Menu Icon

Debt Rattle May 5 2025

May 052025
 
 May 5, 2025  Posted by at 9:51 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , ,  40 Responses »


Felix Vallotton On the beach 1899

 

• Russia Alone in Confronting Entire Collective West – Putin (Sp.)
• Russia Standing Alone Against West – Putin (RT)
• The Summit In The Sand – Putin To Meet Trump In Abu Dhabi May 15-16 (Helmer)
• Ukraine Ignores Russia’s Truce Request, Prepares To Sabotage Victory Day (SCF)
• No Peace And No Respect: Zelensky Threatens The May 9 Parade (Pacini)
• No Ukraine in EU Without Budapest’s Approval – Orban (RT)
• Slovak PM Fico Pledges To Defy ‘Unacceptable’ Zelensky Threats (RT)
• Musk Reacts To Video of Forced Mobilization In Ukraine (RT)
• How to Win the PR War on Tariffs (Scott Pinsker)
• Trump Just Got a Game-Changing Legal Victory (Matt Margolis)
• Trump Orders Reopening Of Notorious Alcatraz Prison (NYP)
• Trump Will Start Nominating Federal Judges ‘Rapidly’ (DS)
• Trump’s 100 Days and the Legal War in Washington (Hans von Spakovsky)
• Romania Hits All-Time Low With Fake Elections, Manipulated By The EU (Jay)
• Right Wing George Simion Wins First Round of Voting in Romania (CTH)
• The Bell Tolls for All White Gentile Ethnicities (Paul Craig Roberts)

 

 

 

 

Biden’s the worst thing that ever happened to old people :-))

Ballroom

JD

Bannon

FSD+

Sachs

GOP

Roosevelt

 

 

 

 

“..if Russia doesn’t rely on its traditional values, it risks losing its identity, and, ultimately, its existence.”

• Russia Alone in Confronting Entire Collective West – Putin (Sp.)

Russian President Vladimir Putin said Russia did not initiate its military operation in Ukraine any earlier because it believed in the Minsk agreements and aimed to resolve the Donbass issue peacefully. Russia did not prepare specifically for a military operation, but instead sought a peaceful resolution to the Donbass conflict, Vladimir Putin told journalist Pavel Zarubin in a documentary dedicated to the 25th anniversary since the president’s first inauguration. The country could not proceed with drastic action on Ukraine without first addressing key issues in the spheres of security and the economy. The president pointed out that the United States is now openly acknowledging that the West is engaged in an existential war with Russia. Putin emphasized that Russia is essentially standing alone in its confrontation with the collective West.

Until 2022, Russia had approached agreements with its Western partners with cautious trust. The signing of the Minsk agreements was a hopeful moment for Russia, expecting compliance from all parties. However, Putin pointed out that the country was ultimately deceived. The West used the pause under the guise of complying with the Minsk agreements to rearm Ukraine and prepare for war with Russia, he added. Putin said that as Western companies began to leave Russia, many risks loomed over the country’s economy. But despite these challenges, Russia did not fall into crisis, thanks to strong economic fundamentals that kept the country resilient. The president underscored the danger of a nation becoming too dependent on external factors, stressing that if Russia doesn’t rely on its traditional values, it risks losing its identity, and, ultimately, its existence.

Read more …

“I was responsible for the future of the country. Of course, I began working to ensure that this never happened..”

• Russia Standing Alone Against West – Putin (RT)

Russia is standing alone against the West, which is waging an “existential war” against the country, President Vladimir Putin has said. Putin made the remarks in a documentary titled ‘Russia. Kremlin. Putin. 25 years,’ filmed by Rossiya-1 broadcaster and released on Sunday. The film marks the 25-year anniversary of Putin becoming the country’s president for the first time. He inaugurated on May 7, 2000. The documentary features conversations between Putin and journalist Pavel Zarubin on various matters, including the hostilities between Ukraine and Russia, as well as a broader conflict between Moscow and the West. “Russia is essentially standing alone against the collective West. This required a serious attitude to the possible development of the situation in this particular sense,” Putin stated.

It has been clear from the early 2000s that the West has been acting “insidiously” against Russia, speaking about one thing and doing the opposite, Putin noted. The West’s failure to hear Russia’s repeated warnings, as well as its refusal to fully recognize the country’s sovereignty and respect its national interests, has ultimately led to the ongoing crisis, the president explained. “This ‘civilized world’ decided that Russia had weakened, historical Russia called the Soviet Union had collapsed, and the remaining parts needed to be finished off. The largest of them was the Russian Federation, and it also needed to be partitioned into 4-5 pieces. I was responsible for the future of the country. Of course, I began working to ensure that this never happened,” he said.

Moscow has repeatedly described the hostilities in Ukraine as a Western proxy war against Russia, in which Ukrainians are being used as “cannon fodder.” Russian officials have argued that the US and other Western powers intentionally escalated tensions by disregarding Moscow’s security concerns over NATO’s expansion in Eastern Europe and its growing military cooperation with Ukraine. Russia and the collective West ended up locked into an “existential war,” Putin stressed, adding that many in the West have now openly admitted that. Back in March, for instance, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio described the conflict as “frankly, a proxy war between nuclear powers – the United States, helping Ukraine, and Russia” and said the West should abandon its dead-end strategy of propping up Kiev “for as long as it takes.”

Putin

Read more …

Only reference to this meeting I have seen.

• The Summit In The Sand – Putin To Meet Trump In Abu Dhabi May 15-16 (Helmer)

After the Victory Day celebration later this week, President Vladimir Putin has agreed to hold a summit meeting with President Donald Trump. “The Americans have repeatedly asked for a summit and the Kremlin has finally decided,” according to a reliable Moscow source, “that there is no need to spurn the extended hand.” The source believes Abu Dhabi, in the United Arab Emirates (UAE), is the likely location. Preparatory discussions were held last week in Moscow when Putin telephoned the UAE President, Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan. The Kremlin communiqué claimed “the current state of Russia-UAE relations…constitute a strategic partnership and…enables ongoing dialogue even on the most sensitive international issues.” That was on May 1. The next day Putin met with Saif bin Zayed Al Nahyan, one of the President’s sons and his personal security chief, titled deputy prime minister.

