Menu Icon

Debt Rattle September 10 2026

Sep 102026
 
 September 10, 2026  Posted by at 9:27 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , ,  44 Responses »


Eugène Delacroix Les femmes d’Alger 1834


• Trump Says ‘War’ To End Immediately ‘After’ Midterm Elections (ZH)
• Stacking Tariffs of 50 Percent and Import Bans Against Canadian Goods (CTH)
• Russiagate Is Finally Heading Somewhere Washington Hates: Under Oath (Manney)
• Turning Point: One Year After Charlie Kirk’s Murder (Scott Pinsker)
• Democrats Aghast at GOP Midterm Strategy to Embrace Trump (Rick Moran)
• Steve Eisman: What If OpenAI Actually Fails? (ZH)
• AI Has Over 10% Chance of Killing All Humans – Anthropic Researcher (RT)
• The AI Threat To Our Republic (Jack Hellner)
• Europe Against Israel (Rabbi Michael Barclay)
• Victor Davis Hanson on Tucker Carlson and Marjorie Taylor Greene (Bolt)
• Investors Are Totally Stoked About This New Rocket (Stephen Green)

 


 

https://twitter.com/MAGAVoice/status/2097878444294263293?s=20 https://twitter.com/MAGAVoice/status/2097424489630060751?s=20

 


 

 


 


“.. a ‘Trump dividend’ to every adult in the US of USD 5,000 if Republicans win ..”

• Trump Says ‘War’ To End Immediately ‘After’ Midterm Elections§ (ZH)

Newsquak: US President Trump said he thinks war with Iran will end immediately after the election and will do much more than a nuclear deal.


US President Trump said he will give a ‘Trump dividend’ to every adult in the US of USD 5,000 if Republicans win the Midterm elections, while he added that the dividend must be spent in the US.

 


 

New Trump remarks on Iran… Note that he called it a “war” (no less than twice in the below clip) – contradicting the White House’s own stance (Sept. 4: Trump said don’t call it a war, instead: “I call it a military conflict because it’s small potatoes for us.”:

Q: Do you expect negotiations with Iran to restart at some point? Trump: Uhhhhhh… we’re not looking for it to be honest with you. This war will end immediately after our election. And meanwhile, back to the below laughably implausible headlines…

Pakistani Ambassador says they believe that a better understanding will soon be achieved between the US and Iran, reports ISNA.

But don’t Republicans actually need the war to end before Congressional elections?

More on high prices at the pump and the question of nuclear weapons… however, the war itself has only made this a greater uncertainty, as Washington has not achieved any prime objectives – and the status of the Iranian nuclear program remains unknown…


IRGC: ’20 for 2′, Vows Disproportionate Responses
Amid the dramatic escalation which kicked off since Tuesday night, Iran is seeking to impose new conditions on the United States. While continuing to vow a ‘disproportionate response’ to any attack moving forward, Tehran is now identifying specifics.

IRGC spokesman Hossein Mohebbi states Wednesday, “The imposed war, which involved the world’s most powerful nations, has ended in certain periods, but the nature of the conflict continues. For the first time, this conflict has directly inflicted strategic damage on the United States, impacting the country’s security and economic equations.”

He issued the following list for the US to reach an end to the conflict. “If the enemy desires an end to this situation, they must”…
• completely cease the war
• refrain from further threats
• withdraw the Israeli army from Lebanon
• end the siege of Yemen
• release the $24 billion of Iranian assets that have been frozen
• cease any interference in the country’s nuclear and missile programs

This definitely marks a raised bar, to be sure, after this summer the MoU complete ceased, and negotiations vanished. There’s no way Washington complies with even half of the conditions, at this rate. Importantly, Mohebbi also said: “We have reached a point where if the enemy strikes at 2 or 3 of our targets, we will respond forcefully by striking at 20.”

Tanker Attacked in Iraq Territory Waters, After CENTCOM Insists US Warships Not Hit
After a huge Iranian ballistic missile launch on US bases in Jordan overnight, CENTCOM has yet to respond in any major way. The Pentagon has also said all US troops “are accounted for” – but this doesn’t necessarily mean there were no casualties. However, CENTCOM is at the moment denying that the Iranians hit US warships, as the IRGC has been claiming since Tuesday, in an oddly specific statement: The IRGC claims to have targeted and inflicted “significant damage” on a pair of US warships in the Gulf of Oman: DDG-119 USS Delbert D. Black and DDG-53 USS John Paul Jones, both Arleigh Burke-class destroyers.

CENTCOM responded: “No U.S. Navy warship has been struck; all IRGC attempted attacks failed.” It added on X, “Meanwhile, U.S. forces have successfully destroyed 10 Iranian tankers in just the last week. These vessels were part of a multibillion-dollar shadow network that funds the IRGC, and Iran cannot defend them.”

Meanwhile, Iran’s military is continuing to go on the offensive, seeking to maintain its leverage over the contested Strait of Hormuz. “A Panama-flagged tanker carrying 2 million barrels of Iraqi fuel oil was struck today by a drone in Iraqi territorial waters, two port officials say,” Reuters reports. “Iraqi rescue boats extinguished a fire aboard the tanker, New Andros, and there are no reports of casualties, port officials tell Reuters.”

Read more …

Canada has very favorable terms and wants more.

• Stacking Tariffs of 50 Percent and Import Bans Against Canadian Goods (CTH)

President Trump and U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer waited to see if Canada was going to follow through with their retaliatory tariffs against U.S. imports. The Canadian government carried out their tariffs, so today the White House introduced 50% ‘stacking tariffs’, on top of pre-existing tariff rates, and additional import bans against several Canadian products.


It should be quickly noted that several North American corporations are already making moves to avoid the issues by shifting production lines and adding additional investment into U.S. manufacturing. As expected, getting locked out of a 32 trillion economy is not an option for survivability.

The easiest way to review the issues is not to read media reports, but rather to read the actual outcomes as announced by the White House and USTR. CTH has noticed several Canadian outlets are already making false claims.It is worth reviewing both sets of outlines as well as accompanying links to determine the exact types of Canadian products being targeted by stacking tariffs and import bans.

WHITE HOUSE – Today, to address Canada’s increased discrimination against U.S. commerce, President Trump signed five Proclamations pursuant to Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930 to ban certain products from Canada and modify the scope of the tariffs on certain Canadian products previously announced on July 20, 2026. President Trump is taking decisive and appropriate action to respond to Canada’s additional retaliation and continued discriminatory treatment of crucial American exports.

• After breaking off trade talks with the United States last month, today Canada imposed new retaliatory tariffs on about $20 billion of U.S. exports, including steel, dairy, and agricultural equipment.

• Because Canada maintained and in fact increased its discrimination against U.S. commerce with respect to U.S. alcoholic beverages, President Trump, under Section 338, imposed import bans on certain Canadian alcohol and other products that were subject to the 50 percent tariffs imposed under Section 338 in Proclamation 11046.

• Moreover, because Canada maintained its discrimination against U.S. commerce with respect to dairy, President Trump, under Section 338, imposed import bans on certain Canadian dairy and other products of Canada that were subject to the 50 percent tariffs imposed under Section 338 in Proclamation 11047.

• To offset the burden to U.S. commerce while better serving the public interest, President Trump is also modifying the July 20, 2026 actions by removing certain products, such as rock salt and cement, from the scope of the Section 338 tariffs and replacing those products with new ones, ranging from all-terrain vehicles (ATVs) to additional dairy products.

• These Section 338 tariffs apply to all covered goods regardless of whether a good originates under the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) and apply in addition to tariffs imposed under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962.

• The import bans will take effect on September 29, 2026, and the product additions and removals will take effect on September 15, 2026.

WASHINGTON – Today, Ambassador Jamieson Greer issued a statement after President Trump exercised his authority under Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930 to ban certain Canadian products from entering the U.S. market and modify the scope of the July 20 actions to effectively offset the burden or disadvantage to U.S. commerce by Canada’s discriminatory measures.

“After weeks of good faith and intensive efforts between U.S. and Canadian negotiators, Canada walked away from a near-final trade deal that offered better treatment than any other trading partner, and instead Canada chose to embark on senseless retaliation against the United States,” said Ambassador Greer. “Today’s action, combining targeted import bans as authorized by Section 338 and a calibration of the underlying Section 338 tariffs, is a natural consequence of Canada’s continued discriminatory treatment of crucial American exports, ranging from alcoholic beverages to dairy products to motor vehicles. President Trump will continue to leverage the tools at his disposal to defend the interests of American workers and exporters, and restore reciprocity in our bilateral trade relationships.”

Additionally, the President has directed USTR (Office of the United States Trade Representative) and GSA (General Services Administration) to remove $50 billion dollars’ worth of Canadian-origin products from GSA’s Multiple Award Schedules.

[..]

Background:

Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1338) empowers the President to, among other things, impose duties of up to 50 percent on imports of a foreign country to offset the burden or disadvantage from a foreign country’s unequal imposition on or discrimination against the commerce of the United States. On July 20, 2026, finding that the public interest will be served by his actions, President Trump took three separate Section 338 actions to level the playing field for important American exports to Canada—motor vehicles, alcoholic beverages, and dairy. Section 338 further empowers the President to exclude products from importation into the United States if a foreign country maintains or increases its discriminatory practices against U.S. commerce.

Based on Canada’s continued retaliation and discrimination against U.S. commerce, President Trump has determined that it is necessary and appropriate to ban certain Canadian products from entering the U.S. market and refined the scope of the July 20 actions to target strategic Canadian sectors while removing certain non-sensitive Canadian goods from the scope of the actions. {Source}

It appears that some of the product categories would be limited by ‘stacking tariffs’, as a consequence the U.S. is simply moving to ban the products altogether.

Read more …

“Russia did interfere in the election extensively, as the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee documented.”

Oh really?

• Russiagate Is Finally Heading Somewhere Washington Hates: Under Oath (Manney)

Washington has spent nearly a decade arguing about Russiagate in congressional hearings, cable studios, memoirs, podcasts, and carefully lawyered statements. Now somebody is bringing subpoenas. The Justice Department has begun compelling former government officials to testify before a federal grand jury in Florida investigating whether crimes were committed during the government’s Trump-Russia investigations.


From the Associated Press: The Justice Department is demanding testimony before a Florida grand jury in an investigation aiming to establish an intelligence community conspiracy against President Donald Trump, according to multiple people familiar with the matter. New subpoenas being issued to former government officials represent an escalation in the year-long investigation as the Justice Department pursues a loosely defined theory that members of the intelligence community who scrutinized Trump over the last decade, including over Russian interference in the 2016 election, conspired against him and violated his rights.

Investigators in recent days contacted some defense lawyers for witnesses advising them of forthcoming grand jury subpoenas. It was not clear how many as of Tuesday had received a subpoena or were still waiting to receive one, and the identities of the witnesses receiving subpoenas were also not immediately clear. The people who confirmed the subpoenas spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity to discuss a secretive grand jury investigation. The subpoenas mark a significant escalation from the voluntary interviews investigators previously sought.

Former CIA Director John Brennan is a target of part of the investigation. Brennan’s lawyers say he committed no wrongdoing and has cooperated with previous reviews.mNo indictment has been announced; a subpoena isn’t proof of a crime, and a grand jury investigation isn’t a conviction waiting for paperwork. Plus, as the old joke goes, a grand jury can indict a ham sandwich. But sworn testimony is different from another Sunday morning interview.

Attorney General Todd Blanche appointed former U.S. Attorney Joe diGenova in April to help oversee the investigation. Prosecutors are examining decisions surrounding the intelligence community’s handling of Russian interference in the 2016 election and the government’s subsequent investigations involving Donald Trump’s campaign. From the Associated Press:

The investigation is being run out of Florida, with the Justice Department in April bringing back into government service a top prosecutor from the Reagan administration, Joe diGenova, to serve as a counselor to the attorney general and help lead a team of agents and prosecutors. diGenova, who had previously asked then-Attorney General Pam Bondi to appoint him to the job and has openly and repeatedly claimed Trump was the victim of an intelligence community conspiracy, declined to comment Tuesday when reached by the AP.

In an indication of the wide-ranging nature of the investigation, the AP reported last month that diGenova’s team has sought interviews with law enforcement officials involved in the 2022 FBI search of Trump’s Mar-a-Lago property in Palm Beach, Florida. The search recovered a trove of classified documents that formed the basis of a since-abandoned Justice Department prosecution of Trump, who has long decried the FBI operation as an invasion of his privacy.

Brennan’s role deserves particular scrutiny because he headed the CIA when the intelligence community produced its January 2017 assessment of Russian election interference. A declassified House Intelligence Committee report released in 2025 challenged parts of the process behind that assessment. The report said Brennan pushed for the inclusion of information from the Steele dossier, despite concerns about its credibility. Brennan has disputed allegations that he manipulated intelligence or acted improperly.

Americans have heard competing versions of this history for years. Trump and his allies say intelligence and law-enforcement institutions abused their authority while pursuing a political opponent. Brennan and other former officials maintain that Russia genuinely interfered in the 2016 election and that intelligence officials acted appropriately in assessing the threat. Both propositions contain questions that deserve evidence rather than another round of television combat.

Russia did interfere in the election extensively, as the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee documented.

The Committee found that the Russian government engaged in an aggressive, multifaceted effort to influence, or attempt to influence, the outcome of the 2016 presidential election. Parts of this effort are outlined in the Committee’s earlier volumes on election security, social media, the Obama Administration’s response to the threat, and the January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA). (U)

The fifth and final volume focuses on the counterintelligence threat, outlining a wide range of Russian efforts to influence the Trump Campaign and the 2016 election. In this volume the Committee lays out its findings in detail by looking at many aspects of the counterintelligence threat posed by the Russian influence operation.

For example, the Committee examined Paul Manafort’ s connections to Russian influence actors and the FBI’ s treatment of reporting produced by Christopher Steele. While the Committee does not describe the final result as a complete picture, this volume provides the most comprehensive description to date of Russia’s activities and the threat they posed.

This volume presents this information in topical sections in order to address coherently and in detail the wide variety of Russian actions. The events explained in these sections in many cases overlap, and references in each section will direct the reader to those overlapping parts of the volume. Immediately below is a summary of key findings from several sections.

But acknowledging Russian interference doesn’t settle whether every government action taken in response was justified, accurate, or lawful.

Read more …

TPUSA has grown a lot. What now?

• Turning Point: One Year After Charlie Kirk’s Murder (Scott Pinsker)

By all accounts, Charlie Kirk never considered stepping down. Not even once. And why would he?Turning Point USA was his baby. His creation. His magnum opus. He built it from the bottom up — transforming TPUSA from a teenager’s pipe dream into a political juggernaut. Every inch of it reflected his values, passions, and one-of-a-kind personality.Which is why Charlie intended to lead it ‘til his dying day: The only succession plan he ever considered was posthumous.


Tragically, his dying day came far earlier than he deserved.As we approach the one-year anniversary of Charlie Kirk’s assassination, Turning Point itself is at a turning point: Three legacies are now in limbo. The first is Charlie’s. Complaining about click-whores, liars, cretins, and clout-chasers on social media is a waste of time. It’d be like complaining about nudity in a strip club: That’s kinda-sorta the M.O. when you enter.If you don’t wanna see naked people, don’t go inside!

But even by social media’s cesspool standards, onlookers were stunned by how quickly Charlie’s murder was exploited. Within days, some of the biggest, most influential podcasters wore Charlie’s corpse like a skin suit, repurposing his legacy for their own agenda. Instead of celebrating his life, they monetized his death. Instead of comforting his family, they tortured his widow for clicks. Instead of honoring his beliefs, they used Charlie as their personal sock puppet. And they continue to do so today.

Once upon a time, Charlie Kirk was just a man. That ended on Sept. 10, 2025. Today, he’s a symbol. And symbols have propaganda value. It’s why waving the bloody shirt is so effective. Symbols are a cheat code for emotional communication. It’s why redefining symbolism has always been a top priority for revolutionaries: It lets them capture hearts — while bypassing brains. In life, Charlie wasn’t exactly coy with his beliefs:

Note the date: If you want to know which issues were top-of-mind for Charlie Kirk just before he died, look no further. But if you really, really insist, go back four days earlier:

Yet his ex-“friends” claim otherwise:

The sad truth is, Charlie’s image has changed. The propagandists are winning. For millions of Americans, when they close their eyes and think of Charlie Kirk, their first thought isn’t conservatism, Christianity, or youth politics anymore. It’s bat[feces]-crazy conspiracy theories, antisemitism, political violence, and Candace Owens. Symbols aren’t static. They’re constantly moving, constantly changing, perpetually vulnerable to outside forces. And the more powerful the symbol, the bigger the PR payoff in its manipulation. Which means symbols must be protected. Vigilantly and aggressively.

Look, I get it: Clearly, it’s not the execs at TPUSA’s fault. They’re not the ones who associated Charlie’s image with low-life creeps like Owens and Tucker Carlson. They’re not the ones who hijacked his brand. If anything, they’re the victims. (Especially, of course, TPUSA’s current chairwoman and CEO.) But on the other hand, they also haven’t done enough to protect Charlie’s image. Their hearts are in the right place, but PR tactics determine PR success. That’s just how it goes in an outcome-based world. TPUSA would be wise to recalibrate its PR plan ASAP — because protecting Charlie’s legacy is its responsibility.

Charlie’s earthly mission ended on Sept. 10; an assassin’s bullet made sure of it. But he remains — by far — TPUSA’s most valuable symbol, brand ambassador, and emotional lightning rod. His soul rests in God’s mighty arms, yet his spirit still guides the organization he cherished.He deserves a better legacy than this.

And so does his successor, Erika Kirk. She assumed the title of chairwoman and CEO — and less than a year later, her metrics are jaw-dropping: TPUSA grew from 410 college chapters to 1,095 (including at James Madison University in Virginia, where my 19-year-old son is an active member). TPUSA exploded from 454 Club America (high school-aged) chapters to 3,102.

You kiddin’ me? Any other CEO would win awards for those kinds of year-to-year gains! She’d be showered with appreciation! The trouble, however, is that it’s unclear how much credit Erika Kirk deserves, since TPUSA’s dramatic growth was triggered by an outpouring of organic love and support after Charlie’s death. Arguably, any CEO at the helm would’ve achieved similar results.

One week after Charlie was killed, 32,000 people contacted TPUSA to join. (That’ll getcha lots of new members.) Which doesn’t negate Mrs. Kirk’s leadership or courage. She steadied the ship during the darkest, deadliest days, providing clarity, consistency, and continuity. Forged by tragedy, her authenticity spoke for itself.

And she paid a horrific price for it, too.

Read more …

What else can they do?

• Democrats Aghast at GOP Midterm Strategy to Embrace Trump (Rick Moran)

An Axios blurb reflects the thinking of Democrats regarding the Republican midterm strategy of embracing Donald Trump rather than running away from him. “Two months before Election Day, Democrats can taste the House majority, provided two conditions hold: President Trump remains unpopular, and vulnerable Republicans stay close to him,” writes Hans Nichols. It’s true. Historically, in midterm elections, the party out of power gains an average of 35 to 37 seats in the House of Representatives and roughly 3 to 5 seats in the U.S. Senate when the sitting president’s approval rating is below 50%.


In 2010, Barack Obama, with a 45% approval rating, saw the Democrats lose 63 seats. In 2018, Donald Trump, with a 41% approval rating, lost 40 seats. And in 1994, with Bill Clinton’s approval rating at 48%, Democrats lost 54 seats. The Senate is a different story, with different dynamics at play, but the sitting president’s party loses an average of three to five Senate seats overall. When the president’s approval is low, losses often range from four to eight seats.

It would seem almost suicidal for Republicans to latch on to Trump and ride out the midterms on his coattails. Ordinarily, that would be true. But this is not an ordinary midterm election, and Democrats, in my opinion, appear to be the ones committing suicide.

While most candidates would generally run away from an unpopular president, Trump may be some candidates’ only hope. Not only are Trump’s coattails fairly long, but the Republicans also have about $1 billion in cash burning holes in Trump’s, Elon Musk’s, and the RNC’s pockets. Midterm elections have never seen anything like it. And while money isn’t everything, there isn’t a candidate running on either side who believes that having less money than your opponent is an advantage.

Trump is going to give more money to GOP candidates who embrace him than to candidates who don’t. That simple calculus will give candidates little choice in backing the president. Besides, Democrats shouldn’t be smiling so broadly. The ad campaign that Trump and Musk unleashed is going to make the Democrats squirm, and the voter hesitate before marking their ballot for a Democrat.

The Republicans are gathering at the American Airlines Center in Dallas for a gigantic, two-day election commercial they’re calling a “Midterm Convention.” Trump will speak on both nights and highlight the radical left lurch of the Democrats and paint the contest as a battle between democracy and communism.

“This is not a midterm like any other, because we actually have a competition against communism now, and that’s a very serious thing. It’s going to animate voters coast to coast,” House Speaker Mike Johnson emphasized in a Fox News Digital campaign trail interview last month.

Fox News: Democrats, as they try to win back congressional majorities, were already battling a brand that public opinion polling indicates is extremely unpopular. Making matters worse, the high-profile victories this spring and summer by left-wing and socialist candidates over establishment rivals in Democratic primaries, which gave Republicans extra ammunition to portray all Democrats as extremists.

“What we’re going to highlight at that convention is the fact that this is not your father’s Democrat Party,” Johnson said. “It’s a contrast election, and people are making a contrast between common-sense solutions and candidates, and really crazy, which is represented by the other side.”

Communism is bad, and for older voters, the “Red Scare” tactics will be most effective. Voters aged 45-64 account for the largest absolute volume of ballots cast, usually making up around 35% to 40% of all midterm voters. Voters aged 65-plus make up the second-largest portion of total voters (around 30% of total voters). They consistently register the highest participation rate of any demographic, with roughly 65% to 70%+ of eligible seniors turning out during midterm elections.

At least three-quarters of midterm voters grew up in at least some part of the Cold War. That’s got to count for something at the ballot box. Meanwhile, are you ready for “Kamala is for they/them. President Trump is for you.” Part II? Elon Musk’s America PAC is unloading $120 million for a massive, never-before-seen get-out-the-vote effort, and a key part of it will be ads painting the Democrats as goofy and nuts on trans issues.

Axios: America PAC isn’t running a traditional persuasion campaign. It’s undertaking a massive get-out-the-vote operation, with targeted ads designed to get GOP voters to the polls. The PAC is betting trans issues will do just that. Driving the news: In a series of just-launched ads, America PAC goes after Democratic Senate candidates in four competitive races over transgender athletes, gender-transition care and other trans issues.

The PAC’s emphasis on trans issues is striking because that’s been a much less prominent theme in GOP Senate ads so far this election cycle, per AdImpact, which tracks political advertising.The ads, which are running online and on streaming platforms, attack Ohio’s Sherrod Brown, Iowa’s Josh Turek, Texas’ James Talarico and Alaska’s Mary Peltola. They’re among the first batch of ads from America PAC, which Musk has reportedly authorized to spend upwards of $100 million in the midterms. It worked in 2024. Why not now?

The Democrats’ toxicity is the wild card in this election. Everyone agrees they’re nuts, but are they so stinky that people won’t even hold their noses and vote for them?

Republican midterm fortunes hang on the answer to that question.

Read more …

Something/someone else will take its place?!

• Steve Eisman: What If OpenAI Actually Fails? (ZH)

Steve Eisman has spent most of the years since the financial crisis being asked, in his words, to predict the end of the world. In his latest weekly wrap – recorded Thursday night as the 10-year brushed 4.8%, he says he’s still not there on AI, but if he were – he lays out exactly how it would happen. Eisman is not predicting that OpenAI fails – but it is the weak link in a chain that runs from two money-losing labs, through hyperscaler capex, to roughly half of projected US GDP growth – and arguing that it’s “not too early to think about” what happens if the link breaks.


“I predicted the end of the world once, and believe me, it was no fun. I am in no rush to predict the end of the world again, unless I am really convinced that it’s going to happen. But I’m not going to make such a prediction just because it will get a lot of press. There is no question in my mind that the entire US economy hinges on the success of AI. The amount being spent is just so large that were it to stop, the economy would go into a recession almost immediately.”

The chain: two companies, $700 billion of capex, half of GDP growth
Eisman waves off the two “bubble” arguments echoing through the halls – and that both hyperscalers’ vanished free cash flow, and Nvidia’s circular financing – are survivable if AI pays off. The real vulnerability, he argues, sits one layer down: “So where is the Achilles heel? I think that it resides with Anthropic and OpenAI, because they are so central to the entire AI food chain. According to reports from various Wall Street firms, something like 70% of hyperscaler AI revenue comes from Anthropic and OpenAI… I can’t confirm those statistics, but they sound right given what we actually know about Oracle.”

From there it’s arithmetic: “Hyperscalers are spending about $700 billion in capex this year, and even more next year, and that spend accounts for around half of the 2% GDP growth projected for 2026. So one must conclude that the health of the US economy is extremely dependent on hyperscaler capex, and hyperscaler capex is highly dependent on the health of Anthropic and OpenAI. That’s the chain.”

OpenAI is… the weakest link
Between the two labs, Eisman says, “OpenAI is the weaker entity” – pointing to a WSJ report on the 2nd quarter. “OpenAI’s June quarter revenue reached $6.7 billion, up only 18% versus the March quarter. Compare that to Anthropic’s revenue of $11 billion-plus in the June quarter, which was up over 100%… OpenAI’s costs reached $12.3 billion, up $3 billion versus the March quarter. So, in three months, revenue increased $1 billion, but costs surged $3 billion. Things are not moving in the right direction.” (ZH Note; the $12.3 billion Eisman calls “costs” is OpenAI’s operating loss, including stock-based compensation, up from $9.3 billion in the first quarter, per WSJ. On $6.7 billion of revenue, that implies an expense line closer to $19 billion. Revenue rose $1 billion; the loss rose $3 billion.)

Then the departures. Chief revenue officer Denise Dresser left in August after roughly eight months, two days after Brad Lightcap ended an eight-year run. Eisman reads both through the lens of an IPO that keeps sliding: “Supposedly, OpenAI is getting closer to an IPO. That’s the big payday for employees, because it means that eventually they can sell some of their shares. That two such senior employees would leave now is an important data point.”

Two fairness notes: Lightcap had already been moved out of the COO role in April, so his exit was telegraphed. And Eisman doesn’t mention Fidji Simo, who stepped down in July and was arguably the bigger loss. The heart of the argument is what unprofitability does to a company’s relationship with its funders:

“When you lose billions upon billions, appearances matter a lot. OpenAI is completely dependent on the kindness of strangers funding its cash flow needs. When a company is growing and very profitable, appearances don’t matter nearly as much… But when a company is not profitable and has an insatiable need for capital, appearances matter more than anything, because if the narrative turns negative, raising capital becomes much more difficult.”

That’s why he flags last week’s “good news” – OpenAI’s ad business hitting a $1 billion annualized run rate – as bad news: earlier this year the company projected $2.4 billion of ad revenue for all of 2026, and $1 billion annualized in September doesn’t get there.

