Menu Icon

Debt Rattle September 15 2025

Sep 152025
 
 September 15, 2025  Posted by at 10:22 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  21 Responses »


Édouard Manet Woman with a jug 1858-60

 

• Suspected Assassin Has Not Confessed To Killing Charlie Kirk – Utah Gov. (RT)
• “He Was A Savant” – Charlie Kirk Challenged and Inspired a Generation (Morgan)
• Three Background Facets in the Charlie Kirk Assassination (CTH)
• Bill Maher Shreds Left’s Disgraceful Response to Charlie Kirk Death (Margolis)
• White House Plans Security Boost On Civil Terrorism Fears (ZH)
• Trump Shares Call For ‘Charlie Kirk Act’ To Hold Media Accountable (RT)
• Antifa Defaces Memorial For Zarutska and Kirk In Vienna (RT)
• Teacher Forces Students To Watch Charlie Kirk Murder Video (Margolis)
• Europe On “High Alert” As Polish Moms Train For War Against Russia (ZH)
• France Is Only The Front Line In A Crisis Gripping The G7 (Lukyanov)
• ‘Unite The Kingdom’ Is a Harbinger of a Western European Cataclysm (Amar)
• EU Must Mend Relations With Trump – Kallas (RT)
• EU NATO Members Displeased With US Reaction To ‘Russian Drone Incursion’ (RT)
• IMF Warns Of Major Gap In Ukraine’s Finances – Bloomberg (RT)

 

 

 

 

“All we can confirm is that those conversations definitely were happening, and they did not believe it was actually him. It was … all joking until… he admitted that it actually was him.”

• Suspected Assassin Has Not Confessed To Killing Charlie Kirk – Utah Gov. (RT)

The suspected assassin of conservative activist Charlie Kirk is refusing to cooperate with the investigation, Utah Governor Spencer Cox has told ABC. The authorities are currently gathering evidence from “people around him” and his online activities, according to the governor. Tyler Robinson, 22, the alleged shooter, remains in custody. He is expected to face formal charges on Tuesday, Cox said. “He has not confessed… to authorities. He … is not cooperating,” the governor stated, adding that “all the people around him are cooperating.” Cox noted that the suspect had a trans partner, confirming earlier media reports. “We can confirm that… his roommate was indeed a boyfriend who is transitioning from… male to female,” which was also verified by the FBI, he said. This person is cooperating with the authorities, according to the governor.

The investigators also established that the suspect talked to acquaintances about the shooting after the incident on Discord and claimed responsibility for it, Cox stated. “All we can confirm is that those conversations definitely were happening, and they did not believe it was actually him. It was … all joking until… he admitted that it actually was him.” The motive of the murder remains unclear, according to ABC. Cox previously told the Wall Street Journal that Robinson was “deeply indoctrinated with leftist ideology.” Asked by ABC to comment on the statement, he replied: “so far, that has come from his acquaintances and his family members.”

Kirk, 31, the founder of Turning Point USA, was fatally shot in the neck while addressing students in Orem, Utah. Robinson was arrested on Friday after his father reportedly recognized him in surveillance footage and persuaded him to surrender. Police recovered a Mauser .30 caliber bolt-action rifle and ammunition engraved with slogans such as “Hey fascist! Catch!” near the shooting scene. US President Donald Trump said in the wake of the incident that Kirk’s murderer should face the death penalty. Cox also previously said the authorities would seek capital punishment for the assassin.

Read more …

“..we actually filmed a video together where he said that he, you know, supports the gay community, and that e pluribus unum, represents all Americans,..

• “He Was A Savant” – Charlie Kirk Challenged and Inspired a Generation (Morgan)

By the time he set off on his final campus speaking tour, Charlie Kirk had built an organization of some 250,000 members, all the while engaging in conservative political organizing, engineering get-out-the-vote efforts, drawing tens of millions of dollars in funding, and growing a media influence machine. A driving force behind Kirk’s movement, Turning Point USA, has been his focus on engaging young minds in political debate and setting an example for new generations of political influencers like himself. Through this mission, Kirk often found himself on a college campus, delivering a speech or sitting down with a table and a microphone and defying his critics with the prompt “prove me wrong,” even in the face of insults and threats. He continued this mission until the very end.

“Charlie Kirk could’ve been running his multi-million dollar operation from a fancy suite or a fancy office, and he could’ve just hired the dangerous part of what he did out to other activists, and instead of doing that, he always stayed in the trenches. And I think that’s one of the most admirable things about him,” said Gunnar Thorderson, a former Turning Point USA organizer who helped establish the organization’s presence at Utah Valley University in Orem, Utah, where Kirk was assassinated on Sept. 10. Thorderson rose from the Turning Point USA chapter president at UVU to a state-level director for the organization in Utah. Now, Thorderson is a sitting member of the Utah Republican State Central Committee. He attributes his trajectory, in large part, to Kirk’s personal mentorship.

“I really got to view him as a mentor and as a personal friend, as he would invest in me one-on-one, on many occasions,” he told The Epoch Times. Thorderson is among many whose political voices Kirk amplified since co-founding Turning Point USA in 2012. “I owe my entire political career to Charlie Kirk,” Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) said in an X post the day after Kirk’s death. “I would quite literally not be in office today if it weren’t for him. Even when my own party was working against me, Charlie endorsed me and campaigned to help me win election.” Luna’s communications director, David Leatherwood, also came into his own, politically, through Turning Point USA and Kirk’s personal support. Leatherwood, 37, a self-described gay conservative, first met Kirk in 2017.

