Launched Small Diameter Bomb (GLSDB), a joint project of Boeing in the US and Saab in Sweden, was given to Ukraine earlier this year, with Kiev’s troops firing these GPS-guided munitions before their American counterparts. However, it has since been pulled from the battlefield after it proved completely ineffective against Russian EW.

Likewise, Russian EW has significantly blunted the accuracy of Ukraine’s Western-provided GMLRS missiles, which are fired from the HIMARS multiple-launch rocket system, Ukrainian soldiers told the WSJ. As with the Excalibur shells, GMLRS missiles were once described by pro-Kiev pundits and analysts as a “game changer” that would swing the conflict in Ukraine’s favor. Russia has long insisted that no amount of Western weapons systems will prevent it from achieving victory. Supplying these weapons is a “futile project” that will only encourage Kiev to “commit new crimes,” Moscow’s ambassador to Washington, Anatoly Antonov, warned last week.

Read more …

“Unelected advisers, party hacks, scheming family members and random hangers-on make the critical daily decisions..”

We Were “Deceived & Gaslit For Years” (Alastair Crooke)

Emmanuel Todd, the French anthropological historian, examines the longer dynamics to events unfolding in the present: The prime agent of change leading to the Decline of the West (La Défaite de l’Occident), he argues, was the implosion of ‘Anglo’ Protestantism in the U.S. (and England), with its entailed habits of work, individualism and industry – a creed whose qualities were held then to reflect God’s grace through material success, and, above all, to confirm membership of the divine ‘Elect’. Whereas traditional liberalism had its mores, the decline of traditional values triggered the slide towards managerial technocracy, and to nihilism. Religion lingers on in the West, though in a ‘zombie’ state, Todd avers. Such societies, he argues, flounder – absent some guiding metaphysical sphere that provides people with non-material sustenance.

However, the incoming doctrine that only a wealthy financial élite, tech experts, leaders of multinational corporations and banks possess the required foresight and technological understanding to manipulate a complex and increasingly controlled system changed politics completely. Mores were gone – and so was empathy. Many experienced the disconnect and the disregard of cold technocracy. So when a senior WSJ editor tells us that the ‘deception and ‘gaslighting’ collapsed with the CNN Biden-Trump debate, we should surely pay attention; He is saying the scales finally fell from peoples’ eyes. What was being gaslighted was the fiction of democracy and also that of America declaring itself – in its own scripture – to be the trailblazer and pathfinder of humanity: America as the exceptional nation: the singular, the pure-of-heart, the baptizer, and redeemer of all peoples despised and downtrodden; the “last, best hope of earth”.

The reality was very different. Of course, states can ‘live a lie’ for a long period. The underlying problem – the point Todd makes so compellingly – is that you can be successful in deceiving and manipulating public perceptions, but only up to a point. The reality was, it simply was not working. The same is true of ‘Europe’. The EU’s aspiration to become a global geo-political actor too, was contingent on gaslighting the public that France, Italy and Germany et al could continue to be real national entities – even as the EU scooped up all national decision-making prerogatives, by deceit. The mutiny at the recent European elections reflected this discontent. Of course, Biden’s condition has been long known. So who then has been running affairs; making critical daily decisions about war, peace, the composition of the judiciary and the boundaries of state authority? The WSJ piece gives one answer: “Unelected advisers, party hacks, scheming family members and random hangers-on make the critical daily decisions” on these issues.

Maybe we have to reconcile to the fact that Biden is an angry, senile man who yells at his staff: “During meetings with aides who are putting together formal briefings, some senior officials have at times gone to great lengths to curate the information in an effort to avoid provoking a negative reaction”.“It’s like, ‘You can’t include that, that will set him off’ or ‘Put that in, he likes that,’” said one senior administration official. “It’s very difficult and people are scared sh*tless of him.” The official added, “He doesn’t take advice from anyone other than those few top aides, and it becomes a perfect storm because he just gets more and more isolated from their efforts to control it”. Seymour Hersh, the well-known investigative journalist reports: “Biden’s drift into blankness has been ongoing for months, as he and his foreign policy aides have been urging a ceasefire that will not happen in Gaza whilst continuing to supply the weapons that make a ceasefire less likely.

There’s a similar paradox in Ukraine, where Biden has been financing a war that cannot be won – yet refusing to participate in negotiations that could end the slaughter”. “The reality behind all of this, as I’ve been told for months, is that Biden is simply ‘no longer there’ – in terms of understanding the contradictions of the policies he and his foreign policy advisers have been carrying out”. On the one hand, Politico tells us: “Biden’s insular senior team are well acquainted with the longtime aides who continue to have the president’s ear: Mike Donilon, Steve Ricchetti and Bruce Reed, as well as Ted Kaufman and Klain on the outside”. “It’s the same people — he has not changed those people for 40 years … The number of people who have access to the president has gotten smaller and smaller and smaller. They’ve been digging deeper into the bunker for months now.” And, the strategist said, “the more you get into the bunker, the less you listen to anyone”. In Todd’s words then, decisions are made by a small ‘Washington village’.

Read more …

“Democrats are seeking to bar third-party candidates from the general election . . . all in the name of perfecting democracy.”

NC Democrats Vote to Block 3rd-Party Candidates from Ballots (Turley)

Months ago, I wrote a column about how Democrats have continued to try to block voters from being able to vote for candidates while claiming the mantle of the defenders of Democracy. This effort not only included Democratic Secretaries of State attempting to remove former president Donald Trump from the ballots, but efforts in the primary from the ballot. Many of these Democrats now calling for a “blitz primary” previously said nothing as voters were barred from having a choice in the primary. Now, in North Carolina, Democrats are seeking to bar third-party candidates from the general election . . . all in the name of perfecting democracy. The Democratically controlled North Carolina’s Board of Elections voted against giving ballot access to new parties supporting presidential candidates Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Cornel West. All three Democrats (Alan Hirsch, Jefferson Carmon, and Siobhan Millen) voted to prevent voters from being able to vote for Kennedy and West, though the decision will have to be reconsidered.