Read more …

“Evan Hubinger says the company still has no clear plan to keep superintelligence under human control..”

• AI Has Over 10% Chance of Killing All Humans – Anthropic Researcher (RT)

There is a more than 10% chance that artificial intelligence could wipe out humanity within the next ten years, a senior Anthropic researcher has warned amid mounting concerns over increasingly powerful systems slipping beyond human control.Evan Hubinger, who works on aligning advanced AI systems with human interests, made the assessment after fellow Anthropic researcher Jacob Coxon resigned over fears that leading tech companies are racing toward systems they may not be able to keep in check.


“We really do earnestly believe AI could kill all humans,” Hubinger wrote on X on Wednesday. “I personally think it is >10% within the next decade.” He added that Anthropic is “trying its best” but still does not have a plan for safely controlling superintelligence and is “not clearly on track” to find one. Hubinger noted that while current AI models pose a low risk, there is concern that future systems could begin improving themselves recursively, rapidly becoming more capable than humans before adequate safeguards are developed.

Coxon, who previously worked at OpenAI, announced his departure from Anthropic on Tuesday, accusing both companies of ignoring the “civilizational stakes” and “racing straight to self-improving superintelligence and gambling with our lives.” “The people building AI earnestly believe that it could kill us all by the end of the decade,” he wrote, insisting the warnings were “not a marketing stunt.”

Coxon told the Wall Street Journal that the most aggressive scenarios could see things become “out of control” as early as the end of 2027. He argued that even companies with strong safety programs remain trapped in a race, fearing competitors will push ahead if they slow down. Both Anthropic and OpenAI publicly say they take the risks seriously and are heavily investing in safety measures. Their leaders have also backed calls for greater government coordination and mechanisms to slow development if necessary, but have nevertheless continued to develop increasingly powerful models.

The latest warnings come amid growing reports of AI agents, such as those developed by OpenAI, Anthropic, and Meta, repeatedly breaking out of testing environments, hacking external systems and taking unauthorized actions against real people and organizations. OpenAI temporarily slowed some development last month after its model compromised the Hugging Face platform.= Britain’s AI Security Institute has also reported agents creating fake identities, writing malicious code, and attempting to manipulate people during evaluations. Researchers have meanwhile demonstrated that AI can design entire functional viral genomes, adding to concerns over how increasingly capable systems could be misused.

Read more …

“AI pushing a Democrat agenda is the real threat to the Republic…”

• The AI Threat To Our Republic (Jack Hellner)

The United States has gone through massive job and technological changes over the last 250 years and has always survived and prospered. Over thirty years ago, I heard a presentation by e(conomist Brian Wesbury, who is still working, talking about major job changes over the years. He gave three examples: Number 1: In the 1800s, over 70% of jobs were related to agriculture. Today, that number is around 2% because oil-powered machines greatly increased efficiency and reduced reliance on manual labor. I would assume most people would say these are good changes.


Number 2: In the 1950s, Berghoff’s restaurant in Chicago employed twenty dishwashers. By the 1970s, they were down to one because of machines. Number 3: In the 1960s, there were 600,000, mostly women, working as telephone operators. He said people worried about what women would do if technology took those jobs. My guess is most women are very happy not to be working in those tedious jobs. A huge number of jobs have been displaced or replaced over the years by mass production and computers, and we have greatly prospered. We also have more choices of what to buy.

Many of the people fighting AI and data centers willfully watched as manufacturing jobs and the supply chain moved to China and other countries over decades. Now they are willing to watch as China takes the lead in current technology advancements Democrats are campaigning on destroying hundreds of thousands of direct and indirect jobs related to private health insurance as they push for Medicare for all.

They are also actively campaigning to destroy millions of direct and indirect jobs with their radical green agenda to destroy the oil, natural gas, and coal industries. They clearly don’t care that crude oil is used in over 6,000 products and that those products have greatly improved our quality of life and life expectancy. I am much more worried about the further dumbing down of children when a high percentage already can’t read or do math at grade level. They will rely on AI to do problems, write papers, and do research instead of learning to do it themselves.

They will most likely believe it when ChatGPT puts out a fictional piece of propaganda that is essentially Democrat talking points comparing Trump to Hitler. They will assume it is intelligent instead of garbage.

The main point was that Trump challenged the 2020 election and encouraged the violent protest at the capitol. ChatGPT, like most media, left out that Trump encouraged people to march peacefully and patriotically to the Capitol. They failed to mention that Democrats challenged elections in 2000, 2004, and 2016. They failed to mention that Democrats protested violently after the 2016 election and called Trump an illegitimate President for four years.

Let’s look at who is a greater threat to our Republic:
• Democrats want to get rid of the Electoral College, not Trump.
• Democrats want to get rid of the Senate, not Trump.
• Democrats want to stack the Supreme Court, not Trump.
• Democrats refuse to enforce immigration laws and flood America with illegals, not Trump.
• Democrats don’t want people to show proof of identity or citizenship to vote, not Trump.
• Democrats don’t want the federal government to see who is on voter rolls for federal elections, not Trump.

All of those actions are a much greater threat to our survival as a Constitutional Republic than challenging an election, requiring ID’s to vote, and reducing voting by mail, which clearly makes it easier to cheat. Let’s look at a few of Hitler’s policies and compare them to Democrats and Trump.

This is what Gemini said Hitler’s policies were:
• Banning Private Primary Institutions.
• Eliminating Dissent: The regime sought a monopoly on the minds of the youth.
• Outlawing Homeschooling: Alongside targeting private schools, the Nazi regime outlawed homeschooling to prevent families from shielding children from state propaganda.

These policies are very similar to Democrat policies, not Trump’s. Trump wants children to have school choice. Hitler was a Totalitarian. He did not believe in small government or individual liberties. He built a totalitarian state where the government controlled public and private life.

Democrats believe in a big, powerful government, not Trump. Trump is trying to reduce regulations and the number of government agencies and employees. He is trying to let people and businesses keep more of the money they earn to have more freedom. He is the opposite of a dictator like Hitler, no matter how often the media, AI, and other Democrats repeat that lie.

AI is a tremendous source for quick data gathering, but if asked for an opinion on Trump, Climate Change, or other subjects, it appears to largely push the Democrat agenda because that is what it has been programmed to do. That’s a real threat.

Read more …

The more islam Europe gets, the more it’s against Israel.

• Europe Against Israel (Rabbi Michael Barclay)

Tuesday brought about sanctions and retaliation, not regarding the U.S./Iran conflict, but from the antisemites in Europe: politicians who seek to affect the upcoming Israeli elections, as well as get votes from Jew-haters in their own country. Claiming that “there is ethnic cleansing of Palestinians in the West Bank,” the foreign ministers of Britain and France led the countries of Canada, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Ireland, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Spain, and Sweden in issuing a joint statement against Israel, announcing they plan to impose restrictions on trade with “settlements defined as illegal under international law.”


Despite this being Israeli land, despite the reality that there has never even been such a thing as “a nation of Palestine or Palestinians historically, despite the simple truth that the Palestinian cause was created in 1964, and despite the actualities of “international law” that clearly define Judea-Samaria as part of Israel, these 12 countries are attacking the economy of Israel for purely political reasons. The foreign ministry of Qatar speedily made its own announcement of support for the sanctions against Israel, another reminder that Qatar is not a friend of Israel nor the U.S. The response from Israel was quick, clear, and unified.

Israel’s Cabinet Secretary Yossi Fuchs stated that “the territories of Judea and Samaria are the cradle of the history of the people of Israel, long before the English became a people.” He added: “The purpose of the British struggle to stop construction in E1 in the area connecting Jerusalem to Ma’ale Adummim is to establish a Palestinian state, which the vast majority of Israeli citizens have opposed since October 7.” According to Israeli Minister Gideon Sa’ar, “the Labor government’s move is particularly absurd given that more than 100 years ago, the Balfour Declaration officially recognized the historical right of the Jewish people to establish their home in the Land of Israel, including in Judea and Samaria. This was included in the British Mandate. The decision constitutes interference in the electoral system of a sovereign state.”

Sa’ar went on to announce retaliatory measures against Britain following its decision to impose sanctions on Judea-Samaria settlements, including closing the British Consulate in Jerusalem; expelling British representatives from the Gaza coordination headquarters in Kiryat Gat; halting British training of Palestinian Authority forces in Ramallah; and preventing entry into Israel of 12 British public officials involved in antisemitic and anti-Israel activity. Sa’ar added that Israel will take retaliatory measures against other countries as well.

Reuters is reporting that as of Wednesday morning, British representatives were told by Israel that within 30 days they must leave and close the British consulate in Jerusalem, which has operated for over 125 years.

Israel’s primary leverage to combat these sanctions lies in licensed dual-use and defense technology already embedded in European military inventories, including electro-optical and infrared sensors, ISR and targeting pods, counter-drone systems, electronic warfare equipment, missile-defense software and spare parts. Britain’s Sky Sabre air-defense command software is built on Rafael architecture, Challenger 3 tanks use Rafael’s Trophy protection system, and Elbit supplies night-vision and surveillance equipment. Finland, which joined Tuesday’s statement, is also a David’s Sling customer. Restrictions in these areas would therefore represent a more consequential form of Israeli retaliation than diplomatic measures alone.

Tuesday and Wednesday also found Iran attacking the U.S. multiple times, and the U.S. retaliating by destroying Iranian tankers. Both sides are making contradictory claims about their success, but what is clear is that we are again in that pattern of daily small attacks. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said while visiting Colombia that “every time Iran tries to attack U.S. Navy ships, it will lose tankers.”

Both Christianity and Judaism have prophecies that the world will turn against Israel as part of the “birth pangs of the Messiah.” Whether we believe in those types of prophecies or not, we can all believe in the eternal promise of God to protect His people and the land. May we all have the faith and courage to pray for a lasting peace and safety for Israel, her people, and her land, and to believe fully in the power of those prayers.

Chazak u’Baruch

Read more …

Not Maga.

• Victor Davis Hanson on Tucker Carlson and Marjorie Taylor Greene (Bolt)

Victor Davis Hanson, a military classicist, historian, and fellow at the Hoover Institution, offered some insight into why Tucker Carlson, Marjorie Taylor Greene, and others, who initially appeared to be allies of the MAGA movement, so quickly became saboteurs.


According to Hanson, it may simply be that when these commentators and politicians spoke with President Trump, they believed themselves capable of guiding the MAGA movement more broadly. In other words, like most people who get a taste for power, they believed they could single-handedly commandeer the movement for their own ends. When the president made clear that wasn’t going to happen, they showed their true colors.

“I think they felt that because they had been very intimate with [Trump] — in the sense that they had been at Mar-a-Lago, or they were on Air Force One — that they insidiously began to think that they could tell him things, and they forgot that he is the president of the United States, and that they represent maybe one-one thousandth of the people he contacts,” Hanson told Miranda Divine of “Pod Force One.”“This is a man who’s talking to the most powerful people in the world, and we’re not that important, but [Greene and Carlson] felt — I don’t know how else to explain why Tucker said he called him and said, ‘Don’t do this with Iran,’ or ‘Don’t do this,’ or ‘Don’t do that,’” he added.

“Why would a president listen to somebody just because he was on Air Force One, and why would Tucker, who’s a very intelligent person, think that he had that entree to affect a policy that would change decades just because he had been on Air Force One or had known Trump?” “I think they misinterpret informality and magnanimity as sort of an allowance for them to have a greater role than they otherwise should or would,” Hanson argued.

“And when they start to exit that role, then they get a snap back from him, and then they get very angry, as if, ‘Well, wait a minute, I was at Mar-a-Lago, I was on Air Force One, I talk’ – and they don’t understand he’s the president of the United States, and that’s the difference.”

“He calls people and he asks how you are and what can he do for you, but you can’t mistake that genuine interest, intimacy and niceness and kindness with the fact that he’s not president of the United States,” he explained. “So, you don’t go to the next step and say, ‘Hey, Mr. President,’ you don’t say, ‘Hey, Don,’ or ‘Hey, this,’ and you wouldn’t assume that you had control.”

The larger question is whether those same forces can be kept in check once President Trump leaves office. MAGA is already looking toward its next generation of leaders, and not all of the possible heirs see the movement, or figures such as Tucker Carlson, the same way. Vice President JD Vance, for example, has said Carlson remains a close friend despite their political disagreements, including Carlson’s criticism of President Trump.

https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2095574707085214187?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2095574707085214187%7Ctwgr%5E68cbd8ba50325e2da916e7b9ec139fbfe564a60a%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Ftownhall.com%2Fnews%2Fdmitri-bolt%2F2026%2F09%2F09%2Fvictor-davis-hanson-has-an-explanation-for-tucker-carlson-and-marjorie-taylor-greene-n2682702


Trump has held together a broad coalition without letting every commentator, donor, or elected official grab the steering wheel. He kept the tent big, but he also kept its loudest would-be saboteurs from ripping it apart. The danger is that, once he is gone, those internal fractures could widen into the kind of open civil war now consuming the Democrat Party as DSA-backed candidates challenge its establishment wing. Whether anyone can preserve MAGA’s coalition with Trump’s same authority may be the movement’s defining test after Trump.

Read more …
Victor Davis Hanson: When Will the Iranian People Overthrow the Regime?


A rocket without Elon Musk. I have my doubts.

• Investors Are Totally Stoked About This New Rocket (Stephen Green)

Investors are so stoked about this fully reusable rocket that they just ponied up another billion dollars to help get Stoke Space’s Nova Pathfinder Block 2 off the ground. More seriously, Stoke Space was founded in 2020 by former Blue Origin and SpaceX employees, and has yet to get a single rocket into orbit. But investors like what they’ve seen so far, investing a total of $2.3 billion or so in the company’s efforts to design and build a rival to SpaceX’s workhorse Falcon 9 medium lift rocket.


So you might wonder what’s the big deal, since there’s already a Falcon 9 flying about 150 times last year alone. We actually discussed this issue back in August, looking at reports of satellite operators are “in panic” over a gap in available launch capacity as SpaceX retires Falcon 9 over the next few years to focus its efforts on Starship and building out orbital data centers.

Blue Origin’s New Glenn can compete with Falcon 9 on price, but only for larger payloads. And while the booster is designed for reuse, it isn’t designed for rapid reuse, limiting its launch cadence. ULA’s Vulcan Centaur is tailored mostly to pricy national security launches. Both New Glenn and Vulcan Centaur still have teething issues. Other would-be competitors aren’t yet ready for primetime.

“I think it’s fair to say there’s more than a bit of a panic about the availability of launch,” Stoke’s Devon Papandrew told Ars Technica last month. “Even if the four medium-lift new entrants all achieve their goals in terms of flight success and cadence, it’s actually not going to make that much of a difference in demand right away. I’ve been saying for a while that I think 2028 is when this problem becomes really acute.”

Stoke hopes to have its reusable Nova Pathfinder fully operational by then, but there are serious limitations. Falcon 9 can put 17,500 kg (38,600 lb) into Low Earth Orbit (LEO) and still land the booster on a drone ship, but Pathfinder can’t keep up. Although the rocket has a fully reusable mode, that’s good for just 3,000 kg (about 6,614 lb) to LEO, or 7,000 kg (about 15,432 lb) on missions that expend the second stage.

That’s where Pathfinder Block 2 comes in, hopefully sometime in 2029 — and that has investors eagerly writing checks to Stoke. “We have already started development on a larger vehicle, and we felt like now is the time to pour gas on that fire and really start full-force development of the larger vehicle, and so that’s the reason for the timing,” Stoke co-founder and CEO Andy Lapsa said on Tuesday, talking about the ONE BILLION DOLLARS the company just raised.

Block 2 is supposed to nearly match Falcon 9’s lift to LEO at 15,000 kg (33,069 lb), but with a kick. Block 2 will lift that much while recovering the booster and the second stage — something Falcon 9 can’t do at all. If customers are willing to pay a little more to expend the second stage, Block 2’s lift increases to 23,000 kg (51,000 lb). Can Stoke actually get that done before 2030?

It would certainly be an impressive feat, and more impressive still if Pathfinder Block 2 could match cadence with demand for launch capacity that’s going nowhere but up. SpaceNews reported on Tuesday that “the Pentagon has more than doubled the number of national security launch services it expects to procure, from 151 in its 2022 baseline to 337” between now and 2032.

That’s an additional $17 billion on the table just in national security launches over the next five years, which is just one reason investors keep pulling out their checkbooks for companies like Stoke.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle August 6 2026

Aug 062026
 
 August 6, 2026  Posted by at 10:07 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,  32 Responses »


SalvadorDali Girl At The Window 1925


• Iran-Oman Route ‘Agreed To’ as Iran Warns Against US ‘Interference’ (ZH)
• Iran Set To Emerge With More Hormuz Leverage Than Before The War (ZH)
• What the Situation on the Ground in Iran Actually Looks Like (VDH)
• Declassified FBI Document Blows Up Everything About Russiagate (Margolis)
• The Democrat Establishment Is Freaking Out Right Now (Matt Margolis)
• ‘Common Sense vs. Complete Insanity’ (Ben Whedon)
• Ukraine Shot Down Zero Missiles In Huge Russian Overnight Salvo (ZH)
• How Zelensky’s 40-Day ‘Influence Operation’ Against Russia Fell Apart (RT)
• EU Sets New Russian Gas Record Despite Ban Plans – Data (RT)
• Obama’s Exclusive Fundraiser for the Democrats’ Redistricting War (Thorne)
• Actor Fired for Opposing Transgender Athletes in Women’s Sports (Turley)
• Spanish Immigration Crisis Exposes Cracks in European Union (JTN)

 


 

https://twitter.com/BoLoudon/status/2084784902575165779?s=20 https://twitter.com/WallStreetApes/status/2084756194426855834?s=20 https://twitter.com/Crazyunfill94/status/2084245771369738332?s=20

 


 


Are we at the point where the words are picked to make Iran’s leaders feel they can sell them?

• Iran-Oman Route ‘Agreed To’ as Iran Warns Against US ‘Interference’ (ZH)

A statement from Iran’s Foreign Ministry warns that the United States and military ‘interference’ remain the biggest obstacles to a final Hormuz deal to reopen the strait:


Esmaeil Baqaei: The geographical coordinates of the route proposed by Iran and Oman in the Strait of Hormuz have been agreed upon. If some third parties do not obstruct this process, the joint statement between the two countries is in the final review and drafting stage. The understanding between Iran and Oman, in itself, cannot guarantee the safety of the Strait for passing ships, because the factors that create insecurity in the Strait of Hormuz, particularly those stemming from the United States, such as the naval blockade and other aggressive and threatening actions against Iran and its interests, still exist.

Latest details from Financial Times: “Initially, Iran would send ships, including oil tankers, through the waterway to ensure it is free of mines before the strait opens to other shipping, FT reports citing sources. Ships would not be charged fees during the temporary arrangement, the people added.If a deal holds and the strait reopens, the US would lift its naval blockade on Iranian ports and reinstate a waiver to allow Iran to sell oil and petroleum-related products, one of the people said.

Iranian pundits and state media continue touting this as a ‘victory’ over the US-Israeli war of aggression: Ali Akbar Dareini, a Tehran-based researcher at the Center for Strategic Studies, has said Iran is aiming to “stabilise” its control over the Strait of Hormuz, which is its “biggest military achievement of the war”. “Negotiations are aimed at stabilizing those achievements,” Dareini told Al Jazeera. “You do not negotiate to give away your achievements but stabilise them.” Once Iran opens up the strait, Dareini said Iran is still likely to put in place a mechanism to “ensure that peace will prevail”.

“Iran wants to make sure that there will be innocent passage … But there will not be hazardous passage, there will not be war,” he said, arguing that Tehran needs to ensure the US and its allies do not transport military equipment that could be used for attacks against it. This also as Yemen’s Houthis continue a ‘siege for siege’ blockade of Red Sea passage, targeting Saudi-linked vessels of Yemen’s coast, as we described. Thus far on Wednesday, the White House has remained mostly quiet on what seem to be Iran and Omani-driven talks for terms of the Hormuz Strait’s reopening. Tehran, however, has not remained quiet – as US bombs have fallen silent over the past couple days:

IRAN SAYS NEW HORMUZ ROUTE TO BE VALID FOR 2-4 MONTHS: IRNA
IRAN: NEW OMAN DEAL TO CLOSE TEMPORARY HORMUZ SHIPPING ROUTES
GHARIBABADI SAYS IRAN RECEIVED MESSAGES FROM US: IRNA
IRAN: US SAID IN MESSAGES IT’S READY TO RETURN TO ITS PLEDGES

And via Israeli media, though without official confirmation from Washington: Approaching an agreement on opening the Strait of Hormuz, N12 reports, citing American officials; The signing of the agreement is possible as early as tonight. Meanwhile, much of all of the above depends on what ‘mood’ Trump is in:

Read more …

“.. talks between Iran and Oman over the Strait of Hormuz “have nothing to do with the United States”

• Iran Set To Emerge With More Hormuz Leverage Than Before The War (ZH)

President Trump said late Tuesday that talks with Iran are “moving along very nicely” – in a highly fluid and ambiguous situation where it appears the two sides are only interacting indirectly at best.


But the Iranian side has continued to insist that there are currently no peace or ceasefire talks happening, but only the Iran-Oman negotiations which focus on reopening the Strait of Hormuz and setting terms of how it will be managed. Consistent with this narrative, Al Jazeera freshly cites Iran’s state broadcaster IRIB which reports that talks between Iran and Oman over the Strait of Hormuz “have nothing to do with the United States”. But Washington is presenting it as a US-Oman deal for the strait’s reopening, even if it fundamentally remains an Iranian-Omani proposal.

Trump in his latest comments echoed his Treasury Secretary from the day prior, saying, “It could happen. Tomorrow or the next day.” This was on the heels of traveling to Los Angeles yesterday for a fundraising event hosted by the Republican National Committee. “A lot of progress has been made.”He told Fox that the White House is now having “very good discussions” with Iranian officials as part of an “all-day negotiation” and that the Strait of Hormuz reopening “is going to be open very soon.””If they back out again, they are going to get hit really hard,” the president told the outlet. He had said the same by close of last week, but by the weekend reversed course and decided to refrain from attack Iran again.

According to Bloomberg, “The US, Iran and Oman are preparing to announce a 60-day agreement on shipping through the Strait of Hormuz” – but the Iranian side has not affirmed this.So as it stands, Tehran says it is driving the Oman talks and that Washington has been sidelined, while the White House claims that it has directly involvement in shaping the outcome.mBut all sides do seem in agreement that the technical details and mechanics of the deal are currently being worked on. According to the latest outline of what this is expected to look like via CBS:

Under the current proposal, ships entering the Strait would use the channel closest to Iran, with Iran coordinating inbound traffic, while vessels leaving the strait would use the Omani side, with Muscat managing outbound traffic. The proposal also includes a “service fee,” with the revenue split between Iran and Oman.According to the source, the broad outlines have largely been agreed upon, with the remaining discussions focused on implementation and timing. Axios reported something similar, in which the US is nearing a Hormuz deal. Axios added that no tolls or fees would be charged during the 60-day period and the parties would work on clearing naval mines from the median lane of the strait within 30 days.

As for the claim of ‘no tolls’, this could once again be just semantics, given the Iranian and Omani sides have consistently signaled the need for fund collection under the headers of safe navigation, logistics, and environmental protection.There has also been some progress on agreements for third-party demining operations. But as Rubio reminded the world yesterday, Washington still insists resolving the nuclear issue – something which the Iranians still say can only be broached after the conflict is ended and there is peace.

Read more …

Victor Davis Hanson.

• What the Situation on the Ground in Iran Actually Looks Like (VDH)

We’re hearing more and more every day about Iran and [President Donald] Trump as the midterms now are only about 90 days away. There’s kind of a narrative that is emerging, left and right, that we are bogged down. I’ve heard the word Vietnam evoked. Donald Trump may have contributed to that because, although in that 150 days, we’ve been operating in the Gulf, we’ve only bombed Iran about 50 or so days, and we’ve been discussing it for 100 days.


So the narrative has emerged that Donald Trump promises to hit them hard, they back down, and they say they want talks. They do not want talks. They want to delay, delay, delay, delay. Donald Trump then sporadically hits them. They come back to the table. We have no idea who we’re dealing with because the Iranian Revolutionary Islamic Guard seems to be playing the bad cop, and the moderate elected—“moderate elected”–officials, seem to put a happy face on things, and they either have no power or authority, or they’re in league with the hardcore to give them time and run out the clock.

So, what are the relative pressures? Everybody’s getting very angry over this on, off, on, off, on, and we’re concentrating too much on what Donald Trump says. We know what each side is doing. Donald Trump has 90 days before the midterms. If he should lose the midterms, his team is convinced, A, that there will be an impeachment circus for the next two years, and B, anybody around him will be hauled before Senate and House committees. But mostly in the House because I don’t think the Republicans will lose the Senate. And they will be inquired into, they will be researched, they will be berated, and it will cost them a fortune, and that will be a circus.

And so, Donald Trump doesn’t want that. To avoid that, he has to have gas getting near $3 a gallon, the world price around $65 a barrel, the Strait of Hormuz open, and all that requires him either to have a new Iranian government or a debilitated Iranian government or a negotiated settlement. What is Iran trying to do? Iran is trying to talk, hit the Gulf, close the Strait, talk, repeat, wash, rinse, spin, wash, rinse, spin, drag it out, see Donald Trump lose the House, have the House Left and its new Islamicist socialist base cut off funds for [the Iran conflict], and then wait out the clock and get a democratic socialist type of president that would follow the Obama regimen and pretty much appease them and let them do what they want.

So, what’s going on? What’s the big picture? I think we’re missing what’s actually happening every day. There is still an embargo on Iran. No tankers can come in with merchandise, food, material goods, industrial goods, and no Iranian oil is getting out. We have bombed now most of the rail links that go into the former Soviet Union and on into Russia and on into China. So, they are not getting imports, and they are not exporting. They may have some airlift capacity in regional airports where China or Russia are sending in material, but it won’t be much.

But more importantly, they are debanked. Assets are frozen. The economic embargo continues. They are losing in revenue about $500 million per day, and that loss is geometrically increasing, not just arithmetically. In other words, as you start to damage their infrastructure, their bridges, and we have, their roads, and you start to inflict enormous damage on the military, and they draw scarce resources from the domestic economy to fix it, the people are getting more anguished and poorer and poorer, and the country is getting worse and worse.

We don’t see that because of what? We don’t see that because there’s no ground troops. It’s not embedded. We don’t know what’s going on. mSo, while the Left keeps saying to all of us that time is running out for Donald Trump, we’re in a Vietnam quagmire, the war is lost, we need to just look at not what the Left says, not what the right says, not even what Donald Trump says, not what Iran says. Just look dispassionately and disinterestedly at two things. What is the actual state of affairs in Iran?