“I met Charlie at one of his campus tours in Fort Lauderdale, and we actually filmed a video together where he said that he, you know, supports the gay community, and that e pluribus unum, represents all Americans,” Leatherwood told The Epoch Times. “And ever since that day, he was always supportive of me, and he invited me to be an ambassador for his organization.” Hallie S., 26, from Gainesville, Florida, credits Kirk’s organization with helping her and other conservative students at Santa Fe College be more outspoken with their views. “I’ve always been more conservative. I was raised conservative, but was never big about speaking up, especially in Gainesville, which is such a liberal area, and you never know how people are going to react,” she said.

Hallie said she was able to revamp the College Republicans chapter at Santa Fe College in Gainesville, thanks in large part to the influence of Kirk and Turning Point USA. “Charlie Kirk was a huge portion of that. He had a huge impact on politics on college campuses, especially in Santa Fe,” she told The Epoch Times. “You had all these students that were like, ‘wow, my conservative values are being represented in a way that really had never been represented before.’” Kelly Shackelford, a First Amendment attorney and president and CEO of First Liberty Institute, said he invited Kirk to speak at a fundraising event in Houston, Texas, shortly after discovering the young influencer. “Typically at fundraisers, everybody’s 60-and-older,” Shackelford told the Epoch Times. “And so I wanted to encourage these older people that there are younger people who are coming behind them, and it’s not going to die with them.”

With much of his content shared online, Kirk’s influence spread beyond the numerous college campuses he visited over the years and reached millions online. Tucker, a teenager who requested his surname not be revealed due to fear of retaliation, told The Epoch Times that Kirk was among a limited number of political influencers whose content he liked to engage with. “I don’t really like watching political stuff. I mean, it’ll come up like on TikTok or something like that, and I just scroll past it,” Tucker said. “But when I saw his stuff, I would always click on it cause it was always interesting and he was just somebody that you could look up to.” During an interview on California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s podcast in March, the Democratic governor confessed that his 13-year-old son wanted to skip school for a chance to meet Kirk. “Literally last night, trying to put my son to bed, he’s like, ‘Dad I just—what time, what time is Charlie gonna be here? What time?’” Newsom said. “And I’m like, ‘dude, you’re in school tomorrow.’”

Leatherwood said he was comforted knowing how many moments of Kirk’s life were captured on camera, preserving his thoughts and views. “The beautiful thing about today and modern technology and our access, our access to media, is that, you know, there are literally hundreds, if not thousands, of hours of footage of him speaking. And those will live on, and I think they’ll actually memorialize his legacy in an even greater way than people can anticipate,” he said. Kirk made debate a core component of his mission. As he visited college campuses around the country, he often did so with a pop-up tent emblazoned with the words “prove me wrong,” and he offered up a microphone to those with differing points of view to confront him directly through dialogue.

“He went from campus to campus, engaging with students that he didn’t really view as the enemy ever. It was just that he felt they needed to be educated and that they needed to have proper discourse,” Thorderson said. “And it was through that that they would end up being convinced of our ideas.” Not all of Kirk’s interlocutors were swayed by his arguments, but they credited him for allowing a discussion. “I stand by so little of everything that [Kirk] said, but one of the things he stood by was conversation,” Hunter Kozak said in a video post the day after Kirk’s death. Kozak, 29, is a student at UVU and was the last person to debate with Kirk before he was shot. Kirk was just minutes into what was meant to be the first stop of his latest campus speaking tour when he was assassinated.

Dean Withers, who had debated Kirk, broke down in tears while filming a livestream on Sept. 10, as he learned Kirk had been shot. Addressing his initial reaction, Withers filmed another video that evening, acknowledging his disagreements with Kirk. “Does that mean I think he deserved to lose his life? No. Does that mean I think his two young children, who were in attendance at the event where he was shot, deserved to watch their father die? No. Does that mean I think they deserve to grow up without him? No. Does that mean I think that his wife, who was also there, deserved to lose her husband? No,” Withers said. “And honestly, if you answered yes to any of those questions, there’s a very clear line drawn between me and you. I don’t want your support, and I don’t support you either.”

Throughout his stardom as a conservative political influencer, Kirk frequently looked beyond politics and emphasized his Christian faith. Speaking with The Epoch Times, Thorderson recalled a morning when he and Kirk were traveling for an event and went for a workout in the hotel gym. It wasn’t long before their exercise turned philosophical. “I remember at the time, I was struggling with my own faith and kind of just playing devil’s advocate with him,” Thorderson recalled. “And he was just so steadfast in his faith and impressive with his knowledge. And that was a moment where I didn’t feel like he was necessarily preaching to me, but really just trying to connect on a personal level and trying to see me where I was at.”

At other points, Thorderson described Kirk being able to hold a knowledgeable conversation on matters beyond politics and articulate a connection back to his core values.“He was a savant,” Thorderson said. Thorderson also recalled having the chance to know Kirk when the Turning Point USA leader was getting to know his wife, Erika. “He just always valued family and wanted to start a family. And that was just, even before he had kids, that was a core value for him,” Thorderson said. Kirk leaves behind his wife Erika and two children.

Read more …

“Yes, Charlie Kirk had become openly critical of the decisions being made by the Israeli government. No, Charlie Kirk did not stop supporting Israel.”

• Three Background Facets in the Charlie Kirk Assassination (CTH)

There are three background facets worth discussing in the Charlie Kirk assassination. To wit, a fulsome historic reference is likely worth creating, so we can all evaluate information with a similar baseline. (1) The background of events in the lead to Charlie Kirk’s murder; (2) the post-shooting activity of the FBI; and (3) the reality of motive carried by the 22-year-old assassin, Tyler Robinson. All three of these issues are separate and distinct; however, some people are dangerously merging them together. This should be avoided.To help avoid conflation that happens, it is worth addressing all three issues separately and comprehensively. In this outline we address the first, the background events swirling around TPUSA and Kirk prior to the shooting.