Yet, even if reversed, they are preserving uncertainty as to whether they will be viable candidates in the minds of voters. The excuses for this action are superficial and manufactured. Chairman Alan Hirsch insisted that their organizations were “problematic” in how they gathered signatures and how Republicans may be supporting their efforts to allegedly “take away votes from Joe Biden.” They also said that they were concerned that the third-party candidates were using the new party rules to gain an easier path to ballots. That is a bizarre objection. They are opting for the best approach under the existing rules. It seems openly partisan for these three Democrats to suddenly raise concerns over the existing rules when it could harm Joe Biden or the Democratic Party. Yet, Democratic commissioner Siobhan Millen worked hard to rationalize what is a raw political muscle play to prevent voters from having a choice:

“If this board keeps rubber-stamping thinly veiled so-called parties, national operatives are going to continue to come in and keep manipulating our system. Allowing unaffiliated candidates to follow the more lenient new-party rules is allowing a blind eye to partisan mischief, potentially.” If Millen wants to see partisan mischief, she does not have to look far. She and her colleagues are engaging in precisely such mischief to deny voters choices this election to try to bolster the chances of Biden in a swing state. Democrats continue to claim to defend Democracy while resisting democratic choice and abusing the legal process. This glaring disconnect was evident when President Joe Biden spoke on the top of the Point-du-Hoc in Normandy on the 80th anniversary of D-Day. Biden again used the event to suggest that democracy was in danger in the United States with the upcoming election.

Yet, Biden has overseen widespread government censorship with federal agencies targeting those with opposing views on everything from elections and climate change to COVID-19 and transgender policies. As Democratic secretaries of state sought to bar Trump from ballots, Biden refused to oppose the efforts. When liberal law professors and members demanded to pack the Supreme Court to guarantee a liberal majority, Biden refused to denounce it during the last campaign. This is why some in the country may view Biden and the Democrats as existential threats not just to Democracy, but to themselves. They see a party that is engaged in efforts to cleanse ballots (of Republicans), censor dissenting voices and prosecute political opponents. The effort in North Carolina continues this hypocritical and cynical narrative. These three Democratic board members just voted to prevent their fellow citizens from being able to cast votes for third-party candidates who are attracting increasing support among disgruntled voters.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Dog stairs

 

 

Malinois
https://twitter.com/i/status/1810787853091115082

 

 

Whales

 

 

Dance
https://twitter.com/i/status/1810755264343106007

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Apr 192024
 


Francesco Hayez The Death of the Doge Marin Faliero 1867

 

Why the Fix Is in for Trump (Victoria Taft)
N.Y. Gives Trump The Anne Boleyn Treatment (Porter)
Ciaramella in the Loop of Biden-Ukraine Affairs Trump Wanted Probed (Sperry)
Israeli Retaliatory Strike On Iran (Scott Ritter)
Which Side God Is On Now (Helmer)
Blinken Shelves Special Request To Probe Israeli War Crimes (Cradle)
Texas Is Being Turned Into a Woke Democrat State (Paul Craig Roberts)
On The Mayorkas Impeachment (Denninger)
UK Insurers Won’t Pay Nord Stream Because Blasts Were ‘Government’ Backed (GZ)
Aid to Ukraine May Deep-Six Another House Speaker (Sp.)
Zelensky Blames EU For Russian Advance (RT)
ECB Fires Back At Plans To Seize Russian Assets (RT)
Top Military Official Lied About Jan. 6: Whistleblowers (ET)
Desperation Behind European Politicians’ Latest Russiagate Hoax (Public)
US Issues Assurances on Assange (Lauria)

 

 

 

 

O’Leary

 

 

Bragg
https://twitter.com/i/status/1780977235949711525

 

 

 

 

Ritter

 

 

Samson

 

 

 

 

America is undergoing a political show trial. For the whole world to see. There are three more waiting in the wings. The legal system should never allow for this. It is now on trial as much as Trump is.

Why the Fix Is in for Trump (Victoria Taft)

Judging by the way the entire array of Democrat operatives at the federal, state, and local levels of law enforcement have scraped the bottom of the local pond, liberated copious amounts of scum, loaded DNC slingshots, and heaved the slime at former President Donald Trump, I’m thinking you might have low expectations for New York City trial, too. We can’t imagine why you’d feel that way.The 34 charges against Trump were magicked into felonies by the Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, who contends there’s an overarching federal election crime at play. That’s how he reanimated these misdys that had already run their statute of limitations. The judge in the case, Juan Merchan, then re-jiggered the statute of limitations, blaming COVID to add another year to the statute of limitations so Bragg could bring these charges against Trump. The New York State legislature made a similar move for E. Jean Carroll so the founder of LinkedIn and ardent leftist Reid Hoffman could bankroll a new round of lawfare. The move revived her ability to bring a sexual assault case against Trump for assaulting her in a dressing room sometime in the ’90s in a dress she swore she wore but which hadn’t been designed yet.

In the fraud case that isn’t fraud and which defrauded no one, Gov. Kathy Hochul assured New York businesses afraid the Jacobins would come for their businesses and assets that “New Yorkers who are business people have nothing to worry about because they’re very different than Donald Trump…” Attorney General Letitia James had never used this law to do to anyone what they’re doing to Trump. She also used another one-off law to pile on the penalties for the victimless non-crime. The judge in that case, who probably wears no underwear under that robe, pronounced Trump guilty before the trial began. And we haven’t even touched on the FBI’s Mar-a-Lago raid over documents Trump is allowed to have under the Presidential Records Act. Or the attempt to get Trump off the ballot using the 14th Amendment. Even the U.S. Constitution is fungible to these leftists. And now we’re in jury selection in Trump’s latest case, which is literally a bookkeeping case in which Trump paid his attorney over time for services rendered that included making sure Stormy Daniels and another woman signed non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) and were paid for them.

Daniels has never been charged with extortion for breaking her NDA and demanding more money or she’d tell the media that she had a tryst or something with Trump. But Bragg lets murderers run the streets, so why are we surprised? Bragg doesn’t include his boffo legal theory in the 34-count indictment, but in his accompanying statement contends that Trump stole the 2016 election from Hillary Clinton. Hillary won New York in the 2016 election by a nearly two-to-one margin, but why let a fact like that get in the way of a great election-year lawfare effort on behalf of Democrats? Indeed, each of these prosecutors and their offices should be required to file with the Federal Elections Commission for in-kind donations to Joe Biden. We also might wonder why Bragg and his fellow conspirators haven’t been swooped up by the FBI and charged with whatever is the opposite of a 1512 c2 offense for starting an official proceeding — this trial — to carry out his violence upon a former president and current presidential candidate.