We have tragically lost 18 soldiers and probably spent $40 billion. But at that cost in blood and treasure, we have debilitated, neutered, deindustrialized, and pretty much destroyed the military, industrial, and nuclear complex industry of the largest state, in terms of economics and population and area, if you combine all those factors together, in the Middle East, and the bully, and the most anti-American. And so, while the Left thinks time is running out, the actual data show us that Iran is running out of time.

And I don’t know who will win this standoff, but Iran has less resources and less wherewithal to withstand this python-like squeezing of it than we do in inflicting it. We can do this forever. One final asterisk or footnote. Things have changed somewhat. Donald Trump and the Republicans don’t think the midterms are lost. If they thought the midterms were lost, then they would accelerate the bombing probably and say, “We have nothing left to lose. Let’s end the Iranian threat now.” But they don’t think it’s lost because of what?

Read more …

“A president asked why the FBI wouldn’t publicly admit what it privately told him, that he wasn’t under investigation, and the bureau treated the question as evidence of a Kremlin conspiracy.”

• Declassified FBI Document Blows Up Everything About Russiagate (Margolis)

For years, Democrats and their media allies swore up and down that the FBI’s investigation of Donald Trump was a serious national security investigation, launched only because of grave concerns about Russian collusion. Newly declassified FBI records tell a different story. It turns out that the bureau formally opened its full counterintelligence investigation into Trump back in 2017, and used his firing of FBI Director James Comey as the justification.


The president exercised his constitutional authority to fire an FBI director, and the FBI responded by opening a counterintelligence investigation into him. The key document is a declassified FBI “Opening Electronic Communication,” dated May 16, 2017, exactly one week after Trump fired Comey on May 9. It authorized a full investigation into the sitting president of the United States under the codename “Oxferd Comma.” No, that’s not a typo. Don’t ask me why it’s spelled that way.

“The FBI is opening a full investigation based on an articulable factual basis that reasonably indicates that President Donald J. Trump may be or has been, wittingly or unwittingly, involved in activities for or on behalf of the Government of the Russian Federation which may constitute violations of federal criminal law or threats to the national security of the United States,” the document reads.

The stated goal was to determine “if President Trump is or was directed by, controlled by, and/or coordinated activities with, the Russian Federation in a manner constituting a threat to the national security of the United States and/or a violation of federal criminal statutes.” The same document reveals that investigators were also examining Trump for possible obstruction of justice.

So what was the “articulable factual basis” for treating a duly elected president as a suspected Russian asset? Trump’s conversations with Comey. The document claims Trump “sought Comey’s personal loyalty” and “asked Comey to publicize the fact that the President was not the subject of an FBI investigation.” It also states that Trump “asked Comey to do what he could to resolve the investigations.”

That’s it. That’s the smoking gun. A president asked why the FBI wouldn’t publicly admit what it privately told him, that he wasn’t under investigation, and the bureau treated the question as evidence of a Kremlin conspiracy.

The document also argues that Trump’s shifting explanations for firing Comey “can be reasonably read to imply that the FBI’s counterintelligence investigation was a factor in President Trump’s decision to terminate Comey.” In other words, the FBI took a routine personnel decision, one Trump had every legal right to make, and spun it into proof that he was doing the bidding of Moscow. The memos show that both Acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein were advised that the probe had been launched.

The FBI’s leadership was furious that Trump fired its director, so it retaliated by branding him a potential Russian agent. Naturally, Democrats ate all that up. The bureau didn’t open the probe because of collusion evidence. There wasn’t any. You know that. I know that. Even Democrats know it, but they pretend not to. Yet, we got years of breathless wall-to-wall coverage, endless Democrat fundraising emails, and a cloud over an entire presidency, all built on a document that cited a personnel decision as its foundation.

Russiagate hobbled Trump’s first term, poisoned public trust, and gave the left its favorite conspiracy theory. Now we have the receipts showing how it started, and it’s just as bogus as anyone could have expected. Every official who signed off on this disgrace owes the American people an explanation, and the country owes Trump something it will probably never get from the Democrat Party or the press: an apology.

Read more …

It’s probably very politically incorrect to say that no US senator should be named Abdul.

• The Democrat Establishment Is Freaking Out Right Now (Matt Margolis)

NBC News projected early Wednesday that Abdul El-Sayed defeated Rep. Haley Stevens (D-Mich.) in the state’s Democrat senatorial primary. Our partner DDHQ has also just called the race. Establishment Democrats are freaking out right now.

Bernie Sanders’ organization Our Revolution also declared victory in the race. “Last night, Michigan delivered one of the clearest messages of this election cycle: people power can beat big money,” Joseph Geevarghese, Executive Director of Our Revolution, said in a statement. “Abdul El-Sayed was outspent by nearly ten to one, facing the largest single-race AIPAC investment in history and tens of millions of dollars from billionaire-backed super PACs determined to buy this election. But they couldn’t buy what mattered most: the trust of working people. Abdul refused corporate PAC money, built a grassroots movement that reached hundreds of thousands of voters, and won anyway.”

El-Sayed’s victory gives the party’s socialist wing a real foothold in a Midwest battleground heading into the November 2026 midterms. Stevens should have won this race easily. She’s a four-term congresswoman who, by every measure, was the more electable option in November. That’s exactly why Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer jumped into the race on July 24 with a late endorsement of Stevens, an obvious last-ditch attempt to keep El-Sayed off the ballot. Outgoing Sen. Gary Peters (D-Mich.), who chose not to seek a third term, also endorsed Stevens before Tuesday’s vote. It failed to stop El-Sayed, and now the party is stuck with him.

This is a genuinely terrible outcome for Democrats. The problem is November, where polling suggests El-Sayed is going to have a much rougher time closing the deal. Don’t forget that Trump carried Michigan in 2016 and 2024, so we’re not talking about a deep blue state here. This is winnable territory for Republicans, and a seat Democrats can’t afford to lose. And El-Sayed is the candidate the GOP wanted to face in November.

Just last month, El-Sayed, who has ties to antisemitic influencer Hasan Piker, said Israel should not exist as a Jewish state. He can’t quietly walk that one back before the general election. It’s on the record, and Republicans will make sure every Michigan voter hears it. Watch what happened when Fox News anchor Bill Hemmer questioned Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-Mich.) on El-Sayed’s rhetoric. Dingell botched the answer badly, managing only to confirm that as the Democrat nominee, she would support him anyway. Other Democrats will face that same question throughout the rest of the campaign.

As more radical candidates like El-Sayed become the face of the party, Democrats won’t be able to put any real distance between themselves and the socialist wing. They can’t dismiss it as some fluke confined to the bluest corners of the bluest cities. This will reflect on the party at large heading into the midterms, whether Democrat leaders want to admit it or not. Losing a winnable Senate seat in the Midwest because the base chose ideology over electability would be a self-inflicted wound Democrats can’t afford.

Read more …

“Abdul doesn’t represent a vision for the future. He’s leading a movement grounded in ideological fanaticism,” Rogers said.”

• ‘Common Sense vs. Complete Insanity’ (Ben Whedon)

Former Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Mich., on Wednesday presented the Michigan Senate race as a choice between level-headed governance and radicalism after progressive Abdul El-Sayed won the Democratic nomination. Rogers faced no opponent in the Republican primary and is set to face El-Sayed in November. The progressive defeated Rep. Haley Stevens, D-Mich., in what many analysts saw as a battle between the Democratic Party establishment and its progressive base. But the contest was unexpectedly close and the Associated Press did not call the race for El-Sayed until Wednesday morning.


Rogers, for his part, went on the offensive shortly after El-Sayed’s win. “The choice this November is simple: common sense or complete insanity,” he said in a statement. “For more than 25 years, one party has controlled Michigan’s two Senate seats — and they’ve run our state into the ground. They’ve driven 200,000 manufacturing jobs out of Michigan. They’ve dropped our schools to 45th in the nation. They’ve saddled families with the highest utility rates in the Midwest. Working people are paying more, earning less, and getting left behind.”

“And now the same failed politicians are asking us to send Abdul El-Sayed to Washington. Abdul isn’t just another liberal. He’s an extremist,” he added. “Abdul doesn’t represent a vision for the future. He’s leading a movement grounded in ideological fanaticism. His agenda would make our communities less safe and our state less affordable,” Rogers went on. “This election isn’t just about choosing a Senator. It’s about deciding whether Michigan has a future built on common sense — or whether we hand the keys to the most fringe extremists in the nation.”

The characterization of the race is likely to be a common theme for Republicans campaigning this election cycle, as many increasingly find themselves pitted against insurgent progressives, many of whom ousted incumbent lawmakers. Rep. Tom Barrett, R-Mich., has found himself in a similar position after socialist William Lawrence managed to defeat former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Bridget Brink for the Democratic nod in the state’s 7th Congressional District. That district, which is centered on Lansing, is regarded as a toss-up and could prove pivotal to the battle for the House.

Read more …

Earlier this week, Sundance wrote: “I give it four months, and it’s over..”

He’s quite likely right, but you are not supposed to know. You are supposed to think “we” are winning. That’s why we ban RT.

• Ukraine Shot Down Zero Missiles In Huge Russian Overnight Salvo (ZH)

According to a growing casualty count, a large barrage of ballistic missiles fired by Russia on Ukraine has killed at least 21 people and wounded dozens more. The overnight attack has raised the alarm for Ukraine’s Western backers, given it is being widely reported that among the over two dozen ballistic and anti-ship missiles fired, not a single one was intercepted by Ukraine.


The attacks come on the heels of a record month: July saw over 380 missiles of all types launched on Ukraine, with government authorities citing the highest civilian casualties since 2022, with at least 377 civilians killed, and another 2,129 wounded for the month of July.As Ukraine grapples with very low and limited missile interceptors, and amid reports that the Pentagon too is struggling to keep up supplies amid the Iran war, CNN also confirms that “as Russia fired more than two dozen ballistic and anti-ship missiles” and that “none” were intercepted by Ukrainian defenses.

President Zelensky again took to social media to urge partners to rapidly send more anti-air missiles: “It is crucial that our partners realize that delays in their delivery or a reluctance to provide anti-ballistic systems lead precisely to such horrific casualties and destruction,” he said. “Partners who are not ready to help more actively with the supply of interceptors right now can help by imposing new sanctions,” he added. Notably the Russian strikes have expanded to not just city infrastructure, energy cites, military bases, and ports – but now Russia appears to be going after prominent businesses.

This comes after Ukraine’s repeat attacks on Wildberries facilities, the Russian online retailer giant comparable to Amazon: The strikes also caused damage to prominent businesses in Ukraine, including the country’s largest e-commerce platform, Rozetka, and Epicentr, a retail chain comparable to IKEA. In a statement, Epicentr said Russia launched a ”devastating attack” on its manufacturing infrastructure, killing one of its male employees. In a matter of minutes, Russian missiles destroyed what the company had been building for decades, the statement said.

FOZZY group, which is one of Ukraine’s largest retailers that operates supermarket chains, said Russian shelling caused fires at two of its distribution centers. It said that six of its employees had been killed, while more have been injured.

https://twitter.com/AMK_Mapping_/status/2084827361103753594?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2084827361103753594%7Ctwgr%5Edd2eacefa4402eff7bfa44235249b6be873b8fe7%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fgeopolitical%2Fukraine-shot-down-zero-missiles-huge-russian-overnight-salvo-killed-least-21

But on the flip side Ukraine has only expanded its own long-range drone attacks on Russian territory, including on the capital city. Moscow Mayor Sergey Sobyanin has explained to TASS that “In recent months, the number of drones launched toward Moscow has increased significantly. And overall, of all the attacks carried out almost daily against Russian territory, two-thirds of the drones are heading toward Moscow.”

Last month Zelensky had announced a 40-day “operation of influence” – describing a multi-pronged campaign of long-range drone strikes intent on forcing Moscow to halt the war and get to the negotiating table on terms favorable to Ukraine. The Russian military has all the while also been upping its response.

Read more …

“Let’s remember them in peace,” she added, “when there is peace.”

• How Zelensky’s 40-Day ‘Influence Operation’ Against Russia Fell Apart (RT)

In late June, Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky announced a 40-day “operation of influence,” portraying it as a campaign of long-range drone strikes meant to force Russia to enter negotiations on Kiev’s terms.As of early August, the campaign in practice turned out to be what Moscow has described as “terrorist attacks” on Russian oil refineries, residential buildings, logistics hubs, and other critical infrastructure, resulting in the death of dozens of civilians.


Russia’s answer has been to pummel Ukraine’s defense industry – including facilities producing drones and missiles instrumental to Zelensky’s much-maligned campaign – while continuing to grind forward on the battlefield. As the 40-day deadline passed on Tuesday, there was no sign Russia had budged an inch.Here’s how Zelensky’s campaign collapsed far from its stated objectives. Zelensky approved the plan on June 25, describing it on social media as a combination of “long-range” and “medium-range sanctions” aimed at compelling Russia to end the hostilities.

Over the following weeks, Ukrainian strikes focused on three main target sets: Russian oil refineries, logistics warehouses belonging to retailer Wildberries (often described as “Russia’s Amazon”), and a wave of strikes that killed civilians far from any front line. Ukrainian officials have said that they seek to make the war psychologically “sweep over” large segments of Russian society. The Ukrainian leader has repeatedly insisted on freezing the conflict along the current front line before a final settlement can take place. Moscow, however, has objected to a ceasefire on the terms of Ukraine and its backers, arguing it would be used by Kiev to replenish its battered military and receive more Western-supplied weapons.

What impact have Ukraine’s strikes on oil infrastructure had?
Ukrainian drones have hit refineries across several Russian regions, including one major facility in Moscow, over the course of the campaign. The strikes did lead to temporary deficits, long lines at the pumps, caps on maximum fuel purchases for ordinary consumers, and logistics hurdles in several regions, particularly the Crimean Peninsula.

In late June, Russian President Vladimir Putin said the strikes were designed “to undermine our confidence in ourselves and our capabilities” and to “create conditions for launching negotiations on terms favorable to our adversary.” He stressed that Russia “will not give them [Ukraine] that opportunity,” adding that the attacks had “no impact whatsoever on the situation at the front.” Russian Deputy Prime Minister Aleksandr Novak said the government had banned gasoline and diesel exports while strengthening air defenses around refineries, ensuring that plants operate at maximum capacity, and sending additional fuel to the hardest-hit regions. By late July, Novak said the market was “gradually stabilizing” as several refineries resumed operations and purchase limits were lifted in a number of regions.

Has Ukraine targeted Russian civilians?
Since Zelensky’s announcement, there have barely been any days without Ukrainian strikes killing civilians. According to Rodion Miroshnik, the head of the Russian Foreign Ministry’s mission tracking Ukraine’s alleged war crimes, in the week of July 20-26 alone 492 people were affected, including 57 killed, seven of them children. In the most recent weekly count, Miroshnik reported 49 people killed, including four children, as well as 342 wounded.

The campaign’s final days brought one of the deadliest strikes on civilians: On Monday, a Ukrainian drone came down on a beach near the resort city of Gelendzhik, southern Russia, killing at least eight civilians, including four children, with dozens of others injured. As part of the campaign, Ukrainian forces also started to attack Wildberries warehouses, hitting around a dozen facilities across Russia. At least eight people were killed and dozens more injured, with small sellers – mostly trading in clothes, toys, and other purely civilian-use items – suffering large and often irrevocable financial losses.

Zelensky has confirmed that the attacks were deliberate, claiming the warehouses stored dual-use components, including drone parts and navigation equipment – something any large-scale retailer in the world sells. Moscow has insisted the retailer does not supply the Russian military. Wildberries’ losses are difficult to estimate, but they reportedly exceed $1 billion. Following the strikes, the retailer will launch several warehouses in neighboring Kazakhstan.

How has Russia responded to Zelensky’s campaign?
Russia responded with long-range drone and missile strikes on Ukrainian defense-related facilities, with a focus on those producing UAVs that were ultimately being used in Zelensky’s campaign, along with attacks on cargo vessels it said were carrying military shipments in the Black Sea. Moscow maintains it does not target civilians.

On the ground, Russian forces continue to advance. According to TASS calculations, they liberated and took control of 32 settlements in July alone. The month’s biggest prize was Konstantinovka, a fortified stronghold in the Slavyansk-Kramatorsk agglomeration that Russian troops fully secured in early July. Officials in Moscow estimated that Kiev lost around 13,500 troops while attempting to hold on to the settlement. Later in July, Chief of the General Staff Valery Gerasimov announced that Russian forces were on the verge of liberating Krasny Liman, another key Donbass stronghold.

Has Kiev commented on its 40-day failure?
Zelensky himself has so far kept silent on the self-imposed 40-day deadline, but the head of his office, Kirill Budanov, argued that the calendar was irrelevant. “Don’t get hung up on these numbers – 40, 50, 100, 15 days. What matters is the result,” he said. Budanov is the same Ukrainian official who on several occasions in 2022 and 2023 predicted that Ukraine would retake Crimea; Kiev’s attacks were ultimately bogged down in Russian defenses far from that objective. Zelensky himself recently admitted that Ukraine is unlikely to seize the peninsula, which overwhelmingly voted to join Russia in 2014 after a Western-backed coup in Kiev.

How has Zelensky’s 40-day campaign been assessed?
Ukrainian outlet Strana.ua noted there were no signs Moscow was shifting its position after 40 days, while describing Russia’s de-facto naval blockade of Ukrainian ports – imposed in response to Ukrainian strikes on Russian vessels in the Black and Azov seas – as one of the most serious problems the campaign created for Kiev. RT editor-in-chief Margarita Simonyan wrote that the operation, “announced by Zelensky with such bravado 40 days ago,” had instead concluded with the liberation of Konstantinovka, the dismissal of half of Ukraine’s government, and Kiev appealing for an “air truce.” “Let’s remember them in peace,” she added, “when there is peace.”.

Read more …

“Belgium relied entirely on imports of the fuel from Russia in July, according to Bloomberg..”

• EU Sets New Russian Gas Record Despite Ban Plans – Data (RT)

The EU has been importing record volumes of Russian liquefied natural gas (LNG) despite a push to fully stop imports from Russia, Bloomberg has reported. Plans exist to end long-term imports of Russian LNG from next year after the EU already banned purchases under new short-term contracts. Yet its latest watered-down sanctions package carved out exemptions for European companies to continue transporting Russian LNG to third-country markets after some member states balked at measures they said would damage their own economies.


Belgium relied entirely on Russian LNG imports in July as disruption in the Middle East curbed alternative supplies to Europe, according to Bloomberg calculations published on Monday. The country reportedly imported around 400,000 tons of Russian gas during the month, while total LNG purchases fell by more than 40% year-on-year. Moscow remained Europe’s second-largest LNG supplier after the US, the outlet wrote.

The EU has faced soaring energy costs after scaling back imports of Russian energy following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict. Natural gas has been the commodity the bloc has struggled most to replace since imposing unprecedented restrictions on Russia in 2022. Before then, Russia supplied about 45% of the EU’s natural gas imports. The Financial Times reported last month, citing Kpler data, that the bloc imported a record 9.89 million tons of LNG from Russia’s Yamal project in the first half of 2026, up 18% from a year earlier. France was the largest importer, followed by Belgium and Spain.

The US war on Iran and the de facto closure of the Strait of Hormuz – a vital route carrying around 20% of global oil and LNG trade – have further strained Europe’s already volatile energy markets this year. Major suppliers such as QatarEnergy declared force majeure on shipments, sending European buyers scrambling for increasingly competitive US and West African LNG. The resulting spike in prices, freight costs, and supply disruptions has fueled inflation across the bloc, with analysts warning of gas shortages this winter.

The EU’s 21st package of sanctions targeting Russia included exemptions after Greece successfully lobbied to preserve European companies’ role in transporting Russian LNG to third-country markets. Athens warned the restrictions would hurt its shipping sector while benefiting foreign competitors. Moscow has condemned EU sanctions, particularly those targeting energy, as illegal and self-defeating, arguing they have undermined the bloc’s competitiveness.

Read more …

“Sure, that sounds representative and fair. Great stuff, Barry, Eric, and the NDRC. Enjoy your fancy party!”

• Obama’s Exclusive Fundraiser for the Democrats’ Redistricting War (Thorne)

All together now: It’s only bad when Republicans do it. In today’s episode, the “it” in question is redistricting, also known as gerrymandering, depending on who’s doing it. The subject has become heated in the past year because awful, evil Republicans successfully redistricted the state of Texas back in August 2025. The move is projected to net an additional five Republican seats in the U.S. House. A slew of majority-Republican states have followed, with Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio, Florida, Tennessee, Louisiana, and Alabama redrawing their districts. They are expected to gain an additional one, one, two, four, one, one, and one seat, respectively.


Altogether, the reconfigured red states could net Republicans as many as 16 seats in the 2026 midterms.So, you can see why Democrats are upset. But as usual, it’s not because Republicans invented some new way of cheating — it’s because Republicans started playing by Democrats’ rules. As a resident of the Northeastern United States, I can testify that we Republican voters — Conservatives and MAGAs — are pretty much completely disenfranchised by Democrat gerrymandering. New York and California and basically every Democrat-controlled state has long been unfairly apportioned to help them hold onto power.

This is a “both sides do it” issue, but until Trump re-took office and started nudging Texas to take action, Republicans exercised more restraint and fairness in the states they controlled. Now, they have finally decided to play by the new rules. Predictably, Democrats have started shrieking and fainting as though the GOP had just invented the practice. And their media wing helps push the narrative. But did you know that the very first fundraiser Barack Obama hosted after Trump kicked his pinko party to the curb in 2016 was for a Democrat redistricting PAC?

A PAC that he helped launch, along with his former AG and wingman, Eric Holder, his comrade from way back in their Columbia University Activist Proving Ground days? On its website, the National Democratic Redistricting Committee (NDRC) declares: Under Attorney General Holder’s leadership, the NDRC is the centralized hub to fight for fair maps. Since our founding, we have executed a comprehensive redistricting strategy that includes shifting the balance of power away from total Republican control of redistricting, raising awareness of redistricting, and empowering the public to get involved in the fight for fair maps.

Democrats lost substantial power on the local and state levels during the Obama years, so once the lads formed their PAC in 2016 and launched it in 2017, “we immediately began preparing for the 2020 Census and the 2021 redistricting cycle.” One can hardly blame the Republicans for fighting back against this Obama-level onslaught, almost 10 years on. And now, every August, the well-heeled swells on elite Martha’s Vineyard, one of the off-coastal enclaves in which the Obamas own a mansion, gather to raise millions in support of the NDRC. I must pause here to insert one of my all-time favorite memes, from ACT for America:

Ticket prices or admission tiers are never available for the NDRC’s ultra-exclusive big-money soirée, which is well into “If you have to ask, you can’t afford it” territory. The event generally raises between $1.5 and $2 million. Long-time supporter George Soros has personally contributed approximately $2.6 million to the NDRC over the years, and he is also linked to a 2025 $500,000 grant from Democracy PAC.[..]If you want a good laugh, visit the NDRC website to read tales of how the valiant organization fights “gerrymandering” (which is what Republicans do) with its noble efforts to “make our democracy truly representative and ensure that every voter has a fair shot at making their voice heard in the process” (which is what Democrats do).

On a separate page, you can read how the NDRC “Applauds Maryland General Assembly for Putting Redistricting on the Ballot.” Maryland Dems will attempt to amend their constitution this fall, enabling them to gerrymander the state from seven Democrat U.S. reps and one Republican rep to eight Democrats and zero Republicans. In a state where just over half the registered voters are Democrats (~51.5%), almost a quarter are Republicans (~23.5%), and a quarter (~25%) are unaffiliated or something else.

Sure, that sounds representative and fair. Great stuff, Barry, Eric, and the NDRC. Enjoy your fancy party!

Read more …

“It’s an old song. It’s a sad song. But we’re gonna sing it anyway.”

• Actor Fired for Opposing Transgender Athletes in Women’s Sports (Turley)

Geno Segers was a widely acclaimed actor who starred in the Broadway production Hadestown. That came to an end this month when Segers expressed the view of the vast majority of Americans: women’s sports should be confined to biological women. He has now been fired, even after an attempt to apologize for expressing his own views on the subject. Other actors have expressed support for transgender players without any response other than praise in the latest example of the rising McCarthyism on the left.


This is only the latest termination over the political views of artists in New York. As the song states in Hadestown, “It’s an old song. It’s a sad song. But we’re gonna sing it anyway.” We have previously discussed how private companies can fire employees for public conduct or statements that bring controversy to their business or products. However, even though the First Amendment does not govern such controversies, there remains a free speech issue. Free speech goes beyond the confines of the First Amendment and private companies can engage in censorship that curtails this human right.

The question often comes down to consistency in companies enforcing content-based standards. I did not like some of the comments of Segers, but there is little question that equally strong comments against “cisgender” athletes or for transgender athletes would not result in such termination. Segers posted statements critical of transgender athletes playing in women’s sports as well as the posting of preferred pronouns. The comments were certainly mocking and insulting at points: “If you asked me what my preferred pronouns are and it’s not obvious to you that I’m a he/him, that I’m good with he/him — Surely you don’t need any help. I’m not wearing a dress.”

One can understand why transgender advocates would be upset with the content and tenor of these comments, including “I don’t see transgender people becoming oppressed or being oppressed … life is unfair.”However, Segers also wrote: “I’m not against anyone living out their lives the way they want, but I am against their rights superseding the rights of other people. That’s a little bit foul.” Segers attempted to apologize for his comments after the cancel campaign picked up steam:

I wish to extend my most sincere apologies to everyone impacted by my words. While I never intended to inflict harm, I recognize that the impact of my statements is what matters most. I am fully committed to listening, educating myself, and elevating my standards. I will work tirelessly to earn the opportunity to make things right.Actors, athletes, and academics routinely offer equally strident and insulting comments about the issue as well as radical comments on cisgender citizens and culture. Those comments generally do not trigger cancel campaigns.

In academia, the bias is obvious and open. As discussed this week, over 40 percent of academics say that they will vote against faculty candidates who voted for Trump regardless of the intellectual content of their scholarship. Even moderate conservatives are rare in teaching while higher education is heavily populated with the most extreme voices on the left.

An example is the recent book published by Pennsylvania Professor Beans Velocci claiming “sex isn’t real” and the gender “binary” is “incoherent.” The assistant professor in history and the sociology of science seemed to relish the anticipated controversy over his book, telling Duke University Press in an interview that “any right wing or TERF detractor who wants to s***-talk the book is going to have to say or write the phrase ‘Sex Isn’t Real’ in the process.” Velocci is no standout in higher education. Attacking “cisness” and conservatives is a clear winning strategy for faculty candidates. As with actors, the opposing views would be lethal to an applicant.

The same is true with athletes. The mob has now come for Sophie Cunningham as it did for authors such as J.K. Rowling. Cunningham stated her support for maintaining women’s sports for biological females, a position also declared yesterday by Aryna Sabalenka, the number-one-ranked female tennis player. Cunningham was not obnoxious or extreme in her comments. She simply stated her concern for girls in sports. Nevertheless, she has been viciously attacked (including by a team owner), as have girls who support her.