The Moscow source says “the messages have been sent that it will not be a conclusive deal, only a meeting. This is a climb-down from the previous, public Russian position that a lot of work needs to be done first, before a presidential summit, by specialists. The Russians have understood there are no specialists on the US side yet, and the opportunity is right to shake hands first, then work out the details later.” The White House press spokesman has announced Trump “will travel to Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates [in this order] from May 13th, until May 16th.” “It’s a display of the Russian hand of friendship and mutual security,” the Moscow source adds. “The Americans are offering nothing concrete but we believe Trump is disposed to giving Russia the security steps it needs.”

The source says the Kremlin is “neither surprised nor disappointed” at Trump’s May 1 tweet declaring that “many of our allies and friends are celebrating May 8th as Victory Day, but we did more than any other Country, by far, in producing a victorious result on World War II.” “It shows you how foolish the Kremlin faction was which has advocated inviting Trump to Red Square for May 9. Putin will give Trump his PR opportunity – but in the sand, not in Red Square.” The shift in the Moscow consensus – from resistance on the part of the General Staff, the intelligence agencies, and the Foreign Ministry – has followed remarks by Vice President JD Vance. “It’s going to be up to them [Russia and Ukraine] to come to agreement and stop this brutal, brutal conflict,” he said on Friday (May 2).

“It’s not going anywhere right [now]. It’s not going to end any time soon…Look, I am optimistic, but it’s hard to say…confident because the Russians and the Ukrainians – they’re the ones who have to take the final step. We got ‘em talkin’. We got ‘em offering peace proposals. We got the minerals deal done. I think we’re in a place where they’ve got to say we’re done with the fighting…but only Russia and Ukraine can make that decision. That’s not something even President Trump can do for ‘em.” In Moscow this is interpreted as acceptance by Washington that the war will continue on Russia’s terms – slow advance westward, no massed offensive – and that it’s now up to “direct” negotiations between Russia and Ukraine to reach an agreement.

“This is a double signal prompting Putin”, another Moscow source says, “to agree to a summit meeting with Trump now without preconditions and without pressure to agree on the Kellogg or Witkoff term sheets. In all likelihood, this will be a feel-good summit. No negotiations at all.” The source adds a caution. “The planned meeting may be derailed at the last minute if the Ukrainians violate the Victory Day ceasefire [between May 8 and 11], and if Trump is either shown to be incapable of controlling the Kiev regime, or duplicitous in aiding the violations. If the Ukrainians do not observe it, the Russians will hit back hard, very hard, and then ask Trump if he still wants to meet. It might go to the wire.”

Read more …

“As the world prepares to honor those who gave their lives in the fight against fascism, Kiev prepares to attack those who once defeated Ukraine’s infamous so-called “heroes.”

• Ukraine Ignores Russia’s Truce Request, Prepares To Sabotage Victory Day (SCF)

Behind its “democratic” rhetoric and constant appeals for Western support, the Kiev regime continues to display its true nature: belligerent, provocative, and increasingly engaged in terrorist practices. The most recent demonstration of this is Ukraine’s plan to sabotage the Victory Day celebrations in Moscow, scheduled for May 9, 2025—a date that symbolizes the Soviet Union’s triumph over Nazism and thus holds profound historical and civilizational significance for Russia and the world. Despite ongoing international tensions, leaders from more than 20 countries have confirmed their attendance at the event. Among them are high-profile figures such as Presidents Lula da Silva (Brazil), Ibrahim Traoré (Burkina Faso), Nicolás Maduro (Venezuela), To Lam (Vietnam), Miguel Díaz-Canel (Cuba), and Aleksandar Vucic (Serbia), along with Chinese President Xi Jinping and Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico.

The diversity of the guest list highlights that the event goes far beyond Russia’s national interest—it stands as a global tribute to the defeat of fascism and a reaffirmation of our shared historical memory. However, on the other side of the border, in Kiev, President Vladimir Zelensky’s government is taking a radically different path. According to diplomatic and intelligence sources, Ukrainian authorities have openly discussed the possibility of launching provocations and terrorist attacks to disrupt the Moscow event. The presence of foreign dignitaries does not appear to deter such plans, revealing a flagrant disregard for basic norms of international law and diplomatic conduct. Zelensky himself, in recent statements, advised world leaders not to attend the May 9 parade, a clear attempt to sow fear and discourage participation.

His suggestion that the event may be targeted echoes earlier remarks in which he stated that “they are worried their parade is under threat—and they should be,” signaling awareness of or complicity in potential sabotage operations. These threats are not vague or speculative. Influential figures within Ukrainian nationalist circles, such as Dmitry Korchinsky—the leader of the radical “Bratstvo” party—have used social media to call on followers to prepare terrorist attacks on Russian soil. In public messages, Korchinsky even recommended planting improvised explosive devices in Moscow’s Red Square ahead of the celebration and proposed using fiber-optically guided drones. The range of potential attacks is wide and deeply concerning: from direct terrorist acts in Moscow and other Russian cities to infrastructure sabotage, targeted assassinations, disinformation campaigns, and psychological operations.

There is also evidence suggesting the possible deployment of foreign mercenaries and nationalist militant groups such as the “Freedom of Russia Legion” or the “Sheikh Mansur Battalion” to destabilize Russian border regions like Belgorod, Bryansk, and Kursk. A full-scale incursion by the Ukrainian regular army into these regions to spread panic and terror cannot be ruled out. In contrast, Russia has formally called for a ceasefire during the Victory Day period—a humanitarian gesture that any state truly committed to international law and human rights should respect. However, all indications suggest that Kiev will not only ignore this appeal but will deliberately violate it. This reinforces the growing perception that the Ukrainian regime acts as a perpetual agent of destabilization, supported—either tacitly or explicitly—by the West.