Turning Point USA (TPUSA) is a donor funded organization. Within the business of engaging causes of worth it takes money, often a lot of money, to run the core logistics of the operation. With Charlie Kirk removed from TPUSA’s mission, I hope their donors and supporters remain fully engaged and are able to expand on his life’s work. Back in 2022, the same background financial interests who were structuring the presidential run of Florida Governor Ron DeSantis also supported TPUSA. Part of that collaboration surfaced in mid-August ’22, when DeSantis exited his five-days of silence in the aftermath of the FBI raid on President Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate (August 8, 2022).

In the lead to the election campaign, DeSantis came out of his bunker directly into a promotional tour for his book, The Courage to be Free. The Florida governor joined TPUSA as several events to increase his national profile. As a natural outcome TPUSA was funded for a short time by the same people funding the DeSantis long-term launch. Many of these donors were already part of the TPUSA financial system; it was a natural convergence.

To his credit, Charlie Kirk viewed the DeSantis effort as supporting a solid conservative, a fellow in the bigger battle, and yet remained supportive of Donald Trump throughout the collaboration and into the presidential primary once DeSantis formally announced over a year later. Recently, when discussing the tragic event of Kirk’s assassination, Tucker Carlson noted Charlie Kirk took a lot of donor backlash for a shift in his position around the issue of Israel and the overwhelming retaliation taking place in Gaza. Both groups, professional evangelicals and strong Israel supporters, took exception to Kirk questioning the attack on Iran and the ongoing decisions by the Israeli government to continue bombardment of Gaza. WATCH:


.
The donor backlash Tucker Carlson is referencing, is also evident in an earlier podcast segment Charlie Kirk did with Megyn Kelly about a month before his murder. Again, for fulsome understanding it is worth watching the entire segment.

.

The reference Megyn Kelly and Charlie Kirk are outlining was/is a cultural shift amid a great deal of young people as it related to how they perceive Israel. The issue was weighing on Charlie Kirk who was a strong supporter of Israel and was known as a voice for Gen-Z independent thinkers. The issue was such an important topic for Kirk, he did an entire focus group discussion on it. From the perspective of Kirk, a distinction needed to be made between support for the nation state of Israel to exist, and criticism for the way the government of Israel was conducting the war against Hamas. However, the pro-Israel donor class do not permit this nuance. Additionally, Charlie Kirk was calling out secular Jews for funding the radical left.

Put the three issues together, (1) a reluctance for conflict with Iran, (2) concerns about how Israel had extended the Gaza conflict, and (3) direct criticism of Jews funding the radical left, and what you get is an overreaction by the Israel-first lobby calling Charlie Kirk ‘antisemitic’.Charlie Kirk was not ever an antisemite. However, his soft touches on the third rail of criticism toward Israel created massive backlash from his donor base; again, hard-core evangelicals and wealthy donors of the Jewish faith. This is not coincidentally the same donor base who funded the launch and 2024 primary effort of Ron DeSantis. Again, to his credit, in the two-months prior to his murder Charlie Kirk did not waiver from his position; a position that was entirely in alignment with the voice of the Gen-Z audience to whom he was connected most deeply.

However, due to Kirk’s history of unwavering support for Israel a shift in opinion was viewed as a risk. The need for control is a reaction to fear. A pressure campaign against Charlie Kirk was created by the aforementioned donor group. This is the context that surrounded the assassination. This context is not connected to the motive of the murderer, nor is it connected to the motive of the FBI in the aftermath. This background just sits alone as the accurate context for some of the external pressures that were upon Charlie Kirk for the two months that preceded his death.

Against this context, the donor groups, individuals and organizations that were participating in the pressure campaign, then had another concern in the aftermath of the shooting. Would they be blamed? Would this, once again, feed yet another conspiracy theory against Jews? That aspect explains the openly obvious media campaign that was waged by the donor groups, individuals and organizations in the aftermath of the shooting. What we saw was coordinated praise for Charlie Kirk by the same people who were criticizing him for a shift in tone and opinion toward Israel and waging the pressure campaign.

Obviously, the people who were pressuring Charlie Kirk would be very nervous about being blamed, and that aspect directly surfaces in the way members of the Jewish community and Israeli government reacted to his murder. The intent of this post is to create an honest record of what was taking place in the background prior to Kirk’s assassination. The reason clarity becomes important is because without it, dangerous conspiracies thrive.There is ZERO EVIDENCE any of these background ‘donor pressure’ issues had anything to do with the murder of Charlie Kirk, yet already online people are making direct and inferred connections that do not exist. Israel did not kill Charlie Kirk.

An unstable ideological leftist named Tyler Robinson, who was living with his transgender boyfriend Lance Twiggs, killed Charlie Kirk because they hated him.Tyler Robinson hated the purity of Christian values that Charlie Kirk represented. Every day that Charlie Kirk spoke to their peers and dismantled the lies, was another day Tyler and Lance felt threatened by the return of a moral society that was the foundation of Kirk’s advocacy. Do not let the issues conflate. Yes, Charlie Kirk had become openly critical of the decisions being made by the Israeli government. No, Charlie Kirk did not stop supporting Israel.

Yes, Charlie Kirk was facing significant backlash by the very influential Evangelical and Jewish donors to his TPUSA organization. Yes, the influential donors were trying to convince Kirk to stop being critical of the Israeli government. However, no, there is no evidence Israel had anything to do with the crazed behavior of a mentally unstable leftist who assassinated him. If that changes, we will openly and honestly outline it as we do with all subjects of great interest and consequence; but right now, there is no evidence of any connection. Pray for Charlie Kirk and his family. Honor his legacy and support all the new awakenings happening as a consequence of this tragic and violent event. Do not allow yourself to be drawn into the dark imaginings of those who have an ulterior agenda.