Trump’s being publicly humiliated and kept off the campaign trail — a feature, not a bug of this lawfare — because he booked payments to his lawyer in 2017, which, let’s note for clarity, is after the 2016 election. Bragg contends these payments were in furtherance of stealing an election. Hillary’s 2016 Russia collusion efforts in conspiracy with the CIA, FBI, DOJ, and White House somehow were left out of Bragg’s election-stealing bill of particulars, but He’s With Her so it’s just fine, whatareyoulookingat? The Federal Elections Commission, Justice Department, and Bragg’s own office have previously declined to pursue this lunacy. However, when George Soros poured money into his campaign, Bragg, like AG Letitia James, promised if he were elected by the Manhattan jury pool, he’d use any tool at his disposal to Get Trump. And now jury selection is underway, and we’ve got a couple of clunkers in that box of rocks that may be professional Trump haters.

Not that Trump can say anything about his latest case since Judge Merchan has put what looks to be a constitutionally suspect gag order on the former president. He’s been admonished by the judge that he should say nothing about his “child,” a grown-ass woman who works for a Democrat political consulting firm and does work for Joe Biden and Chuck Schumer and used the trial as a fundraising tool. Nothing to see here, obviously, so Trump should shaddup already. You can see what’s going on. The left has put what is tantamount to a gag order on us, too. At PJ Media, we’ve been censored, excoriated, “fact-checked” by feedback-loop lefties, and all but killed from social media. The Google gods demonetize us for their latest government-bankrolled censorship program—going after “mal” information. That’s information that is true but which they don’t like because it makes them look bad.

Read more …

“..the whole point of the exercise was to lop off the head of someone who stood in the way of the regime’s continuity..”

N.Y. Gives Trump The Anne Boleyn Treatment (Porter)

Jury selection is now complete in the case of The People of the State of New York vs. Donald J. Trump, which alleges that the defendant lied to his own check register, and lied to the general ledger of his own company, when the invoice given to him by his lawyer was paid and recorded by someone else, and that the misstatement he made to himself in his own records was done “with the intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof.” [..] The prosecutor elected in New York County of New York state indicted Trump, after Trump announced his 2024 run for president, for allegedly violating New York Penal Laws 175.05 and 175.10 seven years ago.

That local prosecutor, Alvin Bragg, is a member of the Democratic Party – and the voters who elected Bragg and from whom the jury will be chosen support the Democratic Party. In 2016, the people of New York County voted 87% for Hillary Clinton and 10% for Donald Trump, and in 2020, 87% for Joe Biden and 12% for Donald Trump. In other words, the jury pool is chosen from one of the most partisan jurisdictions in the country – a place where almost all the judges are Democrats as well. So the Democratic prosecutor elected in the second most Democratic county in the United States will try the former Republican president and current putative Republican Party presidential nominee before a Democrat-appointed judge and a jury drawn from a pool 87% of whom voted against him (and who are being asked if they watch Fox News or listen to talk radio in the screening process).One wonders if the law even matters. But let’s review the two statutes at issue to highlight what the law requires the prosecution to prove.

First, the prosecutor must prove that Trump violated the relevant statute, which requires a finding that he falsified business records with intent to defraud – that he “makes or causes a false entry in the business records of an enterprise.” By the way, falsifying business records in the second degree is a misdemeanor, not a felony. Moreover, New York’s statute of limitations requires that misdemeanor prosecutions be commenced within two years of the commission of the act, meaning that under the last provision, this case should never have been filed. Bragg elevated this misdemeanor into a felony by including New York Penal Law 175.10 in the indictment – falsifying business records in the first degree. That statute reads this way: “A person is guilty of falsifying business records in the first degree when he commits the crime of falsifying business records in the second degree, and when his intent to defraud includes an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof.”

There are other obvious difficulties with this case beyond the credibility of the witnesses (a porn star who denied any affair numerous times and a disbarred lawyer convicted of perjury). For example, why does the entry in the check register or the general ledger matter at all? When would those entries, as opposed to the allegedly false invoices, be shown to anyone for any nefarious purpose? And were the entries even false? Was there any intent to fool someone to obtain something in making the entries – who was the target of the allegedly false entry in private books and records? If there’s no mark, no victim, then how could there be an “intent to defraud”? Defraud whom? And what is the other crime that the person making the book entry intended to commit or hide? If the other crime is not a New York crime but a federal crime, does every county prosecutor in the United States, including Alvin Bragg, have the jurisdiction to enforce an alleged federal crime indirectly through a state crime?

We shall see. The political nature of this trial is obvious, and unprecedented in the United States. Even with irrefutable DNA evidence that Bill Clinton committed perjury, the special prosecutor declined to press criminal charges against him. In America’s recent past, prosecutors tended to exhibit a modicum of restraint. Those days are apparently gone. I reviewed an interesting law review article of political show trials down through history, from the trial of Socrates in Athens to the famous show trials in the 1930s Stalinist Soviet Union, curious to see if I could find historical precedent for this trial. The closest precedent is probably Anne Boleyn’s trial for adultery in 1536. It was about sex, the trial was in a hostile jurisdiction controlled by her accuser, and the whole point of the exercise was to lop off the head of someone who stood in the way of the regime’s continuity. But that’s what Democrats have lusted for since Donald Trump first arrived on the scene, isn’t it? They made no secret of it.

Read more …

“..Ciaramella effectively helped cover up a scandal far worse than what Trump was impeached over..”

Ciaramella in the Loop of Biden-Ukraine Affairs Trump Wanted Probed (Sperry)

The ‘whistleblower’ who sparked Donald Trump’s first impeachment was deeply involved in the political maneuverings behind Biden-family business schemes in Ukraine that Trump wanted probed, newly obtained emails from former Vice President Joe Biden’s office reveal. In 2019, then-National Intelligence Council analyst Eric Ciaramella touched off a political firestorm when he anonymously accused Trump of linking military aid for Ukraine to a demand for an investigation into alleged Biden corruption in that country. But four years earlier, while working as a national security analyst attached to then-Vice President Joe Biden’s office, Ciaramella was a close adviser when Biden threatened to cut off U.S. aid to Ukraine unless it fired its top prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, who was investigating Ukraine-based Burisma Holdings. At the time, the corruption-riddled energy giant was paying Biden’s son Hunter millions of dollars.