By aligning themselves with a government that threatens to sabotage a historic and internationally respected commemoration of the defeat of Nazism, Western countries are, whether knowingly or not, siding with reckless historical revisionism and disorder. This raises a serious question: how far are NATO allies willing to go in tolerating the increasingly extreme methods of the Kiev regime? As the world prepares to honor those who gave their lives in the fight against fascism, Kiev prepares to attack those who once defeated Ukraine’s infamous so-called “heroes.” The West and its institutions may absolve the Maidan junta—but History will judge it differently.

Read more …

“The invitation, as is well known, was also extended to US President Donald Trump, in continuation of the peace talks that have been ongoing since January..”

• No Peace And No Respect: Zelensky Threatens The May 9 Parade (Pacini)

Volodymyr Zelensky, in his delusions as self-proclaimed president-without-end of Ukraine, continues to spout nonsense even during this festive period: referring to the May 9 celebrations, he rejected Vladimir Putin’s proposal for a truce, similar to what happened at Easter. Unfortunately, the rejection was widely predictable, as is the fact that he will try to provoke Russia at the height of the celebrations. Zelensky has called for a 30-day ceasefire, which Russia has no reason to accept given the situation on the battlefield, which is entirely in Russia’s favor. On the other hand, Putin has always said, since the beginning of the SMO, that he would only agree to stop the war permanently, i.e., through genuine and comprehensive peace negotiations, as is customary in diplomacy.

The arrogance of Washington’s puppet knows no bounds, remaining completely outside the bounds of diplomatic decorum. Not even in the worst war schools would they have gone this far. It is almost embarrassing how the Ukrainian president is seeking direct confrontation at all costs. It is no longer a simple repetition of provocation, it is much more: it is a strategy to exhaust the enemy’s patience. The most suicidal move one could attempt. Zelensky has also stated that Ukraine cannot guarantee the safety of the leaders who will participate in the May 9 parade in Red Square. We are witnessing an explicit threat against heads of state who, in theory, could apply restrictive measures and sanctions against Ukraine if they wanted to. How can it come to this? It is a wicked statement.

Clearly, no one is afraid of the threat posed by the ‘loneliest man in the world’, the leader ignored by all, who, like a parasite, has sucked money from European states and NATO members in the name of an impossible war, protecting only his own interests. Imagine you have a crazy friend whom you would never give anything important to do because you are afraid he might ruin everything. That’s Zelensky. But now it’s time to stop playing games. If Ukraine really attacks Moscow, the retaliation will be devastating. And so will the international response. Numerous politicians from around the world are expected in Moscow on May 9. The invitation, as is well known, was also extended to US President Donald Trump, in continuation of the peace talks that have been ongoing since January, as well as to Chinese President Xi Jinping, at a time of particular tension between the US and China.

Once again, it is a lesson in life and diplomacy. Russia seeks mediation and puts it into practice with authority, being in an international position where it certainly does not have to ask anyone’s permission; on the contrary, it sets an example. An example that Kiev should keep in mind. The opportunity is of enormous value: symbolically, it is the repetition of a principle that has been engraved in history, that of anti-fascism and the historical truth of the defeat of Nazism in Europe thanks to Soviet Russia. It is also the repetition of an objective historical victory of socialism, in the Soviet model, over the other ideologies of a century ago (a victory that did not last uninterrupted, unfortunately suffering a severe blow from liberalism after 1989). And today, it is a sign of a clear desire: to reunite the peoples of Eurasia in a bloc that will serve as a guide for all peoples who do not want to submit to Western hegemony, under any name or flag.

Read more …

“..Orban warned that Ukraine’s EU membership “would bankrupt the Hungarian economy,” describing Kiev’s potential accession as a “collective economic trap.”

• No Ukraine in EU Without Budapest’s Approval – Orban (RT)

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban and Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky have clashed over Kiev’s prospects of joining the EU. Orban reminded the Ukrainian leader that Kiev has no chance of becoming part of the bloc without Budapest’s approval. The war of words started on Friday when Orban warned that Ukraine’s EU membership “would bankrupt the Hungarian economy,” describing Kiev’s potential accession as a “collective economic trap.” The Hungarian leader also criticized the EU’s goal of admitting Ukraine by 2030, a target recently reiterated by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. “We know when they want to bring them in. It’s not some vague future; it’s here, knocking at our door,” he said. “Forget the fairy tales about when and how. They want to do it now, as fast as possible.”

Zelensky responded by citing domestic polling in Hungary. “70% support Ukraine joining the EU. That means people in Hungary are with us,” Zelensky claimed. However, the poll conducted by the opposition Tisza Party to which Zelensky referred showed only 58% support. An earlier poll by the Hungarian newspaper Nepszava showed even lower figures, with 47% in favor and 46% against. Orban fired back at Zelensky on X, writing: “What the Hungarian people think is not decided by the president in Kiev or the bureaucrats in Brussels. There is no Ukrainian EU accession without Hungary. Every Hungarian will have their say on this. Whether you like it or not. That’s how we do things here.”

All EU member states must unanimously approve any new country joining the bloc. Hungary has repeatedly cited widespread graft and minority rights issues as reasons to oppose Ukraine’s fast-track membership, with Orban at one point describing the nation as “one of the most corrupt countries in the world.” Ukraine, which has designated EU membership as a national priority, formally applied to join the bloc in February 2022, just days after the escalation of hostilities with Russia. Despite support from several EU members, the timeline for Ukraine’s membership remains uncertain. Brussels has cited the need for Kiev to undertake significant legal, political, and economic reforms.

Read more …

“..Fico, however, stated that the threats issued by Kiev would not deter him from participation in the commemoration.“In my opinion, it’s ridiculous. I reject such threats..”

• Slovak PM Fico Pledges To Defy ‘Unacceptable’ Zelensky Threats (RT)

Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico has confirmed he will attend Russia’s Victory Day celebrations in Moscow on May 9, dismissing warnings by Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky of potential security risks as “ridiculous.” The May 9 parade in Moscow will mark the 80th anniversary of the Soviet victory over Nazi Germany. The Kremlin has extended invitations to the event to the leaders of Serbia, Slovakia, China, India, and Brazil, among others. In April, Russian President Vladimir Putin proposed a unilateral 72-hour ceasefire in the Ukraine conflict to coincide with the Victory Day celebrations. Zelensky rejected the offer, labeling it a “theatrical performance” and advocated for a more substantial, unconditional 30-day ceasefire. Russian officials argue that a new temporary truce would simply allow Kiev to regroup and rearm.