Read more …

“The people who mocked his death or justified it, I think, ‘You’re gross. I have no use for you,’” he said. “The people who are saying now we’re at war, I have no use for you.”

• Bill Maher Shreds Left’s Disgraceful Response to Charlie Kirk Death (Margolis)

Bill Maher used his HBO show “Real Time with Bill Maher” Friday night to call out the disgraceful reaction from some on the left to Charlie Kirk’s assassination. The discussion, which featured Ben Shapiro, quickly turned into a defense of free speech and a condemnation of the toxic rhetoric surrounding Kirk’s murder. “I didn’t realize this was gonna be kind of a theme show because we write our editorial before the week starts, and so it was all about freedom of speech,” Maher said. “Then the assassination occurred, so this is turning into a theme show. But it is kind of interesting that this guy was shot.” Maher noted that Kirk had appeared on both his TV show and podcast. “I talked to him, I liked him,” he said. “I like everybody. I talk to everybody that I think… Um, I’m glad I took that approach.”

Kirk’s death, Maher pointed out, occurred while he was doing exactly what he was known for. “He was shot under a banner that said, ‘Prove me wrong,’ because he was a debater,” Maher explained. “And too many people think the way to do that, to prove you wrong, is to just eliminate you from talking altogether.” Maher didn’t hold back in condemning those who mocked or justified Kirk’s killing. “The people who mocked his death or justified it, I think, ‘You’re gross. I have no use for you,’” he said. “The people who are saying now we’re at war, I have no use for you.” While it was nice for him take this position, he couldn’t help himself and had to sneak in a little of the “both sides” argument that many on the left have been making the past few days. “I think the real war is not between left or right,” he said. “It’s between the people on both sides who want a war and the people who don’t.”

Ben Shapiro, who was close friends with Kirk, offered a personal perspective. “I knew Charlie for 13 years,” Shapiro said, recalling meeting him as a teenager in Palm Beach. “I watched him, you know, grow into a man and watched him, you know, get married and have a couple of very young kids.” Shapiro reminded viewers that Kirk’s work was about engaging with opposing views: “Whatever you thought of Charlie’s views is irrelevant. The fact is that what he made his living doing and what he actually did quite well… was just going and talking to people on the other side. And that’s, you know, what he was killed doing. He was literally in the middle of answering a question and picked up the microphone and was shot in the throat.” The broader issue, Shapiro warned, is a growing cultural acceptance of violence as a response to speech.

“We do have a serious problem in this country with people who believe that violence is the proper response to speech, and that does skew young,” he said. “What the polls tend to show is that of Gen Z, only 58%… believes that there is no excuse for violence in response to speech, meaning that 42% believe that there are some times that… violence ought to be a response.” “That is deeply terrifying,” he added, noting that he has required round-the-clock security for a decade. “Even the assassination of political figures is not the same thing as just being shot in the throat for the crime of debating issues in the public square.” For Shapiro, Kirk’s assassination marked a dark moment in American life. “I thought that that’s not what America is or what it should be about, and we’ve come to some place incredibly dark in our nation’s history,” he said. “And, you know, I weep for the country. I weep for Charlie. It’s, it’s horrific.”

Maher deserves some credit for calling out the ghouls on the left who laughed at or excused Charlie Kirk’s assassination. That kind of honesty is rare in Hollywood, and it’s refreshing to hear someone with his platform say out loud what so many Americans are thinking. I’ve long been critical of Democrats who posture as if they oppose political violence while claiming some moral high ground on the issue. Most of the time, I don’t buy a word of it. But Maher is different. He’s been consistent in warning the left that their rhetoric is toxic and counterproductive. He’s openly pushed back on the lazy habit of calling Trump a Nazi, and he even had dinner with Trump and walked away with decent things to say. That track record gives him credibility where others have none.

Still, his instinct to retreat into the tired “both sides” trope misses the point. The real threat isn’t some abstract culture of division — it’s the left itself, which has made clear it’s at war with anyone who dares to disagree with them. Charlie Kirk was murdered for the simple act of debating ideas in public, and the response from too many progressives has been to cheer or justify it. That tells you everything you need to know. The modern left doesn’t want to win arguments; it wants to silence and destroy the people making them. Kirk’s assassination was an attack not just on one man but on the very foundation of free speech in America.

Read more …

St. George, Utah, looks like a crazy place. No wonder it radicalizes people that are young, easily impressionable.

• White House Plans Security Boost On Civil Terrorism Fears (ZH)

The Trump administration has sounded the alarm on what we’ve openly described as “civil terrorism” – revolutionary left-wing political violence – following the assassination of Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk. In a sign of urgency, the White House requested an extra $58 million in security funding for the executive and judicial branches, according to a Bloomberg News report. Here’s the threat landscape:
• Kill-List Risks: Kirk’s assassination should be interpreted by America First leaders and thought leaders as the potential beginning of a sequential campaign of targeted political violence. The message is obvious: revolutionary armed Marxist radicals won’t stop at Kirk.
• Overnight Federal Response: The FBI disclosed, as per Axios, that agents have opened investigations into leftist groups believed to have had prior knowledge of the attack. No names were released, but the admission marks a significant concern among investigators. Hence, the White House’s move to request $58 million security boost.
• Organized Conspiracy In Kirk’s Assassination? GPS-based research flagged by analyst Tony Seruga suggests as many as a dozen co-conspirators may have been involved – raising the odds of a coordinated network rather than a lone-wolf incident.

More detail on the White House’s request for a $58 million security boost for top officials (via Bloomberg): The request to include the extra funding in an upcoming stopgap bill comes ahead of a Sept. 30 deadline when the current federal spending law runs out. Punchbowl News first reported on the funding request.