Those payments – along with other evidence tying Joe Biden to his family’s business dealings – received little attention in 2019 as Ciaramella accused Trump of a corrupt quid pro quo. Neither did subsequent evidence indicating that Hunter Biden’s associates had identified Shokin as a “key target.” These matters are now part of the House impeachment inquiry into President Biden. “It now seems there was material evidence that would have been used at the impeachment trial [to exonerate Trump],” said George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley, who has testified as an expert witness in the ongoing Biden impeachment inquiry. “Trump was alleging there was a conflict of interest with the Bidens, and the evidence could have challenged Biden’s account and established his son’s interest in the Shokin firing.” Ciaramella’s role – including high-level discussions with top Biden aides and Ukrainian prosecutors – is only now coming to light thanks to the recent release of White House emails and photos from the National Archives.

The emails show Ciaramella expressed shock – “Yikes” is what he wrote – at Biden’s move to withhold the $1 billion in aid from Kyiv, which represented a sudden shift in U.S. policy. They also show he was drawn into White House communications over how to control adverse publicity from Hunter taking a lucrative seat on Burisma’s board. Yet there is no evidence Ciaramella raised alarms about the questionable Biden business activities he witnessed firsthand, which is in sharp contrast to 2019. In that instance, he was galvanized into action after being told by White House colleague Alexander Vindman of an “improper” phone call between President Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. During the call, Trump solicited Zelensky’s help in investigating Burisma and Hunter Biden’s role in the company.

Some former congressional investigators say Ciaramella effectively helped cover up a scandal far worse than what Trump was impeached over. What’s more, he failed to disclose that he had a potential conflict of interest stemming from his connection to the matter Trump asked Zelensky to probe when he lodged his complaint against Trump. RealClearInvestigations was the first to identify the then-33-year-old Ciaramella as the anonymous impeachment “whistleblower,” something major media continue to keep under tight wraps.

Read more …

X thread. News will keep coming in through the day.

Israeli Retaliatory Strike On Iran (Scott Ritter)

Reports of an Israeli retaliatory strike on Iran appear to be related to a very limited attack in the vicinity of the Iranian city of Isfahan on military targets not related to Iran’s nuclear program. The weapons used in this strike are unknown at this point, although Iran claims to have shot down at least three drones of an undetermined type. Israel has not taken public credit for the attack. Indeed, the only link to Israel comes from anonymous statements from sources claimed to be US officials.

While Iran has stated it would strike Israel with immediate and decisive force if Israel were to attack, the extremely limited and anonymous nature of this attack may provide Iran with the opportunity to dismiss this attack as nothing of consequence, thereby eliminating the necessity of an Iranian retaliation. The Iranian Foreign Minister had issued a statement about decisive retaliation at the UN which constitutes official declaratory policy on Iranian deterrence policy which may be deemed sufficient for the moment. If the action in Isfahan is the limit of the Israeli action, then this matter may be concluded.

Read more …

“..there should be no counting by the Israeli and US side on a divine miracle to keep Jerusalem’s lights burning..”

Which Side God Is On Now (Helmer)

Israel is rattled. It’s now up to Iran, leader of the Arab resistance and warfighting alliance – Hamas, Hezbollah, Ansar Allah (Houthis), and the Syrian and Iraqi groups – to demonstrate that they can stop the genocidal schemes of the Israel Defence Forces (IDF), and the Jewish theocracy it enforces as a state; or failing that, to neutralize Israel’s capacities to fight a war of attrition over everything states must have – electricity, ports, money, firepower, defences. The Arab leadership understood this before the Iranians. In 1983 Saddam Hussein told a meeting of Iraqi Army generals: “Human nature represented by the heart of the families and sisters of the Iraqi martyrs in their own weeping and mourning will always be felt; but the Iraqis are better prepared than ever to deal with it. If it ever happens that the Iraqi people were in a conflict with their Israeli enemy, then the Iraqis would be able to withstand three years of fighting in a war. However, the Israelis cannot withstand one year of fighting in a war.”

Seven years later in 1990, Hussein was talking in Baghdad with Yasser Arafat of the Palestine Liberation Organization: “[Arafat]: [Israel] has 240 nuclear warheads, 12 out of them for each Arab capital…[Hussein]: I say this and I am very calm and wearing a civil suit [everyone laughs]. But I say this so that we can get ready at this level.” Readiness at this level was not achieved by the Iraqis, or by Hussein himself. Hamas has demonstrated since last October that the Israelis are unready. Iran demonstrated this again last weekend, despite what Israel claims to have been a near-perfect interception rate: enough missiles got through to strategic targets to prove that with hypersonic speed, higher yield warheads, and better accuracy, the next round of Iranian missiles will be unstoppable. This prospect is what is rattling the Israelis now. As of today’s broadcast on Gorilla Radio and writing this, it is 3:30 on Thursday morning in Tehran: the Israeli attack which has been telegraphed through the British foreign minister, Baron Cameron, has not yet materialized.

When it happens – if it happens — the evidence to gather, before the scope of the Iranian response can be calculated, includes what types of targets were struck, military or civil; where the attack was launched from; what role US intelligence and military support played in execution of Israel’s operation; and what role Russia is playing in early warning, missile tracking, electronic countermeasures, and defence on the Iranian side. When the Iranian counterattack happens, if it happens, there should be no counting by the Israeli and US side on a divine miracle to keep Jerusalem’s lights burning. The last one of those, according to the religion of the Israeli state (and also of presidential candidate Donald Trump), was the Chanukah one. That was in 164 BC, when the Judaean rebels recaptured the Temple in Jerusalem from the Seleucid Greek army. In trying to relight the menorah they found they had only one container of oil — enough fuel for one candle for one day.

God was asked for resupply, so Prime Minister Netanyahu and General Gallant believe. He then delivered by stretching the one-day fuel stock to last for eight days – enough divine miracle time for the Judaeans to refine a new supply for themselves.

Read more …

“..special mechanisms have been used over the last few years to shield Israel from US human rights laws.”

Blinken Shelves Special Request To Probe Israeli War Crimes (Cradle)

US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken has failed to act on a State Department proposal to bar certain Israeli police and army units from receiving US funds over human rights abuses of Palestinians. Blinken has disregarded this despite the growing concern over Israeli army conduct in Gaza, according to current and former State Department officials. A special panel at the State Department made the proposal months ago. Recommendations for action against Israeli units were sent to Blinken in December but have “been sitting in his briefcase since then,” one official told ProPublica on 17 April. The Israeli rights abuses in question mainly took place in the occupied West Bank before Operation Al-Aqsa Flood on 7 October. They include the execution of Palestinians by Israeli border police, as well as torture and rape during interrogation.