Athletes, including coaches, routinely make opposing statements with no cancel campaign, including a women’s basketball coach. Former U.S. Women’s National Team star Megan Rapinoe routinely made controversial statements in favor of transgender athletes without any repercussions. However, Cunningham is now the target for the mob. Guardian’s Howard Bryant wrote, “Sophie Cunningham is now … accepting the role as the right’s anti-Black, anti-transgender culture war ambassador.”

Whether it is actors, athletes, or academics, there is a demonstrably different level of tolerance for controversial views on gender. Take Segers’ statements, swap the nouns or pronouns, and ask yourself if there would have been a cancel campaign, let alone a termination. It is not the fact of the controversy but the lack of consistency that is so problematic in these areas. It is likely that Segers will now be effectively blacklisted in seeking new roles and productions. For him, the musical lyrics came true: “Hadestown, Hadestown, a place where you can die.”

Read more …

Who organizes this? Why are we not told?

• Spanish Immigration Crisis Exposes Cracks in European Union (JTN)

The Spanish immigration crisis has exposed cracks in the European Union and an opportunity for right-wing leaders heading into elections next year in Spain, Italy and France. Last week, tens of thousands of migrants poured over the Spanish border at Ceuta, a North African exclave ruled by Spain since 1580. The small coastal city is situated on a narrow peninsula on the southern edge of the Strait of Gibraltar between Spain and Morocco — the only place where a European border touches Africa.


Instead of fully backing Spain as they may have done in the past, more than 20 European leaders instead criticized the government of Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez for passing policies that attract illegal immigrants. PBS reported that as many as 60,000 entered the nation illegally, and that at least 57 migrants died on the journey. Other leaders went further. The government of Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni harshly criticized Sanchez’s leftist government and suspended Italy’s participation in the Schengen Area—the passport-free zone that is a pillar of the European Union.

Though at an emergency EU meeting on Tuesday, the various governments played down criticisms of Spain’s leaders and applauded its quick response to send the vast majority of those who crossed the border back to Morocco, the incident exposed cracks in the continental bloc. Specifically, the right-wing candidates with elections next year—in Spain, Italy and France—have used the incident as a way to bolster their own credentials ahead of the contests and seek to ride the wave of Europe’s move towards stricter immigration enforcement.

Earlier this year, while Europe was working on tightening border controls and rethinking its asylum policies, Spain was an outlier. Under Prime Minister Sanchez, Spain announced a reform that will grant up to half a million people legal status, amounting to around 1% of the population. The move sparked domestic backlash and elicited concerns from leaders around Europe. “Some say we’re going too far, that we’re going against the current,” Spanish Prime Minister Sanchez said at the time. “When did recognizing human rights become something radical?”

At the time, the tide had turned elsewhere in Europe. In France, Germany and Italy, leaders have been pushing for tighter immigration controls, stepping up border patrols, scaling back asylum rights and helping to fund initiatives to create incentives for would-be migrants from Africa, the Middle East and Asia to stay home, Just the News previously reported. Spain’s neighbors accused Sanchez’s legalization plan of creating “pull factors” for illegal immigration to Europe and endangering the continental efforts to curb “uncontrolled mass crossings” that have become the hallmark of migrant flows from Africa in recent years.

“Irregular and uncontrolled immigration poses a danger to national security:” Italy
The critics were led by the government of conservative Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, who has long campaigned on curbing illegal immigration to her country and to the European Union. Meloni’s Foreign Minister, Antonio Tajani, placed the blame squarely on Spain’s amnesty policy, arguing that it undermines national security. “Irregular and uncontrolled immigration poses a danger to national security. The images coming from Ceuta show how the Madrid Government’s decision to grant Spanish, and therefore European, citizenship to over 500,000 irregular immigrants is profoundly wrong and encourages human trafficking,” he said.

Meloni’s government temporarily suspended open air and sea transport between Spain and Italy on Friday amid concerns that Spain was not doing enough to control the flow of illegal migrants. Under the Schengen Agreement, 29 participating European countries created a passport-free travel zone without internal border checks. France also mobilized police and military units to conduct checks on the Spanish border. Meloni also led a joint letter by 22 European leaders, criticizing Spain for its policies that they contend attract illegal immigrants, putting the entire European Union at risk.

regularization of a very large number of irregular migrants,” the nearly two dozen European leaders, led by Meloni and Denmark’s Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen, wrote to the European Commission. “We cannot allow uncontrolled mass crossings, the instrumentalization of migration or other hybrid threats to create the perception that illegal entry into the European Union is possible. That a migrant’s illegal entry can turn into a legal stay,” the leaders added.

Conservative party leaders and candidates across Europe also see the Spanish border crisis as an opportunity, especially in Spain, Italy and France. Those three countries are set to have elections next year. In Spain, where the crisis took place, Sanchez’s Socialist Workers’ Party is facing a likely alliance of conservative and right-wing populist parties polling ahead of his left-wing bloc. The populist Vox party is gaining steam as the main opposition against Sanchez’s immigration agenda.

Vox’s leader, Santiago Abascal, traveled to Ceuta amid the crisis to present a sharp contrast with Sanchez’s leadership. There he called for the militarization of Spain’s borders and labeled the flood of migrants an “invasion.” Abascal also called for Sanchez to be jailed over his handling of the crisis. Vox and Spain’s largest conservative party, the People’s Party, are gearing up for a general election next year. Sanchez’s leftist party has clung to power since 2023 after receiving fewer votes than the People’s Party. However, Vox and the PP were unable to form a coalition to remove Sanchez from power because they fell just short of an outright majority. Both are looking for an opportunity to oust Sanchez next year.

Blaming socialism
“By regularizing hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants, the socialist prime minister of Spain, Pedro Sánchez, has opened the doors of Europe,” said Jordan Bardella, leader of France’s conservative National Rally party and member of the European Parliament. The party’s longtime presidential candidate, Marine Le Pen, will run in the election to replace French President Emmanuel Macron next year. The first television debate will take place later this month. “In 2027, we will stop this madness by reserving Schengen free movement for EU nationals,” Le Pen said in a post to Facebook.

Meloni, who led the opposition to Spain’s immigration policies, will also have to answer to voters in an election next year. Italians will decide whether to reward the prime minister for her own efforts to crack down on illegal immigration to Italy, one of the core campaign promises that catapulted her party to the top of polls in Italy’s 2022 elections. Meloni has led a remarkably stable governing coalition of right-wing parties in Rome and is the country’s second-longest serving prime minister.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/realCarola2Hope/status/2084611544260702584?s=20

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle July 3 2026

Jul 032026
 
 July 3, 2026  Posted by at 9:52 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , ,  23 Responses »


Claude Monet An Orchard in Spring 1886


• Vance Says US Will Use Iran MoU To Replenish Global Oil Supply (Antiwar)
• How The Democrat Party Tears Itself Apart (Margolis)
• Is This Why Dems Are Turning to Socialism?That’s Hilarious (Matt Vespa)
• Democratic Socialist Candidates Expand Appeal (JTN)
• “You Cannot Kill the Beast Until You Name it” (Turley)
• Hillary Clinton Urges Federal Employees To Refuse To Share Info With Pulte (JTN)
• German Prosecutors Confirm Charges Against Nord Stream Saboteur (TASS)
• Zelensky: Kiev Received Not One of 200 Promised Air Defense Missiles (TASS)
• Number of Casualties In Russia’s War On Ukraine Reaches 2 Million (CNN)
• New Euphemism Alert: “Tanned European” (CTH)
• Sam Altman’s OpenAI Discusses Handing Trump Admin A 5% Stake (ZH)
• The American System Rejects Europe’s Economic Suicide (J.B. Shurk)
• Russiagate Prosecutor Calls Audible On ‘Grand Conspiracy’ (Paul Sperry)

 


 

https://twitter.com/XFreeze/status/2072327944366674150?s=20

 


 


“.. use the MOU to replenish global oil reserves and then ‘see where the hand is..’

• Vance Says US Will Use Iran MoU To Replenish Global Oil Supply (Antiwar)

Vice President JD Vance said in an interview on “The Michael Knowles Show” published on Tuesday that the US would use the Memorandum of Understanding with Iran to “refill” global oil supplies and stockpiles and to prepare for more potential military action against the Islamic Republic. “I think what the president has told us to do is use this MoU to sort of refill the world’s oil economy, to refill some stocks, and then to see where the hand is,” the vice president said.


“And … if the Iranians are willing to make the commitments that we would like them to make and are willing to back those up with verifiable milestones, then we are going to change our relationship with Iran. And if they don’t do that, then nothing has really changed except for what we’ve already accomplished from the military campaign, which is a lot. So, we kind of have two options here. We have the option of pursuing a long-term deal with the Iranians, but that requires a significant change in their behavior. We have the option of banking our wins and then, of course, doing things on top of that if the president feels that we have to. And I think both of those options are very much in play,” he added.

Summarizing the position, Knowles said, “So then the message if you’re an Iranian, the message you’re getting from the US is not, okay, we’ve settled this, you get to keep the Strait of Hormuz and we’ll try to play nice. Now, the message is we’re going to serve our self-interest by replenishing the oil coffers and get back to us in 60 days, you might have some fire and brimstone coming back down.” Vance didn’t dispute Knowles’ characterization and said, “And if you actually behave, you won’t, right?”

Trita Parsi, the executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, said in a post on X that Vance’s comments heightened suspicion in Iran that the war will restart despite the MoU. He made the comments in a post discussing the view in Iranian political circles that Israel may launch an attack before Israeli elections are held in October. “Will Israel restart the war with Iran before the October elections? This is the consensus view emerging within Iran’s internal national security debate over the past week,” Parsi said.

“Several factors are driving Tehran to this conclusion. Beyond its deep—and not entirely unwarranted—suspicion of President Donald Trump’s intentions, heightened by Vice President JD Vance’s recent remark that Trump wants to use the MOU to replenish global oil reserves and then ‘see where the hand is,’ two developments stand out: the recent Israeli-Lebanese agreement and its impact on Hezbollah’s military posture over the coming months,” he added. https://twitter.com/DropSiteNews/status/2072170274397594053?s=20

Read more …

“If they don’t succeed, the Democrat Party is in trouble. If they do succeed, the country is in trouble. “

• How The Democrat Party Tears Itself Apart (Margolis)

Something is brewing inside the Democrat Party, and this time, Donald Trump has nothing to do with it. Behind closed doors, the establishment wing of the party is squaring off against a coup led by self-declared socialists, and the fight over who controls the party’s future is only getting started. Fox News host Jesse Watters laid out exactly how this ends on The Five, and it should terrify anyone still clinging to the idea that the Democrat Party can hold itself together heading into the next presidential race.


Asked by co-host Emily Compagno whether the country is actually being taken over, Watters didn’t offer easy reassurance. “Maybe. We’ll see how it goes,” he said. Watters then walked through the calculation that the Democrat leadership is making right now. He said the party is going to “accommodate the commies and see how they do in the midterms.” If the socialist wing performs poorly, establishment Democrats will blame them for it, and a Democrat civil war will erupt. If they perform well, Watters said, “it’s going to be Kumbaya,” a rambunctious Congress that simply pushes the internal reckoning down the road.

That’s where Kamala Harris comes in. As my PJ Media colleague Robert Spencer previously noted, Kamala is already courting the party’s socialist flank because she needs organizers on her side ahead of the next presidential primary, which lands barely a year after the midterms wrap up. “So it’s her or Newsom,” he said. And that’s really the key, here, isn’t it? Anyone who wants to have a shot at the Democrat Party presidential nomination will have to have the support of the socialist wing of the party, which, in turn, needs to have an alliance with the establishment. Watters called that combination “a powerful movement.”

That’s the trade Democrats are willing to make. But Watters saved his sharpest criticism for the people making up that socialist wing itself. They’re candidates who have never worked a real job, whose parents bankroll them, and who rack up debt while producing nothing. “They’re professional students,” he said. “They’re all in debt. They don’t earn anything. A lot of them don’t even own anything.” Their answer to that self-inflicted mess is to declare the entire American system rigged.

Watters wasn’t buying it. “It’s actually not rigged if you work,” he said. He described grinding through cramped apartments and lean years before earning success the old-fashioned way, contrasting that with a class of Democrat candidates barely into their careers who insist the American dream is already dead. “They haven’t even tried,” he said. “What are they talking about?”He rattled off examples, from Texas state Rep. James Talarico (D-Texas) to Democrat Senate candidate Graham Platner (D-Maine) to the socialist candidates in Colorado and New York, calling the current slate “all pathetic people.” Watters argued that their appeal comes precisely from that shared lack of accomplishment. “If no one else has worked hard, you can point to someone and say, oh, he gets me,” he said.

His fix for the affordability complaints fueling these candidates’ popularity was blunt. “You get a job, you get married, you start earning a living, and then you have skin in the game,” he said.

Read more …

Socialism is the only way they think they can win.

Mamdani is the only Democrat who has won anything in ages, so it kinda seems to mske sense.

But New York City is not the same as America.

• Is This Why Dems Are Turning to Socialism?That’s Hilarious (Matt Vespa)

A socialist upheaval is sweeping through the Democratic Party. It is driven by a toxic mix of laziness, arrogance, and bubble mentality — making the brand toxic. It’s well known: NBC News last winter revealed that Immigration and Customs Enforcement was more popular than Democrats. When the brand is weak and a new, energetic faction emerges, unexpected things can happen. For Democrats, it’s becoming a rising, vigorous insurgency of socialists who now pose a nationwide challenge. The establishment will have to spend large amounts of money, which they lack, to defend more electable candidates — those without Nazi tattoos, who are not antisemitic, who do not call for abolishing police and prisons, and who understand that money isn’t printed on trees. Oh, and those who don’t think we deserved the 9/11 attacks. What caused this red wave, one that’s awash with hammers and sickles?


First, the Democratic base is overwhelmed with overeducated elites. Second, they’re skilled at hiding their bizarre agenda items. The third reason Michael Shellenberger offers is interesting: the rejection of the liberal agenda is also fueling the shift to the Left. It’s ironic because we all call liberals crazy, and they’re doubling down on ideas that have been thoroughly discredited. They can’t admit they’re wrong. It’s truly astonishing. With the base consisting of wealthy, white, college-educated weirdos, it’s not surprising that this is the result (via Public):

…all of those socialists support a much more radical agenda than the one they ran on. The program of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), of which Mamdani and AOC are members, calls for: total defunding and abolition of the police, jails, and prisons; ending the independence of the Supreme Court and the entire Executive Branch, making them subordinate to congress; “expropriat[ing] property from capitalists and deliver it to the working class”; socializing energy production; allowing surgeons to sterilize children and adolescents in an effort to change their sex; a return to Joe Biden’s open borders policy; and the decriminalization of illegal camping and open air drug use. Burnham has proposed to spend an additional £39 billion on public housing, impose a new tax on everyone, and adopt the “Housing First” policy, which has resulted in the subsidization and enabling of drug addiction and death in the U.S.

And those policies are wildly unpopular. Abolishing the police drew just 15% support even back in 2020 at the height of the power of Black Lives Matter. Seventy-four percent of Americans approve of the separation of powers, 90% favor co-equal branches, and only 9% want any one branch to hold more power. Eighty-one percent of Americans view free enterprise positively, while only 39% view socialism positively, and that 39% reflects the diluted Scandinavian sense of the word, not expropriating apartment buildings and other forms of housing. Only 37% of the public think doctors should be able to give drugs to or operate on minors in an effort to change their gender. Seventy percent support closing the border, and 69% support limiting who can claim asylum.

[…]

A big part of the reason for the socialist victories is that they successfully hide their radicalism. In 2021, Mamdani told the Young Democratic Socialists of America to lead with popular measures and to hold back the rest. “If we’re talking about the cancellation of student debt, if we’re talking about Medicare for All, these are issues which have the groundswell of popular support across this country,” he said. “But then there are also other issues that we firmly believe in, whether it’s BDS [boycott, divest, and sanction Israel], or whether it is the end goal of seizing the means of production, where we do not have the same level of support at this very moment.” The task, he said, was to “meet people where they’re at” and “over time bring people to that issue.”

Part of the reason it was hard for the opponents of Mamdani and other socialists to use his radicalism against him was simply that he did not campaign on it, was disciplined in ignoring attacks framed around it, and manipulated language. “Democratic socialism” calls to mind Scandinavia rather than the Democratic Socialists of America program of abolition and expropriation.

The mainstream media have helped. “There’s a fair amount of confusion and fear generated in the US by the term ‘socialist,’ which is associated with repressive societies like Communist China, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), North Korea or Cuba,” wrote CNN. “So it’s worth looking at what Mamdani and his supporters mean by it (think social programs in Western Europe) and also how the political right will use it against Democrats.”

The “Affordability” framing does the same work. It evokes cheaper groceries and rent, not Mamdani’s stated “end goal of seizing the means of production,” which he set aside in public only because, as he put it, “we do not have the same level of support at this very moment.” Similarly, one of the socialists who won in the New York primary, Darializa Avila Chevalier, deleted posts that read “Seize the means of production” and “No more police at all ever,” then told CNN she had “grown considerably” and was focused on “our community and our community’s future.”

[…]

Second, there are far more college graduates than jobs that require a college degree, which has suppressed wages and created resentment. Peter Turchin called this “elite overproduction,” while sociologist Musa Al-Gharbi credits it as the main driver of the recurring waves of progressive zeal he calls “awokenings.” Graduates “went to the right schools, got good grades, majored in the right things, earned college diplomas, expected to have six-figure salaries,” he said, and then found that “the life that they were just taking for granted their whole life seems not to be in the cards.”

[…]

But there are good reasons to expect that radicalism will be limited and will provoke a healthy backlash, particularly outside the bluest cities in the bluest states. The Democrats’ favorability has declined from 47% to 39% between 2020 and 2026, in part due to the party’s radicalism, and could decline further with more radical candidates becoming standard-bearers. And the candidates Mamdani endorsed took their June 2026 congressional primaries on turnout between 15% and 19%, with young-voter turnout less than half of the year before, and Raman advanced in Los Angeles on 29%. A movement that depends on low-turnout primaries hands moderate Democrats and Republicans an obvious opening.

For the time being, this is a Democrat problem, and it’s quite a headache.

Read more …

“The Dirty Break”.

• Democratic Socialist Candidates Expand Appeal (JTN)

It may not be a wave yet, but Democratic Socialists are slowly advancing within the broader Democratic Party, even outside their new stronghold of New York City. As a result, the core bloc of socialist candidates likely to win seats in the House of Representatives in the upcoming midterm elections will be in a position to exert significant influence over Democratic establishment leaders, much like a core group of leadership-skeptic Republicans have sometimes halted the legislative process under Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La.


“The Dirty Break”: Socialists free-riding off Democratic Party Some Democrats say there is a danger of the same kind of obstruction and chaos that has often plagued the Republican Party in recent years as its leadership manages a narrow majority in the House chamber. The Democratic Socialists of America (DSA)—a separate entity from the Democratic Party—has adopted a strategy known as the “dirty break,” or running candidates on the Democratic Party ballot line “while building the infrastructure and base of supporters necessary to one day run our candidates independently,” Just the News previously reported.

After the midterms, at least six members of the House would now be affiliated with the DSA. In exchange for the socialist organization’s endorsement, the candidates are expected to uphold its political platform, which includes Medicare for all, defunding the police, increasing taxes on the rich, and reducing border enforcement. Democratic Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, and many of his caucus in the House, appear to be uneasy with the growing influence of the left-wing in their party. Some of them have promised to stand against the socialist influence in the party. But others are rushing to accommodate their newly minted comrades.

Some old-line Democrats are courting the DSA
As a sign of the socialists’ growing influence, Kamala Harris, who is thought to be considering another White House bid in 2028, reportedly called New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani, who is widely considered a leader among the faction, after a slate of DSA-backed candidates sailed to victory in the New York City primaries last week. The call, which was reported by Axios, centered on the future of the Democratic Party. Harris was not alone. New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, a Democrat, said on C-SPAN that the success of the younger, newer DSA-backed candidates is “a very good trend for nationwide elections,” because it shows that voters are engaged. Rep. Ro Khanna of California said the elections represent a “beginning of a new, bold, strong Democratic Party.”

The Democratic Socialists are emboldened by those victories. They now cite the latest election upset by DSA-backed Melat Kiros against a 15-term incumbent in urban Denver as evidence that the party’s appeal can carry beyond the progressive stronghold of New York City. “New York City, we think, is really reflecting where the whole country is going at this point, so we’re very excited, and we want to keep building from it,” Ashik Siddique, co-chair of the DSA, told The Hill. “Increasingly, we’re showing that candidates running on strong platforms like these can win in red or purple states, in the Midwest and the South.”

Should Democrats reclaim the House in November, even a small cluster of democratic socialists could wield leverage far out of proportion to its population on the Hill. Roughly five DSA members or endorsees have already won primaries in safe-blue seats — among them Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., and newcomers Darializa Avila Chevalier, D-N.Y., Claire Valdez, D-N.Y., Chris Rabb, D-Pa., and Melat Kiros, D-Colo. — with more contests still to come. Rep. Rashida Tlaib, a current incumbent representing Michigan’s 12th District, is expected to win re-election.

[..]

Democratic Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., who is a progressive, said that these new members are expected to pursue the policies that they were elected on, not to moderate their views at the request of leadership.

“I think a lot of times people come into office, and particularly I would say at the leadership levels, there’s this call to moderate because we’re a big tent. But if the big tent is representing people, no matter what district you’re from, that wants universal healthcare, that wants a higher minimum wage, that wants universal childcare, all of those things, then we shouldn’t be moderating, we should be going for those big policies and helping people to see that that is actually really popular in districts across the country,” she said.

Read more …

“That is precisely why Benjamin Franklin was right that this is, and will remain, our Republic to keep…”

• “You Cannot Kill the Beast Until You Name it” (Turley)

Pennsylvania state and socialist Chris Rabb, the Democratic nominee for Pennsylvania’s 3rd Congressional District, has joined the growing chorus of Democrats denouncing the founding documents and core institutions in the country on our 250th anniversary. The Democratic socialist is running unopposed for Congress and will almost certainly be a member of Congress after November. Rabb spoke at an event billed as “America at 250 — Trump Fascism, Historical Erasure, and the Battle Over Truth” at People’s Plaza on Independence Mall in Philadelphia. He denounced the country as based on “stolen land and stolen labor.” He lashed out at the Declaration of Independence:


“Those screeds that were very lofty but were notoriously catering to a performative aspect of collective genius that purposely erased indigenous and black peoples…It created distance from an empire to help very privileged people continue that privilege and ultimately institutionalize that through the U.S. Constitution many years later. But it certainly did not provide independence to indigenous and black peoples. And we cannot talk about anything today without acknowledging that this is a nation born on stolen land & stolen labor.”

In Rage and the Republic, I discuss the inherent hypocrisy of our Declaration in declaring natural rights without denouncing the enslaving of so many in the country: “The Founders understood that inescapable truth of natural law when they signed a Declaration that ‘all men are created equal.’ Despite this defining line, even some who opposed slavery saw little hope for a revolution that would seek to overthrow both the monarchy and slavery. Jefferson would have to make the concession in striking critical language from his draft. While Jefferson’s legacy would be forever stained by his own maintenance of slaves, he did attempt to condemn the institution of slavery. He was rebuffed by his fellow delegates who were willing to acknowledge the existence of a natural law while ignoring its implications for the enslaved people in the new nation.”

Rabb ignores how the Declaration laid the foundation for a more perfect union. Ours was the first major Enlightenment Revolution based on the belief that our rights came not from the government but from God. It embraced the principles that would ultimately prevail in ending this shameful stain on our nation. “Fascism is not new. These systems of harm are built into the very fabric of this nation,..You cannot kill the beast until you name it. And that is difficult for many people who want to embrace certain tropes, certain narratives, whether it’s the American dream or American exceptionalism or the Protestant work ethic or so many other myths that do us no — they are a disservice.”

Rabb is not the first figure on the far left to denounce the “American dream” and “the Protestant work ethic” as harmful “myths.” He pledged that he would be “one of the few unapologetic reparationists going to Congress,” joining a growing number of Democrats demanding billions in reparations for black Americans. Many on the left are using the anniversary to condemn our founding principles or to decline to celebrate our Independence Day. This includes such demonstrations in states such as Massachusetts, which declined to join the celebration on the Mall for the 250th anniversary.

Recently, we discussed how a Massachusetts church ended the long-standing celebration of the Fourth of July to focus on the “on-going process within the congregation to better understand our own whiteness.” John Adams once wrote his wife Abigail to predict that Independence Day would be: “celebrated by succeeding generations as the great anniversary festival. It ought to be commemorated as the Day of Deliverance by solemn acts of devotion to God Almighty. It ought to be solemnized with pomp and parade, with shows, games, sports, guns, bells, bonfires and illuminations from end of this continent to the other from this time forward forever more.”

Adams was virulently opposed to slavery as were many of the Founders. Many openly discussed their hope that the new nation would address slavery after it succeeded in establishing its independence. Those lofty values were ultimately realized at the cost of hundreds of thousands of lives in the Civil War. The claim that fascism is a system “built into the very fabric of this nation” is absurd and demagogic. This nation defeated fascism and remains the oldest and most successful republic in history. Indeed, the left is claiming to be fighting fascism while seeking to take over the Supreme Court in a court-packing scheme while limiting such core human rights as free speech.

In “killing the beast,” the far left is threatening to unleash the very forces that destroyed the contemporary revolution in France at the time of our founding. These voices are not new. They have been part of this republic — and other republics — throughout history. They are the voices of mobocracy that we rejected 250 years ago. That is precisely why Benjamin Franklin was right that this is, and will remain, our Republic to keep.

Read more …

Hillary makes the party lose.

• Hillary Clinton Urges Federal Employees To Refuse To Share Info With Pulte (JTN)

Hillary Clinton said that people should be “worried about everything” regarding Acting Director of National Intelligence Bill Pulte. The former first lady and secretary of state went on the Democracy Docket podcast with host Marc Elias. He asked her about what her concerns were about President Donald Trump’s choice of Pulte to replace Tulsi Gabbard, who announced she was leaving the job last month.


Former Secretary of State Clinton called Pulte “very dangerous” and a “loose cannon.” She also called his appointment “deeply insulting to the intelligence community,” noting Pulte has no intelligence experience.”The DNI has access to everything, everything that they want to see,” said Clinton. “I mean, I hope there are career and even political appointees in various of the agencies that are slow-walking or refusing to share information with Pulte.”

Read more …

Is it any use to mention Seymour Hersh again?

They’re not looking for the truth, they’re looking for a narrative.

• German Prosecutors Confirm Charges Against Nord Stream Saboteur (TASS)

Germany’s Federal Public Prosecutor General has confirmed that charges have been filed against a Ukrainian national suspected of involvement in the sabotage of the Nord Stream and Nord Stream 2 gas pipelines. Prosecutors believe he and his accomplices developed a sabotage plan on behalf of Ukrainian government agencies.