Earlier this week Zelensky urged foreign leaders to avoid visiting Moscow, citing potential security risks. Russian officials accused Zelensky of endangering the safety of civilians attending the May 9 events. Fico, however, stated that the threats issued by Kiev would not deter him from participation in the commemoration.“In my opinion, it’s ridiculous. I reject such threats,” Fico said at a press conference on Sunday. “I will go to the celebrations of the 80th anniversary [of Victory Day in Moscow].” Fico claimed Zelensky was effectively warning invited leaders not to attend, with the veiled threat that Ukraine might retaliate in some way. “Well, celebrate, we might throw you a drone or something like that. These are unacceptable things for me,” he said.

Referring to Zelensky’s claim that Kiev could not guarantee the security of attending leaders, Fico responded: “If Zelensky thinks that his cries will prevent foreign delegations from coming there, it is a huge mistake. Ensuring the security of participants [in the celebrations] is the responsibility of the Russian Federation,” said the Slovak prime minister. The EU’s top diplomat, Kaja Kallas, warned in April that the bloc does not want any member or candidate states attending. During a meeting last month with Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic, who earlier pledged to attend, EC Commissioner for Enlargement Marta Kos reportedly cautioned that his attendance would be held against Serbia in its bid to join the EU. Fico recommended “Kallas and others to deal with more serious problems than whether I will go or not to the celebration of the 80th anniversary.”

Read more …

“Elon Musk has drawn attention to a viral video showing Ukrainian military recruiters forcibly detaining a deliveryman in Lutsk..”

• Musk Reacts To Video of Forced Mobilization In Ukraine (RT)

Elon Musk has drawn attention to a viral video showing Ukrainian military recruiters forcibly detaining a deliveryman in Lutsk, in the western part of the country. Kiev has pursued a violent mobilization campaign for months, often resulting in clashes between reluctant civilians and military personnel. On Saturday, a media user on X shared a video showing three Ukrainian soldiers approaching a man on a bicycle carrying a large yellow bag and wearing a vest, who appears to be a delivery worker. After a brief conversation, the soldiers attempt to drag him into a white van parked nearby, but he resists. Following a struggle, the recruitment officers manage to shove the man into the vehicle, which then drives off. The fate of the detainee is unknown. Reacting to the video, Musk posted “!!” on his social media platform. The X owner and close ally of US President Donald Trump has repeatedly called on the Ukrainian leadership to sign a ceasefire with Russia to avoid further casualties.

Last November, he also criticized reported calls by the US government for Ukraine to lower the minimum conscription age to 18, writing: “How many more need to die?” On Friday, another mobilization video from Lutsk surfaced on social media, with recruitment officers – potentially driving the same van as in the first clip – forcibly detaining a man riding a scooter. Ukraine announced a general mobilization following the escalation of the conflict with Russia in 2022, barring most men 18 to 60 years old from leaving the country. In 2024, faced with manpower shortages and mounting losses, Kiev lowered the conscription age from 27 to 25, while introducing stricter penalties for draft evasion and tightening other mobilization rules. As the mobilization drive continues, numerous videos have emerged on social media showing Ukrainian officials trying to forcibly recruit reluctant civilians, often leading to violent clashes.

Read more …

How to win? Talk about jobs. Talk about no income taxes.

“If we can lift 800 million Chinese peasants out of poverty, then there’s no excuse for leaving any Americans behind..”

• How to Win the PR War on Tariffs (Scott Pinsker)

“In a few moments, I will sign a historic executive order instituting reciprocal tariffs on countries throughout the world, reciprocal. That means they do it to us and we do it to them, very simple, can’t get any simpler than that.” —Donald Trump’s very first mention of tariffs during the May 2 “Liberation Day” event.

That was an honest lead, but it wasn’t optimal PR. There are zillions of truthful, accurate, interesting facts about tariffs. It’s a complex subject that’s intertwined with global trade, international diplomacy, geography, history, and economic policy — textbooks can (and certainly have) been written about it. You could yak about it 24/7 for a decade and still find something new to say. When it comes to tariffs and PR, there’s an embarrassment of riches. I know that sounds like a good thing, but it’s actually a problem.

[..] Experts in highly skilled fields (engineers, medical, tech) are often difficult to train for media appearances… because they know so damn much! For example, if a doctor is representing a hospital during a news segment and is asked about a new procedure they’re offering, he’ll instinctively want to share all the info he’s most excited about: the new research, new clinical studies, new data, new equipment, and new theories! To a doctor, all that stuff is incredibly important — and medically relevant, too. He’s right. But the guy sitting at home just wants to know if it’ll make him feel better. Truth and tactics are different. Let’s get back to tariffs. More often than not, the standard MAGA answer for “why” is twofold: Liberation Day was necessary because other countries were ripping us off, and because what they’ve been doing to us is unfair.

Fairness is almost always accentuated. Even the name reflects it: The “Fair and Reciprocal Plan” on Trade. In fact, that was the very first bullet-point listed under the announcement: The “Fair and Reciprocal Plan” will seek to correct longstanding imbalances in international trade and ensure fairness across the board. Well, fairness is very nice. Most people would support that. But fairness to whom? The guy sitting at home doesn’t associate himself with global trade. He’s indifferent to Walmart’s stock price. For him, tariffs are connected to higher prices.[..] Tariffs are about FAIRNESS, eh?! The way it’s currently being positioned, it sounds a helluva lot “fairer” for those big corporations than for the guy at home, ‘cause he’s the one who’s gonna pay more! Those rich guys don’t seem to be suffering. Asking Joe Sixpack to sacrifice so Walmart, Apple, Google, and Boeing can claim a bigger piece of the pie is a pretty big ask.

