Mar 122026
 


Willem de Kooning Rosy-fingered Dawn at Louse Point 1963
When I still lived in Holland I would go to the StedelIjk Museum all the time just to see this painting.


Trump Says Iran War To End ‘Soon’ As ‘Practically Nothing Left’ To Target (ZH)
Thinking About the Unthinkable (Michael Hudson)
Iran Sleeper Cells ‘Activated’; Threaten To “Eliminate” Trump (MN)
It Seems Netanyahu Has Trump In Over His Head (Paul Craig Roberts)
The Die Is Cast: Either Iran or Washington/Israel Prevail (Paul Craig Roberts)
The Global Elites Lose Again (Heather Mac Donald)
Volkswagen Loses Half Their Profit, Plans to Cut 50,000 Jobs (CTH)
Top DOJ Prosecutor Says Tens Of Thousands Of Noncitizens On Voter Rolls (JTN)
Epstein’s Accountant To Testify Before House Oversight Panel (JTN)
Microsoft Backs Anthropic’s Bid to Block the Supply-Chain Risk Label (ET)
Are Bad Bots Taking Over The Web? (ZH)
Ukraine Can’t Explain ‘War Mafia’ Cash Convoy – Hungary (RT)
EU Members Could Loan Billions Directly To Kiev – Politico
Looks Like The EU Might Have To Pay Zelensky Just To Shut Up (Rachel Marsden)
The Big Lie: America Is a Divided, Hateful Country (Rick Moran)

 


 

 


 

 


 


92 million people in an ancient civilization, and after just a few days you have ‘Practically Nothing Left’ To Target? Sounds delusional, perhaps.

Trump Says Iran War To End ‘Soon’ As ‘Practically Nothing Left’ To Target (ZH)

President Trump on Wednesday said that the war with Iran will end “soon” because there is “practically nothing left to target.” “Little this and that… Any time I want it to end, it will end,” Trump told Axios during a five-minute phone call, adding “The war is going great. We are way ahead of the timetable. We have done more damage than we thought possible, even in the original six-week period.” “They were after the rest of the Middle East. They are paying for 47 years of death and destruction they caused. This is payback. They will not get off that easy,” Trump said.


So, Mission Almost Accomplished™ after the Trump administration has given estimates ranging from weeks to months for how long this might take.Yet while Trump is signaling that the operation has largely accomplished its objectives, US and Israeli officials say there’s been no indication of when fighting might stop. As Axios notes further, Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz said Wednesday that fighting will continue “without any time limit, for as long as necessary, until we achieve all the objectives and decisively win the campaign.” Meanwhile, Israeli and US officials say they’re preparing for at least two more weeks of strikes in Iran.

* * * Update (0930ET): The most significant development in the Strait of Hormuz on Tuesday was the start of IRGC naval mining operations, which were met with massive U.S. firepower that destroyed 16 mine-laying vessels. As we continue monitoring the maritime chokepoint this morning after IRGC attacks on three commercial vessels, attention is now shifting to the IRGC’s drone production capacity, which appears to have been degraded. Bloomberg reports that 2,100 Shaheds have been fired so far in the 12-day conflict. U.S. forces struck IRGC production facilities, disrupting large-scale manufacturing. The report is based on comments from a senior European official.

“Since the Houthis have produced UAVs under bombardment, one would think the Iranians can, albeit not at the same rates, since facilities have to be dispersed and makeshift workshops used,” Sid Kaushal, a senior research fellow at the UK-based Royal United Services Institute, told the outlet.The Wall Street Journal reported earlier that Saudi Arabia’s kill-cost ratio, neutralizing $20,000 IRGC drones with $2 million-plus missiles, has spurred talks with a Ukrainian counter-drone company for cheap interceptor drones.

* * * America-Israel’s Operation Epic Fury entered its 12th day, with U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth indicating that the most intense phase of U.S. strikes is expected on Wednesday. Tehran responded with retaliatory strikes against Gulf neighbors, as Goldman’s foreign affairs chief warned of a growing risk of regional spillover (read here). Overnight, market attention centered on energy, with the IEA reportedly proposing its largest-ever emergency crude release to combat Brent and WTI prices, which have reached triple-digit territory. “The most fighters, the most bombers, the most strikes. Intelligence more refined and better than ever. So that’s on one hand,” Hegseth said. “On the other hand, the last 24 hours have seen Iran fire the lowest number of missiles they’ve been capable of firing yet.”

Read more …

“Iran’s Grand Plan to End U.S. Presence in the Middle East..”

Thinking About the Unthinkable (Michael Hudson)

Iran and Donald Trump have each explained why failure to fight the current war to the end would simply lead to a new set of mutual attacks. Trump announced on March 6 that “There will be no deal with Iran except unconditional surrender,” and announced that he must have a voice in naming or at least approving Iran’s new leader, as he has just done in Venezuela. “If the U.S. military must utterly defeat it and bring about a regime change, or else “you go through this, and then in five years you realize you put somebody in who’s no better.’”[1] It will take at least that long for America to replace the weaponry that has been depleted, rebuild its radar and related installations and mount a new war.


Iranian officials likewise recognize that U.S. attacks will keep being repeated until the United States is driven out of the Middle East. Having agreed to a ceasefire last June instead of pressing its advantage when Israeli and regional U.S. anti-missile defenses were depleted, Iran realized that war will be resumed as soon as the United States is able to re-arm its allies and military bases to renew what both sides recognize is to be a fight to some kind of final solution.

The war that began on February 28 can realistically be deemed to be the formal opening of World War III because what is at issue are the terms on which the entire world will be able to buy oil and gas. Can they buy this energy from exporters in currencies other than the dollar, headed by Russia and Iran (and until recently, Venezuela)? Will the present U.S. demand to control of the international oil trade require oil-exporting countries to price it in dollars, and indeed to recycle their export earnings and national savings into investments in U.S. government securities, bonds and stocks?

That recycling of petrodollars has been the basis of America’s financialization and weaponization of the world’s oil trade, and its imperial strategy of isolating countries that resist adherence to the U.S. ruler-based order (no real rules, but simply U.S. ad hoc demands). So what is at issue is not only the U.S. military presence in the Middle East – along with its two proxy armies, Israel and ISIS/al Qaeda jihadists. And the U.S. and Israeli pretense that it is about Iran having atomic weapons of mass destruction is as fictitious an accusation as that levied against Iraq in 2003. What is at issue is ending the Middle East’s economic alliances with the United States and whether its oil-export earnings will continue to be accumulated in dollars as the buttress of the U.S. balance of payments to help pay for its military bases throughout the world.

Iran has announced that it will fight until it achieves three aims to prevent future wars. First and foremost, the United States must withdraw from al its military bases in the Middle East. Iran already has destroyed the backbone of radar warning systems and anti-aircraft and missile defense sites in Jordan, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Bahrain, preventing them from guiding U.S. or Israeli missile attacks or attacking Iran. Arab countries have bases or U.S. installations will be bombed if they are not abandoned.

The next two Iranian demands seem to far-reaching that they seem unthinkable to the West. Arab OPEC countries must end their close economic ties to the United States, starting with the U.S. data centers operated by Amazon, Microsoft and Google. And they not only must stop pricing their oil and gas in U.S. dollars, but disinvest in their existing petrodollars holdings of the U.S. investments that have been subsidizing the U.S. balance of payments since the 1974 agreements that made to gain U.S. permission to quadruple their oil-export prices.

These three demands would end U.S. economic power over OPEC countries, and thus the world oil trade. The result would be to dedollarize the world’s oil trade and re-orient it toward Asia and Global Majority countries. And Iran’s plan involves not only a military and economic defeat for the United States, but an end to the political character of the Near Eastern client monarchies and their relations with their Shi’ite citizens.

Read more …

“Even those greater than you could not eliminate the Iranian nation. Take care of yourself not to be eliminated!”

Iran Sleeper Cells ‘Activated’; Threaten To “Eliminate” Trump (MN)

US intelligence intercepts reveal Iran may be triggering covert operatives abroad, as Tehran issues direct warnings to President Trump following the airstrike death of its former supreme leader. U.S. intelligence has intercepted an encrypted message from Iran that appears to be an “operational trigger” for sleeper cells embedded in foreign countries, raising alarms about potential attacks. This development comes amid ongoing conflict, with Iran’s new supreme leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, facing threats from multiple fronts after his father’s death in a U.S.-Israeli airstrike.


https://twitter.com/Breaking911/status/2031106637662920797


passcodes, with characteristics suggesting it was meant for operatives outside the country. The alert describes the signal as resembling historical methods used to activate covert assets without internet reliance. “The signals could be intended to activate or provide instructions to prepositioned sleeper assets operating outside the originating country,” the alert stated.Concerns are heightened by reports of Iranian-linked operatives using routes like Venezuela to enter Western nations, potentially establishing networks near the U.S.

Security experts warn of threats from both organized cells and lone actors. Former DHS adviser Charles Marino told the Daily Mail that simultaneous attacks by 10-20 people in a cell are possible, targeting soft spots like concerts or sporting events. The upcoming World Cup, a National Special Security Event, is a particular worry. Tensions escalated further with Iran’s defiant response to President Trump’s comments on the new supreme leader. Trump stated on Fox that Mojtaba Khamenei would be unable to “live in peace” and expressed dissatisfaction with the appointment, warning Iran to brace for “death, fire and fury” if it shuts the Strait of Hormuz. Iran’s security chief Ali Larijani dismissed these as “empty threats,” adding, “Even those greater than you could not eliminate the Iranian nation. Take care of yourself not to be eliminated!”


This exchange follows the conviction of Asif Merchant, a Pakistani national trained by Iran’s IRGC, for plotting to assassinate Trump during the 2024 race. Merchant was found guilty days ago, with the plot linked to revenge for Qasem Soleimani’s 2020 killing. In a related development, Merchant told FBI agents he suspected Iran was behind the July 13, 2024, Butler assassination attempt on Trump. He claimed it mirrored his own scheme, orchestrated under IRGC coercion with threats to his family. Prosecutors allege Merchant recruited hitmen targeting U.S. politicians, including Trump, Biden, and Haley. During his trial, he handed $5,000 to undercover agents. U.S. strikes have since killed the IRGC leader behind the plot, as announced by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.

Hegseth described Tuesday as the “most intense day” of attacks on Iran, with refined intelligence leading to more strikes. Iran has fired fewer missiles in recent hours, he noted. Iran’s IRGC announced that countries expelling U.S. and Israeli ambassadors would gain passage through the Strait of Hormuz, amid warnings from Saudi Arabia’s oil company of market “catastrophe” due to disruptions.] Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stated Israel is “not done yet” in Iran, while warning Lebanese residents ahead of strikes on Hezbollah. French President Emmanuel Macron assured Cyprus of support amid regional strains.

Tehran saw massive airstrikes with “unusually large” explosions, as Trump vowed to end the war “very soon” but indicated further actions. Smoke billowed over the capital, and Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi ruled out resuming U.S. negotiations, citing past betrayals. Mojtaba Khamenei, wounded in the conflict and dubbed “vengeful” by some, has ties to the IRGC and is seen as more extremist. Protests in Iran include chants of “death to Mojtaba,” while state media rallies support.

Trump reiterated warnings on Truth Social, promising to hit Iran “twenty times harder” if oil flow is blocked. Iran insists it will determine the war’s end and continue missile attacks as needed. The Strait of Hormuz remains effectively shut, halting oil tankers and filling storage, spiking global prices and raising economic crisis fears. These intercepts and threats underscore the precarious security landscape, with potential implications for U.S. safety and international stability as the conflict persists.

Read more …

I may not agree all the time, but I highly appreciate the view of a soon 87-year old former (assistant) cabinet secretary.

It Seems Netanyahu Has Trump In Over His Head (Paul Craig Roberts)

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt was asked at a news conference on March 9 if in view of the lack of success of the Israeli-American missile and air strikes to defeat Iran, now that Trump was talking about boots on the ground could America look forward to a draft? Leavitt’s answer was that the President keeps all options on the table.I don’t think that this is going to go down well with American mothers and fathers. Yes, they are brainwashed about “Israel’s right to defend itself,” and “you can’t be an American if you don’t love Israel,” but that was before their sons faced conscription to go to war and to die for Israel.


So far we have only had propaganda, not factual news, about the success for lack thereof of the Israeli-American attack on Iran. But all the indications are that the war has not gone as Trump expected. My own opinion at this time is that the only way Trump can avoid defeat in Iran is to nuke Iran, which I am convinced was Netanyahu’s intent from the beginning. Netanyahu will be telling Trump, “You promised victory. You cannot accept a defeat.”