“This process is one that demands a careful and full review … and the department undergoes a fact-specific investigation applying the same standards and procedures regardless of the country in question,” ProPublica cites a State Department spokesman as saying. “Blinken’s inaction has undermined Biden’s public criticism [of Israel], sending a message to the Israelis that the administration was not willing to take serious steps,” according to several officials at the department who have worked on Israeli relations. US President Joe Biden has publicly expressed frustration with the unprecedented number of Palestinian civilians killed in the Gaza Strip. However, US funds and arms continue to fuel the Israeli war effort, and no formal effort has been made to investigate the growing number of documented war crimes committed by Israel against Palestinians in the strip. On Tuesday, the Washington Post published an in-depth investigation detailing Israel’s role in the killing of a six-year-old and her family who were trapped in a car in northern Gaza.

State Department spokesman Matthew Miller said Washington will ask Tel Aviv “for further information” on the matter. The US has said it would look into several incidents, including late February’s Flour Massacre against dozens of starving and desperate aid seekers. Yet no US probe has been launched into the matter since an internal Israeli army investigation absolved Israel of blame, and Washington refused to condemn the killings. The Guardian reported in January, citing interviews and State Department documents, that “special mechanisms have been used over the last few years to shield Israel from US human rights laws.” The ProPublica report comes days after dozens of Palestinians detained by Israel in Gaza were released, with many giving testimonies of horrific treatment by Israeli forces, including humiliation and torture.

Read more …

“..many Americans still vote Democrat. When a people vote for their own-self destruction, it is clear that the country is finished..”

Texas Is Being Turned Into a Woke Democrat State (Paul Craig Roberts)

The Biden Regime is using federal money to bribe the Aggies, Texas A&M University, to come up with ways to advance “race-based hiring” in public schools. Possible you remember or have heard that Martin Luther King and the civil rights movement was about judging “people by their character and not the color of their skin.” Once perhaps, but it has been a long time since. For half a century skin color has had preference, if it is non-white, in university admissions, employment and promotion. Feminists latched onto the scheme and the female gender was also privileged. This is not to say that no blacks and no females are qualified for their position. Many of them are. It is to say that they are in their position despite their qualifications because they constitute a privileged category before the law, a total violation of the US Constitution and its 14th Amendment.

The emphasis on “diversity” has prevailed over the merit-based system into which I was born and grew up. Today merit is considered racist, a white supremacy tool. Many gifted student programs and high schools for the exceptional have been shut down because two few blacks are qualified, and small presence of blacks violates the sacredness of “diversity” and “equity.” A country whose education, employment and promotion is based on diversity and not on merit is a country that is failing, and most certainly America has long been a failing country. For example, we now have “diversity” appointments to prosecutorial offices such as prosecutors and attorney generals and as judges who have no understanding of law as a shield of the people, but who see it is a weapon to be used against disapproved parties. We see the total collapse of justice in America in the many examples of the Democrats’ Stalin show trials against President Trump and against the alleged “insurrectionists” who attended the Trump rally..

To the few remaining people of my generation it is astonishing that merit, which made America great and a ladder of upward mobility, has been officially cast aside for “diversity” in which advance is based on skin color, gender or self-proclaimed, non-biological gender. Have the people who have created this deplorable situation ever wondered how a non-merit based mediocre society can be a superpower, an unipolar, a hegemony whose exceptional and indispensable existence gives it right to hegemony over the world? China, the host of most of American manufacturing must wonder at the American Delusion. Russia, whose power and economy have been greatly elevated by the mindless American sanctions, must wonder if the USA even qualifies as an opponent. Even Iran no longer fears the US. If you are so unfortunate as to live in New York City or other blue cities, your home and your rental properties can be stolen from you by the Democrats’ massive and ongoing wave of immigrant-invaders who can occupy your property in your absence and occupy your rental property between leases and you cannot evict them.

Regardless of the reality in which they live, many Americans still vote Democrat. When a people vote for their own-self destruction, it is clear that the country is finished.

Read more …

“..it is first, last and only about a Cabinet official’s deliberate refusal to enforce laws as written..”

On The Mayorkas Impeachment (Denninger)

The Senate appears to have a rather odd view of the Executive — then again so does the House, and both are not only toxic they’re demonstrably false. Mayorkas is the first Cabinet secretary to be impeached in almost 150 years. House Republicans voted to impeach Mayorkas in February over his handling of the southern border by a narrow margin after failing to do so on their first try. Democrats have slammed the impeachment as a political stunt, saying that Republicans had no valid basis for the move and that policy disagreements are not a justification for the rarely used constitutional impeachment of a Cabinet official. The impeachment of Mayorkas has nothing to do with “policy disagreements”; it is first, last and only about a Cabinet official’s deliberate refusal to enforce laws as written, including 8 USC §1324.

That statute mandates felony criminal penalties carrying prison sentences for anyone who assists, harbors or transports illegal immigrants. Other sections of US law forbid the Federal Government and its agencies from “paroling” into the United States an illegal immigrant unless that have a facially-reasonable claim to asylum. There is no capacity in the law to permit DHS to do so simply because there are a lot of people illegally crossing. Policy is defined by legislation and thus has to pass both House and Senate and either be signed by the President or a veto must be overridden. It is absolutely true that different Administrations will have different policies but the Constitution is clear and each person in all three branches of Government takes an oath to uphold and enforce all of the laws and thus the means to express policy isn’t to ignore laws you don’t like but rather to work to change them through the legislative process.

If you can’t find agreement via that process then until you can the existing policy stands whether you agree with it or not and if you take an oath to enforce the law as written and you refuse to do so on a deliberate basis impeachment is the peaceful and appropriate action to remove you from said office. Neither the House or Senate acting alone can change policy, no matter which party controls said chamber. Only both, acting in concert, can do so. This is intentional in the design of our Republic; policy changes of significant importance to society are described in our laws, and it is both wildly unreasonable and destructive to civil order to change them on a whim when one person wins or loses an office, no matter the office.

The Senate’s Schumer led his caucus to toss the entire thing as “unconstitutional” on a part-line vote. Big shock, right? When you boil it down essentially everything wrong with this nation comes down to this same issue: Various politicians and paid employees of the government simply ignore any law they disagree with either in its entirety or as applies to some favored group while using it as a cudgel against anyone they dislike. Our national foundation rests on that never being tolerated by anyone, anywhere and for any reason.