Other countries’ tariffs have been grossly unfair and decidedly un-reciprocal; that’s a true statement. And even the media doofuses who’ll call Trump a liar at the drop of a (red) hat are actually taking his word on tariffs: Trump really, truly believes that other countries were unfairly ripping us off; it’s not a put-on. Nobody’s doubting the sincerity of his convictions. But for PR purposes, we need to recalibrate the trajectory of who is being ripped off: We don’t want our audience to think about the Walmarts, Apples, and Boeings of the world. We want them to think about themselves. If the American people personalize this issue — i.e. if they identify with the struggle — then MAGA will win the political war over tariffs. And if they don’t? We won’t. The answer, then, to WHY we have tariffs must always be a four-lettered word: JOBS!

“Fairness” is an abstraction; a job is tangible. I’d be furious with the politician who gave me higher prices, just so Google’s shareholders could make more money — but I’ll gladly sacrifice so my friends, neighbors, and colleagues will have better jobs. Everyone recognizes the value of high-paying jobs. The American economy is unfathomably large. It’s the envy of the world. It’s so big and prosperous, we’ve employed BILLIIONS of foreign nationals over the last 40 years! We’ve made hundreds of millions of Chinese, Indians, Vietnamese, Europeans, and others incredibly wealthy. Since 1978, global trade has lifted 800 million Chinese people out of poverty. Good for them. Maybe the limousine liberals in the Democratic Party haven’t noticed, but our own people are hurting. We need to lift our friends and neighbors out of poverty, too. There aren’t enough good jobs available!

If we can lift 800 million Chinese peasants out of poverty, then there’s no excuse for leaving any Americans behind. So, this isn’t just “Make AMERICA Great Again” — it’s Make AMERICANS Great Again. This is about us! There’s an affordability epidemic in our country: 67% of Americans now believe that homeownership is “unrealistic” for young people. It’s gotten so bad, 73.8% of millennials are living paycheck-to-paycheck. Without your own home, it’s really tough to raise children. And without more children, our entire system collapses. It’s literally an existential threat. Unless we bring high-paying jobs back to our country ASAP, our children and grandchildren won’t have a country left anymore — because greedy, corrupt politicians gave our country away in crooked trade deals. The status quo was destroying the American Dream.

Read more …

“The court noted that the district court likely lacked jurisdiction to interfere with the administration’s personnel actions and funding decisions..”

• Trump Just Got a Game-Changing Legal Victory (Matt Margolis)

When President Trump returned to the White House, he didn’t just get to work cleaning up Joe Biden’s mess—he set his sights on dismantling decades of entrenched bureaucratic bloat, waste, and corruption. With a relentless series of executive orders and policy directives, Trump reignited his mission to drain the swamp—this time with laser precision and zero patience for the status quo. Predictably, the left went into full-blown panic mode. Liberal legal groups immediately launched a barrage of lawsuits, cherry-picking friendly courts in a shameless attempt to stall Trump’s agenda. They’re terrified of losing control over the bloated regulatory state they’ve used for years to push policies they could never pass through Congress. But that strategy just hit a major roadblock.

In a landmark ruling on Saturday, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals handed the Trump administration a decisive legal victory—one that could fundamentally change how activist judges and forum-shopped cases interfere with executive authority. “This is a huge victory for President Trump and his Article II powers granted in the United States Constitution. It’s also a victory for US Agency for Global Media (USAGM) and VOA,” Kari Lake told Fox News Digital. Lake now serves as a USAGM senior advisor to the Trump administration. “We are eager to accomplish President Trump’s America First agenda which has always been to modernize and make our government efficient while cutting waste, fraud, and abuse.” The appeals court’s 2-1 ruling Saturday emphasized the judiciary’s deference to executive authority in matters concerning federal employment and contractual decisions.

The court noted that the district court likely lacked jurisdiction to interfere with the administration’s personnel actions and funding decisions, particularly regarding grant agreements with non-federal entities like Radio Free Asia and the Middle East Broadcasting Networks. This ruling Trump’s March 14 executive order (EO), which aimed to dismantle USAGM operations. This ruling effectively reins in district courts that have been sidestepping proper jurisdictional channels in cases challenging Trump administration actions. The decision serves as a clear reminder that courts themselves must operate within their prescribed legal boundaries. According to Margot Cleveland, senior legal correspondent for The Federalist, the D.C. Circuit’s ruling hinges on a critical point: jurisdiction, which has sweeping implications.

As Cleveland explains, many of the legal challenges being hurled at the Trump administration involve employment decisions—precisely the kind of disputes Congress has explicitly said federal district courts have no authority to adjudicate. The court’s decision also strikes at the heart of a broader legal strategy being used by leftist groups to stymie Trump’s reforms—namely, the claim that the administration is engaging in “wholesale dismantling” of agencies. But as the ruling makes clear, the Administrative Procedure Act was never designed to handle such broad-based political grievances, and Congress never waived sovereign immunity to allow them. In another key point, the court found that the lower court also overstepped its bounds by trying to restore federal grants—something Congress assigned to the Court of Federal Claims, not the district courts. All told, the decision is a sharp rebuke to the legal overreach being used to obstruct the Trump administration’s agenda.

The significance of this decision extends far beyond these specific cases—it establishes clear jurisdictional parameters that could affect dozens of pending lawsuits against Trump administration policies. While the administration won’t prevail in every case, this ruling suggests courts may need to more carefully consider their jurisdictional authority before issuing sweeping injunctions against executive actions.

Read more …

Strong symbols.

• Trump Orders Reopening Of Notorious Alcatraz Prison (NYP)

President Trump called on his administration to reopen and expand Alcatraz so authorities could send the “dregs of society” to the notorious California prison more than six decades after it closed. The commander in chief announced Sunday that he was directing the Bureau of Prisons and other federal agencies to get the massive island facility off the San Francisco bay — which has long been the lore of Hollywood — back up and running again to lock away homegrown, repeat criminals. “For too long, America has been plagued by vicious, violent, and repeat Criminal Offenders, the dregs of society, who will never contribute anything other than Misery and Suffering,” he wrote on Truth Social. “When we were a more serious Nation, in times past, we did not hesitate to lock up the most dangerous criminals, and keep them far away from anyone they could harm.