The Republicans who support the war, ranging from 76% to 85% depending on the poll are too stupid and insouciant to comprehend that they are supporting a war likely to end in nuclear war and their own demise. Patriots are the easiest to deceive, because they wrap themselves in the flag. But a deceived population is a poor basis for survival. Has Netanyahu maneuvered an utterly stupid American president into a draft in a midterm election year?

Read more …

Not both.

The Die Is Cast: Either Iran or Washington/Israel Prevail (Paul Craig Roberts)

President Trump recently declared that he has won the war ahead of schedule. But evidence supports the opposite conclusion. For example, Washington is having to remove sanctions on Russian oil in order to release Russian oil to the market in a weak effort to compensate for Iran’s closing of the Strait of Hormuz. So much for Trump’s “victory.” Washington has already been forced to waive its ban on refiners in India from purchasing Russian oil. US Treasury Secretary Bessent said: “We may unsanction other Russian oil . . . There are hundreds of millions of barrels of sanctioned crude on the water … by unsanctioning them, Treasury can create supply.” One might have thought that the dumbshit Trump regime would have thought of this prior to taking the world to war.


Here we will get a test of Putin’s mettle. Will he sell out his BRICS Iranian ally in exchange for Washington removing its Russian sanctions? Will Putin think he can parlay his cooperation with Israel-America for a mutual defense treaty? Such treachery would be isolating and would cost Russia China’s trust, leaving both countries isolated for Washington to try to destabilize. As Putin has already walked away from Syria and refuses to win the conflict with Ukraine, will he also sell out Iran for hopes that have no chance of being realized? Just how unrealistic is Putin? Can Russia survive Putin’s unrealism?

Until Washington renounces the Wolfowitz Doctrine of US hegemony and Israel renounces the Zionist agenda of Greater Israel, no agreement with Washington means anything other than the stupidity of the Russian or Chinese or Iranian government in giving Washington and Israel time to regroup, resupply, and renew the attack.

On Dialogue Works I discuss with Nima the basic fact that the operative foreign policies are Israel’s agenda of Greater Israel and Washington’s agenda of American hegemony. https://www.youtube.com/live/OEplHZWNG-E Israel’s agenda means that Iran’s only option is to fight for survival. Iran cannot negotiate its survival. The Wolfowitz Doctrine means that China and Russia’s only choice is to prevail over Washington or accept subservience to Washington. It is impossible to negotiate equality with a government, the agenda of which is its hegemony. It is extraordinary that governments, commentators, and media cannot comprehend such obvious facts.

Read more …

I kid you not: Their political rivals say the AfD is actively seeking to overthrow the German constitution. Like the Schiffs and Pelosi’s said about Trump.

The Global Elites Lose Again (Heather Mac Donald)

To the despair of the European establishment, the Alternative für Deutschland (AfD), the most hated political force in Germany, keeps showing robust signs of life, whether in its impressive showing in a state election on Sunday or in a recent courtroom victory. On Sunday, the AfD more than doubled its previous vote share for the parliament of Baden-Württemberg, a key industrial state in western Germany. On February 26, a German court enjoined the country’s domestic spy agency from classifying Germany’s second most popular political party as a “confirmed right-wing extremist” organization. The “confirmed right-wing extremist” designation has been a key tool in the campaign among establishment and left-wing politicians to ban the AfD entirely. The AfD’s fate should not be a matter of indifference to American conservatives. The globalist elites must be broken everywhere if they are to be permanently broken at all.


Growing numbers of the German public defy their overseers and welcome the AfD as an antidote to the EU-Davos philosophy of open borders and the deindustrialization and immiseration that go under the banner of climate-friendly energy policy. The AfD polls second nationally to the Christian Democratic Union (CDU). The CDU was once the cornerstone of postwar conservatism, but its leaders have pulled it to the left in order to marginalize the AfD. In February 2025, Chancellor (and CDU party head) Friedrich Merz cobbled together an ideologically incoherent governing coalition whose sole purpose is to shut the AfD out of power, despite the AfD’s receiving the second largest share of the German vote. The establishment proudly refers to this exclusionary strategy as the “firewall,” which allegedly protects German democracy from falling into the hands of purported neo-Nazis.

Despite the relentless agitation against it, the AfD is the leading political force in many East German states. It is rising fast in the West, including in several states, such as Baden-Württemberg, holding elections this year for their local parliaments. That’s where the government-imposed “right-wing extremist” label comes in. If one wants to see the Deep State in its most perfected form, Germany is the place to look.

The country’s domestic spy agency, the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution, has vast discretion to wiretap German citizens and to determine their political legitimacy. It assesses whether a political movement is an enemy of the “free democratic basic order” and “inimical to the Constitution.” Depending on how confident the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution is regarding the anti-democratic character of a party, it classifies that party as “a suspicious case,” a “suspected extremist” party, or a “confirmed extremist” party. These categories govern how much surveillance the Office for the Protection of the Constitution is allowed to conduct on party members—a startling amount by non-German standards, yet now almost shrugged off by its nationalist targets as an unavoidable condition of political existence.

Previously, the Office for the Protection of the Constitution had classified the AfD as a “suspected” right-wing extremist organization. But in 2025, the office bumped up the classification to “confirmed extremist” on the basis of a secret 7,000-page dossier of materials, collected from public sources and from years of wiretaps on party members’ phones. That “confirmed extremist” designation meant that the office was now certain that the AfD was actively seeking to overthrow the constitution. The reclassification was clearly the result of prodding from the previous minister of the interior, Nancy Faeser, a member of the Social Democratic Party (SPD). The intention was to accelerate the movement to ban the AfD altogether.

So what makes the AfD so dangerous to German democracy? Has it called for suspending elections? For storming the Bundestag (parliament)? For jailing, banning, or censoring its political opponents? For preventing those opponents from participating in the parliamentary debate? For shuttering the internet to contrary opinion? Has it used violence against its enemies? Is it antisemitic? No, it is the AfD’s enemies who seek to ban and censor it, who deny it its parliamentary privileges, who have launched arson attacks against its leaders, and who have assaulted its members. The AfD has done none of these things to its opponents, nor has it called for doing so. It has abided by every legal ruling against it, however tendentious. The AfD is Germany’s staunchest supporter of Israel and German Jews; it alone has tried for years to cut off the U.N. slush fund that supports Palestinian terrorism.

Its representatives are the target of shunning that would make a teenage girl blush. If an AfD member enters a crowded elevator in the modernist Bundestag, he may suddenly find himself alone, as his fellow legislators flee from possible contamination. So what makes the AfD so toxic?

Its cardinal sin is to argue that mass third-world migration is destroying traditional German culture and identity. It is to point out that Germany’s open-borders policies are saddling the country with a crime- and terror-prone, welfare-dependent, culturally alien population that consumes taxpayer resources while only intermittently giving something back to German society. Its crime against democracy is in calling for the enforcement of laws already on the books regarding the deportation of criminal aliens and other migrants who have no right to remain in German society. At its core, its heresy is to assert that a country has a right to decide its level of immigration and resulting culture change, rather than that level being determined by the will of the migrants themselves.

These AfD positions do not threaten due process, popular sovereignty, or other democratic values. If the AfD is nonetheless antithetical to democracy, as we are told, then democracy at present means above all else a commitment to maximum demographic replacement. Speak out against unchecked immigration from the Third World, and you will be branded not just as a racist and xenophobe but as a threat to democracy itself, since democracy is now defined as the embrace of policies that erode national identity. (Such erosion is sought only in Western countries, however.)

Read more …

“..EU car companies buy Chinese car company carbon credits, to avoid the EU fines. The Chinese car companies then use the carbon credit revenue to subsidize lower priced Chinese EVs to the European car market, thereby undercutting the European EV car companies..”

Volkswagen Loses Half Their Profit, Plans to Cut 50,000 Jobs (CTH)

The origin of this issue goes back to 2021 and the relaunch of the Build Back Better European green energy program to fight the non-existent climate change problem. We have been highlighting the consequences within the EU auto sector. We noted in October of last year, the EU’s mandated fines against auto manufacturers who do not hit their production goals for electric vehicle sales began in 2025. EU automakers unable to meet the regulatory compliance goal began purchasing carbon credits to avoid stiff EU fines. Many of those carbon credits were purchased from Chinese EV automakers, who then turned around and started using the extra EU revenue to discount Chinese cars sold in Europe.


At the same time as Chinese autos hit record highs in Europe, EU car sales are flat or declining. Now, Volkswagen is announcing they lost half their profits in one year and will be cutting 50,000 jobs in the next four years. (MSM – Europe) – Volkswagen just revealed its operating profit sank like a stone last year, dropping by more than half as tariffs, Chinese competition, and shifting strategies took a serious bite out of the bottom line. And that performance now has the VW Group’s execs reaching for the cost-cutting scissors, including plans to shed 50,000 jobs by the end of the decade.The German automaker reported an operating profit of €8.9 billion ($10.3 bn at current rates) for 2025. That’s down a hefty 53 percent from the year before and well below what analysts were expecting. Revenue, meanwhile, barely moved, slipping only slightly to around €322 billion ($374 bn). (read more)

This was very predictable. In essence, EU car companies buy Chinese car company carbon credits, to avoid the EU fines. The Chinese car companies then use the carbon credit revenue to subsidize lower priced Chinese EVs to the European car market, thereby undercutting the European EV car companies. The EU tariff applied to gasoline powered cars or hybrids from China is 10%. That tariff is not enough to stop the imports. The Chinese hybrid autos are substantially less than European car brands, and there’s no financial incentive for China to build auto plants in the EU zone especially when you consider the EU is subsidizing those cars by purchasing carbon credits.

When analyzed from a cost and consequence, the entire EU dynamic toward car companies is a little funny. However, for Germany this is a serious issue, and with the German industrial economy already stagnant – every impact to their auto industry only makes the situation worse. When you overlay the big picture of their expensive “green energy” costs, the EU find themselves in an unescapable downward spiral. Quite literally, all commonsense seems to have been lost in their green energy chase. By focusing on energy targets, specifically by trying to force production of European electric vehicles that are not favored by European car purchasers, the EU is shrinking their economy to the benefit of Beijing exploitation.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz recently travelled to China for a discussion with Chairman Xi Jinping. Chancellor Merz returned to German with a stark message about how the nation needed to quickly get productive in order to meet the far superior work ethic he saw in China. At the same time, the EU has destroyed its energy sector by chasing windmills and solar farms instead of maintaining the much cheaper coal and gas alternatives. Overall, Europe has made a series of really bad decisions, but those consequences will surface the hardest within the largest industrial economy, Germany. They’ve got major problems now.

Read more …

“Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Harmeet Dhillon..”

Top DOJ Prosecutor Says Tens Of Thousands Of Noncitizens On Voter Rolls (JTN)

The top Justice Department prosecutor for civil liberties and voting rights tells Just the News that her ongoing review of state voter rolls has proven tens of thousands of noncitizens made it into a position to cast ballots and that hundreds of thousands of dead or departed residents were not properly removed from state election systems. “It’s really frustrating that we’re being prevented from doing our job,” Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Harmeet Dhillon said Tuesday night, criticizing state election offices and federal judges who are blocking her office from her historic effort to obtain and review every state’s voter roll ahead of the 2026 midterm elections.


Dhillon gave an early accounting of the initiative, disclosing during a wide-ranging interview on the Just the News, No Noise television show that 16 states have turned over their voter rolls to DOJ or signed memorandum of understanding to provide the data while 29 are facing litigation to compel them to turn over the lists. “We want every American citizen to feel confident in voting and feel confident in the outcome of that election, and that is why we’re undertaking this massive project,” she explained. While having access to less than half the state’s election databases, Dhillon said she has already found deeply disturbing statistics that are only bound to get worse as more states are forced to comply.

“We’re finding tens of thousands of noncitizens on the voter rolls, hundreds of thousands of dead people on the voter rolls, and duplicate registrations between states,” she said. Earlier this month, DOJ announced it had indicted an illegal alien from Africa for illegally voting in seven federal elections in Pennsylvania. Federal law prohibits foreigners from voting in federal elections.Mahady Sacko, who came to the United States illegally from Mauritania, was arrested by Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers and the FBI in Philadelphia. He has been charged with voter fraud, officials said. “This criminal illegal alien committed a felony by voting in federal elections dating back to 2008. Illegal aliens should NOT be electing American leaders,” Deputy Assistant Homeland Secretary Lauren Bis said. “Our elections belong to American citizens, not foreign citizens. Congress must pass the SAVE America Act immediately to secure our elections.”