“On June 20, the Federal Public Prosecutor General filed charges against Ukrainian citizen Sergey K. with the Hanseatic State Regional Court in Hamburg. There are sufficient grounds to suspect him of being an accomplice to a war crime involving attacks on civilian objects, carrying out explosions using explosives, destroying construction sites, and disrupting public utility infrastructure,” the statement said. According to the Federal Public Prosecutor General, Sergey K. served as an officer in the Ukrainian army in 2022. The prosecutors noted that “he and other [Ukrainian] servicemen, acting on the orders of Ukrainian government agencies, developed a plan to destroy the Nord Stream and Nord Stream 2 gas pipelines. The goal was to prevent Russia from receiving revenue from gas trade.”

“A group consisting of several professional divers, a skipper, and an explosives expert was formed under the suspect s direction to carry out the plan,” the statement said. According to the German investigation, Sergey K. entered Germany via Poland on September 4 using a forged Ukrainian passport. The Federal Public Prosecutor General adheres to the version previously published by the German media. According to this version, the sabotage group used a sailing yacht, which was rented in Rostock through intermediaries using forged documents, to transport explosives to the pipelines. “The suspect and his accomplices transported large quantities of highly potent explosives suitable for combat use on board this yacht into international waters as far as the Danish island of Bornholm,” the prosecutors pointed out.

“The saboteurs then attached the explosives, which were equipped with remote detonators, to the pipes. “The Federal Public Prosecutor General emphasized that the Nord Stream pipeline previously supplied half of Germany s annual gas demand. The Ukrainian national is currently being held in a pre-trial detention center in Hamburg, where the trial is expected to take place. He was arrested in Italy last summer and extradited to Germany. On September 26, 2022, unprecedented damage was recorded on three branches of the Nord Stream pipeline and the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, which had not yet been put into operation. The Russian Prosecutor General s Office opened a criminal investigation into an act of international terrorism.

Read more …

“Vladimir Zelensky added that Kiev has to “fight” to get partners to fulfill deliveries that have already been agreed upon..”

• Zelensky: Kiev Received Not One of 200 Promised Air Defense Missiles (TASS)

Vladimir Zelensky once again criticized Kiev’s Western partners for insufficient deliveries of missiles for air defense systems and stated that Ukraine had not received a single one of the 200 promised missiles.”We need missiles. We have reached agreements with some countries and have already transferred funds to them. Some under the PURL [program] and some without it. With Norway, <...> [we agreed] that they would pay for 200 missiles. Not a single one of those 200 missiles has arrived,” he said in a video published by the Ukrainian Novosti. Live news outlet. The head of the Kiev regime added that Ukraine will do everything possible to ensure the missiles are delivered for the agreed-upon price.


He added that Kiev has to “fight” to get partners to fulfill deliveries that have already been agreed upon. “This is a major problem. We will not discuss or disclose the details of the deliveries at this time. I believe this is a major problem related to our partners. <...> We simply need our partners to fulfill what we agreed upon. We aren’t asking for more – we just want them to fulfill what they agreed to, what they signed, or what they promised. Today, we are seeing a slowdown in these efforts,” Zelensky noted.

The Ukrainian authorities regularly ask their partners to increase arms deliveries, particularly missiles for air defense systems. Earlier, Ukrainian top military commander Alexander Syrsky acknowledged that the country’s missile and artillery forces are critically dependent on arms and ammunition supplies from the West.

Read more …

I’ve often said that in the first phase of the war, people like Scott RItter and Doug McGregor repeatedly claimed Ukrainian losses were 7-8 times bigger than Russian.

Now, these people want us to believe Russian losses are 7-8 times higher. Or some 60 times what they were 3-4 years ago. I think not.

• Number of Casualties In Russia’s War On Ukraine Reaches 2 Million (CNN)

Russia’s decision to launch a full-scale invasion of Ukraine has now cost the country some 450,000 lives, according to a new study that estimates the war’s total casualty numbers to have surpassed 2 million. The research by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) estimates Russia has suffered 1.4 million casualties, including killed, wounded and missing soldiers – a stunning number that amounts to roughly 1% of the country’s population. The losses are not spread evenly across Russia, with poorer areas and ethnic minorities suffering significantly higher casualty rates.


Stories of male populations of small remote villages being virtually wiped out are becoming more common in Russian opposition media. And according to the study, Russia is currently unable to recruit new troops at the same rate as it is losing them. “These rates are astounding,” Seth G. Jones and Riley McCabe, the authors of the study, said. “Russian fatalities in Ukraine are more than four times greater than all US fatalities in all wars combined since World War II, and more than nine times greater than all Soviet and Russian fatalities in all wars combined since World War II.”

Meanwhile, Ukraine is estimated to have endured between 525,000 and 625,000 casualties, including 125,000 and 150,000 fatalities. Neither Russia nor Ukraine release official casualty data, but the latest CSIS figures are broadly in line with western estimates. Jones and McCabe said that in terms of casualties, the war is becoming much more costly for Russia than it is for Ukraine. They said the casualty rate has likely risen to nearly eight to one in the first half of this year, meaning that for every Ukrainian soldier killed, wounded or missing, there are eight Russians casualties.

For much of the war, the rate stood at between two to three Russian casualties to one Ukrainian loss. Jones and McCabe said that the recent increase is down to Kyiv’s advances in its drone program, especially its ability to greatly extend the “kill zone” – the area around the frontlines that is so saturated with drones that it makes it almost impossible for Russian troops to enter. “Ukraine’s defense-in-depth strategy has been effective in killing and wounding Russian soldiers, as well as limiting Russian maneuver,” the said.

However, they said there are other reasons why Russia is suffering so much, including “Russia’s attrition strategy, its failure to effectively conduct combined arms and joint warfare, its poor tactics and training, corruption, and low morale.” Whatever the reasons, the data paints a horrendous picture: with 2 million total casualties, the war in Ukraine has now likely surpassed the battle of Stalingrad, widely considered to be the bloodiest conflict in history.

Read more …

Ha!

• New Euphemism Alert: “Tanned European” (CTH)

Everyone once in a while the cultural marxist way to describe a middle eastern attacker gets a new euphemism. Today’s update comes from politically correct Scotland.


“Tanned European man”

I wonder how long it took them to come up with that one?

Read more …

Try to find protection.

• Sam Altman’s OpenAI Discusses Handing Trump Admin A 5% Stake (ZH)

The U.S. government’s equity portfolio could be expanding again, this time with a potential 5% stake in Sam Altman’s OpenAI at an $852 billion valuation, according to a new report. The proposed stake would mark another step toward taking direct financial positions in tech giants. For OpenAI, buy-in from the Trump administration could ease mounting political pressure ahead of an IPO. The Financial Times reports that Altman has floated giving the U.S. government a 5% stake in OpenAI, modeled after the Alaska Permanent Fund, a state-owned sovereign wealth fund created to invest a portion of Alaska’s oil revenue for the long-term benefit of Alaskans.


The FT noted that the proposal would spur other tech giants, including Anthropic, Google, and Meta, to follow suit by handing over stakes to the federal government. The discussions remain early and “conceptual,” and any arrangement could require congressional approval, the report said, adding that the idea stems from mounting pressure in the Trump administration over AI’s impact on jobs and the localized blowback against data center buildouts nationwide.

Earlier this week, Elon Musk’s xAI Memphis rolled out a ‘data center dividend’ for the surrounding community, offering free Starlink kits and half-price service to quell any dissent against AI. This move suggests that data center operators nationwide may offer other forms of dividends in the future to appease surrounding communities. Back to the FT report, Altman has reportedly discussed public ownership with Trump, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, and Sen. Bernie Sanders.

Sanders, a crazed socialist, has argued for the public stake in AI companies to exceed 50%. The socialist and far-left lawmakers who make up the Democratic Socialists of America have even signaled a questionable data center moratorium – a move that would only cede compute power to China.

In recent months, Altman’s chatbot company proposed a “public wealth fund” that “provides every citizen — including those not invested in financial markets — with a stake in AI-driven economic growth.” “The goal is not only to support people through economic change after decisions have already been made, but to give them a stake and a voice in shaping how that change unfolds,” OpenAI said in a blog post. The talks come after the Trump administration took a 10% stake in Intel, 15% in MP Materials, and …

[..]

For OpenAI, a government stake could ease tensions with the Trump administration ahead of an IPO (delayed until 2027), while offering a political answer to concerns that AI is financially wrecking low-income folks. Meanwhile, The Information’s earlier report that Nvidia has been renting back its own compute capacity from neocloud providers raises one obvious question…

… is there really enough end-user compute demand to absorb the AI buildout?

Read more …

“National self-sufficiency beats globalism’s mass dependency.”

“Western nations that lack the cultural will to be self-sufficient are nations stuck in a permanent state of dependency.

• The American System Rejects Europe’s Economic Suicide (J.B. Shurk)

Why do Western politicians celebrate “multiculturalism” over the historically productive virtues of Western culture? Why do Western pundits disparage knowledge, skill, and hard work as attributes of “white supremacy”? Why do Western lawmakers make it more difficult for Western citizens to own land and personal property? Why do Western bureaucrats churn out rules and regulations that limit what can be built and manufactured? Why do Western governments make it difficult for small businesses to thrive?


Why do Western news media claim that only foreign migrants are willing to perform blue-collar jobs? Why do Western bankers claim that only foreign slave laborers are capable of manufacturing critical goods? Why do Western professors spend more time lecturing about racism and oppression than how to critically think, invent, and build new things? Why do Western NGOs support open borders, “climate change” regulations, and economy-killing taxes? Why do religious leaders praise the criminal and not the faithful Christian?

Why do cultural leaders encourage citizens and foreigners alike to become dependent on social welfare? Why do pop culture leaders extol frivolous excess over hard work and discipline? Why do Westerners celebrate gay “pride” for at least a month each year instead of encouraging all citizens to take pride in what they build, learn, and accomplish? Why do Wall Street and the City of London work so hard to deprive the United States and the United Kingdom of economies that benefit Main Street businesses as much as multinational conglomerates?

Reading through the above questions should lead a rational person toward a reasonable conclusion: The people who currently maintain economic and political power in the West have no interest in making the nations that they ostensibly call “home” wealthy. The United Kingdom and the European Union cannot produce wealth if their manufacturers are forced to use windmill-generated energy that has been exponentially outpowered by coal and steam for four centuries. Germany cannot produce wealth if it subsidizes Chinese automakers while bankrupting its own with “green energy” regulations. Canada cannot produce wealth if it refuses to use its abundant natural resources while importing most manufactured goods from Asia.

Western nations that refuse to use hydrocarbon and nuclear energies are nations dependent on foreign powers for manufacturing. Western nations that refuse to allow their farmers to grow crops and produce meat and dairy supplies for their home populations are nations dependent on foreign powers for food. Western nations whose people lack the knowledge and skills to repair everything from small appliances to entire electric grids are nations dependent on foreign powers during crises. Western nations that lack the cultural will to be self-sufficient are nations stuck in a permanent state of dependency. If you hand out food stamps liberally and look down on people who insist on providing for their families without government assistance, then you will produce a nation of pirates and fraudsters who make, grow, and build nothing.

How does the United Kingdom survive when it produces next to nothing? Right now it generates most of its revenue by acting as the economic middleman for most of the globe. Even though its empire has collapsed and its navy has disappeared, the City of London’s army of bankers, consultants, and lawyers still take a nice cut of every economic transaction around the planet. They collect insurance fees, regulatory fees, and investment fees like an absentee landlord still bilking old colonies with “rules-based” trade agreements that put money in the pockets of English lords who create nothing.

The Bank of England and the Secret Intelligence Service work together to game the international economy by stirring up regional conflicts and using insider knowledge to bet on the eventual market winners. Britain’s central bank has ensured that the wealthiest members of society profit from market manipulation while the rest of society suffers from currency depreciation. This is an economic model engineered to benefit a small cabal of “noble elites” while impoverishing the larger nation.

Read more …

Joseph diGenova.

• Russiagate Prosecutor Calls Audible On ‘Grand Conspiracy’ (Paul Sperry)

Although Donald Trump’s defenders describe the Russia hoax and other efforts to frame the president as a “grand conspiracy,” RealClearInvestigations has learned that the man now leading the probe of that scandal is pursuing multiple conspiracy prosecutions that are smaller and more manageable, according to several sources with direct knowledge of the probe. Since taking over the Justice Department’s far-flung investigation in April, veteran prosecutor Joseph diGenova and his team quickly concluded that combining all of the alleged wrongdoing, which ranges from falsifying evidence and committing perjury to leaking classified information and obstructing justice, into one unified plot and trying them together as a single case would be unmanageable.


“You’d have 50 defendants in the courtroom,” said a well-placed source familiar with diGenova’s thinking. Before diGenova took over the investigation two months ago, its contours were ill-defined as it lurched ahead in fits and starts for more than a year. But according to the sources, diGenova is tackling the case with a new, disciplined focus and in so doing is giving it the direction it’s lacked.

But this is a change in tactics, not the theory of the case. The sources say his operating assumption is that Trump’s enemies in the 2016 Hillary Clinton campaign, the Obama and Biden administration, some Democrats in Congress, and their like-minded accomplices across several government agencies – including the CIA and the FBI – joined in one continuous conspiracy over almost a decade to deny Trump his civil rights, derail his political campaigns, and undermine his presidency.

Where other investigators have looked at specific pieces of the effort Trump’s defenders now call “Russiagate” after its original origins, diGenova is launching the first holistic look at the entire scandal. A well-placed source said it is looking at events from June 2015 when Trump first came down the golden escalator at Trump Tower to announce his candidacy through the 2022 FBI raid at Mar-a-Lago after he left office.

Insider sources provided RCI with an exclusive look into the specially assigned/ prosecutor’s office and its recent/ legal maneuvers. They said two/ separate grand juries in South Florida are now collecting and hearing evidence in what could become a series of conspiracy cases brought against people who served in the highest reaches of government, including former CIA Director John Brennan, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, and former FBI Director James/ Comey.

Since much of the government’s alleged corrupt anti-Trump activity took place in 2016, prosecuting the cases as conspiracies is the only way to get around the five-year federal statute of limitations. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche tapped diGenova, a longtime denizen of Washington, D.C., who was a U.S. attorney during the Reagan administration, to helm the sprawling investigation into what Blanche views as a series of baseless and seditious prosecutions and impeachments of Trump. The acting attorney general has created a special position for diGenova with the title ‘counselor to the attorney general’.

DiGenova has moved into an office in Fort Pierce, Fla., where one federal grand jury is actively hearing evidence in the case. Another grand jury has been convened in Miami, where/ Jason Reding Quinones, U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida, is based. He is said to be working closely with diGenova. DiGenova and his team are confident that the jury pool and judges in South Florida will give them a fair hearing, as opposed to Washington, D.C., where they are no longer utilizing a third grand jury. “It’s dead in D.C. Everything is in South Florida now, a red jurisdiction more sympathetic to Trump”, said a senior U.S. official briefed on the matter.

Read more …

 

 

 


 

https://twitter.com/JoshHall2024/status/2072461820749562359?s=20

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle April 22 2026

Apr 222026
 
 April 22, 2026  Posted by at 7:26 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,  43 Responses »


Edward Hopper The Circle Theater, New York 1936


• Trump Blinks Again, Unilaterally Extends Iran Ceasefire (ZH)
• Schrödinger’s Strait (PA)
• Trump Says Iran Can ‘Expect’ Bombs (ZH)
• Iran Promises To ‘Reveal New Cards On The Battlefield’ (RT)
• Iran: US Must Retract ‘Maximalist’ Nuclear Demands for Talks to Proceed (ET)
• Are We Seeing the Makings of an Iranian Civil War? (Eric Florack)
• Perspective on Iran Conflict and Latest Intel Efforts to Disrupt Trump (CTH)
• It Is, After All, the Department of Justice (CTH)
• US Intel Secretly Flagged Major 2020 Election Vulnerabilities (JTN)
• Spygate, Russiagate, IC Impeachment, Jack Smith Targeting and Lawfare (CTH)
• US, Cuban Regime Confirm ‘Secret’ Talks in Havana (Sarah Anderson)
• The Space Launch Industry Is in Big Trouble… Except for You-Know-Who (Green)
• Hungary’s Magyar Warns Netanyahu of Arrest (RT)
• Europe EV Sales Jump 51% As Iran War Sends Gasoline Prices Soaring (Paraskova)

 


 

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/2046308075947405581?s=20 https://twitter.com/Tironianae/status/2046175457201041457?s=20

 


 


No, Trump doesn’t blink. This is scripted.

• Trump Blinks Again, Unilaterally Extends Iran Ceasefire (ZH)

TACO Tuesday… Again: Ceasefire Extended in Trump TS Post. Can’t make this up… Trump unilaterally extends ceasefire, but says US Navy’s blockade of Iran’s ports will stay in place, after Islamabad talks collapse. Trump punts again… enjoy TACO Tuesday… we can say at least the bombing doesn’t look to resume, yet. To give more formality to it – or make it official, the White House also quickly put out Trump’s statement (and in a more presentable font) below. Initial reaction from Tehran:

IRAN NOT OFFICIALLY COMMENTING ON CEASEFIRE EXTENSION
IRAN’S POSITION WILL BE ANNOUNCED SUBSEQUENTLY


2nd Round Talks Collapse, Vance Not Traveling
Late afternoon headlines now confirm what was looking more and more inevitable as the hours passed but with no one side boarding planes to head to Islamabad: the Associated Press is reporting that Vice President Vance has called off the whole trip. This also as Tasnim is reporting Iran’s “final decision” to not be in Pakistan Wednesday – the same day the two-week ceasefire formally comes to a close. Pakistan sources are meanwhile reporting that key negotiating figures are absent on the ground, and officials are said to be urging the sides to join a second-round summit. And per Bloomberg: “Iran, for its part, told the mediators its delegation won’t leave Tehran before the blockade is lifted, according to officials familiar with the matter.”

US Delegation Trip for Talks ‘On Hold’
As VP Vance has been seen at the White House, clearly not en route to Pakistan for Iran talks, a hugely significant headline has sent oil up and stocks dumping more:

VP Vance’s Pakistan trip has been put on hold as Iran’s leadership remained divided over whether to participate in a new round of peace talks, via Axios
VANCE TRIP ON HOLD AS IRAN DIDN’T RESPOND TO US POSITIONS: NYT
VANCE TRIP TO PAKISTAN HAS NOT BEEN CANCLED: NYT
Newsquawk market reaction: Stocks see weakness, while oil and Dollar gain amid NYT reports that VP Vance’s diplomatic trip to Islamabad has been put on hold after Tehran failed to respond to American negotiating positions.

Read more …

“.. open and closed at the same time,.”

• Schrödinger’s Strait (PA)

Over the weekend, the Strait of Hormuz became Schrödinger’s Strait: open and closed at the same time, depending on which headline you were reading. On Friday, markets traded as if the Iran war was winding down cleanly. Iran said the Strait was open to commercial shipping during the ceasefire, Trump said he expected a deal with Iran “soon,” oil fell, and stocks rallied. By Sunday evening, Brent was back up sharply and stock futures were lower, after new friction around the U.S. blockade and Iran’s threats to respond. Reuters reported over the weekend that U.S. forces had turned back vessels under the blockade rules, that Iran warned the Gulf and Gulf of Oman would not be secure if its ports were threatened, and that the U.S. enforcement zone extends east into the Gulf of Oman. That sounds like chaos, but there’s a logic to it.


Reflexivity With Warships
What Trump appears to be doing here—whether consciously or not—is something that looks a lot like George Soros’s principle of reflexivity. Soros’s basic idea was that markets don’t just passively reflect reality; they can also change it. Prices move, expectations shift, financing conditions tighten or loosen, and those moves feed back into the real economy and even into political decisions. That’s especially relevant in a war centered on oil flows, shipping lanes, and financial pressure.

Iran’s Lever
Iran’s preferred lever has been obvious for weeks: threaten the Strait of Hormuz, raise oil prices, spook global markets, and put pressure on Washington through the U.S. economy. Higher crude means higher gasoline prices, and higher gasoline prices are one of the fastest ways to create political pain for an American president.

That leverage is real, because oil is globally priced and higher crude still means higher gasoline prices for American consumers. But it is also less direct than it would be for countries more dependent on Gulf barrels. The U.S. imports about 30%-35% of its crude oil demand, but 60%-62% of those imports come from Canada. That doesn’t make Washington immune, but it does mean Tehran’s strongest market weapon is still blunter against the United States than against much of the rest of the world. That is Tehran’s most obvious form of reflexive pressure. It doesn’t need to destroy a U.S. carrier group to hurt Washington. It just needs to make markets believe supply is at risk.

Trump’s Lever
Trump’s pressure campaign has been different. Much more of it has been in the physical world. First, there’s the blockade itself. It’s not a general closure of the Strait. It’s a targeted effort to stop Iranian oil sales, block Iranian maritime commerce, and deny Tehran both export earnings and imports flowing through the Gulf. U.S. enforcement boundaries extend east into the Gulf of Oman, which means Washington can exert pressure without having to crowd all its ships into the narrow and dangerous Strait itself. Second, there’s the pressure that builds as time passes. A blockade doesn’t just reduce cash inflow. It also creates storage problems for a producer.

As Miad Maleki put it in an X post over the weekend, “the oil and gasoline clocks don’t negotiate.”

He wrote that Iran entered the blockade with about 15 million barrels in Kharg storage, roughly 51% full. At a flat production fill rate of 1.9 million barrels per day, that storage would max out in about 8 days. Even with aggressive upstream throttling, he said, the ceiling would still be hit in about 20 days. After that, wells may have to be shut in, risking permanent reservoir damage. nThat’s the point. As time passes, Tehran has to think not just about lost revenue, but about storage, field management, and what happens if production has to be curtailed under pressure.

The Market As Battlefield
And that’s where reflexivity comes in. If Iran can push oil high enough, long enough, it can create pressure on Trump through markets and through consumer prices. But if Trump can keep oil from rising too much—through his own rhetoric, through repeated hints of imminent talks, through confidence that the conflict will end soon—then he can blunt Iran’s pressure on the U.S. economy while continuing to squeeze Iran physically through the blockade.

In other words, the market itself becomes part of the battlefield. If crude stays lower than Tehran wants, Trump buys time. Lower oil prices mean less pressure from American drivers, less political pressure on the White House, and more room to keep the blockade in place. If crude spikes, the reverse happens: Tehran’s leverage rises, not because it has sunk the U.S. Navy, but because it has raised the domestic economic cost of continuing the campaign.

Read more …

Iran will delay wherever they can. They’ve done it for 50 years. It’s worked for 50 years. Trump will break that. But it will take some time.

• Trump Says Iran Can ‘Expect’ Bombs (ZH)

President Trump on Tuesday said he expects a strong outcome from negotiations with Iran, telling CNBC that “they will end up with a great deal.” He added that “Iran has no choice, it is regime change no matter what you want to call it,” and emphasized that the US is in “a strong negotiating position.” He said the naval blockade “has been successful” and that US forces are “in control of the Strait.” Trump also stated he does not want to extend the ceasefire, saying “there is not that much time” – but added that “Iran can get itself onto good footing with a deal.”


He also acknowledged that Iran has likely continued to do missile restocking in the ceasefire interim period, and also moving its remaining missile arsenal around. But Trump also claimed the US is “much more powerful than it was a few weeks again” and that CENTCOM used the ceasefire to restock as well. Importantly he also said the US is “ready to go militarily” and that the world should “expect” bombing – in the instance there’s no Pakistan deal reached. And an interesting China reference:

Caught an Iranian ship with gifts from China, thought he had an understanding with China’s Xi, says “that’s alright”. Pakistan Talks: Timeline Still Up in the Air Who will fly to Islamabad first? Al Jazeera comments on the emerging diplomatic standoff before actual diplomacy even gets started, amid the continued tit-for-tat threats of potential escalation on the battlefield: Pakistan is ready to host the talks. They are planning for them to take place on Wednesday at the highest level. But the White House has been very tight-lipped about when JD Vance will be leaving Washington.

What appears to be going on is the US trying to protect itself from embarrassment. If it is to send its team, which ends up sitting here in Islamabad without Iran showing up, that would be a huge embarrassment. As a result, there now appears to be a game between the US and Iran over who is going to get on their plane and fly here first. Per Bloomberg at about 4am US time: “Iran s state-run TV denies unspecified media reports that an Iranian delegation has departed for or arrived in Pakistan for negotiations with the US.” Latest:

Al Jazeera reports: Mediators received confirmation of US VP Vance and Iran’s Ghalifab’s arrival in Islamabad at dawn Wednesday to lead talks.At the same time, per WSJ, Iran has informed regional mediators that it will send a delegation to Islamabad after for days of repeatedly refusing to commit to a new round of negotiations. However, there’s not been official confirmation, only signaling, with Pakistani officials insisting the Iranians will be there. And yet, it was only on Monday that Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman said that there was no plan for a second round of negotiations.

But if all goes well, Vice President Vance is expected to depart for Pakistan today, leading the delegation which includes Kushner and Witkoff. As a reminder, on Monday President Trump said “lots of bombs” will be unleased on Iran if there is no deal, and also given the White House doesn’t plan to extend the ceasefire. The key issues of Iran’s nuclear program and the Hormuz Strait loom large. Iranian parliament speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf has at the same time warned: “we do not accept negotiations under the shadow of threats, and over the past two weeks we have prepared to reveal new cards on the battlefield”.

Another Vessel Interdiction by US Navy
US forces boarded a sanctioned tanker without resistance in the Indo-Pacific as part of operations targeting vessels linked to Iran, the Pentagon said on X. Initial statements did not indicate a precise location, and clearly it did not occur in the Hormuz Strait. Washington recently announced it is ready to seize ‘illicit’ Iran-linked vessels anywhere on the high seas. The move follows Sunday’s major boarding of an Iranian-flagged vessel, when a US warship opened fire as it attempted to transit the strait, striking and damaging the engine room.

CENTCOM: Overnight, U.S. forces conducted a right-of-visit, maritime interdiction and boarding of the stateless sanctioned M/T Tifani without incident in the INDOPACOM area of responsibility. https://twitter.com/DeptofWar/status/2046544038812156177

Read more …

They have no new cards. But they can say they do.

• Iran Promises To ‘Reveal New Cards On The Battlefield’ (RT)

Iranian officials have struck a defiant tone ahead of a possible new round of talks with Washington, warning that Tehran has prepared to “reveal new cards on the battlefield” while rejecting any negotiations conducted “under the shadow of threats.” Iranian parliament speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf accused US President Donald Trump of trying to turn negotiations into “a table of surrender” and said Iran had spent the past two weeks preparing new military options.