“That’s the way it’s supposed to be. No longer will we tolerate these Serial Offenders who spread filth, bloodshed, and mayhem on our streets.” Trump, 78, also said the “substantially enlarged and rebuilt” prison would “serve as a symbol of Law, Order, and JUSTICE.” But the logistics behind the presidential order are thornier. The island is now a major tourist attraction that is run by the National Parks Service and attracts thousands of visitors each year. It’s also a designated National Landmark. Alcatraz was initially closed because its infrastructure was crumbling and it was too expensive to keep running — given all food, supplies and other necessities had to be delivered by boat. The facility was operated as a major federal detention center between 1934 and 1963 and was nearly inescapable because the island was surrounded by strong currents and ice-cold water. Some of its most famous prisoners included gangsters Al Capone and George “Machine Gun” Kelly.

The island has become the subject of several Hollywood blockbusters, including “The Rock,” starring Sean Connery and Nicolas Cage and the 1979 film “Escape from Alcatraz,” starring Clint Eastwood. During Alcatraz’s 29 years as a prison, 36 men made a bid for freedom — with nearly all of them dying or getting captured by guards. To this day, it remains unknown if three inmates – brothers John and Clarence Anglin, and fellow inmate Frank Morris – successfully made it off the island alive during their attempted escape in 1962. Trump, in his social media post, said the country can’t be held hostage by “criminals, thugs, and Judges that are afraid to do their job and allow us to remove criminals, who came into our Country illegally.” The Republican has railed against federal judges who have slowed his effort to boot alleged gangbangers and ship them off to the infamous El Salvador megaprison.

Just last Thursday, District Judge Fernando Rodriguez – who was appointed by Trump – blocked the US government from using the Alien Enemies Act to deport suspected members of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua. Trump also ordered the FBI, the Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security to help get Alcatraz reopened. The president previously reopened a detention center at Guantanamo Bay, where criminal migrants have been sent. When that announcement was made in late January, one of the president’s sons, Donald Trump Jr., floated the idea of dumping prisoners in Alcatraz. “Now this is a great idea,” he said in reference to Guantanamo Bay. “Maybe we should also reopen Alcatraz?!?!”

Read more …

“..we have thousands of murderers in this country, we’re getting them out and they say ‘we don’t want them out, we want them to stay in our country until we have a trial..”

• Trump Will Start Nominating Federal Judges ‘Rapidly’ (DS)

President Donald Trump will nominate federal judges “rapidly,” he told The Daily Signal on Sunday night. “We’re putting them in rapidly and trying to get very good ones, but we need judges that are not going to be demanding trials for every single illegal immigrant,” Trump said on Air Force One. “We have millions of people that have come here illegally, and we can’t have a trial for every single person, that would be millions of trials.” Trump is off to a slower start in nominating judges than his first term, having only nominated one federal judge, Whitney Hermandorfer, who will serve on the 6th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals in Cincinnati, Ohio. About 100 days into Trump’s first term, the Senate had already confirmed a new Supreme Court justice, Trump had nominated an appeals court judge, and several other prominent judicial nominees were in the queue to be announced within days.

But according to the president, his slow start to judicial nominations is about to morph into a sprint. Trump said America needs federal judges who won’t insist on a trial for the deportation of every illegal immigrant. “The people elected me in a landslide… We won every swing state… by big numbers… not only swing state, but the popular vote by millions of votes… they elected me, this was the number one issue,” Trump said, “and now we have judges that are radicalized, and they’re crazy because … if you believe this, they want us to have a trial for every person that came illegally into our country.” “So they come into our country illegally, and we’re supposed to take weeks, I guess, and months to have a trial, you want every criminal, and we have murderers that are all over the country,” the president continued. “I don’t think the Supreme Court will stand for that, I can’t believe it, because you know what? If they do, we’re not gonna have a country.”

The Daily Signal asked the president how he will ensure his nominations are different than the judges blocking his agenda, and he said all he can do is his best. “All you can do is do the best you can,” he said. “You try to appoint the best people to being judges or anything else that you appoint, but so far you know we’re very disappointed with the decisions that come out, mostly from people appointed by others than me.” “But it’s so hard to believe that you have a murderer, you know we have 11,888 or whatever the number is, we have thousands of murderers in this country, we’re getting them out and they say ‘we don’t want them out, we want them to stay in our country until we have a trial,’” Trump said. Trials take years, and America doesn’t have that much time to curb illegal immigration, according to the 47th president. “They take years,” he said. “It’s so crazy. We won’t have a country left. We can’t have that happen.”

Read more …

” If the Supreme Court doesn’t take steps to do that, Congress may remove it from the court’s hands and deal with the problem itself.

• Trump’s 100 Days and the Legal War in Washington (Hans von Spakovsky)

During his first 100 days in office, President Donald Trump acted with unprecedented speed to make major changes in government policies and root out the pervasive waste, fraud, and diversity, equity, and inclusion poisoning our government and its programs. Still, he was hampered by a handful of biased judges who abused their authority to keep him from implementing the policies the American people voted for. Jurisdiction is limited to the federal districts where the hundreds of district court judges reside. However, some of these judges arrogantly assert that they can override the president in areas of core executive branch competency and issue sweeping injunctions that affect the entire nation. They even claim they can act on behalf of people who aren’t parties in the cases before them.

These judicial tyrants seem to believe that the Constitution gives them more power than the president to make decisions on the size of the federal government, how it spends its money, and whom it can hire and fire. They say they have a right to overrule the president’s national security judgment on issues that affect our relations with foreign governments, our military readiness, and the safety of the public from unchecked illegal immigration. The Constitution does not give that authority to the judiciary. Perhaps these judges would like to rewrite President Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address to say we must preserve “government of the judges, by the judges, for the judges.” Make no mistake: These judges are acting far outside their authority, and their actions are unprecedented.