Dhillon revealed there are dozens more noncitizens who DOJ has confirmed voted illegally, but those cases have not yet been prosecuted because the U.S. Senate has not confirmed U.S. attorneys in many jurisdictions. “For every person that we’ve seen a story about, I know of dozens and dozens more cases, and U.S. attorney’s offices are wanting to bring these cases, but we have, of course, interference with the very appointment of these U.S. attorneys at the political level,” she explained. “So that’s above my pay grade, but it’s really frustrating that we’re being prevented from doing our job.

Dhillon said there are two reasons why states aren’t turning over voter rolls: some simply don’t want the DOJ to review their work and others are afraid of being sued by Democrat voting rights lawyers like Marc Elias or future Democratic presidential administrations. “You may ask, why don’t states clean it up themselves? Well, sometimes it’s just inefficiency, but more times it’s actually states wanting to clean up their voter rolls, and the Marc Elias’s of the world and even the DOJ (under Biden) are suing them to stop them from cleaning up their own voter rolls,” she said.

Read more …

I don’t care much for Epstein’s accountant. But this sentence stuck out. I had to read it twice and still have questions:

“Both Kahn and Indyke recently settled a lawsuit alleging they facilitated sham marriages for immigration purposes in which foreign-born victims married U.S. citizens whom Epstein abused.”

Does that state that Epstein abused US citizens who after that fact sham-married foreign-born victims -of Epstein?!

Epstein’s Accountant To Testify Before House Oversight Panel (JTN)

An accountant for late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein will testify Wednesday before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee in a closed-door deposition. Richard Kahn was Epstein’s accountant for more than 10 years and became an executor of his estate after his death, CBS News reported. Kahn was one of Epstein’s closest associates in his final years, as he managed the financier’s investments, finances and other matters, such as renovations on his private island. Another executor of Epstein’s estate, lawyer Darren Indyke, is expected to testify before the committee on March 19.


According to documents from lawsuits and the Justice Department’s Epstein files, Epstein, Kahn, and Indyke together operated a sophisticated and tangled web of businesses. The release of the files has shed more light on Epstein’s association with some of the world’s most powerful men, some of whom continued to associate with him after he pleaded guilty in 2008 to soliciting a minor for prostitution. After the House committee issued subpoenas to Kahn and Indyke in January, Daniel H. Weiner, an attorney for both men, said that allegations against them are “false.”

“It is worth emphasizing that not a single woman has ever accused either Mr. Indyke or Mr. Kahn of committing sexual abuse or witnessing sexual abuse, nor claimed at any time that she reported to them any allegation of Mr. Epstein’s abuse,” Weiner said. “Indyke and Kahn did not socialize with Mr. Epstein, and they have always rejected as categorically false any suggestion that they knowingly facilitated or assisted Mr. Epstein in his sexual abuse or trafficking of women, or that they were aware of Mr. Epstein’s actions while they provided legal and accounting services to Mr. Epstein.” Both Kahn and Indyke recently settled a lawsuit alleging they facilitated sham marriages for immigration purposes in which foreign-born victims married U.S. citizens whom Epstein abused.

Read more …

“Their true objective is unmistakable: to seize veto power over the operational decisions of the United States military. That is unacceptable..”

Microsoft Backs Anthropic’s Bid to Block the Supply-Chain Risk Label (ET)

Microsoft on March 10 filed an amicus brief backing Anthropic’s lawsuit against the Department of War, seeking a court order to temporarily stop the Pentagon from labeling Anthropic as a supply-chain risk. Anthropic filed the suit on March 9 after the Pentagon designated it a supply chain risk to national security, a label that would hinder the Pentagon and its contractors from using Anthropic’s artificial intelligence technology in their work for the U.S. military. The designation stemmed from Anthropic’s rejection of the Pentagon’s request for unrestricted access to its Claude models over concerns that the technology could be used for mass domestic surveillance or fully autonomous weapons. The Pentagon has denied that it planned to use Claude for such purposes.


In its amicus brief filed March 10, Microsoft said it was directly affected by the Pentagon’s designation of Anthropic because it uses Anthropic’s technologies in products made available to the Pentagon. The tech giant said that a temporary block on the designation would “enable a more orderly transition and avoid disrupting the American military’s ongoing use of advanced AI.” Microsoft warned that U.S. warfighters could be hampered “at a critical point in time” if companies are required to immediately alter existing product and contract configurations used by the Pentagon. It also warned that putting the Pentagon’s designation of Anthropic into immediate effect will have “broad negative ramifications for the entire technology sector and the American business community.”

Microsoft said the Pentagon gave itself a six-month period to transition services away from Anthropic’s technologies but did not provide the same transition timeline for contractors that use Anthropic products. “Should this action proceed without the entry of a temporary restraining order, Microsoft and other government contractors with expertise in developing solutions to support U.S. government missions will be forced to account for a new risk in their business planning,” it stated. “Should companies choose to forgo the opportunity to work with the U.S. government due to the attendant risks, the U.S. government, its missions, and the people it serves would lose access to state-of-the-art technological solutions,” Microsoft said.

[..] Anthropic alleged in its lawsuit that the federal government designated the company in retaliation for its viewpoint protected under the First Amendment. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth on Feb. 27 accused Anthropic of trying to dictate military operations by denying the Pentagon permission to use its Claude models for all lawful purposes. “Their true objective is unmistakable: to seize veto power over the operational decisions of the United States military. That is unacceptable,” Hegseth said in a post on X. The Pentagon used the Claude AI system for mission-critical functions, including intelligence analysis, modeling and simulation, operational planning, and cyber operations.

Read more …

We don’t even agree what is a ‘bad bot’.

Are Bad Bots Taking Over The Web? (ZH)

The share of global web traffic generated by humans is shrinking, while bot activity is on the rise. According to Imperva Bad Bot Reports, in 2018, humans still accounted for 62 percent of web traffic, with malicious bots at 20 percent and benign bots at 18 percent. But over the past seven years, the balance of web traffic has shifted dramatically. As Statista’s Tristan Gaudiat shows in the chart below, humans now represent less than half of all traffic (49 percent in 2024), while malicious bots have surged to 37 percent, accounting for well over twice the traffic of benign bots (14 percent).


This rise in malicious bot activity reflects a growing cybersecurity challenge. Bad bots are often used to steal login details, collect sensitive data, spread misinformation and manipulate online ads. Industries like e commerce, finance and social media are particularly affected. Bot fraud is estimated to cost businesses billions each year. Yet, not all bots are harmful. Benign bots, such as search engine crawlers and chatbots, play a crucial role in indexing the web and improving user experiences. However, their declining share suggests that cybercriminals are outpacing legitimate automation. As AI and machine learning make bots more sophisticated, their growing share of web traffic is likely to remain a defining trend in the years ahead.

Read more …

Corruption ”R’ Us

Ukraine Can’t Explain ‘War Mafia’ Cash Convoy – Hungary (RT)

Ukraine has failed to explain why an armored convoy carrying tens of millions of dollars in cash and gold, and supervised by people with ties to Ukrainian intelligence, was transiting through Hungary, Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto has said. He also implied that the funds may be a sign of Ukrainian plans to meddle in Hungary’s upcoming elections. Tensions between the two countries escalated last week when Hungarian officials impounded two trucks belonging to Ukrainian state-owned Oschadbank near Budapest, seizing $40 million and €35 million in cash and 9 kg of gold as part of a money laundering investigation. The funds were being transported from Austria’s Raiffeisen Bank to Ukraine.


Hungary said the convoy was being supervised by a former general of Ukraine’s Security Service (SBU), with other escorts also reportedly having military backgrounds. All seven escorts were deported back to Ukraine, while the assets and the trucks remain in custody. Ukraine, meanwhile, has denounced the seizure as “state banditism” and “blackmail.” Speaking on Tuesday, Szijjarto – who previously suggested that the convoy could be linked to a Ukrainian “war mafia” – rebuked Kiev over what he described as a failure to answer basic questions about the convoy and previous transfers of the same kind. “I think the last time such a transfer happened was in the Stone Age, when two banks settled €1.1-1.2 billion in cash between each other,” Szijjarto said.

The minister further questioned the convoy’s route, pointing out it had bypassed Poland – a NATO member with relatively good relations with Kiev – in favor of Hungarian roads. “So what is this money doing here? And what are the Ukrainian secret service people and people with military connections doing among the escorts?” he said. He also described it as “very suspicious” that the detained Ukrainians were being represented in Hungary by a law firm linked to the Tisza opposition party. Szijjarto suggested that the cash could be tied to alleged Ukrainian efforts to influence Hungary’s April 12 parliamentary elections. “The Ukrainians have an interest in a certain election outcome, and 500 billion forints are again floating around in Hungary. How strong the connection between the two is – that is what needs to be found out now.”

Read more …

“A €90 billion loan plan is currently being blocked by Hungary and Slovakia over Ukraine’s refusal to allow them access to Russian oil ..”

EU Members Could Loan Billions Directly To Kiev – Politico

Cash-strapped Ukraine could receive as much as €30 billion ($35 billion) from individual EU members, Politico reported on Wednesday. The idea is being discussed as Hungary and Slovakia pressure Kiev to resume Russian oil supplies by blocking a joint €90 billion EU loan. Kiev claims supplies through the Soviet-built Druzhba pipeline are suspended due to damage from a Russian attack, with repairs not expected until late April – after key elections in Hungary. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has accused Ukraine of orchestrating an energy crisis to boost the opposition.The freeze on the joint EU loan was part of Orban’s retaliation for the alleged Ukrainian plot. Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico said his government would block the money even if Orban’s party loses at the ballot box next month.


Baltic and Nordic nations are considering bilateral loans to Ukraine totaling €30 billion to avert bankruptcy, Politico said, citing anonymous sources. Separately, Dutch Finance Minister Eelco Heinen reportedly told fellow EU ministers that the Netherlands intends to provide Ukraine with €3.5 billion annually through 2029. In late February, the International Monetary Fund approved an $8.1 billion loan to Ukraine, with $1.5 billion disbursed immediately to ease Kiev’s budgetary strain. The IMF agreed to postpone demands for financial reforms that the Ukrainian government declined to implement.

Supporters of Ukraine in the EU have proposed a similar scheme for its accession bid. Under the “reverse enlargement” idea, Ukraine would be formally admitted without meeting candidate criteria, enjoying limited privileges and obligations. The proposal has faced strong opposition from member states insisting that EU expansion must remain merit-based.The EU is also under additional economic pressure from the US-Israeli campaign to topple Iran’s government through military force. The Middle East conflict has disrupted oil and LNG supplies, and the resulting price shock poses heightened risks to European consumers, given the EU’s politically motivated rejection of Russian energy.

Read more …

Zelensky and the cabal all around him.

Looks Like The EU Might Have To Pay Zelensky Just To Shut Up (Rachel Marsden)

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban and Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky have a little something for the ladies for Women’s History Month. They’re apparently going to spend the entire time beaking each other off on the global stage. Get your wads of bills ready to toss, girls! Especially you, Queen Ursula. Let’s peek in, shall we? Orban says he’s already on the verge of pulling out his tool. Guess we missed the part where they play footsie under the table first. “We have no military force for this, I can reassure everyone that this is not part of our plans. But we have political and financial tools,” the Hungarian PM said, in demanding that Zelensky open the tap on the Druzhba pipeline of Russian oil to Hungary that represents the landlocked country’s critical supply.


Orban has said he has no interest in taking his foot off the firehose of cash that the EU has been blasting out on itself and whatever else it has going on in the land of golden toilets amid the fog of war – all under the pretext of helping Ukraine, of course.“We hope that one person in the European Union will not block 90 billion or the first tranche of 90 billion, and that Ukrainian soldiers will have weapons” Zelensky said. “Otherwise, we will give the address of this person to our Armed Forces, to our lads. Let them call him and talk to him in their own language.”

Who could that “one person” possibly be? In any case, guess he’ll either be getting an email, or maybe a visit, depending on what the word “address” actually means here. Or maybe just a phone call with a bunch of guys breathing heavily down the line in a foreign language. Hard to tell. Zelensky, an actor, could probably use a better scriptwriter for his Godfather-style lines. Or maybe just drop a dead rat in the mail next time and skip the public speculation. The EU brass has told these two lovebirds to pipe down. But it really isn’t in Zelensky’s interest to do that. And Brussels seems to be making sure of it. If only because emerging info suggests that Zelensky is on the verge of ensuring that he gets rewarded for playing hard to get.

There are two possibilities shaping up. Either Orban feels enough pressure to drop his veto of the EU’s latest €90 million spending package in order to get the gas flowing during this heated Hungarian election period. An unlikely scenario given that his more pro-EU opponent in the April 12 national vote has left very little daylight between him and Orban on the issue of the need for Zelensky to restart the pipeline. Or, alternatively, Orban can double down and maintain his insistence, leaving Brussels with a new convenient pretext, since it’s being reported by Bloomberg that Brussels is considering the possibility of basically bribing Zelensky with EU money to “fix” the pipeline.