I fully understand that these policy matters have serious and vehemently-expressed opinions on all sides. That’s a good thing: Freedom of expression is in fact also a foundation of America. But no public official is empowered to take that disagreement and turn it into a malicious abuse of existing law whether by intentional omission or weaponization against disfavored persons or those who hold a different point of view. Down that road lies a line that cannot be foreseen in advance in that the people may, at some point, determine that the strictures of polite society no longer apply to them by that very example set by our officials. You do not want this; it is precisely through that road that essentially every civil conflict and social destruction has occurred and if you believe you’ll be immune to it if it happens, no matter how wealthy or poor you might be, you’re wrong.

Read more …

“..lawyers for Lloyd’s and Arch suggest that even if they were required to pay up, anti-Russian sanctions would leave their hands tied..”

UK Insurers Won’t Pay Nord Stream Because Blasts Were ‘Government’ Backed (GZ)

The legal team representing high-powered insurers Lloyd’s and Arch says that since the Nord Stream explosions were “more likely than not to have been inflicted by… a government,” they have no responsibility to pay for damages to the pipelines. To succeed with that defense, the companies will presumably be compelled to prove, in court, who carried out those attacks. ritish insurers are arguing that they have no obligation to honor their coverage of the Nord Stream pipelines, which were blown up in September 2022, because the unprecedented act of industrial sabotage was likely carried out by a national government. The insurers’ filing contradicts reports the Washington Post and other legacy media publications asserting that a private Ukrainian team was responsible for the massive act of industrial sabotage.

A legal brief filed on behalf of UK-based firms Lloyd’s Insurance Company and Arch Insurance states that the “defendants will rely on, inter alia, the fact that the explosion Damage could only have (or, at least, was more likely than not to have) been inflicted by or under the order of a government.” As a result, they argue, “the Explosion Damage was “directly or indirectly occasioned by, happening through, or in consequence of” the conflict between Russia and Ukraine” and falls under an exclusion relating to military conflicts. The brief comes a month after Switzerland-based Nord Stream AG filed a lawsuit against the insurers for their refusal to compensate the company. Nord Stream, which estimated the cost incurred by the attack at between €1.2 billion and €1.35 billion, is seeking to recoup over €400 million in damages. Swedish engineer Erik Andersson, who led the first private investigative expedition to the blast sites of the Nord Stream pipelines, describes the insurers’ legal strategy as a desperate attempt to find an excuse to avoid honoring their indemnity obligations.

“If it’s an act of war and ordered by a government, that’s the only way they can escape their responsibility to pay,” Andersson told The Grayzone. Following a report by Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh which alleged that the US government was responsible for the Nord Stream explosion, Western governments quickly spun out a narrative placing blame on a team of rogue Ukrainian operatives. Given the lack of conclusive evidence, however, proving that the explosions were “inflicted by or under the order of a government” would be a major challenge for defense lawyers. Even if the plaintiffs in the case are able to wrest back the funds in court, they are likely to face other serious hurdles. Later in the brief, lawyers for Lloyd’s and Arch suggest that even if they were required to pay up, anti-Russian sanctions would leave their hands tied.

“In the event that the Defendants are found to be liable to pay an indemnity and/or damages to the Claimant,” the brief states, “the Defendants reserve their position as to whether any such payment would be prohibited by any applicable economic sanctions that may be in force at the time any such payment is required to be made.” After they were threatened with sanctions by the US government, in 2021 Lloyd’s and Arch both withdrew from their agreement to cover damages to the second of the pipelines, Nord Stream 2. But though they remain on the hook for damages to the first line, the language used by the insurers’ lawyers seems to be alluding to a possible future sanctions package that would release them from their financial obligations. “Nord Stream 1 was not affected by those sanctions, but apparently sanctions might work retroactively to the benefit of insurers,” observes Andersson.

The plaintiffs may face an uphill battle at the British High Court in London, the city where Lloyd’s has been headquartered since its creation in 1689. As former State Department cybersecurity official Mike Benz observed, “Lloyd’s of London is the prize of the London banking establishment,” and “London is the driving force behind the transatlantic side of the Blob’s “Seize Eurasia” designs on Russia.”

Read more …

“..hardline Republicans may force a vote on the motion to vacate shortly before the aid bills for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan hit the House floor..”

Aid to Ukraine May Deep-Six Another House Speaker (Sp.)

Despite his repeated pledges to bring foreign aid bills to the House floor only when a solution to the border crisis is found, Speaker Johnson unveiled three separate funding packages, namely $26 billion for Israel, $61 billion for Ukraine, and $8 billion for Taiwan and allies in Indo-Pacific, at the time when the US southern frontier still remains wide open. “Republican speaker Mike Johnson went into that secured room with a bunch of guys in gray suits from the deep state, and he came out of that room after the meeting as Uniparty speaker Mike Johnson and no longer a Republican,” Michael Shannon, a political commentator and Newsmax columnist, told Sputnik. “That’s the only explanation for it that makes sense, because he’s completely turned around, and now he’s on the Washington agenda of the Uniparty and no longer listens to or tries to do what the base wants,” the commentator continued. “That’s what’s happening here. Once they get into a position of leadership, they abandon the base,” he maintained.

Shannon explained that Ukraine is obviously not on the GOP’s base priority list right now, given that Republican voters are much more concerned about the influx of illegals into the US, inflation, and budget deficit spending. A recent YouGov survey indicated that 61% of Republicans don’t approve of sending more weapons and other military assistance to Ukraine. Among them, 69% of self-identified MAGA Republicans and 55% of non-MAGA Republicans said they don’t want to send more military aid to the Kiev regime. A group of House conservatives confronted Mike Johnson on Thursday, namely, Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), and Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) advocating the motion to vacate in order to sack the incumbent speaker in the same way they ousted his predecessor, Kevin McCarthy. Massie told journalists that there would be more Republican votes to remove Speaker Johnson than there were to boot out McCarthy last October.