Last year, the Harvard Law Review noted that of the 127 nationwide injunctions issued since 1963, 64 were against the first Trump administration. Similarly, Justice Clarence Thomas noted in Trump v. Hawaii (2018) that district courts had issued such injunctions in recent years “without considering their authority to grant such sweeping relief.” Thomas said these injunctions “did not emerge until a century and a half after the founding” and are “inconsistent with long-standing limits on the equitable relief and the power of Article III courts.” In the case in question, district courts had issued nationwide injunctions against Trump’s proclamation restricting entry of aliens from eight nations, many of them terrorist states, because of the security threat they posed. As in many of today’s cases on dangerous criminal gangs and terrorist organizations, those judges thought their national security judgment overrode that of the president.

Trump won that case when the Supreme Court ruled that he was well within his authority to make that judgment and that the admission and exclusion of aliens is a “fundamental sovereign attribute exercised by the government’s political departments largely immune from judicial control.” Over the past 100 days, we have again witnessed numerous injunctions against actions well within Trump’s constitutional authority as the chief executive and commander in chief. Justice Neil Gorsuch warned against this type of judicial activism in 2020 in Department of Homeland Security v. New York, a case involving rulemaking on the definition of “public charge” as used in federal immigration law. In that case, multiple lawsuits had been filed with conflicting rulings by different courts. Gorsuch cynically said these different rulings didn’t matter.

“Despite the fluid state of things—some interim wins for the government over here, some preliminary relief for the plaintiffs over there—we now have an injunction to rule them all: the one before us, in which a single judge in New York enjoined the government from applying the new definition to anyone, without regard to geography or participation in this or any other lawsuit.” The Supreme Court stayed that injunction, but it never ruled on the legitimacy of the rulemaking. As soon as the Biden administration came in, it withdrew the government’s appeal and revoked the rule as part of its open borders policy. Today’s bout of lawfare is still in its preliminary stages, and the substantive merits of the various claims have not yet been decided by federal courts of appeals or the Supreme Court. However, the president has had some significant wins.

Notably, the Supreme Court recently dissolved temporary restraining orders issued by Chief Judge James Boasberg of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in a decision that told Boasberg he lacked jurisdiction over the removal of members of the terrorist group Tren de Aragua. Similarly, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals stayed a Biden district judge’s injunction that had told the administration it couldn’t root out DEI poison from the executive branch. The lawfare against the administration is undoubtedly frustrating, but we’ll see what happens when these cases reach the Supreme Court. In Trump v. Hawaii, Thomas said that if the “popularity” of nationwide injunctions continues, “this Court must address their legality.” Let’s hope the justices do that soon. If the Supreme Court doesn’t take steps to do that, Congress may remove it from the court’s hands and deal with the problem itself.

Read more …

“How convenient it was for Brussels to cancel an election in a country where corruption is so endemic that the people simply didn’t question how anti-democratic the stunt was in the first place..”

• Romania Hits All-Time Low With Fake Elections, Manipulated By The EU (Jay)

The European Union continues to sink deeper and deeper in its own political excrement as it not only believes its own manufactured consent by its Brussels cabal of wasters who call themselves journalists but is also tightening down its grip on its 400 million citizens. The EU never pretended to be a democracy but these days it is surpassing even the Stalinist period of the Soviet Union in its determination to control every thought of its citizens, which, of course means hunting down and persecuting any journalists who even simply question the narrative. The latest example – as there are many – is good ‘ol Chay Bowes, an RT presenter-come-journalist who was sent to Romania to cover the presidential elections – second time around, as the original result in March, which didn’t please the EU, was cancelled.

It’s what the EU does quite frequently. It simply cancels democratic processes which don’t come up with the results it prefers. Ireland and France experienced the same with their own referendums which had to be done a second time to get the right result. These days the EU simply calls any results which it doesn’t like ‘Russian interference’ and everyone just rolls over and accepts it, amazingly. Well, perhaps not amazingly for Romania which entered the EU in 2007 as its sort of Third World member state with corruption so bad that the narrative in Brussels at the time was “we’ll let them it and then reform them”. Not much has changed. The elite in Bucharest quite confidently takes its instructions from Brussels these days which told the Romanians to arrest Bowes when he arrives in Bucharest and get him to sign some bullshit fake police statement admitting all kinds of nonsense before kicking him out of the country.

Only the EU elite would go this far to block any kind of old school reporting on the ground by polemics like Bowes, who is probably considered very odd in his native Ireland, but was really only going to report what he saw and heard. Only the EU would be this obsessed with using the example of his arrest as a warning to any other odd journalists who don’t believe the EU script, that this is what happens to you. Bowes may well be wondering what will happen to him if he ever has to return to Ireland to see loved ones. Will his own police, on the instructions of the fabulously corrupt EU, have him arrested on some fake charge? At the heart of the matter is a man called Georgescu who, in basic terms, stands against everything that the corrupt EU and its boss – Ursula von der Leyen – stand for and so he got branded as being ‘pro-Russian’ and they have the piece of paper to prove it. From their own secret service goons. Oh yes they have.

Although he didn’t stand this second time around, back in March he got very close to winning outright the election before the EU stepped in. How convenient it was for Brussels to cancel an election in a country where corruption is so endemic that the people simply didn’t question how anti-democratic the stunt was in the first place. Romania, it would seem, is an irony-free zone. And I should know. In 2007 I travelled there to interview the PM for Euronews, only to find that once I arrived the interview was cancelled. I protested in a sarcastic email offering a couple thousand euros bribe to the press officer, only to receive a very angry email back. The press honcho had taken my offer seriously. Undeterred, I comforted myself by interviewing Romania’s new, young anti-corruption minister who, somewhat on cue, was forced to resign a few days after the interview. Yes, you’ve guessed it. He was accused of graft on a grand scale himself.

Democratically speaking, Romania is not at all a serious country, which has allowed the EU to meddle in its internal workings quite effortlessly rather like Moscow might have done at one point in its history. The elite in Bucharest and their EU masters have a real problem with Georgescu and is policies which are remarkably similar to those of Victor Orban, the EU’s in-house irritant who holds back the project from thinking big. “His frequent posts channelled widespread frustration over persistent poverty and endemic corruption in the country” Bloomberg wails. “Reprising themes popular with prominent nationalists such as Hungary’s Viktor Orban and Brazil’s Jair Bolsonaro, he condemned LGBTQ rights, questioned the use of vaccines, portrayed the coronavirus pandemic as a hoax and espoused the “Great Replacement” theory — the idea that Christian populations are being systematically replaced by non-Christians and immigrants”.