What’s that repair going to cost? Oh, let me guess – €90 billion, perhaps? And are European defense contractors also going to be involved in these “repairs”? Will they require golden toilets in the outhouses on-site? In which case, it’s not hard to see that it could end up serving as the ultimate workaround for much of same spending that’s being blocked by Orban – just rebranded as something that he couldn’t possibly pass up. What’s he going to do – block funding to Ukraine earmarked as “aid” meant to ensure that his Druzhba demands to get the oil flowing to Hungary are met?

No one seems to care too much anymore about whether the repair issue itself is even legitimate. Orban had proposed a fact-finding mission. Zelensky was like, bro, you don’t hear me asking to go peek into your closet to see if you have any weapons for me when you say that you don’t. Not the best analogy.

A better one would be to compare Ukraine to the local charity that asks whether you have old clothes to donate – and then insists on rummaging through your drawers to make sure that you’re not holding out. And Hungary’s request of Kiev is like ordering a pizza (from Russia, in this case), paying for it, watching the delivery guy arrive – and then the building’s security guard, let’s call him Vladimir Z., stands in the lobby eating slices and saying, “Sorry man, delivery seems to be delayed. Nothing I can do.” Or paying for express shipping and the mailman just keeps your package in his truck while telling you, “Yeah the postal system is slow these days. Really unfortunate.” .”

Read more …

“The Big Lie: America Is a Divided, Hateful Country With No Hope of Ever Being United Again”

The Big Lie: America Is a Divided, Hateful Country (Rick Moran)

I am addicted to the internet. I freely admit it. As a news junkie, I am as well-informed as anyone in the country. I know a lot about a few things; I know something about a lot of things; and I know nothing about many things. I spend 10-14 hours a day online, reading, writing, researching, and thinking. While it’s my job, I would spend the time online anyway just because I can’t stand not knowing.And I’m trapped. The life I’m living is not “real” in the sense that most of the 320 million Americans live the same kind of life. Are they as angry as many of us? Do they fear for the future of the U.S. as much as most of us? Are they habitually offended by everything I write?


When I refer to “us,” I mean PJ Media readers and the online right and left: the politically aware, perpetually outraged, eternally wounded, aggrieved, displeased, and helplessly partisan among us who enjoy being outraged, get a rush from catching a political opponent in hypocrisy, and laugh at an enemy’s misfortune. Jim VandeHei and Mike Allen, co-founders of Axios, have a piece in that publication that we should all read to remind us that the “online political community” to which we ostensibly belong is only a tiny part of America. The “super majority” of Americans are “patriotic, hardworking, neighbor-helping, America-loving, money-giving people who don’t pop off on social media or plot for power.”

And the real shocker: “Most people agree on most things, most of the time. And the data validates this, time and time again,” they write. Axios: We’ve been manipulated by algorithms and politicians amplifying the worst of humanity. Our feeds and screens spread a twisted, inaccurate view of America.It makes it seem like the nation is hopelessly broken … Political enemies are evil … Facts are no different than fiction … Morality, honesty and service don’t matter … And salvation can only come from magical technologies or a powerful few.

What if we told you it’s a big lie that makes you stop believing your own two eyes? Every day, people battle over outrageous things said on X. Did you know that four out of five Americans don’t use X, and therefore don’t see what you see? Pew Research Center found last year that only 21% of U.S. adults use X, and just 10% visit it daily. The loudest platform in politics reaches barely one in five Americans. “Maybe, just maybe, it’s the very people on these platforms who are the crazy ones,” they write. “Maybe, just maybe, most people are simply normal, sane, real.”

We know this to be true. If we talk to our neighbors, co-workers, or members of our congregations, we know what they’re concerned about: family, work, bills, and everything else that goes into creating a normal life. They don’t give a crap about what AOC just said, Trump’s latest putdown, a Democrat calling us fascists, or a Republican calling Democrats communists.The overwhelming majority of the nation just doesn’t care. In a given year, you see hundreds of people frequently enough to appraise their character. Are they good people? Would they help shovel after a snowstorm or lift groceries for an aging neighbor? Do they volunteer and give to others? We bet the answer is a resounding yes. This is America’s Super Majority.

The numbers back this up. Americans gave $592.5 billion to charity in 2024 — a record, with individuals accounting for two-thirds of it.Over 75 million Americans formally volunteer each year, and 130 million informally help their neighbors. Gallup research out last month found that 76% of U.S. adults gave money to a religious or other nonprofit organization in the past year, and 63% volunteered their time. This isn’t a broken nation. This is a generous one, where the vast majority quietly do the right thing every single day. This is from two hard-headed, respected journalists who have been writing about politics for most of their lives, not a couple of starry-eyed kids. They’ve hit on something important that we should all try to keep in mind.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

I looked at it and I’m out for now, because I’m not in the US.

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Mar 102026
 


Rufino Tamayo The Dance of Joy 1950


From Redcoats to Robots: AI is Challenging our Republic’s Future (Turley)
Trump Makes A Huge Move to Get The SAVE Act Passed (Matt Margolis)
Farther Along (James Howard Kunstler)
‘Wagging the dog’: Putin Mocks EU-Ukraine rRelationship (RT)
Has Trump Made a Bad Choice of War? ((Paul Craig Roberts)
Israel, Netanyahu and Trump Preparing the World for the Anti-Christ? (PCR)
Pentagon Officials Saying Iran War ‘God’s Divine Plan’ (Cradle)
Is Iran’s Regime Trying to Trigger Sleeper Cells in the USA? (Catherine Salgado)
Bondi Charges Muslim Terrorists Who Tried to Bomb NYC Protest (Sarah Anderson)
Meloni Slams Italian Judges For Blocking Expulsion of Foreign Criminals (RMX)
In A Sane World, Zelensky’s Mafia Regime Would Be Isolated (Amar)
Hungary Detains Ukrainians Transporting 10s Of Millions In Cash, Gold (Brooke)
Vance Vs. Rubio? Trump’s Pals Have a Preference. (Sarah Anderson)
Why the Left Suddenly Hates Gwen Stefani (Queen)

 


 

https://twitter.com/robertdunlap947/status/2030960465799532639?s=20 https://twitter.com/jackprandelli/status/2030598639559540917?s=20

 


 

 


 


“This republic will survive so long as it does not die by our own hand.”

From Redcoats to Robots: AI is Challenging our Republic’s Future (Turley)

This week, thousands of workers are receiving pink slips. They are not being let go due to inflation or outsourcing to foreign countries. To the contrary, they are being fired because booming sectors of the economy no longer need them. Indeed, it is an economy that may need fewer and fewer humans. Amazon this week announced further job cuts due to robotics and AI. Recently, Jack Dorsey, the co-founder of Twitter, announced that his company Block would be laying off 40 percent of its employees. He cited AI as reducing the need for human employees. In my book, “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution,” I discuss not just the economic changes unfolding due to AI and robotics but also the political implications of those changes for the American republic.


These economic changes are unfolding all around us. We are looking at one of the greatest job losses in history. In a free-market system, such technological changes tend to offset losses with new jobs in emerging industries. And there will be such growth with the AI and robotic revolutions. But it is also likely that we are looking at a static class of unemployed and practically unemployable citizens as this new revolution unfolds. “Low-skill jobs are the most likely to be replaced by a robotic workforce,” I write in the book. “Amazon warehouses are now entirely mechanized with twelve different types of over seven thousand robots moving rapidly to collect and direct goods where hundreds of people were once employed.”

But what is most notable about the Amazon announcement is that these were white-collar jobs. The impact of AI is not confined to factory workers and truck drivers. The danger is that politicians will react predictably and try to subsidize jobs that are no longer viable and industries that are being dramatically downsized. At the same time, they are likely to expand model programs in Democratic cities for universal basic or guaranteed income. Democrats have moved forward with more than 60 bills creating such programs, and this week, Cook County, Ill. (the second-largest county in the U.S.) made permanent the universal basic income program it had originally launched with federal COVID-19 relief funds.

The problem is the creation of what I call a “kept citizenship” in a republic designed for people who are economically and politically independent from the government. That system is seriously undermined by a large percentage of citizens living off the government dole. The solution cannot be an “arts-and-crafts” population kept entertained by government programs to learn glassblowing and pottery-making. A different type of citizen would emerge that is unlikely to be sufficiently free of the government to counter its excesses or failures.] “Rage and the Republic” lays out what I call a “liberty-enhancing economy.” It notes that this is not just the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence but the 250th anniversary of the release of Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations.

The founders immediately embraced Smith’s economic theories as the perfect companion for their political theories. They believed that true freedom requires economic independence from government. That means accepting the economic changes and the loss of certain jobs. AI and robotics will largely wipe out certain jobs from taxi drivers to radiologists to warehouse workers. Meanwhile, we need to focus on homocentric jobs. In the book, I called these “Guinan jobs” after the bartender on the starship Enterprise in “Star Trek: The Next Generation.” As a kid, I was always confused by Guinan (played by Whoopi Goldberg), who would mix a drink next to a replicator that could produce the perfect Romulan cocktail every time without fail or variation. Customers clearly wanted Guinan to make the cocktail, even if it is not perfect every time.

The question I ask is, how many “Guinan jobs” are out there. There are many, including teachers, psychiatrists and lawyers, who will be affected but likely not eliminated by AI. We will still want humans in these positions. All governments will face this existential crisis in the 21st Century. It will create growing instability globally. Although AI and robotics will make goods cheaper and more widely available, they are also likely to have a dramatic effect on populations. For example, as production costs drop with the new technology, there will be less advantage to moving factories to other countries with cheaper labor forces, such as China and Mexico.

Companies may choose to build near consumer markets to save on transportation costs while utilizing higher-skilled worker populations to maintain robotic and AI systems. That could produce massive unemployment in certain countries with low-educated, low-income populations. That in turn could destabilize governments and increase the chances of war in countries with large populations of unemployed young men. I also do not feel great optimism for global governance systems like the European Union. The EU has largely eviscerated the elements I identify in the American Revolution as producing the oldest and most stable democratic system. Although global governance is likely to increase, it could fail spectacularly due to its inherent instabilities.

In the U.S., this period of economic change is likely to fuel calls for socialist policies. Socialism has always thrived on economic upheavals. Indeed, socialists often use their own failures to further collectivize or centralize economies. Our republic is uniquely situated to not only survive but to thrive in the 21st Century. It was conceived in and designed for changing economic conditions. But if we are to survive, we must remain faithful to the constitutional structure that has afforded us stability for more than two centuries. Despite calls to trash the Constitution, pack the Supreme Court and change our political system, these protections are the very things that can get us through this century intact.

The Founders designed our Republic to prevent the tendency of democracies to become what one called a “mobocracy.” They knew that political and economic instability could create a form of “democratic despotism” in which democracies devoured themselves. We have a system that has overcome challenges — from redcoats to robots — that have crushed other countries. However, we must remember who we are. Our nation, created in the winds of change by a free and industrious people, need not fear change. It is a system designed for bad times, not good times. The true crisis is a crisis of faith being fueled by some in academia and in the media. This republic will survive so long as it does not die by our own hand.

Read more …

“He’s flat-out refusing to sign any other legislation until the Senate passes the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act.”

Trump Makes A Huge Move to Get The SAVE Act Passed (Matt Margolis)

President Donald Trump dropped a bombshell on Truth Social on Sunday. He’s flat-out refusing to sign any other legislation until the Senate passes the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act. With midterms looming this year, Trump calls it his absolute top priority, demanding it “must be done immediately” because it “supersedes everything else.”Trump couldn’t be clearer. “I, as President, will not sign other Bills until this is passed,” he wrote, rejecting any watered-down compromise. The SAVE Act, which has already passed the House, has the votes for passage in the Senate, but not enough to overcome the 60-vote threshold to overcome the filibuster. The SAVE Act is overwhelmingly powerful because it requires real proof of U.S. citizenship to register to vote and enforces photo ID to vote.


This isn’t some radical idea. A photo ID is required for so many routine things that most people barely think about. You need one to buy alcohol or cigarettes, board a plane, rent a car, check into a hotel, open a bank account, purchase certain prescriptions, or enter many federal buildings. There are plenty of bars and clubs that won’t let you in without one, but nobody calls those policies racist. Nobody claims they suppress civil rights. Yet somehow, the moment the same basic form of identification is required to prove you are who you say you are when you vote, Democrats insist it’s a sinister plot to disenfranchise voters.The truth is far simpler: requiring ID to vote is common sense, and the hysterical comparisons to Jim Crow say far more about the weakness of the argument than the policy itself.