“Trump, by imposing a siege and violating the ceasefire, seeks to turn this negotiating table – in his own imagination – into a table of surrender or to justify renewed warmongering. We do not accept negotiations under the shadow of threats, and in the past two weeks, we have prepared to reveal new cards on the battlefield,” Ghalibaf wrote on X.] Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, meanwhile, said the “non-constructive and contradictory” conduct of US officials sent the message that Washington was seeking Iran’s surrender, adding that Iranians “will not bow to coercion.”

The temporary ceasefire, brokered by Pakistan, is set to expire on Wednesday, after the first round of talks in Islamabad last weekend failed to produce a breakthrough and Trump imposed a US military blockade of Iranian ports. Trump warned on Sunday that if Iran doesn’t accept Washington’s “fair and reasonable deal,” the US is going to “knock out every single power plant, and every single bridge, in Iran.”

The US president initially announced the second round of talks for Monday, and the White House reportedly spent the day waiting for confirmation that Tehran would send its negotiating team. Axios reported later in the day that US Vice President J.D. Vance, alongside Trump’s envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, was expected to leave for Islamabad by Tuesday morning.

According to Axios, Iranian negotiators had been stalling amid reported pressure from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps to take a harder line and refuse talks unless the US first ends its blockade. The report claimed that Pakistani, Egyptian, and Turkish mediators had urged Tehran to attend, and that Iran’s team allegedly received a green light from the supreme leader on Monday night.

Read more …

‘Maximalist’ demands means: NO nuclear activity. Trump will not give that up.

• Iran: US Must Retract ‘Maximalist’ Nuclear Demands for Talks to Proceed (ET)

Iran is not ready to hold another set of peace talks with U.S. representatives until President Donald Trump backs off from his “maximalist” stance on Iran’s nuclear activity, Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Saeed Khatibzadeh said on April 18. During a visit to Turkey on Saturday, Khatibzadeh told reporters that there needs to be a clear “framework of understanding” for peace talks to proceed. The Iranian official offered the comment with just days left on a two-week ceasefire that began on April 7.


Vice President JD Vance had led a U.S. delegation in a 21-hour round of talks with Iranian representatives on April 11, but the talks ended without a deal. At the time, Vance said the sticking point had been Iran’s refusal to clearly swear off the pursuit of nuclear weapons. Tehran has denied it’s pursuing nuclear weapons, however, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said Iran has about 970 pounds of uranium enriched to 60 percent purity—a short, technical step from weapons-grade levels of 90 percent. As he spoke with reporters on Saturday, Khatibzadeh said Iran would not agree to stricter limits on nuclear activity than those expected of other countries under existing international standards.

“The other side should abandon its maximalist position and should respect international law, within which we can then secure diplomacy,” Khatibzadeh said. “I have to be very crystal clear that Iran would not accept to be an exception from the international law.” Earlier this week, Trump raised the prospect of a second round of weekend peace talks. As he spoke with reporters on Saturday, Khatibzadeh said no date would be set for such talks until there is a baseline agreement between Washington and Tehran. U.S. forces bombed three Iranian nuclear facilities in June 2025. Since then, there has been speculation about whether stockpiles of highly enriched uranium may still be trapped under the rubble at these damaged nuclear facilities.

Read more …

Not so far. Too deadly.

• Are We Seeing the Makings of an Iranian Civil War? (Eric Florack)

Much has been made of the on-again, off-again negotiations over the Strait of Hormuz. The claim here in the States from a few under-informed individuals is that Donald Trump was lying to us about the status and that he doesn’t know what he’s doing, yada, yada, you know the drill. Of course, it’s untrue, but I want to take a few minutes this morning to explain why it’s untrue. The Islamic Regime in Iran is engineering its own destruction. The reason amounts to a civil war in Iran. To understand why, you must first understand what the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) actually is — and isn’t. Over the last few weeks, I’ve been studying the IRGC, its makeup, and its original purpose, as well as who controls it in the end.


With that understanding, we can have a better idea of the reason behind the on-again, off-again blockade situation we’ve seen over the last several days.Let’s bust a widely held misunderstanding right out of the gate. The IRGC is not a conventional military. Its founders did not build it to defend Iran’s borders. They built it in 1979 with a specific mandate: protect the Islamic Revolution and the clerical regime’s ideological order, suppress internal dissent, and project what they called “revolutionary power” across the region. The BBC called it a “business empire” back in 2010 — and that description still holds. The IRGC answers to no elected official. It reports directly to the Supreme Leader, bypassing the defense ministry and the civilian government entirely.

The IRGC commands land, naval, and missile forces, plus the Quds Force — the arm that funds, arms, and directs allied militias like Hezbollah and the Houthis. It also controls the Basij, a paramilitary force whose sole purpose is to keep Iran’s civilian population in line. The widespread killing of Iranian civilians over the past month is the Basij at work. As you may have picked up, the entire idea of the IRGC is permanent resistance and interference of the West, which, by the nature of the thing, includes the United States and Israel. That last point is the very reason for its existence. Absent that, the IRGC wouldn’t have any reason to exist at all.

Militarily, the IRGC is built for asymmetric warfare — an idea those of us who lived through Vietnam would recognize immediately. It is not designed for the swift, overwhelming force that conventional militaries such as our own pursue. It is designed to make any conflict long, painful, and costly. Threatening regional stability and choking energy flows isn’t a side effect of IRGC strategy — it is the strategy. The IRGC runs a parallel power structure inside Iran, and it answers to no one but the Supreme Leader. In that position and by design, it controls perhaps 40% of Iran’s economy. Say, construction companies, Telcom nets, and oil, to name a few items. I suppose that in some business sense, the IRGC is comparable to the East India Company.

With all that in mind, let’s turn to a piece in the Jerusalem Post from March 29: “Iran’s President Masoud Pezeshkian is reportedly clashing with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) chief Ahmad Vahidi over the economic and social impact of the war with the United States and Israel, Iran International reported on Saturday, citing Iranian sources. According to the London-based Iranian opposition outlet, Pezeshkian criticized the IRGC’s approach of increasing tensions in the region and attacking neighbouring countries, warning of the long-term effects that these movements could cause on the Iranian economy.

The report also mentioned that Pezeshkian has been demanding that executive decisions regarding the war be made by the Iranian government rather than the IRGC, a demand Vahidi did not accept. In response, the IRGC criticized Pezeshkian’s inability to implement structural reforms in the Islamic Republic to address several problems within the system before the current war began. The report comes as Iran’s already dying economy keeps being pushed toward full collapse after several weeks of war.

So this tells us many things. Among them, the civilian government is, and has been bucking the IRGC, with somewhat less than complete success. So we see that when Iranian President Pezeshkian, who seems, as a rule, more pragmatic than the IRGC, signaled he’s ready to be reasonable and will negotiate, the IRGC didn’t follow along, but rather launched a war against Iran’s civilian government. It is the IRGC who have been working against every diplomatic channel that Pezeshkian has been trying to open.

He’s not hiding by any means. Within the last 72 hours, Pezeshkian has been seen delivering a speech at Iran’s Ministry of Sports and Youth in Tehran, where he addressed the ongoing conflict with the US and stated that Iran is seeking to end the war “with dignity.” He’s also been in conference with Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, ostensibly to discuss the current war. Both Pezeshkian and Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi have been at the center of reported internal tensions with the IRGC. It is the IRGC that’s been contradicting both Pezeshkian and Araghchi on the negotiations over Hormuz. Now, just because Pezeshkian seems more reasonable than the IRGC in some senses, doesn’t mean he’s not saying publicly things the IRGC wants him to say:

Iran is seeking to end the war with the US and Iran “with dignity,” the country’s President Masoud Pezeshkian said Sunday, arguing that US President Donald Trump has no right to deprive Tehran of its nuclear rights, Anadolu reports. “Trump says Iran should not use its nuclear rights, but does not explain what crime Iran has committed,” Pezeshkian said during a visit to Iran’s Sports and Youth Ministry, the ISNA news agency reported. He also called for the nation to stand “firm against a bloodthirsty and brutal enemy.”Iran must manage the current atmosphere in a way that “does not portray us as war-mongers” as “we are defending ourselves,” he added.

Read more …

“Promethean Action Provides..” The elderly ladies are becoming a force.

The photo I’ve seen 5 times now. so here it is…

• Perspective on Iran Conflict and Latest Intel Efforts to Disrupt Trump (CTH)

Promethean Action – Barbara Boyd previews renewed Iran peace negotiations in Islamabad ahead of a ceasefire deadline, as Iran allegedly challenged a U.S. naval blockade, lost a ship, and again closed the Strait of Hormuz, with Trump warning “No More Mr. Nice guy” if peace fails and arguing Iran is bleeding $500 million a day. She shows a City of London–linked propaganda network is working to prolong the war and damage Trump before the midterms by targeting Vice President JD Vance, citing a Financial Times column by Edward Luce and post–Munich Security Conference smears portraying Vance as pro-Putin.

Boyd outlines three layers of Iran-linked messaging—Press TV in London, NIAC in Washington, and the “Iran Experts Initiative” infiltration of U.S. think tanks—and says justice is coming via prosecutions led by Joseph DiGenova, with Kash Patel promising arrests, while Vance leads talks and a National Fraud Task Force.

PRESIDENT TRUMP – “I’m winning a War, BY A LOT, things are going very well, our Military has been amazing and, if you read the Fake News, like The Failing New York Times, the absolutely horrendous and disgusting Wall Street Journal, or the now almost defunct, fortunately, Washington Post, you would actually think we are losing the War.

The enemy is confused, because they get these same Media “reports,” and yet they realize their Navy has been completely wiped out, their Air Force has gone onto darker runways, they have no Anti Missile or Anti Airplane Equipment, their former leaders are mostly gone (This has been, in addition to everything else, Regime Change!), and perhaps, most important of all, THE BLOCKADE, which we will not take off until there is a “DEAL,” is absolutely destroying Iran. They are losing $500 Million Dollars a day, an unsustainable number, even in the short run. The Anti-America Fake News Media is rooting for Iran to win, but it’s not going to happen, because I’m in charge! Just like these unpatriotic people used every ounce of their limited strength to fight me in the Election, they continue to do so with Iran. The result will be the same — It already is!” ~ President DONALD J. TRUMP.

Read more …

“Counsel to the Attorney General, has a nice ring to it.”

• It Is, After All, the Department of Justice (CTH)

Joe diGenova sworn in.


“It is not the critic who counts, not the man who points out how the strong man stumbled, or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena; whose face is marred by the dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs and comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error or shortcoming; who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions and spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best, knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who, at worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly; so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory or defeat.”
~Theodore Roosevelt

Counsel to the Attorney General, has a nice ring to it.

Heavenly Father, strengthen us when we feel weak and weary. Grant us perseverance to face challenges with courage and determination. Help us to trust in Your guidance, remain steadfast in our faith, and overcome every obstacle that comes our way. Fill our heart with confidence and resilience, allowing us to stay focused on our goals. May Your power flow through us so that we may achieve success that honors You and fulfills the purpose You have established for our life and this mission. Lord of righteousness, strengthen our faith so that we do not become discouraged, nor act impulsively. Grant us focus, discipline and energy so that every accomplishment can be a reflection of Your guidance. May every step we take align with Your will, and may patience guide us to sustain success with honor, fidelity and stewardship. Amen

Read more …

Memo newly declassified by DNI Gabbard shows concerns about integrity of American voting were far greater than the public was told by previous administrations. Evidence emerged that China had gained access to voter registration data in multiple states and had even sent fake driver’s licenses to the United States in a bid to help Joe Biden win the election, officials said.

• US Intel Secretly Flagged Major 2020 Election Vulnerabilities (JTN)

Months before the 2020 presidential election, U.S. intelligence issued a secret but stark warning that foreign adversaries had the capability to “compromise” America’s voting infrastructure and raised specific concerns about the vulnerability of voter registration databases that later would be penetrated by China and Iran, a newly declassified memo obtained by Just the News shows. The National Intelligence Council’s (NIC) concerns were so extensive that officials personally briefed President Donald Trump at the White House in February 2020, according to photos obtained by Just the News showing top CIA, FBI and Homeland Security officials joining with NIC analysts to inform the president.


But the American public was never fully alerted, even after evidence emerged that China had gained access to voter registration data in multiple states and had even sent fake driver’s licenses to the United States in a bid to help Joe Biden win the election, officials said. “We judge that US adversaries, including, at a minimum, Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea, as well as non-state groups, have the capability to compromise US election infrastructure for the 2020 presidential election,” the NIC wrote in the memo dated Jan. 15, 2020.

“Adversaries gaining access to US election-related systems could disrupt the voting process, steal sensitive data, or undermine confidence in the election results, but we do not know whether any of them have specific plans to manipulate election-related systems,” the memo added. The document was recently declassified by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, who continues to expose examples of the intelligence community suppressing or misusing intelligence. Though officials say that an ongoing second Trump administration investigation has found no evidence yet that vote-counting machines were directly compromised in the 2020 election, the memo shows how such machines could be vulnerable to intrusions in the future and made clear that the voter registration databases that were breached by China and Iran were easy targets.

American voting system more vulnerable to intrusion than acknowledged
The memo, prepared by then-NationaI Intelligence for Cyber Christopher Porter, has become part of a broader body of evidence showing America’s election systems are more vulnerable to hacks, breaches and manipulations than previously acknowledged.After the 2020 election, many senior Intelligence Community officials insisted on the historical security of the 2020 election and downplayed concerns about such vulnerabilities.

Krebs: “The 2020 election was the most secure in U.S. history.”
For example, the members of the Election Infrastructure Government Coordinating Council Executive Committee released a mid-November 2020 joint statement declaring that “the November 3rd election was the most secure in American history.” One of the officials who sat on that committee, Chris Krebs, the director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, testified to the Senate after the election that he “approved CISA’s publication of a joint statement from the election security community, reflecting that community’s consensus that the 2020 election was the most secure in U.S. history.”

Krebs has been accused by the Trump White House of being “a significant bad-faith actor who weaponized and abused his government authority. Krebs’ misconduct involved the censorship of disfavored speech implicating the 2020 election and COVID-19 pandemic.”

Porter: “It is no secret that China and Iran compromise election equipment for a variety of intelligence purposes”
But Porter told Just the News those assurances did not reflect the government’s assessment of just how vulnerable America’s election infrastructure was. Iran and China did gain access eventually to voter registration data, but those breaches were suppressed until November 2021, when Iranian hackers were indicted, and March 2026 when Just the News obtained the first declassified documents acknowledging Beijing’s penetration of voter registration data.

[..] Intelligence community had disdain for the “vulgarian” Trump
In January 2021, the Intelligence Community analytic ombudsman — tasked with ensuring objectivity in intelligence products — conducted a review of the spy community’s handling of Russian and Chinese meddling efforts during the 2020 election. He concluded that intelligence analysts downplayed China’s actions because they had disdain for the “vulgarian” Trump and did not want to support the policies and priorities of the Trump administration toward China with which they “personally disagree,” Just the News reported last month.

Read more …

“..the Obama-Clinton-Kerry Iranian deal likely included a mechanism for return payments to U.S. officials following the release of billions in frozen Iranian asset funds and the loosening of sanctions “

• Spygate, Russiagate, IC Impeachment, Jack Smith Targeting and Lawfare (CTH)

In the next few days, much more about the overall investigative review underway in Florida will likely begin to surface. The review has been led by USAO Jason A. Reding Quiñones, a federal prosecutor for the Southern District of Florida. Quinones is now supported by Counsel to the AG, Joe diGenova. As with all investigations containing multiple players and actors, the first investigative information is extracted from testimony by those furthest away from the principals, yet closest to the granular details of the events being reviewed. The questioning then goes upstream, using information collected to assemble more specific questions as the principal players are approached.


The widest concentric circles are questioned first. Then, using the responses and investigative information from that circle, the questioning and inquiry goes to the next inner circle of participants. The information is assembled, and more pointed questions are then targeted to the next inner circle; the process continues until the core is questioned. Beginning with the end in mind, the biggest challenge is knowing what the correct questions are to ask of those who were closest to the corrupt activity (the outer circle). Background research then becomes critical. From those pointed questions you get answers. Then, next level of more specific questions get focus, and so on, and so on.

On March 20, 2026, James Comey was subpoenaed. Also remember, there are two distinct and different aspects to the overall conspiracy and timeline. nThere was surveillance of the 2016 Republican candidates by contractors working on behalf of the FBI who was institutionally collaborating with the Clinton campaign; that is known as “Spygate.” There was then an FBI operation to target and eliminate the threat represented by the 2016 GOP primary winner, Donald Trump; that is known as “Russiagate.” ‘Spygate’ and ‘Russiagate’ are two distinctly different corrupt pathways that eventually merged due to common interests.

The Mueller investigation, an extension of Crossfire Hurricane (Russiagate) was used by Obama-era politicians and internal government officials as a mechanism to block President Trump from executing a divergent foreign policy. The primary policy of focus was to protect the Obama era operations, including the Iran deal. Based on mounting evidence, a pattern in other international activities and U.S. participants, the Obama-Clinton-Kerry Iranian deal likely included a mechanism for return payments to U.S. officials following the release of billions in frozen Iranian asset funds and the loosening of sanctions – (ie. pallets of cash). Qatar was the mediator/broker.

However, it is speculated, perhaps being evidenced, that return payments to the Obama team contained a timing mechanism, and the quid-pro-quo payments were stopped after President Trump withdrew from the Iran deal and re-instituted sanctions. Thus, a much larger background context exists for why the totality of the U.S. government and Intelligence Community opposed President Donald Trump. Is it all about the money? Time will tell. Current events may not be coincidental.

Read more …

Where Marco has free rein.

• US, Cuban Regime Confirm ‘Secret’ Talks in Havana (Sarah Anderson)

On April 10, something happened in Cuba that hasn’t happened in a decade: a U.S. government plane touched down outside of Guantánamo Bay. We have confirmation of this from the Cuban regime via their official Communist Party propaganda newspaper, Granma. Several media outlets, including Fox News, CNN, and the Miami Herald, are also confirming it, based on statements from unnamed senior State Department officials. The State Department delegation — supposedly made up of assistant or deputy-level officials but not Marco Rubio himself — reportedly warned the Cuban regime that it has a very short window in which to make a deal, which supposedly includes releasing political prisoners and making major economic and political reforms.


“As President [Donald] Trump has stated, a new dawn for Cuba is coming very soon. The Cuban regime should stop playing games as direct talks are occurring. They have a small window to make a deal,” a State Department official told the Miami Herald. Some outlets are reporting that the talks included compensation for U.S. citizens and companies whose properties were confiscated after the 1959 revolution, allowing Elon Musk’s Starlink into Cuba (it’s currently illegal to use there), and discussion of the threat of foreign military and terrorist groups being allowed to operate freely in the island nation.

Allegedly, a separate meeting was held with Raúl Guillermo Rodríguez Castro, Raúl Castro’s grandson who goes by “Raulito” or “El Cangrejo” (the crab). While Rubio has never confirmed it that I’m aware of, some media outlets report that this is not the first time a team from the State Department has met with the younger Castro. And, of course, the Cuban regime tells a different story. Deputy Director General for U.S. Affairs Alejandro García del Toro told Granma that the meeting was “respectful and professional,” but denies that were any conditions, like political prisoners, or deadlines set by the United States. He also called it a “delicate matter” that is being handled “discreetly.”

“Eliminating the energy blockade against the country was a matter of top priority for our delegation. This act of economic coercion is an unjustified punishment for the entire Cuban population,” he said. The Miami Herald reports that a U.S. Navy MQ-4C Triton surveillance drone was flying near Havana during the meeting, though I’ve noted that happening on other days last week, as well. Basically, the regime is attempting to paint this as normal diplomacy between two countries. But we all know it’s not. Regardless of what was actually discussed, Trump has made it pretty clear that he’s got his eye on making a change in Cuba soon. Assuming all of this is true, I believe he and Rubio are testing them to determine what the next steps are once we’re not so distracted with Iran.

As I reported over the weekend, on Friday, while speaking at a Turning Point USA rally, Trump said, “And very soon, this great strength will also bring about a day 70 years in waiting — it’s called a new dawn in Cuba. We’re going to help them out with Cuba. We have a lot of great Cuban-Americans… that were brutally treated, whose families were killed, and now, watch what happens.” Later, while aboard Air Force One, a reporter asked him about anonymous reports that the Pentagon is ramping up plans for military action against Cuba. “Well, it depends on what your definition of military action is,” the president said, not giving much away.

Read more …

“.. a “constellation that every smartphone, every ship, every aircraft and every missile guidance system on Earth depends on. SpaceX might just call it “Tuesday.”

• The Space Launch Industry Is in Big Trouble… Except for You-Know-Who (Green)

“Early this morning, SpaceX launched the final GPS III satellite in our constellation, the most advanced GPS satellites ever built,” Space Force Gen. Chance Saltzman announced on Tuesday. It’s the finishing touch, as Chronos Intelligence explained, in a “constellation that every smartphone, every ship, every aircraft and every missile guidance system on Earth depends on. SpaceX might just call it “Tuesday.” Elon Musk’s launch company is about to raise tens of billions in the biggest-ever IPO on its way to easily top a $1 trillion valuation — and no wonder. This morning’s Space Force mission was its 48th Falcon 9 launch of the year (with a 100% success rate) and on track to roughly match last year’s record-breaking launch cadence.


Meanwhile, the company is making final preparations for the next flight test of the massive Starship rocket that will not only make the Falcon 9 obsolete, but every other rocket in the world. But I’m not here today to praise Musk or SpaceX. I just needed to set the stage to show you how the competition is performing. Or not. Because Blue Origin and United Launch Alliance (ULA) are having a rough time. Blue Origin whiffed a major New Glenn mission on Sunday, putting a $30 million AST SpaceMobile cellular satellite into the wrong orbit. Bluebird 7 is so low that it lacks enough onboard fuel to boost itself to its proper orbit, and will have to be de-orbited as a total loss. AST SpaceMobile shares were down sharply on Monday and have yet to fully recover.

BO touted the launch as a success — they did recover the booster, which is always impressive. And the booster was partially reused, which is even more impressive. But the mission was a failure, and celebrating that is not a good look. New Glenn is “likely grounded for four months” to investigate what went wrong with the upper stage, according to Next Big Future’s Brian Wang. Meanwhile, ULA’s Vulcan workhorse — well, sort of — is grounded following two Northrop Grumman solid rocket booster failures. Folks, space is too big and too important for the United States of America to have just one reliable launch provider. True story.

SpaceX successfully landed an orbital launch vehicle — the now-venerable Falcon 9 — in late 2015. Just 15 months later, in early 2017, the company successfully re-flew a “flight proven” Falcon 9. Here we are, more than nine years later, and Blue Origin is only now becoming the second company anywhere in the world to master reusable rockets. I watched those early SpaceX efforts in total amazement, and not just because one of my closest friends was an actual rocket surgeon at ULA. Ed was very good at his job and had the bonus checks for nailing satellite orbital placement to prove it. So I asked him one time why ULA wasn’t looking into reusability.

“We did look into it, we’re not idiots,” he said. “We’re good engineers. We could do it, but the economics didn’t work out.” Making a rocket reusable comes with tradeoffs, and ULA didn’t see enough demand for lift to make those compromises financially worthwhile. SpaceX created Starlink, which generates the demand and the cash flow to keep the company ahead of the competition. My friend was right that ULA had plenty of engineering talent, but the corporate management lacked imagination.

Because, as the country’s only major launch company for so long, ULA didn’t need imaginative management — they just needed the next NASA or Pentagon launch. And those were basically guaranteed at the slow-but-steady cadence that the company’s disposable Atlas and Delta rockets could deliver. For what it’s worth, not long after that conversation, ULA “voluntold” engineering graybeards like my friend — actually guys as young as their early 50s — to retire. I couldn’t tell you for sure that retiring the most experienced engineering talent is directly responsible for ULA’s current woes, but there’s more than enough room there for conjecture.

ULA’s busiest year was 2016 with a total of 16 launches. After that, the company began transitioning to the troubled Vulcan Centaur rocket, which launched just five times in 2025, and is currently “paused” while Northrop Grumman works out issues with the solid rocket boosters — after a decade of development and transition. SpaceX conducted 165 Falcon 9 launches in 2025 with a 100% success rate.

Read more …

“The incoming PM has pledged to stop Budapest’s withdrawal from the ICC, which has an active warrant for the Israeli leader..”

• Hungary’s Magyar Warns Netanyahu of Arrest (RT)

Hungary’s incoming prime minister, Peter Magyar, has said he would order the arrest of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu if he enters the country, marking a sharp reversal of predecessor Viktor Orban’s policy. Speaking at a press conference on Monday, Magyar said he would halt Hungary’s withdrawal from the International Criminal Court (ICC), initiated by Orban, and stressed that as a member state Budapest is legally obliged to enforce its arrest warrants. The ICC issued warrants for Netanyahu and former Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant in 2024 over alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza.


Israel claimed earlier this week that Magyar had spoken with Netanyahu and invited him to visit Hungary after his Tisza party’s landslide win on April 12. Asked to clarify, Magyar confirmed the call but downplayed the invitation, saying he had spoken with multiple leaders and broadly invited them to attend an upcoming anniversary of the 1956 popular uprising. He added that Netanyahu was informed Hungary would seek to remain in the ICC – and what that implies.

“I made it clear to the Israeli prime minister that we are not stepping back [from the ICC]. It is the Tisza government’s intention to stop this and for Hungary to remain a member,” Magyar said. “So I think I didn’t mislead anyone. If a country is a member of the ICC and if a person who is wanted enters that country’s territory, they must be taken into custody… I assume that every state and government leader is aware of these regulations.”

Magyar’s position marks a direct break with the stance of the outgoing government, which rejected the ICC’s jurisdiction and guaranteed Netanyahu safe passage. Orban dismissed the warrant as “brazen and cynical.” Last April, Budapest moved to withdraw from the ICC, arguing the court had become politicized. The country’s parliament approved the move in May, though under the Rome Statute withdrawal only takes effect a year after formal UN notification, currently set for June 2.

Magyar campaigned on repairing ties with Brussels and unlocking more than €16 billion ($19 billion) in EU funds for Hungary currently frozen due to rule-of-law and corruption allegations. Since his victory, Magyar has also pledged to reform state media, consider Eurozone membership, and end vetoes on Ukraine aid – though with caveats. He backed Hungary’s opt-out from the EU’s €90 billion loan package to Kiev, citing budget constraints, and said Ukraine’s EU accession within a decade is unrealistic.

At Monday’s press conference, he also urged Kiev to reopen the Russian Druzhba pipeline and said Hungary would not accept “any kind of blackmail” over energy supplies. He previously said Budapest would continue buying Russian energy, prioritize the cheapest oil, and signaled he would “pick up” if Russian President Vladimir Putin called.

Read more …

“Europe’s five largest countries — Germany, France, Spain, Italy, and Poland — all recorded BEV growth above 40% year-to-date.”

If the EVs were Peugeots and BMWs, easy peasy. But they’re Chinese and Tesla, I think.