Read more …

“Simion hoped to harness the election support Georgescu built last year by saying he’ll have a job for him, even possibly as prime minister.”

• Right Wing George Simion Wins First Round of Voting in Romania (CTH)

The original winner of the previous Romanian election in 2024, Calin Georgescu, was removed as the election winner and barred from ever running again because Georgescu did not support the EU security state and did not want war with Russia. The election was thrown out because the wrong person won the vote of the Romanian people. A second election was organized, and the man who represents the voice of Georgescu, George Simion, has won the first round. However, do not get too excited; remember, NATO is building their biggest military base in Romania, and they will not accept any impediments. Like Moldova, the second round will likely see massive numbers of “Romanians voting from abroad” to help shape the final result. The people living in Romania will not technically be the ones deciding the Romanian election. In the new era of intelligence systems controlling “democracy,” all votes from people with an interest in the matter will be counted in favor of the candidate chosen by the EU national security apparatus.

Politico: “BUCHAREST — George Simion, the hard-right leader of the Alliance for the Union of Romanians, is projected to win the first round of Romania’s presidential election with around 40 percent of the vote, according to partial results from the country’s election authority. Simion badges himself as a supporter of U.S. President Donald Trump’s “Make America Great Again” movement, wants to stop military aid to Ukraine and will leave the EU quaking as another key country threatens to turn its back on mainstream European policies. “I promise I will always heed the will of the people. I am here to serve Romanians, not the other way around,” Simion said in a statement early Monday. He will face centrist Bucharest Mayor Nicosur Dan, who edged out establishment figurehead Crin Antonescu to make it into a runoff on May 18.

Dan won 20.7 percent of the ballots of Romanians voting at home, barely ahead of Antonescu, who received 20.5 percent. But Dan won 26 percent of the votes of Romanians voting abroad, with nearly 80 percent of the polling stations counted. Antonescu only received 7.3 percent of the votes abroad. […] The election results are being closely watched in Brussels and Washington, as Romania has become the latest battleground between the far right and the political establishment. […] Sunday’s vote was part of the election do-over that Romania’s top court ordered in December, after canceling the November ballot over allegations of illegal campaigning and potential Russian interference in favor of Calin Georgescu, an ultranationalist firebrand who came out of nowhere to win the first round.

That was the first time a candidate backed by a mainstream political party did not make it into the second round. Georgescu was set to face reformist Elena Lasconi in the second round. Lasconi, whose center-right Union Save Romania party leadership abandoned her to support Dan, only received some 2.8 percent of the votes of Romanians voting at home, according to the partial results. Simion hoped to harness the election support Georgescu built last year by saying he’ll have a job for him, even possibly as prime minister. “We are approaching an exceptional result, far beyond what the system’s TV channels present, which stirred up division, sprayed venom and distorted everything I said,” Simion said in a message projected at his party’s headquarters after the exit polls were released.

Read more …

“President Trump’s effort to restore power to ethnic Americans is being blocked by an anti-American judicial system that represents immigrant-invaders, not American citizens.”

• The Bell Tolls for All White Gentile Ethnicities (Paul Craig Roberts)

The Vice President and Secretary of State of the United States have called attention to the tyrannical behavior of the current German government, a corrupt anti-democratic government, controlled by Israel, that is holding on to power by designating its rival, AfD, the rapidly growing second largest party as “extremist.” Recent polls indicate that the AfD has pulled even and perhaps a bit ahead of the government that is trying to suppress it. By applying the “extremist” label to its rival, the government gives itself the power to use its spy agencies to keep the AfD under surveillance. This permits the current corrupt government to know in advance the AfD’s electoral plans while demonizing the AfD as so extreme that it must remain under surveillance.

On what grounds is the AfD designated extremist? The German Domestic Security Service BfV explains: The AfD represents ethnic Germans. Representing “people based on ethnicity and descent” disregards the human dignity of immigrant-invaders and is “incompatible with the democratic basic order.” Here we have it stated clearly just as Jean Raspail put it in The Camp of the Saints. It is anti-democratic for a government to represent the citizens from whose ethnicity the name of the country is derived. Democracy requires representation of those who entered the country illegally or under false pretenses. All government enforcement measures are then directed against the ethnic citizens who are coerced to accept the invasion. As Jean Raspail showed, this is a formula for the extinction of white ethnicities. President Trump’s effort to restore power to ethnic Americans is being blocked by an anti-American judicial system that represents immigrant-invaders, not American citizens.

Hanne Herland of the Herland Report tells us accurately that this is the situation all over Western Europe, the UK and Ireland: “In Europe, non-Western immigrants were given the victim card, and the current discrimination against the indigenous native Europeans by their own leaders began. Instead of listening to their needs, they demonized their views and attacked their own populations. “Europeans were told to step aside and allow immigrants to behave however rudely they wanted, since they came from poor countries and ‘didn’t know any better.’ They were to be excused from law-breaking behavior such as violent rapes, murders or entering the country illegally.” In other words, the immigrant-invaders weren’t civilized sufficiently to know any better, and it is all the fault of racist white ethnicities. What representing immigrant-invaders means in the EU is the loose enforcement, if any enforcement at all, of criminal and rape laws against immigrant-invaders.

Holding immigrant-invaders accountable would be racism, like what the Germans did to Jews. In effect, what is happening all over Europe and in Britain is that immigrant-invaders are becoming overlords over the ethnicities that comprise the former nations, now towers of babel. So, on top of their Israeli overlord, Europeans have immigrant-invaders as another overload. What a joke that Europeans and British and Irish are “free people.” They are the most enslaved in history. Even their tongues have been cut out. They cannot speak. The entire Western World is a dead man walking. Every person who rises to the defense of Western civilization is demonized, arrested, fired, dismissed from his university, framed in a false prosecution and imprisoned. The Insouciant West was insouciant for too long, It has lost its life.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Genes

Birth rate

Giga

Trump 1980

BR

Mess

Ali Baba

 

 

 

 

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