The administration also signaled support for expanding resources to safeguard lawmakers, though it left the specifics of that decision to the legislative branch, the outlet reported. Further detail from Axios’ report on federal and state law enforcement honing in on radical leftist groups that may have been involved in Kirk’s assassination – or at least had prior knowledge of the plan: Between the lines: Federal and state law enforcement officials also are examining leftist groups in Utah to see whether they had knowledge of the alleged shooter’s plans beforehand, or if they lent material support to him afterward. One of those groups eliminated its social media profile after the shooting, Axios has learned.

Latest profiling of the Kirk’s alleged shooter:
Charlie Kirk Assassination Suspect Lived With Transgender Partner, Discord Denies Use
Alleged Kirk Assassin A “Radical Left ANTIFA-Adjacent Creep” Wrote “Hey Fascist” On Bullet Casing

Before the assassination of Kirk, we had already assessed and warned of an emerging radical leftist threat environment with potential threat risks to the Trump administration, America First leadership, and individuals holding any opposing viewpoints to those of the left. There were some indicators of escalation visible well in advance, suggesting that the attack on Kirk could be part of a broader wave and a new era of civil terrorism, versus what was previously thought as an isolated event:

Read more …

“She accused the media of bringing “chaos, hatred, division, and anarchy all across this country” and also linked Kirk’s death to “constant hateful rhetoric”..”

• Trump Shares Call For ‘Charlie Kirk Act’ To Hold Media Accountable (RT)

US President Donald Trump has shared a video calling for a law that would make media outlets, content creators, and social media networks financially liable for making false claims and unsubstantiated accusations against anyone. The president reposted a short clip on Truth Social that was originally published on TikTok by a woman going by the name Elly May. There, she calls on him and his administration to reinstate the Smith Mundt Act, which, according to her, “held news corporations accountable for lying to the American people and spreading propaganda instead of truth.”

A piece of Cold War-era legislation, the Smith- Mundt Act was aimed at preventing domestic dissemination of US media content intended for foreign audiences, such as from Voice of America or Radio Liberty. Contrary to what May said in her video, it was not repealed under former US President Barack Obama and is still in force. It also has nothing to do with holding US news media accountable for spreading false narratives at home. In the video, May also urged Trump to name it “the Charlie Kirk Act” after the conservative activist murdered this week. She accused the media of bringing “chaos, hatred, division, and anarchy all across this country” and also linked Kirk’s death to “constant hateful rhetoric” he faced online and in the media.

Trump did not comment on May’s video in his repost. A petition of a similar nature launched on Change.org on Saturday got nearly 43,000 signatures in about a day. Directed at Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance, it also called on them to introduce strict penalties against news media, content creators, and social networks for spreading “false narratives,” baseless accusations or employing “unfair” censorship. Kirk, 31, the founder of Turning Point USA, was killed while addressing students at a college in Orem, Utah, on Wednesday. A suspect arrested in connection to the case was “deeply indoctrinated with leftist ideology,” according to Utah Governor Spencer Cox. In the wake of the incident, Trump vowed to pursue not only Kirk’s murderer but also what he called the “radical left” networks that fuel political violence.

Read more …

But of course…

• Antifa Defaces Memorial For Zarutska and Kirk In Vienna (RT)

Antifa has vandalized and defaced a memorial dedicated to the late conservative commentator Charlie Kirk and Ukrainian refugee Iryna Zarutska in Vienna, Austrian Freisinnige (Freelance) party chairman Christian Ebner said on Sunday. The makeshift memorial had been set up outside the US Embassy in the Austrian capital following the murders, both of which have inflamed partisan divisions in the US. During a vigil for Zarutska and Kirk on Friday, people placed photographs, flowers US flags and letters at the wall of the embassy, and lit candles. The memorial has been vandalized and torn down by Antifa activists as of Sunday, according to Ebner.

“Antifa vandalized it; these inhumane left-wing extremists don’t even respect a memorial service,” he wrote on X on Sunday. Footage circulating on social media shows black-clad demonstrators chanting slogans as they stand opposite people taking part in the vigil on Friday. According to Austrian influencer Alexander Ehrlich, who was at the vigil, the group interrupted a moment of silence for the two murder victims by chanting slogans. Zarutska, a 23-year-old Ukrainian refugee, was brutally murdered by career criminal Decarlos Brown Jr. on a North Carolina train last month. The graphic video of the unprovoked stabbing was released by the local transit system last week and went viral.

Conservative influencer Kirk was fatally shot during a public appearance at a Utah university on Wednesday. The murders have sparked intense debate over media bias, public safety, and the increasingly violent culture war, with conservative figures accusing liberal media of ignoring Zarutska’s death until long after it had gone viral on social media. US President Donald Trump has strongly condemned both killings and promised to pursue those he accused of funding and fueling “radical left” political violence in the US. He has also said he would push for the death penalty for both killers.

Read more …

“.. hatred of conservatives becomes so normalized that a teacher feels emboldened to show snuff films to children and justify murder in the name of “justice.”

• Teacher Forces Students To Watch Charlie Kirk Murder Video (Margolis)

What happened in Toronto last week should send a chill down the spine of every parent, not just in Canada but worldwide. On September 11, a teacher at Corvette Junior Public School in Toronto allegedly showed a classroom of ten- and eleven-year-olds the horrific assassination video of Charlie Kirk. According to a report from the New York Post, the teacher didn’t just show the video once—he played it repeatedly, forcing children to relive the violence over and over while delivering a tirade on “antifascism” and transgender politics, and declaring that Kirk “deserved this fate.” Let that sink in: a public school teacher seized on the brutal murder of a political figure to indoctrinate children, twisting a tragedy into a platform for radical propaganda.