And Americans support it overwhelmingly. A Pew Research poll recently showed that 83% of Americans favor requiring government-issued photo ID to vote, with support cutting across political and demographic lines. That includes 71% of Democrats, 76% of black Americans, and 82% of Hispanics. Despite this, Democrats are playing hardball. “The SAVE Act is Jim Crow 2.0. It would disenfranchise tens of millions of people,” Chuck Schumer wrote on X. “If Trump is saying he won’t sign any bills until the SAVE Act is passed, then so be it: there will be total gridlock in the Senate. Senate Democrats will not help pass the SAVE Act under any circumstances.”

Well, the good news is that Trump’s threat really isn’t about forcing Democrats to pass the SAVE Act; it’s about getting wobbly Republicans on board to enforce a talking filibuster. Democrats are in the minority, of course; they have everything to gain by gridlock. Republicans, however, do not, and Trump is attempting to force their hand, not the Democrats’. And make no mistake about it, Trump’s not negotiating. He wants the gold standard: ID, proof of citizenship, minimal mail-ins. This forces accountability on a system Democrats have rigged for years. I know that Senate Majority Leader John Thune isn’t exactly a fan of tinkering with the filibuster, but Democrats will nuke it completely the second they have they control the House, Senate, and White House again, so from where I sit, it makes perfect sense to enforce a talking filibuster now because at least that’s what the filibuster is supposed to be.

Read more …

“Lead me, follow me, or get out of my way.” — General George S. Patton, Jr.

Farther Along (James Howard Kunstler)

Don’t lose the plot. Embrace the suck. This is the world’s hard time, for now. The birth of anything can be a bloody horror. It can even look like death. Don’t be too afraid to see what comes on the other side of this awful spectacle. So many Americans are rooting and wishing for the Iran war to turn out badly for Western Civ. And why? Because Trump. And why? Because at the same time he is ending Iran’s long-running nuclear blackmail game, he is terminating the rackets of the Democratic Party. The incipient changes in operational order create new categories of winners and losers.


Now you know why Hamas and Hezbollah terrorists run on the same track as America’s Woke-Jacobin-Marxists, including the pitifully deluded wine ladies of posh West LA, Grosse Point, Beacon Hill, Fairfax County, et cetera, whose brains have been hijacked by the cable news demon factory (and their sponsors). Chaos does everything possible to avoid meeting order. And this is why passing the SAVE Act is as consequential as ridding the Middle East of its chief chaos agent. Do you realize how perfectly insane our country’s election procedure has become? The fraud is titanic and right in your face, and the remedy is so plain and simple. What possible excuse is there to thwart it?

Non-citizens have no right to vote. Mail-in ballots are patently subject to chicanery. Vote tabulation machines are demonstrably hackable. 80-percent of Americans know this is the truth. How is there controversy over this? How? Because among all the broken institutions in our country, Congress is the worst. The Congress of our time is demonstrating that we might not be worthy of governing ourselves. We are at a cycle-low for public rectitude. Anything goes and nothing matters as long as the campaign contributions keep rolling in. You see how this has been going.

But mark this: we are going to get election reform one way or another. It’s that urgent, and failure to accomplish it by legislation will warrant a national emergency. And when the election machinery has been fixed, we had better do something about the plague of corporate money that runs like poison through our politics because of the Supreme Court’s foolish decision in the 2010 Citizens United case. They decided (by a slim 5-4 majority) that limitless campaign contributions by corporations amounted to free speech under the Constitution.

I will tell you concisely why this was tragically fallacious. Free speech in our country is a God-given right of sovereign citizens. Corporations are not citizens. Corporations don’t have obligations, duties, and responsibilities to the public interest (a.k.a. the common good). Corporations explicitly, by law, have obligations, duties, and responsibilities solely to their share-holders. The interests of corporate share-holders and the nation’s public interest are manifestly oppositional. Perhaps now you can see why this was such a dreadful invitation to political chaos.

So, Mr. Trump, for all his flaws, attempts to bring order out of chaos at home and in global relations, and the agents of chaos mightily resent the shut-down of their precious chaos. With Iran, it has come to fighting fire with fire. It’s unlikely that most of the people in that country seek to become martyrs. The cult of martyrdom is strictly the business of the maniacs who seized power there in 1979, a reign of terror, extended by proxy around the whole Middle East and beyond.

Read more …

” Budapest and Bratislava have repeatedly accused Kiev of blackmail. They also say Brussels has sided with Ukraine instead of backing two EU member states.”

‘Wagging the dog’: Putin Mocks EU-Ukraine rRelationship (RT)

Russian President Vladimir Putin has likened the relationship between Ukraine and the European Union to “the tail wagging the dog,” saying that despite the aggressive behavior of the government in Kiev, Brussels keeps supporting it.The Ukrainian authorities are preventing vital Russian oil from reaching Hungary and Slovakia via the Druzhba pipeline, which runs through Ukraine, claiming it was damaged by Russian strikes – claims Moscow rejects. Budapest and Bratislava have repeatedly accused Kiev of blackmail. They also say Brussels has sided with Ukraine instead of backing two EU member states.


“The situation is very strange,” Putin said on Sunday in an interview with Vesti. “I get the impression that we are dealing with a case where ‘the tail is wagging the dog’, and not the other way around.” The Russian president called the stance taken by Kiev dangerous and aggressive. He stressed that Brussels is continuing to provide Ukraine with endless support, both in weapons and financial aid. Commenting on the energy market, Putin emphasized that halting transit could further undermine the energy security of EU member states, as happened after the sabotage of the Nord Stream pipelines.

“Yet the EU prefers to continue the supply, effectively indulging the Kiev regime,” Putin added. Putin criticized Western countries for the ongoing crisis in Ukraine, describing it as a “systemic mistake.” The president said the conflict began with Western support for a coup in Kiev, followed by the reunification of Crimea with Russia and unrest in southeastern Ukraine, including Donbass and Novorossiya. “These are not our actions,” Putin asserted, adding that European countries were now “reaping what they have sown.”

Read more …

There is no good choice for war.

Has Trump Made a Bad Choice of War? ((Paul Craig Roberts)

The propaganda that Americans are receiving about how hard Washington and Israel are hitting Iran does not seem to be backed up with evidence. It seems that the US Navy that Trump was going to use to escort oil tankers through the Strait of Hormuz has had to be moved away outside of the range of Iranian missiles. It seems that the American bases in the oil city states are no longer functioning and that the US will be operating out of far away Italy. Moreover Trump’s rhetoric doesn’t support the war propaganda. He is now speaking of the war in terms of months instead of a few days, but the US and Israel, stupidly expecting Iran’s quick collapse, did not inventory enough missiles for a war that last months. So Trump has started mentioning “troops on the ground” which he previously said was not in the picture.


Considering Iran’s large size– Iran is larger than France, Germany, Spain, and the United Kingdom combined–the United States hasn’t sufficient troops, and it is doubtful that Israel would risk any of its own. The Israelis cleverly used western gentile troops against Iraq and Libya and Arab forces to overthrow Syria. Even the few commentators, many of them experienced military men, speak of Russia, China, or India mediating the conflict and bringing it to end with mediation. Apparently, they have never considered how a conflict can be mediated when one side, the Israeli American side, intends the destruction of the other side. How does Iran go about mediating its destruction? This is for Iran an existential conflict.

The survival of Iran as a sovereign nation rest entirely on an Iranian victory. An Iranian government that submitted to mediation would be submitting to the erasure of Iran as a country. It would be a government of traitors. I have never understood how the Iranian government could be so completely misinformed as to think that the issue was whether or not Iran enriched uranium to make nuclear weapons. The nuclear issue was never more than a pretext to be used to destroy Iran. The real issue has always been to clear Iran out of the way of Greater Israel. The previous pretext was the “war on terror” that the Zionist Bush and Obama regimes used to destroy Iraq and Libya and that was used to destroy Syria. Zionists have been extremely clear that their agenda is Greater Israel. Netanyahu himself and several Israeli ministers have held up maps on television of Greater Israel, a territory that encompasses the Muslim Middle East.

This new phrase of the 21st century American war for Greater Israel has been launched by the Zionist regime of Donald Trump. How is it possible that the Iranian government thought Washington had any interest in negotiating a non-nuclear weapon agreement with Iran? Just as Russia and China seem incapable of comprehending the Wolfowitz Doctrine, Iran seems incapable of comprehending the agenda of Greater Israel. There is no possibility whatsoever of any Iranian government negotiating its way out of Greater Israel. But watch Iran again give up a winning hand and return to negotiation. According to information I have, the chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff warned President Trump not to initiate a war for which sufficient stockpiles of weapons had not been accumulated.

But Trump convinced by someone, perhaps Netanyahu, that it would only take a few missiles and bombs and the collapse of the Iranian government would allow the imposition of a puppet ruler such as the son of the former American puppet ruler of Iran. As my faithful readers know, my concern has always been that the Zionist neoconservatives allied with Israel, who have been in control of American foreign policy since the regime of George W. Bush, are pushing too hard against Russia, against China and against Iran. The Zionist American neoconservatives’ agenda of American world hegemony and Israeli hegemony in the Middle East are roads to nuclear Armageddon.

It is my opinion that Russia, China and Iran have been poorly led by leaders who prefer their hopes to reality, and therefore have failed to understand that they are targets in the way of American and Israeli hegemony. It is almost as if they have never read the Wolfowitz Doctrine or have any awareness of the Zionist doctrine of Greater Israel.

I try to hold onto optimism. But Russia and China, which are supposed to constrain American neoconservative aggression, have totally failed their responsibility. Consequently, Putin is at war that he refuses to win in Ukraine. China pretends that it can avoid war even as its oil imports are reduced 50% by war that China could have prevented. The Iranian government trying to avoid a war, which was obvious to any intelligent person was unavoidable, submitted a second time to American “negotiations” and was again deceived and surprise attacked. Russia, China and Iran do not seem to be led by competent people in touch with reality. By the time Russia and China wake up to reality, will their only option be nuclear?

[..] the “Peace President” has become the “War President.” It is losing Trump supporters. Trump’s base is split. Trump has lost Marjorie Taylor Green and Thomas Massey, his most effective supporters in Congress. Trump has lost Tucker Carlson, his most effective support in the media. If it turns out that Trump has allowed the satanic Israeli Prime Minister to goad him to start a war that Trump loses in a midterm election year, there is no one to defend Trump from impeachment. You tell me if this is a sign of an intelligent president of the United States.This war that Trump has started for Israel has many risks, one of which is that to avoid defeat Trump and or Israel might use nuclear weapons.

[..] Perhaps Donald Trump, Israel’s tried and true wartime operative, will be removed from office after the midterm elections. If so, the prospect of nuclear war lessens in the intermediate term. If not and Iran has staying power, the United States for the second time in history is likely to resort to the use of nuclear weapons. This, I think would finish America.

Read more …

“Netanyahu is the dominant force in the world today, not Trump, not Putin, not Xi. They are not even players.”

Israel, Netanyahu and Trump Preparing the World for the Anti-Christ? (PCR)

It seems that neither governments (with the exception of Israel), media, nor commentators understand what is transpiring in the Middle East. Governments are offering to mediate the conflict. Russia and China, either of which could have prevented the conflict, are calling for peace. An Iranian government official has apologized for attacking the Arab oil city-states that serve the US as air and naval bases for the Israeli-American attack on Iran. It seems that the Putin disease of never attacking those who facilitate attacks on Russia has spread to Iran. It is not clear, even to Iran it seems, that Iranians are in an existential fight for their existence, a fight that can only end in their victory or defeat. Israel and Israel’s American puppet will have it no other way.


Do Russia and China not understand that their calls for peace are ridiculous and suggest that the governments of both countries have no comprehension whatsoever of reality? And the same goes for the rest of the world and for all of the media and the many commentators. The bloviating is unbearable. I have read so many totally absurd explanations of what the Israeli American initiated war on Iran is about. Apparently, fewer Middle Eastern commentators have heard of the Zionist agenda of Greater Israel than Russian and Chinese commentators have heard of the Wolfowitz Doctrine. We are experiencing the foreign policy of countries that have no clue to the two agendas determining world events.

Just as Putin is unrealistic beyond belief by thinking that he can obtain a mutual security agreement with Washington prior to Washington abandoning hegemony over the world as the principal goal of its foreign policy, the governments of the world including Iran and the talking heads are unrealistic beyond belief in ignoring that Iran’s existence is incompatible with Greater Israel. War propaganda has 100% prevailed over facts since 9/11. The result is a completely mindless media that merely follows along whatever the official narrative is at the moment. The western media long ago ceased to be capable of any intelligent explanation or analysis or truthful reporting. Mainly the whore Western media is focused on getting whoever is the target of the moment.