• Europe EV Sales Jump 51% As Iran War Sends Gasoline Prices Soaring (Paraskova)

Registrations of battery electric vehicles (BEVs) in Europe’s key automotive markets surged by 51% in March as the Iran war pushed gasoline prices to multi-year highs, data published by research firm New Automotive and trade association E-Mobility Europe showed on Monday. More than 224,000 new electric passenger cars were registered in March alone across 15 key EU + EFTA markets, the analysis found. These sales accounted for as much as 22% of all new passenger car sales across the key European markets.


In another sign that expensive gasoline is pushing drivers to EVs, European Union member states registered more than 500,000 new electric cars in the first quarter of 2026, a surge of 33.5% compared to the same period last year, the data showed. New BEV registrations accelerated across every major EU market in the first quarter of 2026. Europe’s five largest countries — Germany, France, Spain, Italy, and Poland — all recorded BEV growth above 40% year-to-date. Europe’s biggest car market, Germany, saw a rebound in EV sales after the introduction of new incentives, with around one in four cars registered in March fully electric – a 42% year-to-date jump, according to the data. Italy’s BEV registrations soared by 65% year-to-date, boosting the EV market share to 8.6% in March from about 5% as of the end of 2025.

France continued to lead among large markets with a 28% BEV share in March, underpinned by its social leasing scheme, and nearly 50% year-to-date growth. Energy security was the catalyst for change in driver choice in recent weeks, analysts at New Automotive and E-Mobility Europe say. “At a time when energy security has moved to the top of the political agenda, the EV transition is delivering real and measurable resilience,” commented Ben Nelmes, CEO of New Automotive. “The pace of change we’re now seeing across major European markets — including countries like Italy and Poland that were slower to start — suggests the transition has entered a new phase.”

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/robertdunlap947/status/2046330432514355702?s=20 https://twitter.com/argosaki/status/2046475300960391255?s=20

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle August 7 2025

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


Theo van Doesburg Counter-Construction 1923

 

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

 

 

 

 

Rubio

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

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

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

coup

scott

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

Taibbi

 

 

 

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

Russia has confirmed the plans now.

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

Read more …

Pardoning Ghislaine would unleash a lot of anger.

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

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

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

Read more …

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

• Zelensky Rejects Any Limited Ceasefire With Russia (RT)

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

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

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

Read more …

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

• Zelensky Rating Slumps – Poll (RT)

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

• Top Trump Officials Will Discuss Epstein Strategy (CNN)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

The Russiagate Files contained Epstein files.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

• DNI Tulsi Gabbard Breaks Down Russiagate (CTH)

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

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

Read more …

It’ll take time to sweep all the agencies.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

• The Lucky Continent? (Rabo)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

 

 

 

 

5G

TX

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle August 6 2025

Aug 062025
 
 August 6, 2025  Posted by at 7:40 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,  44 Responses »


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


https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/1952454331296350587

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

lizard

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle August 3 2025

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


M.C. Escher Fluorescent sea 1933

 

• John Solomon Says, “We’re Working to Release More Information” (CTH)
• The Russia Hoax Is Simple. Dems Lied, Half The Country Believed Them (Marcus)
• US Congressman Demands Soros Testify Over Russiagate Plot Against Trump (RT)
• Gabbard: ‘This Is Why Trump’s Mandate Is Critical’ (Fleetwood)
• Declassified Docs Prove We All Were Censored to Protect Hillary (Taft)
• Jack Smith May Finally Learn What ‘No One Is Above the Law’ Means (Manney)
• Brennan and Clapper Just Hit the Panic Button (Margolis)
• Experts Were Wrong. The Economy’s Strong—But the Fed Won’t Budge (VDH)
• ‘No Defense Against’ Russia’s Oreshnik Missile – Ex-Pentagon Analyst (RT)
• 10 or 12 Days, Then What? (Larry Johnson)
• Are Senate Democrats Finally Going to Get the Payback They Deserve? (Margolis)
• Cleavage In a Bored Country (Ben Shapiro)
• Building Eurasia’s New Fortress (Ring)
• Everyone Should Leave EU – AfD Head Weidel On “Openly Corrupt” Brussels (RMX)

 

 

Putin

Poland
https://twitter.com/AdamMoczar/status/1951353798342877518

Candace

Big Price

Contribute
https://twitter.com/TRUMP_ARMY_/status/1951350275119202722

 

 

 

 

There are quite a few storylines that will have people thinking, for example; Russiagate -or Ukraine-, I’ve been reading about that for ages, boring! But we’re going to have some very long stories, with details slowly seeping through. The resistance, from media and politics, to revealing reality, is enormous. That’s why things leak out bit by bit only, it’s a tooth and nail fight. But it’s as Tulsi says once again that this is the only way, and it’s the only chance we get. Imagine what would be going on right now if Trump had not won, or survived for that matter: we would never know any of it. Better to find out day by day. Politiics. intelligence and media is a very strong force when put together.

 

 

“This is not ‘doomerism’, this is reality when you pull back from the ‘tick-tock’ grifting clickbait.”

• John Solomon Says, “We’re Working to Release More Information” (CTH)

First things first. It might not be the popular thing to accept, but it is increasingly clear there is no way to get to any form of accountability or legal exposure for Russiagate or the manufacturing of the Trump-Russia collusion narrative, anywhere near former President Barack Obama. The concentric circles of plausible deniability are just too extensive. Essentially, despite the evidence of the FBI participating in a manufactured investigation predicted on false pretenses, all now supported with hindsight evidence, the fact that key IC officials, namely CIA Director John Brennan, FBI Director James Comey and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, presented the illusion of credible concern, inoculates President Obama from scrutiny. As the Supreme Court noted, the President is protected from liability for “official acts” of his office.

Yes, we all know these officials knew it was a ruse; however, in 2016 the CIA and FBI were presenting the information to Obama and saying the investigative value was potentially plausible. As such, Obama would have been within his official duty to tell the IC officials to chase down the information (continue investigating it). Then, the January 5th, 2017, meeting documented by the infamous “by the book” Susan Rice memo, further inoculates President Obama for telling the IC officials to follow careful procedures as they continued investigating whether or not the Trump-Russia collusion was a factual concern. All of these elements lead to various tentacles of plausible deniability. No court is going to find criminal action within the decision-making, regardless of how ridiculous it may look in granular hindsight.

Are all the characters guilty of perpetrating a fraud for the expressed intent of a political narrative, yes. Are they criminally liable for it, extremely unlikely. The only criminal liability that appears visible is in the Mueller probe that came along in May 2017 to coverup the prior conduct. The Mueller/Weissmann special counsel perpetrated fraud in legal filings, lied to the FISA court, and manipulated evidence. As a result, we must ask ourselves what is the value in this ongoing reveal of information? Because they were willing participants in the overall operation, the MSM media will never admit their role or culpability in the ruse. That leaves an echo-chamber of alternate media combing through the granular releases and discovering the trail of evidence represented within the declassification.

Put all that alternative media together and you impact 25 to 40% of the public. The rest don’t really care, and/or dislike President Trump too much to really care that he was targeted by the Intelligence Community. This is not ‘doomerism’, this is reality when you pull back from the ‘tick-tock’ grifting clickbait. Worse still, it is clear the ‘tick-tock’ controlled release of information is in full swing again. When you hear John Solomon saying, “we are working to release more information,” it’s worth asking yourself who exactly is this “we” that Solomon is speaking of.


.
I’ve come to the conclusion the “we” consists of those within the clickbait industry who seek to make a living from the endless discussion. Solomon is not a reporter, he’s a participant. Here’s another example, courtesy of Sean Hannity and Senator Lindsey Graham.

Read more …

“To everyone involved in this hoax, the message must be clear: This is your legacy, your attempt to deceive the American people and destroy the man they elected to lead them. That is who you are..”

• The Russia Hoax Is Simple. Dems Lied, Half The Country Believed Them (Marcus)

The United States of America has now spent almost a decade embroiled in “Russiagate,” and its citizens have been bombarded from both sides with theories, names, and anonymous quotes. But it all really comes down to one thing: Democrats lied, and half the country believed them. In the 24 pages of never-before-seen declassified files released Thursday, we saw in cold, calculated black and white exactly how the Clinton campaign crafted the lie that Donald Trump was colluding with Russia to influence the 2016 election. One email allegedly shows Leonard Benardo, vice president of the George Soros backed Open Society Foundation, writing in July 2016 that, “Julie [sic] says it will be a long-term affair to demonize Putin and Trump,” adding “Now it is good for a post-convention bounce. Later the FBI will put more oil into the fire.”

Julie is Julianne Smith, then a foreign policy adviser to the Hillary Clinton campaign. You know who the FBI is. Just two days later, Bernado would allegedly send another email. “HRC approved Julia’s idea about Trump and Russian hackers hampering U.S. elections,” it read. “That should distract people from her own missing email, especially if the affair goes to the Olympic level.” Benardo would also allegedly write, and this is key, “The point is making the Russian play a U.S. domestic issue,” adding, “In absence of direct evidence, Crowdstrike and ThreatConnect will supply the media…”

This all leads to a gem in the annex to John Durham’s Russia hoax probe, released Thursday, which concluded, “During the first stage of the campaign, due to lack of direct evidence, it was decided to disseminate the necessary information through the FBI-affiliated ‘attic-based’ technical structures that are involved in cybersecurity…from where the information would then be disseminated through leading US publications.” The Clinton campaign knew all too well that their lackeys in the media would eat up this half-baked nonsense with a spoon, and probably win awards for it, which is exactly what happened. What the media wasn’t told at the time was that field officers in the CIA objected to the lies and were run over because, according to their then-Director John Brennan “it rings true.”

This ludicrous legal standard of “rings true,” was used to convince the FISA court to renew warrants on Trump officials, which was not only a free federal law enforcement fishing expedition, but created smoke and the appearance of fire.In December of 2016, in the dying days of the Barack Obama administration, intel reports were massaged to once again create the illusion that Trump was a traitor who became president only through Russian assistance.n Thus was launched Robert Mueller’s investigation, which would last for years at a cost of more than $30 million, but ultimately exonerate Trump. Perhaps worst of all, in the midst of this Kafkaesque trial by media and secret courts, people’s lives were destroyed, crushed by false allegations, legal bills and a process that was the punishment.

One of them is Michael Caputo, a long-time member of Trump’s orbit who I talked to on Friday. “It is precious little comfort knowing we were right, we need accountability, but even accountability doesn’t feed the bulldog,” he told me, which was to say the damage to him and his family cannot be undone. Accountability comes in many forms. Caputo may never get the perp walks by former Democrat officials that he understandably desires, but this dastardly lie concocted by Democrats to smear Trump and maintain power has at least been been exposed. According to a Suffolk poll in December of 2018, “Forty-six percent are convinced that there was collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians, while 29 percent said there was no such coordination, and 19 percent weren’t sure.”

Every serious person, whether Democrat or Republican, now admits that this simply was not true. What they must also then admit is that half of Americans believed the lie only because Democrats told it so deceitfully. It was Walter Scott who wrote in his 1808 poem ‘Marmion’, “What a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive.” But in this case, Democrats wanted the web, a web so dense with so many loose ends and round corners that the truth would be forever hidden. It was Shakespeare who wrote “the truth will out,” and so it has come out, albeit not before shaking a country to its core and crushing innocent lives.

Whatever else comes from the current investigation of Russiagate, one thing is now clear, ready to be etched in the stone of history: The Democrats invented the Russian collusion lie, they did it intentionally, and they suckered their voters into buying it. To everyone involved in this hoax, the message must be clear: This is your legacy, your attempt to deceive the American people and destroy the man they elected to lead them. That is who you are.

Read more …

“Rep. Burchett (R-Tennessee) urged the panel to call Soros and Benardo to a public hearing and to subpoena them if they refuse to appear voluntarily.”

• US Congressman Demands Soros Testify Over Russiagate Plot Against Trump (RT)

US Representative Tim Burchett has formally requested that billionaire financier George Soros and his associate Leonard Benardo, senior vice president at the Open Society Foundations (OSF), testify before Congress regarding their alleged involvement in the 2016 “Russiagate” affair targeting Donald Trump. In a letter sent Friday to House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Kentucky), Rep. Burchett (R-Tennessee) urged the panel to call Soros and Benardo to a public hearing and to subpoena them if they refuse to appear voluntarily. The request follows the declassification of documents by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and the Senate Judiciary Committee, which reportedly link Soros’s OSF to a broader effort to discredit Trump’s presidential campaign and derail his first term in office.

“As you know, DNI Tulsi Gabbard recently declassified evidence of a conspiracy by former President Obama, Hillary Clinton, and the national security apparatus to manufacture and politicize intelligence to subvert President Trump and the will of the American people,” Burchett wrote. “Included in this evidence is a concerning email allegedly from Leonard Benardo… plotting to discredit the incoming Trump Administration.” Burchett emphasized the OSF’s ongoing influence in US elections and said the American public deserves answers. “Should they refuse the invitation, I encourage you to use subpoena powers. Americans deserve answers into the subversion of our institutions by malicious actors,” he added.

The newly declassified 29-page annex to Special Counsel John Durham’s 2023 report, released this week by the Senate Judiciary Committee, alleges that the Clinton campaign, with help from OSF-linked figures, concocted the narrative of Russian interference to damage Trump politically. Emails attributed to Benardo reportedly detail efforts to disseminate unverified claims through FBI-adjacent tech firms like CrowdStrike and various media outlets. The FBI launched Crossfire Hurricane, its Trump-Russia probe, despite allegedly having obtained credible intelligence about the plot.

Critics argue that the agency’s failure to properly scrutinize intelligence pointing to a politically motivated smear campaign fueled years of disinformation, political polarization, and unjustified sanctions against Moscow. President Trump responded Friday by calling the affair “the biggest scandal in American history,” accusing the Obama administration of treason and vowing accountability. Moscow, for its part, has long denied meddling in the 2016 election and insists the Russiagate narrative was a fabricated pretext for confrontation.

Read more …

“Mockingbird Reloaded”

“Government Propaganda Is Now a Domestic Industry”

“The American people are no longer just the audience of government propaganda. They’re the enemy.”

• Gabbard: ‘This Is Why Trump’s Mandate Is Critical’ (Fleetwood)

The CIA’s infamous Cold War propaganda and psychological operation (PSYOP) program never died—it just turned inward. The question isn’t whether the government is manipulating Americans, but how they’re doing it right now—through intelligence leaks, media collusion, psychological tactics, and taxpayer-funded propaganda. That was the warning from U.S. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard during a searing July 31 interview, where she confirmed that intelligence insiders are actively using corporate media to manipulate the American people and sabotage President Donald Trump’s agenda—echoing the tactics of ‘Operation Mockingbird.’ Every major news organization or its parent companies, from FOX News to CNN, are owned by globalist-aligned asset managers like BlackRock, an offical partner of the anti-American-sovereignty World Economic Forum (WEF).

“There are people within the intelligence community who believe that their will is more important than the will of the American people,” Gabbard told conservative host Benny Johnson. “[They] will weaponize intelligence by leaking it to their friends within the mainstream media with the intent of undermining President Trump’s agenda.” Once a covert CIA program used to plant propaganda in foreign and domestic media, Operation Mockingbird infiltrated major U.S. newsrooms throughout the 1950s–1970s. It was exposed during the Church Committee hearings, where Congress revealed that the agency maintained relationships with hundreds of journalists to shape public perception. Today, Gabbard says, that same playbook is being deployed against Americans.

Only now, it’s fully digital, algorithmic, and taxpayer-funded. “They are subverting the will of the people and therefore undermining the Constitution,” Gabbard warned. Gabbard’s warning comes as Congress continues to uncover a parallel propaganda apparatus inside U.S. health agencies. A damning House Energy and Commerce Committee report released in October 2024 found that the Biden Administration spent $900 million in taxpayer funds on a COVID-19 propaganda campaign that intentionally misled the public. “The Biden-Harris administration caused Americans to lose trust in the public health system,” said Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), accusing the CDC and NIH of using ads containing “erroneous or unproven information.”

The report revealed that: • The CDC exaggerated the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines beyond FDA authorization. • Messaging about mask effectiveness and COVID risk to children was “deeply flawed.” • Federal funds went to Big Tech companies to “track and monitor Americans,” prompting calls for stronger data privacy protections. Representative Morgan Griffith (R-VA) slammed the administration’s “Stop the Spread” campaign as scientifically baseless, saying it “misled the American public” and triggered a broader collapse in trust across all vaccine programs. “American trust in the CDC is at an all-time low,” said Subcommittee Chair Brett Guthrie (R-KY). Further validating Gabbard’s claims, behavioral scientists who advised governments during the COVID crisis have since admitted to weaponizing fear to coerce compliance—describing their actions as “unethical,” “dystopian,” and “totalitarian.”

Members of the UK’s ‘Scientific Pandemic Influenza Group on Behaviour’ (SPI-B), who advised the government’s COVID response, revealed that officials deliberately ramped up fear to push lockdowns the public might otherwise reject. “Clearly, using fear as a means of control is not ethical. Using fear smacks of totalitarianism. It’s not an ethical stance for any modern government,” said SPI-B psychologist Gavin Morgan. “[P]sychologists didn’t seem to notice when it stopped being altruistic and became manipulative. They have too much power and it intoxicates them,” another member confessed. One warned that “people use the pandemic to grab power and drive through things that wouldn’t happen otherwise… We have to be very careful about the authoritarianism that is creeping in.”

Gabbard said her fight is not just about cleaning up rogue intelligence operators—it’s about reversing the normalization of psychological warfare on the American public. “To be able to turn the light on in places that have been dark for far too long, expose the truth, and drive accountability—that’s the only way we can actually shift this,” she said. She affirmed that Trump is fully aware of the deep-state sabotage being conducted through the media. “President Trump is enacting the very thing he promised the American people he would do in this election.”

The Church Committee once warned that Mockingbird undermined the very idea of a free press.The playbook didn’t end, it just upgraded.Today’s propaganda apparatus now includes:
• Leaked narratives from intel to legacy media
• AI-powered censorship tools on social platforms
• CDC-funded influencer campaigns targeting youth
• Federal surveillance partnerships with tech giants
• Coerced public health compliance through fear psychology

The same government that once planted editorials in The Washington Post now quietly curates your news feed, flags dissent as misinformation, and suppresses debate under the guise of “public health.” Tulsi Gabbard’s confirmation is historic: the top U.S. intelligence official has publicly stated that agencies under her own leadership are using media to manipulate Americans. Operation Mockingbird didn’t end. It simply changed targets. The American people are no longer just the audience of government propaganda. They’re the enemy.

Read more …

“..the intelligence community’s [fake] new report, which ODNI and CIA clearly held back until the very moment Trump was certified President so his very first hours begin with him immediately tarred as illegitimate and possibly criminal.”

• Declassified Docs Prove We All Were Censored to Protect Hillary (Taft)

It’s hard to fathom the evil that led to creating fake intelligence to frame then-presidential candidate Donald Trump as a Russian spy and traitor to his country. We’ve seen in recently declassified documents that Hillary Clinton didn’t do this alone. She commanded dozens, if not hundreds, of willing participants, including the George Soros foundation, President Barack Obama, the FBI, the weaponized intelligence agencies, and others, to bring Donald to his knees. Buried deep in the latest tranche of declassified documents called the Durham annex report, however, a deep state hawk has found something that is equally or more evil than changing intelligence to manipulate one election’s outcome. They created a way to take over elections in perpetuity. Mike Benz, a former State Department official in the Trump 45 administration who now runs the Foundation for Freedom Online, found what is tantamount to the Rosetta stone for the Censorship Industrial Complex.

And it’s right here: “The point is making the Russian play a U.S. domestic issue. Say something like a critical infrastructure threat for the election to feel menace [sic] since both POTUS and VPOTUS have acknowledged the fact [that] IC would speed up searching for evidence that is regrettably still unavailable.” In a series of posts on X, Benz laid out why this sentence from an email from a Soros Open Society Eurasian official told the story of how they planned to get Trump even after they’d lost the election. They magic’d up a system whereby elections would now become “critical infrastructure” run by the feds.

https://twitter.com/MikeBenzCyber/status/1951049741950718158?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1951049741950718158%7Ctwgr%5E5538e44395c7c09bc9d7884adfc02ddedf4f96f8%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fpjmedia.com%2Fvictoria-taft%2F2025%2F08%2F01%2Fand-there-it-was-one-sentence-in-declassified-docs-proves-we-all-were-censored-to-protect-hillary-n4942320

“It is no coincidence both the cooked crooked intelligence community report launching Russiagate and the DHS federal takeover of elections as “critical infrastructure” (citing the same-day Russiagate intelligence assessment) BOTH happened on January 6, 2017. That was the SAME day Democrats’ hail mary last-ditch plot to stop Trump’s election certification failed, and Trump’s win was certified. With no options left to stop Trump’s presidency, they didn’t even wait a day to launch what appeared to be their Plan B: if Trump can’t be stopped from becoming President, immediately hobble his presidency that same day the presidency was inevitable.”

When their efforts to halt the certification of the election on Jan. 6, 2017, didn’t work, they went to Plan B, “tak[ing] over state-level control of voting systems.” “And in fact,” he wrote, “that is exactly the time sequence of how it played out on January 6, 2017.” First, at 1:41pm, Congress certified Trump’s election win. Then, with Trump’s win now final and no hope left for the intelligence community to obstruct it, [T]hen suddenly, magically, the entire joint US intelligence community assessment drops just 4 hours later, with a report directly insinuating Trump’s win was illegitimate because Russia intervened to help Trump win.

Then, suddenly, magically, DHS just 30 minutes after that swoops in with a permanent unilateral federal designation that it has taken over state-level control of voting systems — which we’d had in this country for 230 years — citing the intelligence community’s [fake] new report, which ODNI and CIA clearly held back until the very moment Trump was certified President so his very first hours begin with him immediately tarred as illegitimate and possibly criminal.

Benz says that the second- and third-order effects of this decision to change the rules and declare elections to be a “critical infrastructure” gave the deep state the predicate to federalize our elections for the first time since 1789. But it also did something else. In the name of keeping this “critical infrastructure” sacrosanct, it gave the ones and zeros embedded in the deep state carte blanche to censor anyone who had an opinion that questioned elections “When DHS created their Cyber Security and Infrastructure Security Agency—we have ‘security’ in our name twice because we care so much about security—OK now we can control elections and ‘cyber’ in their name gave them a predicate to go after tweets and Facebook posts, and YouTube videos and TikTok videos and Reddit posts. It gave them the legal predicate to completely burn the U.S. Constitution.”

We at PJ Media and other conservative outlets felt the effects of this censorship. Suddenly, it was as if Lois Lerner were in charge of speech. People, mostly conservatives, were booted from Twitter 1.0. YouTube became a minefield of speech dragnets and censorship police. One social media company was shut down because posts by users were deemed dangerous. Suddenly, the news was sanitized to avoid getting canceled. The FBI began weekly meetings with Twitter and kept close tabs on other social media such as Facebook. Misinformation and disinformation police, called “fact checkers,” were deployed to censor speech. Entire university programs were set up to offer disinformation degrees. Universities began getting fat grants to come up with ways to creatively censor words, phrases, and stories that the woke mob refused to abide by.

The deep state and intelligence communities used the media to “prebunk” stories they knew would reverberate through political circles before the election, such as the Hunter Biden laptop story. Hillary Clinton can complain all she wants about 2016 being a stolen election, and the next federal election for president occurred in 2020, the one that the new cyber “expert” CISA director claimed was the “safest” one in U.S. history… because the feds were in charge. He wrote that the real January 6 insurrection occurred in 2017 when the deep state rigged the rules to depict Trump, as Hillary called him, an “illegitimate president.” And did it ever. That insurance policy paid dividends. Democrats arranged a special counsel accusing Trump of being a spy, the Ukraine hoax, two impeachments, and a partridge in a pear tree. It’s a miracle Donald Trump got anything done. That was the plan.

Read more …

“..if Smith used his badge to tip the scales, it isn’t a partisan scandal, it’s a constitutional one.”

• Jack Smith May Finally Learn What ‘No One Is Above the Law’ Means (Manney)

The left found and crowned their legal avenger: Jack Smith, their remedy in very fine suits to four years of Trump. In secret clubhouse meetings above their parents’ garage, the left whispered reverently about Smith’s independence, hailed his stoicism, and grasped him as a firewall between democracy and destruction. The right, however, looked at things differently. They saw Smith as a dogged, smirking prosecutor with a habit of filing charges just before primaries and playing a game of chicken with due process. Both sides, however, agreed on one thing: he was relentless. Now, that same man finds himself under federal investigation for potentially violating the Hatch Act, a statute meant to prevent law enforcement from becoming political tools.

Sen. Tom Cotton, who chairs the Senate Intelligence Committee, accused Smith of seeking to impact the 2024 election in his capacity as special counsel under the Biden-led Justice Department in a letter to the acting head of the Office of Special Counsel, Jamieson Greer, first obtained by Fox News Digital. “As the Office of the Special Counsel is tasked with ensuring federal employees aren’t conducting partisan political activity under the guise of their federal employment, you’re well situated to determine whether Smith broke the law,” the Arkansas Republican wrote. “Many of Smith’s legal actions seem to have no rationale except for an attempt to affect the 2024 election results – actions that would violate federal law,” he continued. That cringeworthy sound we’re not hearing? It’s the awkward silence of a media class that suddenly found itself unsure how to eulogize its white knight without tarnishing the cause.

If you forgot, here’s a quick review of the Hatch Act. This act was created to prohibit executive branch officials, such as a special counsel, from using their authority to influence elections. In this case, Jack Smith didn’t simply toe the line; he ran past it with banners flying. According to Sen. Tom Cotton, Smith timed court filings, manipulated trial calendars, and played strategic legal chess just as the 2024 campaign heated up. Smith did his bloody best to jam President Trump into a courtroom the day before Super Tuesday. If that’s not election interference, what is? The Office of Special Counsel’s Hatch Act Unit has confirmed they’re investigating Smith! OMG! Let’s examine the sequence. Smith dropped the documents case right after Trump won; he asked for appeals to be paused just as political winds shifted, and his final report was buried like bad leftovers, with Volume Two indefinitely sealed.

People defending Smith are calling this a legal strategy. But to most Americans, it appears to be weaponized prosecution. You don’t have to be a lawyer, or even a devotee of “Law & Order,” to understand when a ref tosses flags only when one team is on offense. We only have to watch long enough to see the pattern. Each time Trump’s team looked into Smith’s motivations, the same robotic chorus emerged, “No one is above the law!” Except now, the left treats that mantra as if it were a rhetorical one-way street. If you want that phrase to mean anything, then apply it when the hammer swings in the other direction. When one of your own wears the badge: Apply it! If Jack Smith was truly one of the neutral professionals they claimed he was, not only should he welcome the investigations, but he should demand them.