Parents were understandably outraged when their kids came home shaken and traumatized by what they had been put through. Imagine being a child in fifth grade, expecting a normal day at school, only to be subjected to the graphic sight of a man being assassinated—then told the victim somehow earned it. A letter was sent home on Friday to all students affected by the showing of the video, calling the teacher’s alleged behavior “extremely troubling and completely disturbing,” the Toronto Sun reports. “During class, students were said to have been shown a portion of a violent video in response to questions being asked about a recent tragic event in the United States,” read the letter signed by Corvette Junior Public School Principal Jennifer Koptie.

The letter stated that the video was allegedly shown to students in grades 5 and 6 — typically aged 10-11 — by a staff member who was supervising a French immersion class and was not the regular teacher. “While an investigation must still be conducted to learn all of the details, the report of this incident is extremely troubling and completely unacceptable,” the letter continued. “We recognize the seriousness of this matter and have taken immediate steps to follow all appropriate policies and procedures,” Koptie wrote. “The teacher has been relieved of all teaching responsibilities pending the outcome of the investigation and will not be at the school,” the letter continued. Assistance is being offered to any children traumatized by the incident, Koptie said.

This is what the political left does when ideology trumps decency. Instead of treating the murder of a human being as a moment to grieve or counsel, this teacher turned it into a grotesque object lesson in leftist identity-driven politics. A tragedy became a weapon to bludgeon students with lectures on antifascism and gender utopianism. It wasn’t about teaching; it was about grooming young minds to see political opponents as subhuman, their deaths as justified, and their suffering as deserved. Evil like that doesn’t just come out of nowhere. It’s the result of years of cultural decay, where radical politics take precedence over morality, and hatred of conservatives becomes so normalized that a teacher feels emboldened to show snuff films to children and justify murder in the name of “justice.”

What this teacher did to his students is unimaginable, yet at the same time, it’s a reflection of the vile hatred that comes from the left. And sadly, this isn’t an isolated incident. Schools have become battlegrounds where left-wing activists, armed with the language of “equity” and “social justice,” manipulate children into absorbing their worldview. And when tragedies occur, they pounce—not to heal, not to comfort, but to spread hate. Showing elementary school kids the assassination of Charlie Kirk wasn’t a lapse in judgment. It was the inevitable endpoint of an ideology that devalues conservative lives and sanctifies violent resistance against them.

Read more …

“Only three to four drones are confirmed to have been shot down. This means that either Poland has possibly the worst air defenses in NATO, or, the reported number of drones is greatly inflated..”

• Europe On “High Alert” As Polish Moms Train For War Against Russia (ZH)

A recent incident in Polish airspace involving at least three Russian drones has inspired hysteria in greater Europe (stoked by EU politicians and the media). The event, which involved what appear to be Russian reconnaissance drones, is similar to previous incidents of purported Russian UAVs shot down after crossing into NATO skies. No attacks, no casualties and no clear intent of invasion. However, the presence of these drones in Polish skies, even if their flight path was only meant to take them to Ukraine, is enough to fuel European calls for possible escalation. The EU and UK continue to insist on deployment of “peace keeping” troops to intervene in the Ukraine war, with France, Germany and Britain suggesting boots on the ground to reinforce the now faltering Ukrainian front lines.

The Polish Foreign Minister, Radoslaw Sikorski, asserts that the drone incursion is part of a Russian plot to “test NATO reactions without triggering a full scale war”. The Polish claim that at least 19 drones were involved in the incursion and that the devices had traveled “hundreds of miles” before they were intercepted. Only three to four drones are confirmed to have been shot down. This means that either Poland has possibly the worst air defenses in NATO, or, the reported number of drones is greatly inflated.

“The drones didn’t reach their targets and there was minor damage to property, nobody was hurt. If it happened in Ukraine, by Ukrainian definitions, that would be regarded as a 100% success,” Silorski said. But the drones had no ordnance attached and there is no evidence that they were targeting anything or anyone. As President Donald Trump noted, the crossing into Poland was more likely a mistake. This response has angered the Europeans, who are desperate for US involvement in the war. Poland’s response has set the country on “high alert”. Troops have been reinforced and the border with Belarus has been closed. The government is now sponsoring voluntary military training for civilians. Open to the public, the training has attracted over 20,000 recruits including Polish mothers, who say they want to “protect their children”.

The idea is logical enough, though the deployment of women for front line combat is generally an act of desperation rather than sound strategic policy. It is interesting that a country which practices strict gun control and eligibility requirements for citizens is suddenly so interested in using those citizens as a militia reserve against a hypothetical Russian invasion. Ukraine suffered from similar restrictions on its citizens before they were invaded and this stunted their defensive capabilities. EU officials say the drone event is an “aggressive, reckless act” and is “part of a serious escalation by Russia,” only reinforcing the bloc’s “support and resolve to support Ukraine.” The problem, though, is a matter off logistical realities.

Europe’s contributions to NATO defenses are minimal and the vast majority of military spending has long been covered by US taxpayers. Europe’s ability to manufacture the weapons needed to fight a prolonged conflict with Russia is next to nil and the means to supply their forces with enough equipment and resources to engage in an attrition war does not exist. The US military is the only force with the resources to manage a long term war in Ukraine, which is why the EU continues to demand that the Trump Administration commit to escalation. European officials have been encouraging Volodymyr Zelensky’s ambitions to take back lost Ukrainian territory with talk of potential EU troops. This has extended the life of the war and sabotaged efforts to organize diplomatic talks. Currently, Russian forces are surging on the Eastern front and Ukraine is facing the loss of the entire Donbas region. Central Ukraine is also at risk as Ukrainian troop strength dwindles. Analysts outside of typical western propaganda networks argue that Ukraine is facing a total loss unless a resolution is achieved in the near future.