So, where are we today? The world has yet again turned a blind eye to an Israeli-American war crime. A country engaged in peace negotiations was secretly attacked. This obvious war crime has been ignored by governments, except for one member of one European government. What will the consequences be? As far as I can tell, none of Israel and Washington’s targets are sufficiently aware that they are targets and continue to believe in negotiations, despite what has twice happened to Iran. The unrealism will encourage more provocations from Israel and their White House puppet.

It seems to me that a case can be made, perhaps it has been, that Zionists are Satan’s agents and from the Zionists ranks will arise the Anti-Christ. Perhaps it is Netanyahu. Netanyahu is the dominant force in the world today, not Trump, not Putin, not Xi. They are not even players. Netanyahu has used the Americans to destroy for Israel, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Sudan Somalia, and now the targets are Iran, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, and Turkey. True to form these countries will not unite to protect themselves anymore than have Russia, Iran, and China. It seems that the world is at the risk of governments incapable of comprehending reality. Perhaps they are too busy appropriating taxpayers money, taking bribes, and making trade deals. Try and find serious people in the world. They are the ones you most hate. They disturb you in your comfortable world of official narrative in which others are evil, but not us, in which others have difficulties, but not us –except those caused by anti-semites, and racists, and homophobes, and right-to-lifers. Governments that cause wars are bringing democracy and freedom. As George Orwell said, “war is peace.”

Read more …

“Hundreds of complaints from US service members report that commanders told them the war on Iran is part of biblical prophecy for Armageddon ..”

I saw this a few days ago, the prayer session in the Oval Office, and asked myself: how is this different from the religious crazies in Tehran?

Pentagon Officials Saying Iran War ‘God’s Divine Plan’ (Cradle)

Dozens of US Democratic lawmakers have called for an investigation into allegations that military commanders are portraying the war on Iran as part of biblical prophecy, according to reporting by Military.com, citing complaints from service members and a letter sent to the Department of War inspector general on 6 March. The request follows hundreds of reports that officers told troops the campaign against Iran is “divinely ordained” and that President Donald Trump has been “anointed by Jesus.” Lawmakers warned that invoking religious prophecy to justify military operations could violate constitutional protections and War Department rules requiring religious neutrality.


The controversy began after an anonymous non-commissioned officer contacted the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF) on behalf of several soldiers in a unit stationed outside the Iran combat zone. The individual wrote that a commander urged personnel to view the war as “all part of God’s divine plan,” while citing passages from the Book of Revelation. According to the complaint, the officer told troops that “President Trump has been anointed by Jesus to light the signal fire in Iran to cause Armageddon and mark his return to Earth.” MRFF founder Mikey Weinstein told Military.com that the organization logged more than 200 similar complaints between Saturday and Tuesday afternoon, with reports coming from personnel stationed at 50 military installations across all branches of the US armed forces.

In a letter sent to Inspector General Platte B. Moring III, members of the Congressional Freethought Caucus and other lawmakers warned that “justifying a war based on interpretations of biblical prophecies” and telling troops they are risking their lives to advance a religious vision raises serious constitutional concerns. The lawmakers also asked investigators to determine whether statements by War Secretary Pete Hegseth or other officials have contributed to the spread of biblical rhetoric within military ranks, warning that such public remarks could promote similar messaging in operational briefings. Lawmakers asked investigators to determine if troops who reported the issue faced retaliation and whether additional safeguards are necessary to maintain religious neutrality in the military chain of command.

Independent journalist Jonathan Larsen initially reported over a hundred complaints from soldiers to the MRFF, claiming that commanders are describing the Iran war as divinely ordained and connected to biblical prophecy. One non-commissioned officer said the rhetoric was “so toxic and over the line” that it shocked troops and “destroy[s] morale and unit cohesion.” Weinstein warned the reports show commanders treating the war as “biblically sanctioned” and linked to the approaching “End Times,” while noting similar religious rhetoric has appeared in remarks by US political figures discussing West Asia.

Read more …

“This is precisely why we need to cut off the head of the snake in Iran, because they do have terrorist proxies in dozens of countries..”

Is Iran’s Regime Trying to Trigger Sleeper Cells in the USA? (Catherine Salgado)

A new report claims that the United States has intercepted communications from the Iranian regime attempting to activate terrorist sleeper cells within the United States. We have to take anything ABC News reports with a grain, or perhaps a shaker, of salt, but its report that the Iranian regime is hoping its terrorist proxies around the world are going to rise up and help it as they have been doing for so many years would almost be predictable rather than surprising. This is precisely why we need to cut off the head of the snake in Iran, because they do have terrorist proxies in dozens of countries. Fortunately, if there was such an encrypted message, the United States has intercepted it and is aware.


We know for a fact that tens of thousands of terrorists came into the United States under the Biden administration, including jihadis from Iranian-backed Hamas and Hezbollah. Almost as soon as the United States and Israel launched Operation Epic Fury, an immigrant from Senegal wearing a sweatshirt that said “property of Allah” and who had an Iranian flag and a Quran, murdered three young people in Austin, Texas. And last week, two Muslims with ISIS sympathies attempted to attack a crowd of New York City protesters with improvised explosive devices. The Islamic Iranian regime has built up a massive international network, and even many terrorists not directly connected to it are in sympathy with it.

But as for the new report from ABC News, it claimed the following: “The U.S. has intercepted encrypted communications believed to have originated in Iran that may serve as “an operational trigger” for “sleeper assets” outside the country, according to a federal government alert sent to law enforcement agencies. The alert, reviewed by ABC News, cites “preliminary signals analysis” of a transmission “likely of Iranian origin” that was relayed across multiple countries shortly after the death of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Khamenei, the supreme leader of Iran, was killed in a U.S.-Israeli attack on Feb. 28.

The transmission was encoded, the outlet added, and was supposedly going to “clandestine recipients” who would know how to decipher it. Such messages do not require the internet to reach “covert operatives or sleeper assets.”The federal government alert cautiously predicted that the encrypted message could “be intended to activate or provide instructions to prepositioned sleeper assets operating outside the originating country.”

Read more …

“..The charges include providing material support to a terrorist organization and using a weapon of mass destruction.”

Bondi Charges Muslim Terrorists Who Tried to Bomb NYC Protest (Sarah Anderson)

In case you missed it, on Saturday, March 7, an anti-Islam protest gathered outside Gracie Mansion — the official residence of New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani — when two homemade improvised explosive devices (IEDs) were thrown toward the protesters. The devices contained triacetone triperoxide or TATP, a volatile homemade explosive often called “mother of Satan,” as well as nuts, bolts, and screws. They were ignited but failed to fully detonate, creating smoke and chaos. Thankfully, no one was injured. A third device was later found near a vehicle the alleged terrorists drove, sparking evacuations at nearby apartment buildings.


The suspects are 18-year-old Emir Balat and 19-year-old Ibrahim Kayumi, both of whom are from Pennsylvania. They were arrested shortly after the incident. Both the New York City Police Department (NYPD) and FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force called it “ISIS-inspired terrorism.” According to Balat’s statement to law enforcement, he wanted to carry out an attack that was bigger than the Boston Marathon bombing. Here’s more from the official statement: =In the NYPD vehicle en route to the NYPD precinct, BALAT, without being questioned by the NYPD officers transporting him, made the following spontaneous utterances, in part and as captured on the transporting NYPD officers’ body-worn camera footage:

[..] ‘this isn’t a religion that just stands when people talk about the blessed name of the prophet… We take action! We take action!’; and “‘I didn’t do it someone else will come and do it.’ After arriving at the precinct and being advised of, and waiving, his Miranda rights, BALAT requested a piece of paper and, after being given a paper and pen, wrote the following: ‘All praise is due to Allah lord of all worlds! I pledge my allegience [sic] to the Islamic State. Die in your rage yu [sic] kuffar! Emir B.’ Based on my training and experience, I know that “kuffar” is an Arabic term that refers to ‘non-believers’ or ‘infidels,’ and that ‘Die in your rage’ is a slogan used by ISIS and based on a verse in the Quran.

Law enforcement officers later asked BALAT if he was familiar with the Boston Marathon bombing, and if that was what BALAT had hoped to accomplish. BALAT responded: ‘No, even bigger. It was only three deaths.’ According to the New York Post, “[Balat] defiantly flashed an ISIS salute as he was led away in shackles during his perp walk. Wearing a black t-shirt and beige pants, Balat made the gesture before one of the officers detaining him slapped his hand down. Balat, whose parents are reportedly from Turkey but who became naturalized citizens in 2017, was arrested Saturday along with 19-year-old Ibrahim Kayumi after a homemade ‘Mother of Satan’ bomb was allegedly thrown at protesters outside New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s Upper East Side residence.”

Read more …

US, Britain and now Italy?

Meloni Slams Italian Judges For Blocking Expulsion of Foreign Criminals (RMX)

Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni has sharply criticized judicial decisions blocking the detention of migrants transferred to Albania, citing the case of a Moroccan rapist with a long criminal record whom authorities say they cannot detain or deport after he applied for international protection. Speaking to RTL 102.5, Meloni said some court rulings preventing the continued detention of migrants transferred to Italian processing centers in Albania were “surreal” and undermined public safety. “I also wonder where the feminists are in the face of these events,” Meloni said during the interview, referring to the case of one of the migrants, Moroccan national Fathallah Ouardi, who had been transferred to Albania but was later returned to Italy after judges refused to validate his detention.


Meloni said the man had a lengthy criminal record. “The record of one of these migrants includes convictions for drug dealing, resisting a public official, conspiracy to commit sexual assault, and gang rape,” she said, as cited by Secolo d’Italia. According to the prime minister, the court rejected the detention order after the migrant applied for international protection. “This is someone who entered Italy illegally, started dealing drugs, and gang-raped a woman — we can’t detain him, we can’t send him to Albania, we can’t repatriate him, and we’re almost forced to grant him international protection,” she said, adding that such decisions raise serious questions about the protection of victims and public confidence in the justice system.

“How can we guarantee the safety of citizens like this?” she asked. “These decisions are surreal; they affect not the government’s work but citizens’ rights, first and foremost, the right to safety.”m“What trust can a woman who has been gang-raped have in the system if her rapist can’t even be deported?” she added. “I also wonder where the feminists of ‘Non una di meno’ are on these issues.”The Italian leader also defended her government’s migration policies, including the controversial use of offshore migrant processing centers in Albania. “I am determined to do what the citizens have asked me to do: a tough policy on irregular immigration, including with new tools like the centers in Albania,” Meloni said.

“Even though some are trying everything they can to prevent it, I am determined on this and am willing to work three times, four times, ten times harder if necessary.”Remix News provided reporting this week on another Moroccan national accused of raping a 26-year-old woman in Bottanuco in what was a sustained attack over the course of an evening. The suspect was born in 1987 and has accumulated a series of criminal charges and convictions in Italy over more than a decade. Authorities say he was investigated for drug trafficking between 2014 and 2015 and charged with illegal immigration in 2015. Records also list illegal entry and residence in Trentino in 2016 and theft in 2017.

Court documents further list convictions including resisting a public official and drug trafficking in 2014, as well as participation in sexual assault and gang sexual assault in 2018. A further drug trafficking conviction was recorded in 2025.

Read more …

“..the Hungarian authorities see things very differently. Their customs agency says that the transport is suspected of being part of a money laundering operation. They also maintain that among those detained was a former high-ranking general of Ukraine’s combined intelligence service and secret police, the SBU. ”

In A Sane World, Zelensky’s Mafia Regime Would Be Isolated (Amar)

Politics can be very rough. Yet, usually, as long as they don’t collapse into war, at least in public a certain minimum pretense of decorum is maintained. Especially by governments vitally dependent on others’ support. Ukraine under the rule of never-reelected Vladimir Zelensky, however, has anything but a normal political system.


It is in this context that Vladimir Zelensky’s latest folly needs to be seen: Zelensky has threatened Hungary’s leader Viktor Orban, telling him he will hand the prime minister’s address over to “our guys” in the military so that they could “communicate with him in their own language.” Obviously, this is not even a hint of violence anymore, but the equivalent of a mafia godfather placing a dead horse’s head on your pillow or leaving a bullet on your doormat. The reason: Orban is exercising his right within the EU not to agree to yet another insane “loan” – the kind that will never be paid back, at least not by anyone in Ukraine – for Zelensky’s astronomically corrupt regime.