“If I had my wish, MTG’s motion to vacate the speakership, which I believe Representative Chip Roy from Texas also supports, would be successful, and the speaker’s chair would be vacated, and it would stay vacated until after the election,” said Shannon. “It’s obvious we can’t pass any conservative legislation with this House and this Senate. So not passing any bad legislation as far as I’m concerned, and as Daniel Horowitz of the Conservative Review mentioned, is probably the most viable alternative. That being said, I don’t know if MTG has the votes to vacate the speakership. I think we’ll just have to see how that develops.” According to Axios, hardline Republicans may force a vote on the motion to vacate shortly before the aid bills for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan hit the House floor.

Some Democrats, who hailed Johnson’s maneuver regarding the Ukraine aid bill, said they would help the speaker save his job. For his part, Johnson said he would not resign and branded the effort to oust him as “absurd”. However, the timing is crucial, a senior House Democrat said, as quoted by the media outlet: the Dems are much more likely to “save” Johnson after the aid bills are passed, not before that. Massie warned Johnson against relying on Democrats, stressing that the speaker would become “toxic to the conference.” “For every Democrat who comes to his aid, he’ll lose 2-3 more Republicans,” the congressman said, as quoted by NBC News’ Sahil Kapur.

Massie

Read more …

Petulant child.

Zelensky Blames EU For Russian Advance (RT)

A shortage of Western arms supplies and unkept promises by EU members have allowed Russia to advance on the battlefield, Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky told senior European officials on Wednesday. Zelensky made the claims during a video conference address to national leaders and senior members of the EU bureaucracy, who have convened for a two-day summit in Brussels. The Ukrainian leader reiterated that his country needs more Western material and financial assistance to continue its armed conflict with Russia. “Now the Russian army feels its strength in almost everything related to the armed component. And it is precisely because of this strength – in artillery, in equipment, in the ability to operate in the sky – that they are putting pressure on us at the front and are gradually moving,” he said.

Although he thanked Kiev’s donors for their aid, Zelensky also complained of unfulfilled promises. “Unfortunately, we have not yet seen a million artillery shells from the European Union that were discussed so much. Also, some other initiatives have not yet been fully implemented, and this is primarily reflected in what our soldiers can use at the front,” he stated. Russian President Vladimir Putin believes “he will succeed in his counteroffensive,” Zelensky claimed, adding that “the only root of this hope is the shortage of weapons among our soldiers.” In addition to offensive systems, Kiev wants more Western air defenses to protect its industrial base, as well as investment and technology to launch domestic arms production. It also requires electricity to compensate for the destruction of power facilities destroyed by Russian precision strikes, and according to Zelensky needs “energy of spirit” in the form of accelerated accession to the EU.

“We need the European Union to deliver what it had promised, and our people need to see Ukraine moving closer to full membership,” Zelensky insisted, urging Brussels to progress to the next phase of talks in June. Analysis published by Politico on Wednesday cited the refusal of Ukrainians to enroll into the military as a major problem for Kiev. EU statistics body Eurostat estimates the number of fighting age Ukrainian men living in member states at some 650,000. Most of them arranged to be smuggled across the border, the outlet said. This week, Zelensky signed into law a bill that makes it easier for conscription officials to issue summonses and imposes harsh punishments for avoiding the draft.

Read more …

“..breaking the international order that you want to protect; that you would want Russia to respect..”

ECB Fires Back At Plans To Seize Russian Assets (RT)

US-backed proposals to seize frozen Russian assets could undermine the international order, European Central Bank (ECB) President Christine Lagarde has cautioned. Her comments came during a meeting in Washington on Wednesday, where the G7 finance ministers and central bank governors were discussing the issue of using the immobilized assets of the Russian central bank to support Ukraine. In a joint statement, the finance ministers and regulators said they would continue working on “all possible avenues” to make use of Russian sovereign assets, according to Reuters. The push to seize Moscow’s money has been led by the US and has caused a rift among the G7 and the EU political elite. Washington and its allies have blocked some $300 billion of Russian central bank assets due to sanctions adopted in response to the launch of Moscow’s special military operation against Kiev in February 2022.

Around $200 billion of that money is held in the EU. The US has been insisting for months that international law allows for the confiscation of the funds, but Germany and France have expressed concerns that such a move could set a dangerous precedent. ”I have seen four different schemes or proposals to circumvent what many other jurists or lawyers… regard as a very serious legal obstacle that can be construed as a violation of the legal international order,” Lagarde, a former lawyer, said, as quoted by the Financial Times. Moving from freezing the assets to confiscating them could entail “breaking the international order that you want to protect; that you would want Russia to respect,” she added. During the meeting in Washington, a senior US Treasury official outlined the options the finance ministers were “doing technical work” on.

”One of them is seizure, but another is collateralizing, or even using the windfall profits or the interest from these assets to fund a loan,” Deputy US Treasury Secretary Wally Adeyemo said, as quoted by Reuters. The outlet reported earlier that the US and its allies were considering using the interest due on the frozen Russian assets as collateral for loans or bonds issued to help Ukraine. Moscow has repeatedly said that the seizure of its funds would amount to theft and would further undermine global trust in the Western financial system. Russia has also warned that if necessary, it might respond in kind to such a move by the US and its allies.

Read more …

The mess gets bigger by the day. We need Liz Cheney under oath.

Top Military Official Lied About Jan. 6: Whistleblowers (ET)

The secretary of the Army on Jan. 6, 2021, lied about multiple details regarding what unfolded as the U.S. Capitol was breached, National Guard whistleblowers said during a congressional hearing on April 17. Then-Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy made multiple false claims, including that he spoke to the commanding general of the District of Columbia National Guard on two separate occasions after officials requested that the Guard be deployed to the Capitol, the whistleblowers said. After Maj. Gen. William Walker conveyed a request from the U.S. Capitol Police for Guard personnel, Mr. McCarthy called Maj. Gen. Walker at 2:14 p.m. and instructed the Guard to stand by, according to a Guard timeline of Jan. 6, 2021. But that call and others that Mr. McCarthy or one of his top advisers were said to have made later authorizing the Guard for mobilization and deployment did not happen, according to the Guard officials.

“At no time did Gen. Walker take any calls, nor did we ever hear from the secretary on any of the ongoing conference calls or the secure video teleconferencing throughout the day,” Capt. Timothy Nick, who served as Maj. Gen. Walker’s personal assistant on Jan. 6, 2021, said during the hearing. “This I know because I was with the command general the entire time recording the events.” Capt. Nick has not previously discussed publicly what transpired on Jan. 6, 2021, and neither has Brig. Gen. Aaron Dean, who was the National Guard’s adjutant general on the day that the Capitol was breached. The Department of Defense (DOD) inspector general report on Jan. 6, 2021, which relied heavily on Mr. McCarthy and other military officials, was rife with “inaccuracies,” Brig. Gen. Dean said. “I believe it is my duty and moral obligation to stand before you today and illuminate the truth,” he told the hearing, which was held by the House Administration Committee’s Subcommittee on Oversight.