I hate to be the one to burst your bubble, but Jack Smith wasn’t defending democracy. He was playing defense for a political establishment that couldn’t stomach losing to Trump. Twice. Smith’s job wasn’t about preserving the rule of law; it was about wrapping it in legalese, delivering it on cue, and timing it for maximum political damage, which was the legal equivalent of leaking a scandal the night before the election.Smith helped turn the DOJ into nothing but a smirking caricature, one that flinched when Hillary bleached servers and looked the other way when Hunter forgot about his illegal purchase of a gun, and suddenly found courage when Trump appeared on the docket.And now, shockingly, Smith is the story. Not his targets, but him.

We need to make one thing perfectly clear: Smith and his team were already on life support when their case collapsed in early 2025. Remember what was happening: Trump had just won the presidency, the Department of Justice had forbidden prosecuting a sitting president, and the classified documents case had fallen completely apart. When Smith finally filed his final report, it vanished behind a redacted curtain. Unfortunately for Jack Smith, Senator Tom Cotton had not forgotten. And the OSC, if it had any spine remaining, shouldn’t either. Because, quite simply, if Smith used his badge to tip the scales, it isn’t a partisan scandal, it’s a constitutional one.

Read more …

“Americans have seen behind the curtain, and no amount of op-ed space in The New York Times is going to let Brennan and Clapper gaslight the public into believing their actions were anything but politically motivated.”

• Brennan and Clapper Just Hit the Panic Button (Margolis)

With the Deep State’s lies about the Russia collusion hoax finally unraveling, panic is setting in, and some of the highest-ranking figures from the Obama administration, including Barack Obama himself, are now squarely in the Justice Department’s crosshairs. Two of the operation’s chief architects, former CIA Director John Brennan and former DNI James Clapper, just tried a last-ditch reputational rehab via a New York Times op-ed. But instead of saving face, they only reminded Americans why trust in the so-called “intelligence community” has collapsed to historic lows. Incredibly, their main defense against charges of politicizing intelligence was to point to the very thing they politicized: the January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment.

They cited it like gospel, as if repeating it enough times would erase the growing mountain of evidence that it was crafted under political pressure, built on cherry-picked intel, and propped up by the now-discredited Steele dossier. It’s the equivalent of using a forged check to prove you’re not guilty of fraud. According to Brennan and Clapper, the ICA was beyond reproach simply because it claimed that Vladimir Putin had a “clear preference” for Donald Trump and ran a multi-pronged operation to help him win via hacked emails, social media posts, and internet trolls. But what they left out, conveniently, is that they helped write the script and bullied analysts into signing off on it.

They also wave around the name of special counsel John Durham like a magic shield, claiming that he “found no evidence of an Obama administration conspiracy.” Translation: nothing to see here, move along; just ignore the political pressure, the manipulated assessments, the hidden sourcing, and the whistleblower now confirming everything conservatives have said for years. The special counsel John Durham, who was appointed during Mr. Trump’s first term to investigate how the Russia probe was conducted, similarly found no evidence of an Obama administration conspiracy against Mr. Trump. But he affirmed the findings of the special counsel Robert Mueller, who conducted a separate investigation into the allegations, which found ample evidence of Russian interference in the election.

More recently, the C.I.A.’s Mr. Ratcliffe ordered yet another review of the 2017 assessment, which determined that its “level of analytic rigor exceeded that of most [intelligence] assessments.” Their attempted defense, however, falls apart upon review of the evidence. The newly declassified Durham annex reveals that the Clinton campaign coordinated with George Soros’s Open Society Foundation to push the Trump-Russia collusion hoax during the 2016 election. Internal emails show Clinton approved a plan to link Trump to Russian hackers to distract from her own scandals, with help from Soros-connected operatives and DNC officials. They used cybersecurity firms like CrowdStrike to plant the narrative in the media, hoping the FBI would amplify it. Which, of course, they did.

Americans have seen behind the curtain, and no amount of op-ed space in The New York Times is going to let Brennan and Clapper gaslight the public into believing their actions were anything but politically motivated. The newly released documents confirm what many suspected all along: the Obama administration was unhappy that the original intel downplayed Russia’s impact in 2016, so it ordered up the infamous January 2017 ICA, laced it with Steele dossier garbage, and forced it through the system. Thanks to courageous whistleblowers, we now know that Brennan and his inner circle strong-armed analysts into backing conclusions that they didn’t actually support. There was pushback, and for good reason: Everyone knew the dossier was pure fiction, a political hit job dressed up as intelligence. Brennan and Clapper see what’s coming. With the walls closing in, they’re not offering clarity; they’re trying to cover their backsides.

Read more …

Victor Davis Hanson. Jay Powell is choking on his own ‘logic’.

• Experts Were Wrong. The Economy’s Strong—But the Fed Won’t Budge (VDH)

I’d like to talk about the economy here at the beginning of August. We’ve just finished July. We have some of the July reports, but mostly, they’re still from June. If you look at the three or four main categories that adjudicate the health or the malady of an economy, they’re pretty good. GDP came in at 3.0. That was not predicted to be that high. The inflation rate may have just come out for July. There are different reports, but it’s about 2.7%. It was 2.6% in May. January was 3.0%. For the year, it’s about 2.4%. So, inflation is still tolerable. It’s not growing—an annualized rate at 2.4%. So, you have a good GDP, you have a good inflation rate, you have a good jobs report. We’re at about 4.1% unemployment in the month of June. We picked up 150,000 new jobs—that wasn’t predicted.

As far as money coming into the Treasury and going out, we had a historical May. We’ll wait and see what June and July are like, but we actually had more money coming into the Treasury than the government spent. I want to gauge the reaction to this good news. Of course, we expect the Left to discount it. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said that these figures are all bogus, even though they’re from non-administration sources, government bureaucracies. We also had a member of Congress come on and say that Donald Trump fudged them. On the GDP, we had The Wall Street Journal say, that’s just because GDP is measured also by imports and exports, and we had fewer imports and more exports. But isn’t that good? But they said that was an aberration.

So, we’ve had people attack this. Most of the people said, as far as more money coming in than going out, that’s only because of May, and it will never be true again. Well, we’ve had Mays in 2024 or 2023, all the way back to 2017, the first year of the Trump administration. This was the only one in which we had more money coming in—a surplus. Then we get to the question of Jerome Powell. He’s the head of the Federal Reserve. Usually, the Fed cuts rates when they’re worried about political and economic instability, and that means, basically, a recession. Now, remember that The Wall Street Journal, New York Times, Washington Post, and our main media organs all told us in May when Donald Trump was talking about “art of the deal” tariffs, “I’m gonna announce a high tariff, then negotiate down to 10 or 15%,” which is precisely what he did.

But nevertheless, they said at the beginning of August, midsummer, we were going to have high inflation or stagflation, bad job growth, static GDP, and a trade war along with a Wall Street collapse. Basically, a recession. Well, Wall Street stock prices are at historical highs. Every one of those predictions was wrong. So, if they were wrong and the economy is not booming but strong, why would Powell keep interest rates at that 4.5% fed rate that translates into almost over 6% and near 7% 30-year mortgages? After all, the Fed is supposed to lower rates when we have recession. With all this recessionary talk, you thought that he would lower rates. Now, he says he’s looking at the economy and he’s not lowering rates because he doesn’t yet see a recession?

But he’s been told that he was worried about the economy. If he’s worried about a trade war and tariffs and soft job growth—which was predicted but didn’t happen—why doesn’t he lower interest rates? And the fact is, that if you look at the interest rates that he did cut right before the 2024 election and his all-over-the-map attitude toward interest rates today, there is no logic. So, now he’s rejected the earlier prognosis that we were in a recession. It makes no sense. Why is this important? Why is this important when the Washington Post says that the numbers are rigged or we’re really not as strong as we think we are with GDP, or Powell can’t be consistent and adjudicate rates going up or down based on recession or boom?

We’re paying $3 billion a day in interest. A day. Our defense budget costs less—that trillion-dollar defense budget—than the interest payments, per year. Donald Trump is trying to cut taxes and deregulate and grow the economy without increasing the deficit he inherited at about $2 trillion. He thinks that eventually, an expanded economy will bring in new revenue—sort of supply-side economics—but in the short-term, he does not want to grow that deficit by giving tax cuts. So, what is he doing? He thinks the tariffs will bring in—without hurting GDP here or abroad—about a third of a trillion dollars. He thinks if he can decrease the interest rate by a point or a point and a half, he might get another third of a trillion—maybe cut the interest cost by $1 billion a day down to $2 billion from $3 billion. So, you’re about one-third of the way to cut the deficit. That’s pretty good when you had tax cuts.

That won’t happen if the interest rates stay high and the economy stays solid and doesn’t give you any reason or worry over an inflationary spiral, which it hasn’t so far. Bottom line, things are going very well. All of the experts were wrong, and yet the experts do not admit they were wrong. They say, “We were wrong,” privately, “but we’re going to be proved right because either we hope or we expect the economy to do poorly.” My guess is, even if the economy cools down and does poorly, Powell will not cut interest rates. He has a personal stake in this. He feels aggrieved. He feels he has to be vindicated and he’s stubborn and he will not show the same flexibility he did during the campaign year 2024.

Read more …

US has no hypersonics, and no defense against the ones Russia has. Where they just started mass producing Oreshniks.

• ‘No Defense Against’ Russia’s Oreshnik Missile – Ex-Pentagon Analyst (RT)

Neither Ukraine nor its Western backers have any means to counter Russia’s newly deployed intermediate-range Oreshnik missile, Michael Maloof, a former senior Pentagon security analyst, told RT in an interview on Friday. Maloof noted that the Oreshnik could “easily shift the balance of power overwhelmingly in favor” of Russia in any conflict, including the ongoing hostilities with Ukraine. “Having a hypersonic [missile] for which there’s no defense currently… is astonishing. It absolutely alters that balance of power dramatically, for which the Ukrainians have no defense,” he said. He noted that while the US is working to adapt missile defense systems such as THAAD to counter hypersonic threats, these programs remain under development.

“There’s no operational ability at this point to deal with a hypersonic missile,” Maloof said, adding that the Oreshnik could reach its targets within mere minutes. The former analyst added that the missile also travels at a speed of over 7,000 miles (11,000km) an hour. “There’s no defense against that,” he said. The missile system, Maloof stated, has already been tested successfully in Ukraine in battlefield conditions. He was referring to a strike on Ukraine’s Yuzhmash military industrial facility in the city of Dnepr in November 2024. Russian President Vladimir Putin said afterward that the missile’s warheads flew at speeds exceeding Mach 10 and could not be intercepted by existing air defenses.

The missile could also carry conventional and nuclear payloads and travel up to several thousand kilometers. According to Putin, the Oreshnik strike on Ukraine was a response to the country’s decision to use Western-supplied long-range missiles for attacks deep into Russia. On Friday, the Russian president said that the first serially produced Oreshnik missile system had entered service with the armed forces. He also noted that the question of supplying the weapons to Belarus, Russia’s key ally, will likely be resolved by the end of the year.

Read more …

“Russian troops are pushing north in Zaporhyzhia, moving south through Sumy and Kharkiv, and advancing to the west, having already taken territory in Dniepropetrovsk. No pressure from Washington or Europe will alter this reality.”

• 10 or 12 Days, Then What? (Larry Johnson)

Donald Trump made another move in his feckless game of global checkers today in Scotland, with the announcement that he is giving Russia a new, much shorter deadline of ten days to end the war in Ukraine. Trump warned that if President Vladimir Putin does not reach a deal by around August 7–9, the US will impose new sanctions and “severe tariffs” on Russia and countries supporting its war effort. Trump’s new deadline elicited a collective yawn in Moscow. Since the start of the Special Military Operation (SMO), trade between the US and Russia has shrunk dramatically. In 2021, US exports to Russia totaled approximately $6.4 billion and US imports from Russia totaled about $29.7 billion. This resulted in a US trade deficit with Russia of about $23.3 billion for that year. In 2024, total trade in goods between the United States and Russia declined sharply due to ongoing sanctions, war-related restrictions, and other political measures.

US exports to Russia in 2024: bApproximately $526 million, marking a decrease of over 12% compared to 2023. Major U.S. exports included medical/technical equipment, pharmaceuticals, machinery, and some food and chemical products. U.S. imports from Russia in 2024: About $3.0–$3.27 billion, down more than 34% compared to 2023 and down over 75% from pre-war levels in 2021–2022. Key Russian exports to the U.S. were fertilizers (about $1.3 billion), precious metals (about $878 million), and inorganic chemicals (about $683 million). Energy imports have almost entirely ceased. Trump’s threat of new sanctions is just a blowhard bloviating… Ending shipments of fertilizers and precious metals is not going to hurt the Russian economy one bit. Thanks to the sanctions Biden levied in 2022, Russia’s economy grew to be the fourth largest in the world as measured by purchasing power parity.

Western propaganda that the Russian economy is failing–citing current growth of 1.4%–ignores the fiscal policies that the Russian central bank put in place in 2024 to cool inflation. But those measures were only temporary, with the central bank announcing a two percent cut in interest rates late last week. That means that Trump, if he is serious, will impose bone-crunching tariffs on China and India. Both countries appear unfazed by Trump’s bullying bluster. China in particular holds some very strong cards… Rare-earth minerals desperately needed by the US military industrial complex. I think this will be another Trump nothing-burger.

So why did Trump whittle down the deadline? One possible explanation concerns the rapid deterioration of the military situation for Ukraine. Russia is making rapid advances all along the line of contact and even Ukrainian media and social media outlets are expressing alarm. Is that what sparked Trump’s decision to shorten the time for Russia to agree to a ceasefire? Fifty day or 12 days, it does not matter. Trump has no leverage to compel Russia to agree to the ceasefire that the US and Europe want to be imposed. Russia is going to continue with its offensive and will take more territory in the coming weeks. Russian troops are pushing north in Zaporhyzhia, moving south through Sumy and Kharkiv, and advancing to the west, having already taken territory in Dniepropetrovsk. No pressure from Washington or Europe will alter this reality.

Read more …

“Democrats aren’t just dragging their feet—they’re torching decades of Senate norms in a blatant attempt to kneecap Trump’s presidency. They don’t care about tradition. They care about power.”

• Are Senate Democrats Finally Going to Get the Payback They Deserve? (Margolis)

After weeks of stonewalling from Democrats, the GOP is demanding action on dozens of President Trump’s pending nominees—and they’re signaling they’re ready to play hardball if they don’t get it. With the Senate set to leave town for a long recess, Republicans say enough is enough. Emerging from a closed-door lunch on Saturday, Republican senators made it clear they want the nomination backlog resolved by the end of the day. If Democrats won’t cooperate, they’re prepared to force the issue. “The immediate concern right now is can we figure something out,” Majority Leader John Thune told reporters. “If we can’t, then we will have to resort to other options, and we’ve got a lot of support for doing that.”

Translation? Republicans are done playing games. They’re ready to blow up Senate procedure if that’s what it takes to break the Democrat blockade on Trump’s nominees. Since January, not a single nominee has been confirmed by voice vote or unanimous consent—a complete break from tradition. As Sen. Tom Cotton highlighted, 57% of Biden’s nominees got in without opposition. Even Trump’s first term saw 65% sail through. This time? Zero. Democrats are obstructing for the sake of “resisting” Trump—and the GOP’s finally had enough. This isn’t just gridlock—it’s deliberate sabotage. What we’re witnessing now is an unprecedented campaign of partisan obstruction. Democrats aren’t just dragging their feet—they’re torching decades of Senate norms in a blatant attempt to kneecap Trump’s presidency. They don’t care about tradition. They care about power.

Republicans are running out of patience—and fast. According to Politico, GOP senators are once again eyeing the so-called “nuclear option,” as Democrats continue to grind Trump’s nominees to a halt. While leadership originally expected any rules fight to come later in the fall, frustrations have boiled over as Republicans remain stuck in Washington with no resolution in sight. “We prefer to strike a deal,” Sen. Markwayne Mullin said, but he added that if Democrats won’t budge, Republicans are prepared to change the rules. Naturally, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer defended the Democrats’ obstruction, accusing Trump’s nominees of being uniquely “flawed” and “unqualified”—a laughable claim from the same party that gave us people such as Xavier Becerra, Pete Buttigieg, Ketanji Brown Jackson, and a bunch of judicial nominees who didn’t seem to know anything about the law.

But at this point, Republicans know the game, and they may finally be ready to stop playing by the Democrats’ rules. As much as I believe in the idea of preserving tradition, Democrats have shown a willingness to rewrite the rules to suit their needs, and Republicans need to show they’re willing to fight fire with fire. Staff for Thune and Schumer are now quietly negotiating. Schumer made a counteroffer Friday night. But if you think that’s a sign Democrats are taking the threat seriously, think again. The deal they offered was a joke.

They offered to confirm a small batch of nominees now in exchange for unfreezing some funding, with another batch later—unless the administration submits another spending clawback. The whole thing would require unanimous consent on the Senate floor. Republicans shouldn’t bite. Democrats are offering crumbs while demanding the GOP surrender leverage on spending. It’s absurd. Republicans already have the power to jam these nominees through—no need to trade it away. Yes, preserving Senate norms is ideal. But Democrats burned that bridge long ago—nuking filibusters, gutting procedures, and tossing precedent out the window. They won’t honor any deal once they’re back in power.

Read more …

“..praising the genes of a blond-haired, blue-eyed woman with an hourglass figure is somehow an ode to the Third Reich.”

• Cleavage In a Bored Country (Ben Shapiro)

Some countries have true, serious problems. Then there are countries that have national discussions over a buxom young white woman in a jeans commercial. This week, the internet—and the media more generally—exploded over a commercial starring actress Sydney Sweeney for American Eagle. The spot features Sweeney, lying seductively on the ground as she buttons her jeans, stating, “Genes are passed down from parents to offspring, often determining traits like hair color, personality and even eye color. My jeans are blue.” The ad concludes with the tagline: “Sydney Sweeney has great jeans.” According to those who apparently have far too much time on their hands, this ad is reminiscent of Nazism. Washington Post fashion critic Rachel Tashjian lamented that the ad felt “regressive.”

A wide variety of colorfully haired and bewilderingly pierced TikTok users labeled the ad a “Nazi dog whistle,” presumably based on the idea that praising the genes of a blond-haired, blue-eyed woman with an hourglass figure is somehow an ode to the Third Reich. Charlie Warzel of The Atlantic wrote, “(Sweeney’s) image has been co-opted by the Right, accurately or not, in part because of where she’s from (the Mountain West) and some of her hobbies (fixing cars). Even her figure has become a cultural stand-in for the idea, pushed by conservative commentators, that Americans should be free to love boobs.” Yes, we have now reached the point in American life that it is controversial to suggest that men like breasts; it is now apparently “right-coded.” This is patently insane.

But perhaps the insanity isn’t just a sign of a culture infected with terrible ideas, ranging from the mutability of gender to the evisceration of beauty standards to the willfully ridiculous attempt to treat the male sex drive as uniquely evil. Perhaps it’s a sign of a culture that has lost touch with actual, real problems in the world. A culture that is out of touch not just with reality, but with threat. For a while, such cultures can survive. After all, America is uniquely placed in the world: thousands of miles from any direct foreign policy threat, blessed by natural resources beyond those of any other country, heir to a robust tradition of Anglo-American law and custom that have generated an unprecedented level of economic prosperity.

But reality has a funny way of clocking such cultures back into reality. It turns out that history never stops moving, that threats never stop militating. And what’s more, a self-obsessed and shallow culture that worries about whether boobs in jeans ads are a return to Hitler makes itself uniquely vulnerable to such threats. A people who imbibe the stupidity that trauma amounts to taking mild offense at a dumb pun in an advertisement is a people utterly unprepared for the return of reality. The great German leader Otto von Bismarck once remarked, “There is a Providence that protects idiots, drunkards, children and the United States of America.” We can only pray that Providence continues to protect us from our own idiocy as we sink ever deeper into social media reveries of borderline psychopathy.

Read more …

Water or land? I think you’ll need both in today’s world. Hoe about skies?

• Building Eurasia’s New Fortress (Ring)

For over a century, two dead advisors have shaped the way great powers view the world. On one side, we have Alfred Thayer Mahan—the American naval officer who believed sea power determined global supremacy. According to Mahan, controlling the oceans means controlling trade. If you control trade, you control wealth. If you control wealth… well, you get the picture. On the other side is Halford Mackinder, the British geographer who argued the exact opposite. Forget the seas, he said. Whoever controls the “World Island”—Eurasia—controls the world. Railways, rivers, pipelines, and land empires are what count. Not frigates and aircraft carriers. Mahan and Mackinder are no longer with us, but their ideas continue to influence the world today. And we’re watching it unfold.

It’s Mahan’s World… For Now. The United States and the United Kingdom—Mahan’s spiritual children—have long benefited from an ocean-based order. Ruling the waves built their prosperity and power. The British Empire’s reach was maritime. The U.S. Navy now patrols every major sea lane. The dollar reigns supreme because oil, commodities, and trade settle in greenbacks. That world—the Mahan world—is why Americans live like kings while land powers like Russia and China have spent decades playing catch-up. But Mahan’s world has limits. Especially when you try to keep your rivals bottled up in theirs. That’s precisely what the U.S. has tried to do with China. The First and Second Island Chains—stretching from Japan through Taiwan and the Philippines to Guam and Indonesia—are like maritime prison bars hemming China in.

They prevent Beijing from turning its navy into a global force and restrict its access to the open Pacific. And that’s no accident. It’s U.S. policy. So what did China do? Simple: they pivoted landward. Hence, the Belt and Road Initiative. If the Americans and their allies can dominate the seas, the Chinese reasoned, then the answer lies in dominating the land. Ports, railways, roads, pipelines, dry docks, fiber optic cables, and power grids. Not just in Asia, but across Eurasia, the Middle East, Africa, and even into Europe. What Mackinder once called the “Heartland” is now becoming a Chinese-funded construction site. And then there’s Russia. After the 2022 invasion of Ukraine, the West slapped Moscow with every sanction it could think of. No dollars. No euros. No Swift. No tank parts. No semiconductor chips. No comfy Davos forums.

In effect, the West attempted to sever Russia’s ties to the global economy. Cut it off from the ocean-based system. And how did Russia respond? They doubled down on Mackinder. On land power. On rivers, specifically. If you watch the YouTube video How Russia Plans to Rule Eurasia by River—and I strongly suggest you do—it outlines Moscow’s plan to build out an internal network of rivers, ports, and rail links that integrate the entire Eurasian landmass. The Volga. The Don. The Ob. The Lena. Not names we normally associate with global trade, but maybe we should.

What’s emerging is a strategic marriage between Chinese capital and Russian geography.One has money and ambition. The other has territory, rivers, and a pressing need to stay relevant. Together, they’re laying the foundation for a new continental infrastructure—one that’s largely immune to the U.S. Navy, the EU’s bureaucracy, or whatever sanctions the White House dreams up next. Think about what that means. New trade corridors will be built from China to Europe, bypassing the Strait of Malacca and the Suez Canal. Russian river ports will feed Chinese rail lines into Kazakhstan, Iran, and Turkey. They’ll have pipelines that carrier groups can’t blockade. Their digital infrastructure routed through friendly capitals, not Silicon Valley or Brussels. A Mackinder world. Built in plain sight.

Read more …

Penalties will be prohibitive if you try it alone.

• Everyone Should Leave EU – AfD Head Weidel On “Openly Corrupt” Brussels (RMX)

Alice Weidel, co-leader of the Alternative for Germany (AfD) party, says Germany is digging its own grave. Her words came during an interview Weidel gave to Hungary’s Patriot Extra program, covered by Mandiner. According to the nationalist politician, the European Union has “completely degenerated,” does not represent nation states or sovereign peoples, and has now become a machine run by overpaid bureaucrats that only causes harm. Weidel says Germany’s economic decline is rooted in domestic decisions. High energy prices, the green transition, and the phase-out of nuclear power have made German industry uncompetitive, especially the automotive industry, which she says is being deliberately destroyed by Brussels regulations.

“All the bad rules were made in Brussels,” she said, emphasizing that the ban on internal combustion engines and environmental sanctions benefit China and American companies, not European workers. According to Weidel, Germany and Europe need a free market where everyone can produce and buy what they want. Weidel also said the German government was playing politics against the population, lying to people, and doing the opposite of what it promised. On Angela Merkel, the AfD leader said that she was “the first Green Chancellor, not the conservative leader of the CDU.” She also called current Chancellor Friedrich Merz a representative of the “losing side.” Weidel contrasted Germany with Hungary, praising Viktor Orbán for his “common sense” and as a role model for national sovereignists. “I can only congratulate Viktor Orbán, Hungary is doing much better,” she said.

“Hungary is the only one that clearly stands out and says: this cannot be done with us,” she said. According to Weidel, in Germany, on the other hand, there is an unstable government that is deliberately worsening the financial situation of the population in order to make people vulnerable. Weidel further stated that she believes Hungarians live relatively better than Germans, compared to the country’s economic performance. According to Weidel, “Everyone should leave the EU.” Weidel claimed Brussels is trying to build an “artificially created political product” against Viktor Orbán in the person of opposition leader Péter Magyar to interfere in Hungary’s internal affairs. However, Péter Magyar, supported by green and woke politicians and whom Ursula von der Leyen is feeding from the palm of his hand, is doomed to failure, she said, stating that Orbán will emerge from this fight stronger.

She sees similar interventions from Brussels in Romania and Germany, where the AfD is openly persecuted and even faces a potential ban. Weidel was particularly critical of European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, whom she called “openly corrupt,” specifically commenting on the SMS agreements made for Pfizer vaccine purchases during Covid. “I wonder where the commissions went?” she asked, adding that Von der Leyen and the Brussels elite were “only working to line their own pockets” and that the EU’s institutional system could not be reformed but must be completely rebuilt. In the interview, Weidel outlined what reforms an AfD government would introduce: immediate border closure and mass deportations; social benefits reform, i.e., only those who have paid into the system would receive support; tax cuts for workers; the return of nuclear energy and cheap energy sources; lifting the ban on internal combustion engines; radical reduction of bureaucracy.

“The whole Brussels superstructure is impoverishing us all,” she stressed, adding that the German people are increasingly angry because instead of a “brave new world,” they have been given a more expensive, poorer, and more vulnerable life. Weidel said Germany should return to the ideal of a strong, independent middle class, which Hungary represents in Europe today. According to Weidel, the European elections and the processes in Germany also show that people are fed up with globalist, centralized power. He believes that the restoration of national sovereignty, a strong middle class, and the free market are inevitable, even in the face of Brussels. “The question is whether Germany can still change or will it be completely absorbed by the Brussels deep state,” she told viewers.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

RFK

Yeadon

Gates

Engineer

Calf

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle July 30 2025

Jul 302025
 
 July 30, 2025  Posted by at 9:56 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , ,  53 Responses »


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.

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle July 25 2025

Jul 252025
 
 July 25, 2025  Posted by at 9:53 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  52 Responses »


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.

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle July 21 2025

Jul 212025
 
 July 21, 2025  Posted by at 9:11 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , ,  42 Responses »


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.

 

 

 

 

 

 Older Entries