Orban is right about that “loan,” of course. Yet that isn’t even the core of this particular scandal. That is the fact that Zelensky feels he can issue a direct, mafia-style threat against the leader of an EU member state. Regarding Zelensky, though, there is no surprise here. He has been at the top of a regime that combines a bizarre sense of entitlement, shameless demands, outrageously greedy corruption, and a repulsive record of sabotage and assassination operations, very much even against its Western backers. Ask Germans who still have a spine about the Nord Stream attack, for instance. Or, if you can’t find a German with a spine, ask Viktor Orban, who has correctly called it “state terrorism.”

What needs more emphasis than Zelensky’s depraved sense of impunity is that he has reason to feel that way. It is true that, in this instance, the EU Commission has publicly protested against his barbaric behavior. But let’s be realistic, that is a formality, nothing but a gentle slap on the wrist for appearances’ sake. What really matters is that first the West as a whole and recently the EU “elites” on their own have spent years emboldening Zelensky and his regime by feeding Ukraine’s corruption, accepting and spreading Kiev’s lies, and suppressing any criticism of this policy as “Russian talking points.”

Indeed, in the EU, Hungary and Slovakia as well have been harassed and treated as pariahs for their resistance to this coddling of the Zelensky regime. It is all the more remarkable that both countries have principally stuck to their guns, even while having to concede ground repeatedly.

Thus, it may be a coincidence, but it is a remarkable fact that just one day after Zelensky’s open mafia boss fit, Hungary hit his ultra-sleazy regime where it hurts by striking at its money: In a certainly deliberately spectacular operation – balaklavas, body armor and assault rifles included, and all carefully caught on camera – Hungarian anti-terrorism forces stopped a Ukrainian currency and gold shipment that was crossing their country in two armored transporters. Arresting and temporarily detaining seven Ukrainians, the Hungarian officials found $40 million, €35 million, and about nine kilograms of gold. While the detained have been released and are back in Ukraine, the money and gold as well as the transporters have stayed in Hungary.

Kiev has called the Hungarian measures “state terrorism,” which is as absurd as Orban’s assessment of the Nord Stream attack is compelling. The Ukrainian government and Oshchad Bank, that had organized the transport, claim that everything about it was perfectly legal, but the Hungarian authorities see things very differently. Their customs agency says that the transport is suspected of being part of a money laundering operation. They also maintain that among those detained was a former high-ranking general of Ukraine’s combined intelligence service and secret police, the SBU. Ukrainian journalists, in turn, have even named the general as Genady Kuznetsov, the former head of Kiev’s Center for Anti-Terrorist Special Operations.

Budapest’s customs agency has also made public some intriguing figures: In the first two months of this year, the total of currency and gold shipped to Ukraine via Hungary has already amounted to over $900 million dollars, more than €420 million, and 146 kilograms of gold. Clearly, the amounts finally stopped and, it seems, seized were only a small part of a much larger, ongoing flow.According to Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto, these funds may be linked to the “mafia,” here obviously meaning not just organized crime in Ukraine but Zelensky’s circles themselves, which may be one and the same thing, of course. Also, Szijjarto is a smart man; he may well have sent an implied message to Kiev as well: If you talk like the mafia, we will treat you as mafia. Rest of Europe: Watch and learn.

Read more …

““Since January, a total of $900 million and €420 million in cash has been transported through Hungary, and 146 kilograms of gold bars..”

Hungary Detains Ukrainians Transporting 10s Of Millions In Cash, Gold (Brooke)

Hungarian authorities have detained seven Ukrainian citizens and seized tens of millions of dollars, euros, and gold that were being transported through the country in armored vehicles, triggering the latest diplomatic dispute between Budapest and Kyiv. Hungary’s National Tax and Customs Administration (NAV) confirmed on Friday that criminal proceedings had been launched on suspicion of money laundering following an operation carried out on March 5. Authorities intercepted two armored cash-transport vehicles traveling through Hungary from Austria toward Ukraine. According to the Hungarian authorities, the vehicles were carrying approximately $40 million, €35 million in cash, and 9 kilograms of gold.


Hungarian Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó said the case raised serious questions about the movement of large quantities of physical cash through the country. “Since January, a total of $900 million and €420 million in cash has been transported through Hungary, and 146 kilograms of gold bars have also been transported through the country,” he said, as cited by Magyar Hírlap.“We have a number of serious questions about this. First of all, this is a huge amount of cash, and we wonder why Ukrainians need to transport such a large amount of cash. If it is true that this is a transaction between banks, then the question rightly arises as to why the banks do not settle this between themselves by bank transfer, why it is necessary to transport such a large amount of cash, and why it has to be transported through Hungary,” Szijjártó added.

“These questions arise mainly because these cash shipments are accompanied by people who have clear ties to Ukrainian secret services.” Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s political director, Balázs Orbán, also commented on the case, raising concerns about the purpose of the funds. “Hundreds of millions in cash and gold moving through Hungary toward Ukraine — escorted by people linked to Ukrainian intelligence. Armored vehicles, suitcases full of money, staggering sums,” he wrote on X. “Whose money is this? What was it meant to finance? Who benefits from it? And why must such enormous amounts of cash travel across our country instead of being transferred through normal banking channels?”

He added that authorities would conduct a full investigation and argued that the Hungarian public had a right to know where such funds were coming from and what they were intended for. Ukraine, however, has strongly rejected the allegations and accused Hungary of illegally detaining its citizens and confiscating bank property. Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha said the seven individuals were employees of the state-owned Oschadbank who were conducting a routine cash transfer between financial institutions. “Today in Budapest, Hungarian authorities took seven Ukrainian citizens hostage. The reasons are still unknown, as well as their current well-being, or the possibility of contacting them,” Sybiha said in a social media post cited by Ukrinform.

According to Kyiv, the vehicles were transporting currency and precious metals between Raiffeisen Bank Austria and Oschadbank Ukraine as part of standard banking operations. Sybiha accused Hungary of acting unlawfully. “If this is the ‘force’ announced earlier today by Mr. Orban, then this is the force of a criminal gang. This is state terrorism and racketeering,” he said. Oschadbank also confirmed that two of its armored vehicles and a seven-member transport team had been detained in Hungary while carrying out what it described as a routine transfer of funds and banking metals. “The value of the assets in the seized vehicles amounted to $40 million, EUR 35 million, and 9 kg of gold,” the bank said in a statement, adding that the transport had been documented in accordance with international banking and customs procedures.

According to GPS tracking data cited by the bank, the vehicles were last located in central Budapest near one of Hungary’s law enforcement agencies. Ukrainian officials said the whereabouts of the bank employees were not immediately known. Ukraine’s foreign ministry has also issued a warning advising Ukrainian citizens to avoid traveling through Hungary following what it described as the “kidnapping” of the bank employees and seizure of state bank assets. The incident marks the latest escalation in already strained relations between the two countries.

On Thursday, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky sparked outrage among European nationalist politicians by suggesting that Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s address could be given to Ukrainian armed forces so they could “speak to him in their own language.” Hungarian officials interpreted the remark as a threat directed at Orbán amid ongoing disputes over Hungary’s opposition to a proposed €90 billion EU loan package for Ukraine.

Read more …

Good battle.

Vance Vs. Rubio? Trump’s Pals Have a Preference. (Sarah Anderson)

It feels like we’ve been talking about who the 2028 GOP nominee will be from the moment Donald Trump was inaugurated in 2025. Even Trump himself has thrown his opinions out in multiple interviews. Ultimately, it seems to come down to either Vice President JD Vance or Secretary of State Marco Rubio, possibly even a combination of the two. Vance feels like the natural MAGA heir, and he performs best in polls by a mile. He’s extremely intelligent, he’s a veteran, and he has major relatable Middle America appeal. His story is the ultimate proof that you can pull yourself out of any bad situation, and he’s been a great advocate for people of faith and family values. But he’s also young, and some say he needs more experience under his belt, plus some of his ties to certain right-wing influencers come across as unappealing to certain voters.


Rubio definitely has the experience, and his star has risen in his current position as secretary of State, National Security advisor, and pretty much head of everything. He’s proven his competence on foreign policy 100 times over in just one year, he’s made the case for American exceptionalism most eloquently, and he’s the subject of what may be the most popular meme on the internet — I know that sounds silly, but it matters. He also appeals to Hispanic voters, which the GOP needs desperately, and could pull in some moderates and independents.

But he doesn’t poll nearly as well — though he’s gaining some momentum in 2026 after Venezuela and Iran — and many voters still focus on his past and file him under labels like “neocon,” “establishment,” and “RINO.” Based on his 2016 presidential run, they don’t think he’d be a good candidate. According to NBC, Trump has been polling his pals and donors at Mar-a-Lago dinners in recent weeks, and they have pretty strong opinions about who they want to see as the nominee. On the night before the conflict in Iran began, Trump was actually hosting a dinner at his home base in Florida “with a group of roughly 25 GOP donors, including New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft and billionaire Georgia gubernatorial candidate Rick Jackson.”

Trump asked the crowd who he should support in 2028, and according to someone who was there, the crowd shouted “Rubio” and cheered almost unanimously. However, another person in attendance told NBC that the room was more evenly split. (And these are not named sources, so, as usual, take that with a grain of salt…) NBC also reports that another former Trump official said that you have to remember that Mar-a-Lago crowd is not all that representative of the United States. The Mar-a-Lago donor crew are not JD people. He did not get picked [to be vice president] because of the Mar-a-Lago crowd. If you remember, that crowd was lobbying the president to pick Marco.

White House spokesman Steven Cheung responded and said this isn’t the administration’s current priority: “The president has assembled an all-star team that has achieved unprecedented success in just over one year. No amount of crazed media speculation about Vice President Vance and Secretary Rubio will deter this Administration’s mission of fighting for the American people.” A lot of people have made a big fuss over the fact that JD Vance was in Washington, D.C. when we struck Iran, while Trump was with Rubio in Florida, believing it was proof of some sort of favoritism. But a White House spokesperson said this the reality is that it was a matter of security — it’s probably best not to have the president and vice president in the same place when you’re militarily going after one of the country’s biggest enemies.

Vance hasn’t announced whether or not he plans to run, but I can’t imagine he won’t. Rubio has said that if Vance does run, he’ll step aside and support him. Many have floated a Vance-Rubio ticket. My personal opinion on that is that Rubio is much more useful where he is — being the vice president almost feels like a step down. Then again, maybe he can make history again and be the vice president and secretary of State and National Security advisor and head of everything else.

Read more …

Because she’s conservative.

Why the Left Suddenly Hates Gwen Stefani (Queen)

At the tail end of my college years, a band from Orange County, Calif., burst onto the national scene. MTV News called this group a “ska-punk band” — it seemed like a lot of new bands in that era received that moniker — but No Doubt’s music was a true fusion of ska (along with rocksteady and reggae) and rock with more of a punk edge than a punch sound and a sparkling pop melodic sensibility. But what set No Doubt apart was its charismatic frontwoman, Gwen Stefani. She had a unique combination of that aforementioned punk edge and SoCal glamor. Add her boundless energy and truly unique voice into the mix, and a rockstar was born. “Just a Girl” was a fun hit, but No Doubt won me over with “Spiderwebs.” And then “Don’t Speak” launched them into the stratosphere; somebody (I don’t remember who) said several years later that if the record label had released a physical single for “Don’t Speak,” it would’ve become the biggest number one hit of all time.


No Doubt had a few more years of success, and Stefani began a massively successful solo career. Additionally, she married Gavin Rossdale of the band Bush and had three kids. When they divorced, she married country singer Blake Shelton. Side note: After she divorced Rossdale, she was supposed to marry me. I guess she didn’t get the memo.In recent years, Stefani has been more out front about her Catholic faith. She has been a practicing Catholic for years, but she currently partners with Hallow, a Catholic prayer and Bible study app that also markets to non-Catholic Christians. She and Shelton also lead traditional lives, which is unusual for a pair of longtime professional musicians.

Stefani’s openly faithful life and loyalty to her marriage have apparently made her a target of leftist ire. The Telegraph, the center-right (or should I say centre-right?) UK news outlet, published a feature over the weekend about how Stefani has become “an enemy of the left.” Of course, part of this stems from Stefani’s faith and her partnership with Hallow, which is — GASP! — pro-life. The Telegraph’s Poppie Platt writes of how Stefani is wadding panties everywhere: Stefani recently found herself in hot water over her decision to partner with the popular American “prayer and Bible study” app Hallow, which is anti-abortion and counts major Trump donor – and PayPal founder – Peter Thiel among its investors. Its other prominent celebrity backers include two of Hollywood’s most famous Christians, Mark Wahlberg and Chris Pratt.