Despite Mr. Walker conveying the request for assistance at about 1:50 p.m., the Guard was not deployed to the Capitol until about 5:10 p.m. “This was a dereliction of duty by the secretary of the Army,” Rep. Greg Murphy (R-N.C.), one of the members of the committee, said. Mr. McCarthy refused to appear before the panel, Dr. Murphy said. Christopher Miller, the acting secretary of defense at the time, authorized Guard deployment at 3:11 p.m., but Mr. McCarthy took the order and decided to draw up a plan before ordering the deployment, according to military timelines and testimony from Mr. McCarthy and others. “You never would employ our personnel, whether it’s on an American street or a foreign street, without putting together a [plan],” Mr. McCarthy told the now-disbanded House Jan. 6 committee.

The whistleblowers also testified that Army officials Lt. Gen. Walter Piatt and Gen. Charles Flynn, during a 2:30 p.m. conference call on Jan. 6, 2021, expressed concern about the optics of having the Guard at the Capitol. “I did hear the word optics. And they did use it. Specifically, Gen. Piatt said ‘optics.’ And his concern was that he did not want soldiers or airmen on Capitol grounds, with the Capitol in the background,” Brig. Gen. Dean said. “They were giving every other reason why we should be around the Capitol, away from the Capitol, and not responding to the Capitol.”

Read more …

“..von der Leyen has conceded that there is no proof of a Russian bribery network. “They have carried [Putin’s] propaganda into our societies,” she said. “Whether they have taken bribes for it or not.”

Desperation Behind European Politicians’ Latest Russiagate Hoax (Public)

European politicians claimed late last month that Russia bribed European politicians to spread disinformation and interfere in the upcoming June elections. “Russian influence scandal rocks EU,” screamed a March 30 Politico headline. Russia “is using dodgy outlets pretending to be media [and] using money to buy covert influence,” claimed European Commission Vice President Vera Jourova. The BBC agreed: “Russian network that ‘paid European politicians’ busted, authorities claim.” Heads of state hyped the alleged scandal. “We uncovered a pro-Russian network,” claimed Petr Fiala, the Prime Minister of the Czech Republic, “that was developing an operation to spread Russian influence and undermine security across Europe.” Poland’s intelligence agency said it had conducted searches in the Warsaw and Tychy regions and seized €48,500 (£41,500) and $36,000 (£28,500).

However, following an investigation by Public, the head of the Czech Intelligence Agency (BIS), Michal Koudelka on Monday admitted that his agency has no information about any bribery scheme. “I cannot confirm anything,” he said. It’s true that Russia’s media influence in Europe intensified considerably during the Covid-19 pandemic. At that time, a number of marginalized voices found space on the German broadcasts of the Kremlin’s propaganda television, Russia Today, which the president of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, promptly shut down in 2022. But von der Leyen has conceded that there is no proof of a Russian bribery network. “They have carried [Putin’s] propaganda into our societies,” she said. “Whether they have taken bribes for it or not.” Public asked von der Leyen what evidence she has for her allegations. What was the misconduct or illegal activity if there were no bribes? Von der Leyen did not respond to Public’s requests for comment.

Read more …

“..one of the things that the British courts don’t understand is the U.S. doctrine of separation of powers..”

US Issues Assurances on Assange (Lauria)

The United States Embassy on Tuesday filed two assurances with the British Foreign Office saying it would not seek the death penalty against imprisoned WikiLeaks‘ publisher Julian Assange and would allow Assange “the ability to raise and seek to reply upon at trial … the rights and protections given under the First Amendment,” according to the U.S. diplomatic note. Assange’s wife Stella Assange said the note “makes no undertaking to withdraw the prosecution’s previous assertion that Julian has no First Amendment rights because he is not a U.S citizen. Instead,” she said, “the US has limited itself to blatant weasel words claiming that Julian can ‘seek to raise’ the First Amendment if extradited.” The note contains a hollow statement, namely, that Assange can try to raise the First Amendment at trial (and at sentencing), but the U.S. Department of Justice can’t guarantee he would get those rights, which is precisely what it must do under British extradition law based on the European Convention on Human Rights.

The U.S. Department of Justice is legally restricted to assure a free speech guarantee to Assange equivalent to Article 10 of the European Convention, which the British court is bound to follow. But without that assurance, Assange should be freed according to a British Crown Prosecution Service comment on extraditions. In USAID v. Alliance for Open Society, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2020 that non-U.S. citizens outside the U.S. don’t possess constitutional rights. Both former C.I.A. Director Mike Pompeo and Gordon Kromberg, Assange’s U.S. prosecutor, have said Assange does not have First Amendment protection. Because of the separation of powers in the United States, the executive branch’s Justice Department can’t guarantee to the British courts what the U.S. judicial branch decides about the rights of a non-U.S. citizen in court, said Marjorie Cohn, law professor and former president of the National Lawyers’ Guild.

“Let’s assume that … the Biden administration, does give assurances that he would be able to raise the First Amendment and that the [High] Court found that those were significant assurances,” Cohn told Consortium News‘ webcast CN Live! last month. “That really doesn’t mean anything, because one of the things that the British courts don’t understand is the U.S. doctrine of separation of powers,” she said. “The prosecutors can give all the assurances they want, but the judiciary, another [one] .. of these three branches of government in the U.S., doesn’t have to abide by the executive branch claim or assurance,” Cohn said. In other words, whether Assange can rely on the First Amendment in his defense in a U.S. court is up to that court not Kromberg or the Department of Justice, which issued the assurance on Tuesday. “The United States has issued a non-assurance in relation to the First Amendment,” said Stella Assange.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Japan
https://twitter.com/i/status/1781068681931293121

 

 

Huajiang
https://twitter.com/i/status/1780929621610955001

 

 

Emperors

 

 

Family
https://twitter.com/i/status/1780913695993852363

 

 

Parrots

 

 

Hedgehogs

 

 

Tiger
https://twitter.com/i/status/1780890045454471561

 

 

Bald Eagle Walking

 

 

 

 

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