Read more …

“Economic interdependence and ideological constraints ensure that problems not only go unsolved but reinforce each other.”

• France Is Only The Front Line In A Crisis Gripping The G7 (Lukyanov)

France is once again in crisis. Francois Bayrou’s government failed to win a vote of confidence in the National Assembly and has resigned. President Emmanuel Macron has promised to quickly propose another candidate. But after calling early elections last spring, he created a parliament with no stable majority. Now he must try to form a cabinet for the third time in little more than a year. If he fails, new elections will follow, and this time not even Macron’s usual tricks may save him. Both the far right and the far left have been waiting for this moment, sharpening their teeth for the embattled president for years.The spectacle in Paris is not unique. It is part of a wider malaise across the political systems of the G7.

In Japan, Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba long insisted he would not step down. Yet his party’s losses in two parliamentary elections left him no choice. In Britain, a scandal forced the resignation of the deputy prime minister and left the Labour Party floundering at approval levels no better than the discredited Conservatives. Nigel Farage’s Reform Party now leads in the polls. In Germany, Chancellor Friedrich Merz is recording record-low ratings while the anti-establishment Alternative for Germany remains stable at CDU levels.Italy and Canada are steadier, but barely. Canada’s Liberals were rescued not by their own strength but by Donald Trump. His coarse attacks on Ottawa provided a rally-round-the-flag effect, sparing them a near-certain defeat.

The result was continuity in power, though with Mark Carney replacing Justin Trudeau. As for the United States itself, the picture is clear enough: Trump’s supporters face little resistance. His opponents are simply lying low, waiting for better times. Each of these cases has local causes, yet together they reveal something larger. For countries with deep democratic traditions, turmoil is not new. They have endured crises before. But the simultaneity of today’s upheavals makes this moment extraordinary. The world is in open unrest, and no major power is insulated. The question is not whether the turbulence will continue, but how well political systems can withstand the waves.

Here there is a crucial difference between the United States and its allies, on the one hand, and the European Union on the other. The US, Canada, Britain, and Japan remain sovereign states. Their degree of sovereignty can be debated, but their governments retain legitimacy and can act quickly when circumstances demand it. Those decisions may be good or bad, but they are at least their own, and they can change course if the results prove ineffective. For the EU states, the situation is different. Their sovereignty is deliberately limited by the framework of European integration. In the second half of the 20th century, this was the Union’s great strength: by pooling authority, its members gained leverage they could never have achieved alone. But the same framework now acts as a brake. In a world where speed of decision is vital, Brussels makes it harder, not easier, to act.

Economic interdependence and ideological constraints ensure that problems not only go unsolved but reinforce each other. Worse, there is no vision of how the system might be changed under current institutional rules. As a result, rather than rethink course, leaders try to bulldoze through with even more energy in the same direction. Opposition forces are excluded even when they win elections. And the Ukrainian issue has been turned into the central pillar of EU politics. Should that issue fade, a mass of uncomfortable domestic questions will come to the surface – and Western Europe’s rulers know it.

Manipulation and muddling through remain possible, of course. France and Germany may once again stagger past their current difficulties. But each time it becomes harder, and the gap between society’s demands and the establishment’s interests grows wider. This is why the “moment of truth” for EU politics is approaching. No one can predict what follows. The bloc will not return to the pre-integration era. But the political forces cast as outsiders today may soon be the ones defining the new order.

Read more …

“..it makes little sense to get stuck once again reiterating what a very dubious figure Robinson cuts. Instead, let’s focus on why he is capable of causing such a stir.”

• ‘Unite The Kingdom’ Is a Harbinger of a Western European Cataclysm (Amar)

Seen from its former empire, riots in Great Britain may look wretchedly atavistic. Not to speak of a tiny bit of Schadenfreude. For the Times of India, the recent Unite the Kingdom rally and riots have turned London “into a stage for Britain’s anxieties.” And not just anxieties. While many protesters remained peaceful, there also was, in best old English tradition, some energetic fighting: Kicks, fists, and bottles flew as if at a football match or late at night outside a not-yet-gentrified pub around last call. There ended up being 26 police officers injured and 25 protesters arrested. For now. The authorities have promised to catch even more. Clearly so as to make an example of the uppity ruffians and keep the rest of the common people in check. That, too, is good old English tradition.

Organized by “far-right activist” (The Hindu) Tommy Robinson (aka Stephen Yaxley-Lennon), Unite the Kingdom was billed as a “free speech” demonstration, but its real and explicit core agenda was a protest against immigration and Islam (or rather the daft, mean caricature of Islam that Robinson and his followers propagate). Still a fairly young man at 42 years of age, Robinson has a well-known and ingloriously petty criminal record: assault, passport and mortgage fraud; yet another conviction, for contempt of court, was arguably political. He also has stacked up serious credentials as a right-wing influencer, organizer, and troublemaker. None of that, however, has stopped him or is ever likely to do him any political harm. On the contrary, just as with other recent break-out figures – Trump in the forefront – the very deserved bad-boy rep is only making him stronger.

Unfortunately, even Robinson’s aggressive siding with genocidal Israel (his really unforgivable crime, in my book) – a pattern now common with the far right in the West – and plausible assessments that he is functioning as a “Zionist asset” (and benefitting from it) won’t hurt him. Even if it sits extremely, comically badly with his constant complaining about foreigners subverting Britain. That is just the horribly corrupt way the West is now. And to be fair, in that respect, Robinson is de facto as mainstream as the whole ruling Labour Party and the rest of Britain’s establishment, too, from BBC to NHS. That’s why, here, it makes little sense to get stuck once again reiterating what a very dubious figure Robinson cuts. Instead, let’s focus on why he is capable of causing such a stir. That will tell us much about the current state of Britain and the West more broadly.

Read more …

“US President Donald Trump, the “most influential man in the world..”

• EU Must Mend Relations With Trump – Kallas (RT)

The EU must improve relations with US President Donald Trump, the “most influential man in the world,” and adapt to his way of doing business and politics, the bloc’s foreign policy chief, Kaja Kallas, has said. Kallas made the remarks in an interview with German outlet RND published on Friday. She was asked whether the EU can still trust Trump after a much-criticized trade deal that imposed a 15% tariff on most exports from the bloc while lifting tariffs on US industrial goods. The deal, which also involved shifting from Russian energy to US imports, sparked backlash from EU officials, who said it favors Washington.

“The US is and remains our most important partner. But the new administration has clearly changed how it conducts policy and official business. We Europeans must adapt and adjust to their way of working,” Kallas said, adding that Trump’s tariffs have become a “new benchmark for how well a country gets along with the US.” “Trump is the most influential man in the world… We simply have to learn how to work with him.” Kallas also said any settlement of the Ukraine conflict is unlikely without Trump’s involvement, claiming that only the US “has the power to force Russia into serious peace negotiations.” She expressed hope that Trump will follow through on earlier threats and impose further sanctions on Moscow.

Russia has not been targeted with US tariffs due to the existing sanctions, but Trump has threatened tariffs on its trade partners if the Ukraine conflict is not resolved quickly. Last month, he doubled the tariffs on India to 50%, accusing it of aiding Moscow by buying Russian oil and defense equipment, and hinted at new measures against China. This week, Trump signaled that he could further sanction Russia if NATO members stop buying its oil, arguing that the military bloc’s commitment to Ukraine peace efforts is insufficient. Russia has denounced the Western sanctions as illegal, and has said it is open to talks on Ukraine, but stressed that any peace deal must address the root causes of the conflict and include Ukrainian neutrality, demilitarization, and recognition of the new territorial realities.

Read more …

What do you mean you don’t want to go to war? We try so hard..

• EU NATO Members Displeased With US Reaction To ‘Russian Drone Incursion’ (RT)

European NATO states are reportedly ‘dismayed and confused’ by Washington’s reaction to an alleged Russian drone incursion into Polish airspace, according to Reuters. Some members of the bloc view US President Donald Trump’s reluctance to outright blame Moscow for the incident on Wednesday as a sign that he is not committed enough to their defense, the news agency reported on Saturday, citing unnamed European officials. US aircraft also played no role in repelling the alleged attack, according to Reuters. US officials said it was because the Dutch military was responsible for Polish airspace within NATO at the time.

“Trump’s handling of the incident has ranged from dismay to confusion and unease,” Reuters said. A German official told the news agency that European NATO members “cannot rely on anything” with the Trump administration.An Eastern European diplomat called Washington’s “silence” on the matter “almost deafening,” while an Italian official told Reuters that NATO members were mostly displeased with the US reaction. The Polish government stated that its military tracked at least 19 alleged violations of its airspace by Russian drones over a seven-hour period on Wednesday, describing the episode as “deliberate” and “unprecedented.” It also convened an emergency UN Security Council meeting over the incident.

Trump downplayed the accusations, suggesting that the alleged incident “could have been a mistake.” He also said he was “not happy about anything having to do with that whole situation” and expressed hope that it would just “come to an end.” Moscow responded by saying Warsaw’s claims were not supported by evidence and hyped up by the “European party of war.” Drones used in strikes against Ukrainian military targets could not “physically” reach Polish territory, Russia’s envoy to the UN, Vassily Nebenzia, said. European leaders, including French President Emmanuel Macron and European Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen, condemned the alleged incursion as “reckless” and expressed solidarity with Poland.

Read more …

There are no finances. There’s only a gap.

• IMF Warns Of Major Gap In Ukraine’s Finances – Bloomberg (RT)

Ukraine faces a growing funding gap that could require billions more in outside support to finance its conflict with Russia, Bloomberg has reported, citing sources from the International Monetary Fund. Ukraine, which spends around 60% of its budget on the conflict, relies heavily on Western assistance to cover pensions, public wages, essential services, debt, and humanitarian needs. It obtained a $15.5 billion loan from the IMF in early 2023 to cover some of the expenses and has already received around $10.6 billion, but the financing program was based on the assumption that the conflict would end this year and expires in 2027.

Kiev requested a new funding plan earlier this week, estimating that it will need up to $37.5 billion over the next two years if the conflict continues. But according to the Bloomberg report on Thursday, the IMF believes Ukraine may need $10-20 billion more than this, raising the total to $57.5 billion. IMF spokeswoman Julie Kozack confirmed on Thursday that the agency has begun talks with Kiev on a new support program, but did not acknowledge the reported shortfall. Sources told Bloomberg that Kiev and the IMF are expected to settle on a figure for the new loan next week. Ukraine’s cabinet and Finance Ministry declined to comment on the report.

Ukraine has struggled to secure new aid from its main backers. US contributions have dwindled since President Donald Trump’s return to office, leaving the EU as the biggest donor. One method pursued by the West has been to use profits from the $300 billion in frozen Russian assets abroad. Last year, the G7 backed a $50 billion loan plan to be repaid from these earnings.Some Western countries have called for the full confiscation of Russian assets, while others warn of legal risks. Nevertheless, the profits have already been tapped, with the EU, which pledged $21 billion under the program, disbursing roughly half of the amount so far this year.Russia has warned that financial and military aid to Ukraine only prolongs the conflict and has denounced the use of frozen assets as “robbery” which violates international law and erodes trust in the Western financial system.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

 

 

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