After Stefani shared a video encouraging her fans to download the app and join its Lent prayer challenge – “Hey everyone, I just got my ashes, and I’m ready for Lent… Check it out. God bless,” she gushed – her more liberally minded followers went into meltdown. “This ‘Maga makeover’ thing is really gross,” one wrote on Instagram, while another said Stefani’s “pandering to the racist rednecks in this country is really disappointing to see.”Platt points out that Stefani has engaged in what the left would consider “cultural appropriation” for years: hip-hop affectations, nods to Latin culture, the Harajuku girls. Yet Stefani has never uttered the first mealy-mouthed apology for any of it.

And while Stefani hasn’t made any overt political statements that I can find, she did share an interview that Tucker Carlson did before he went full antisemitic Qatari stooge with The Chosen star Jonathan Roumie, another devoted Catholic. That was a problem for leftist pearl clutchers. Stefani has traded the Los Angeles-area life for something more settled with Shelton. My friend and colleague Sarah Anderson sent me a video Shelton made of the garden that he and Stefani are planting. He refers to her as “my wife — her name’s Gwen.” Her desire for a more traditional life is nothing new. After all, she wrote No Doubt’s single “Simple Kind of Life,” in which she contrasted settling down with a family against the nomadic life of a musician. But living that simple kind of life in reality is too much for leftists.

Platt writes: In 2024, she released the country-influenced album Bouquet, filled with songs that swapped the feminist-friendly, girl-boss messaging No Doubt was famous for – on angsty hits such as Just A Girl – for odes to marriage and settling down; it was duly slammed by critics. The fact it was recorded in Nashville with help from her country star husband Shelton only added further fuel to the fire for her liberal former fans, who felt like she had replaced independence with subservience. In response to the fuss over the Hallow advert, one X user said: “She’s married to a God-loving Southern country singer, what do you expect?”

Here’s what it all boils down to: the left despises normalcy. The kind of people who faithfully worship, plant gardens, and live quiet lives with spouses and kids are the kind of people leftists hate. Stefani is part of this segment of Americans who become targets of left-wing vitriol — whether she’s actually MAGA or not. And that tells you far more about the left than it ever tells you about Stefani. If you’ve noticed that faith, family, and living a normal life increasingly make you a target of the cultural elites, you’re not imagining it. At PJ Media, we’re committed to calling that out and defending the values that built this country.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Mar 082026
 


Frida Kahlo Self portrait in a Velvet Dress 1926


Donald Trump Is a Great Man of History (Josh Hammer)
I Think We’re Going to Need a Bigger Military (Sarah Anderson)
The Real Reason Trump Fired Kristi Noem Is Not What You’ve Been Told (Margolis)
Can We Just Appreciate How Hardcore Trump’s New DHS Secretary Is? (Margolis)
Right Now, Russia is Like Amazon During COVID (CTH)
The White House Fool (Paul Craig Roberts)
US Military-Industrial Complex Agrees To Quadruple Bomb Production (ZH)
No Justification for US-Israeli War On Iran – Moscow (RT)
The End of Russia’s Gas Era (Dmitry Lekukh)
Is There Any Escape from Israel’s Control of America? (Glenn Greenwald)
Conversation with Alexander Dugin (PCR)
Will Reality Ever Dawn? (Paul Craig Roberts)
Prosecution of Maltese Man for Discussing Transition from Homosexuality (Turley)
The Clearest Sign Yet the Obamas’ Marriage Is a Total Lie (Margolis)
EU Nationalists Rally Around Orbán (RMX)

 


 

https://twitter.com/OCOCReport/status/2029958942114128203?s=20 https://twitter.com/apocalypseos/status/2030167724530262091?s=20

 


 

 


 


(Almost) half the country thinks he’s Hitler instead.. Dangerous.

Donald Trump Is a Great Man of History (Josh Hammer)

Most students of history have likely pondered the question: Is it the times that make the man, or is it the man that makes the times? The question, though superficially intriguing, seems to have an easy enough answer: Sometimes it is the times that makes the man, and sometimes it is the man that makes the times. Rarest of all is the man who is both summoned and elevated by the times, on the one hand, and who has the courage and conviction to shape the times in return, on the other hand. It is this lattermost group of men who we might refer to as the truly great men of history.Donald Trump is, on this metric, a great man of history.


In 2016, Trump was first swept into office, just a few months after the Brexit referendum in the UK, amid a broader wave of nationalist backlash to the regnant neoliberal global order. Trump, a lifelong free-trade skeptic with New York City outer-borough sensibilities, was the right man to lead at the right moment. He became the first president since Richard Nixon’s fateful trip to visit Chairman Mao in Beijing to begin decoupling the U.S. from its economic bear hug with the Chinese Communist Party. More recently, Trump has overseen a historic securing of America’s porous southern border and an equally historic withdrawal from dozens of transnational institutions.

Trump has met the moment and risen to the occasion in numerous foreign theaters besides China and the broader Indo-Pacific as well. He saw decades of American malaise, managed decline and overextended empire, and he has promptly reversed course.Trump and his administration have repeatedly proven willing and unafraid to criticize America’s European allies, nudging our core NATO partners to be better versions of themselves in such areas as military spending and defense self-sufficiency. He has responded to decades of buildup of murderous transnational nonstate cartels and Chinese and Russian entrenchment in our own hemisphere by reasserting the Latin America-centric Monroe Doctrine, as most spectacularly evidenced by January’s Operation Absolute Resolve extraction of fugitive Nicolas Maduro in Caracas.

And now there is the unfolding Operation Epic Fury in Iran. For 47 years, Iran’s revolutionary Shiite theocracy has been attempting to kill, and indeed killing, Americans. From the U.S. Marine Corps barracks in Beirut in 1983 to the Bush-era roadside IEDs in Iraq to the attempted (and indicted) assassination of Trump himself, the mullah regime in Tehran has a long and bloody track record when it comes to American loss of life — more than 1,000 Americans killed in total, according to U.S. Central Command. For decades, presidents kicked the can down the road, appeasing and negotiating with the mullahs as if they were atheistic Soviets and not 72 virgins-aspiring apocalyptic Islamists. The mullahs dissembled and stalled, while racing toward nuclear weapons and intercontinental ballistic missiles on which to mount them.

And then Trump came along. Trump campaigned on ending so-called forever wars in the Middle East. His critics, both on the left and in certain pockets of the impotent right, have accused Trump of violating that promise with the current campaign. But those critics are wrong. Iran has been at war with us, whether or not we think about it and acknowledge it, since the founding of the revolutionary regime in 1979. The revolutionaries’ very first action was to storm the U.S. embassy in Tehran and commence a 444-day hostage crisis. Tehran’s “death to America” chants since then have been daily, and its anti-American atrocities have been legion.

With Operation Epic Fury, Trump isn’t starting a new forever war — he is ending one. Time and again, Trump has shown that he is willing to take actions that U.S. presidents of both parties long paid lip service to support but never actually effectuated. The notion that the world’s most zealous Islamist regime cannot acquire the world’s most dangerous weapons had been spoken so many times by so many different politicians over the decades that it had become old hat. No one actually acted on it until Trump tore up Barack Obama’s disastrous nuclear deal in 2018 and bombed key Iranian nuclear facilities during Operation Midnight Hammer in 2025. Now, with Operation Epic Fury, Trump is attempting to finish the job and permanently ensure that Iran no longer threatens American interests.

God bless him for it.

Read more …

“The New Monroe Doctrine.”

I Think We’re Going to Need a Bigger Military (Sarah Anderson)

Well, folks, the moment is upon us. If you’ve been reading this column for the last month, you know that I’ve been teasing this big meeting of Latin American leaders — those aligned with the United States — in Miami, hosted by Donald Trump and Marco Rubio. That will happen on Saturday, March 7, and I am not sure how much will be made public (though I do know someone who will be there, so fingers crossed, I get some info), but I’ll be around to cover what I can. I think this marks the official beginning of an exciting — and historic — moment for the United States and our entire region. According to Rubio, the summit will include leadership and heads of state from 13 countries. I can confirm 12:

  • Argentina
  • Bolivia
  • Chile
  • Costa Rica
  • Dominican Republic
  • Ecuador
  • El Salvador
  • Guyana
  • Honduras
  • Panamá
  • Paraguay
  • Trinidad and Tobago


I have heard rumors that number 13 could be Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, but I can’t confirm that one. Note that Mexico, Brazil, and Colombia were not invited, nor was Venezuela’s Delcy Rodríguez, because she’s not really a head of state. We run that country, and inviting ourselves to our own summit would be redundant. Initially, the reason for the summit was said to be to “stop China’s encroachment in the region,” but Karoline Leavitt has described it as promoting “freedom, security, and prosperity in our region.” Same thing? I imagine it will be a good bit of both anti-cartel measures and anti-China measures, along with some economic stuff. I also imagine that there will be a lot of talk about the future of Venezuela and Cuba because it’s going to take a regional effort to make them totally great again.

But this is a good team. These countries are all aligned or are ready to align with the United States and move away from China. They largely agree with everything Trump has done globally. They all have conservative or right-leaning leadership who are ready to take a hardline stance against the cartels and organized crime that plagues the Americas. As the Trump administration has stated, they are the “ISIS and the Al-Qaeda of the Western Hemisphere,” and they must be dealt with. Assuming this becomes a regular thing, I think Colombia, after its elections in a few months, and Venezuela, after it elects a real leader, will be able to join. Who knows, after Brazil’s October elections, it may even get to join Team Americas. I don’t have a lot of hope for Mexico, but Trump may have something up his sleeve.

We’re Gonna Need a Bigger Military
Maybe I’m just a big dork, but I’m really excited about this. I’m tracking all the presidential planes coming into Miami as I write this. The Summit follows the Pentagon’s Americas Counter-Cartel Conference, which Catherine has been writing about over the last 48 hours. It included “defense and security leaders from 17 countries across the Western Hemisphere.” She quotes Pentagon Chief Spokesman Sean Parnell as saying, “The Department of War values the strong partnerships that make collective action possible to prevent external powers from interfering in our neighborhood and confronting shared threats. We look forward to working with these committed nations to support efforts that strengthen regional cooperation and advance a safe, secure, and prosperous Western Hemisphere.”

Read more …

“..the fallout in Minnesota, the ad campaign, the allegations of infidelity, the mismanagement of her staff, and her constant feuding with the heads of other agencies..”

The Real Reason Trump Fired Kristi Noem Is Not What You’ve Been Told (Margolis)

The story you heard first — that President Donald Trump fired Kristi Noem over a $220 million ad campaign — isn’t wrong, exactly. But it’s incomplete. The ad spending lit the fuse; an eight-word question that Noem refused to answer in plain English plunged the detonator. Here’s what really pushed Trump to fire her. It was previously reported that the breaking point for Trump was when Noem testified on Tuesday that he had personally approved $220 million in Homeland Security advertising, including a cinematic spot of her riding a horse in front of Mount Rushmore with a voiceover that said, “From President Trump and me: Welcome home.” Trump says he never knew about it, and multiple reports indicated he was really upset over her claim.


So yes, Trump was already halfway out the door with Noem after Tuesday. Then came Wednesday. What went down that day sealed her fate. At the House Judiciary Committee hearing, Rep. Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-Calif.) asked Noem point-blank, “Have you had sexual relations with Corey Lewandowski?” Noem didn’t say no.“I am shocked that we’re going down and peddling tabloid garbage in this committee today,” Noem replied. “I would tell you is, that he is a special government employee who works for the White House. There are thousands of them in the federal government.” Lawmakers pressed her repeatedly. Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-Fla.) told her directly, “I really think you need to say the word ‘no’ into the record so that you can clear that up.” Noem never did.

“It kept mounting up,” said another source, who agreed that it was the last nail in the secretary’s coffin. A third source said, “There was just no going back with the two hearings. It all became about her and him.” Lewandowski himself told The Post he wasn’t sure what role the alleged affair played. “You’re asking me to speculate on things that I have no insight into,” he said when reached by phone. “The question about the affair at the hearing was actually the final straw. It was f—ing brutal,” a source told the Post.

Lewandowski, for his part, played dumb. Asked whether the affair question factored into Trump’s decision, he said, “You’re asking me to speculate on things that I have no insight into.” He also described himself publicly as merely an “unpaid volunteer” — despite DHS staffers describing him as Noem’s de facto chief of staff who ran what employees called a “reign of terror” inside the department. Noem and Lewandowski began to lose influence in January when a second anti-deportation activist, Alex Pretti, was killed by federal agents in Minneapolis, following the earlier fatal shooting of Renee Good. Trump sent in the pair’s internal rival, border czar Tom Homan, to calm and wind down the local operation.

An administration official said: “Replacing Kristi was based on the culmination of her many unfortunate leadership failures including the fallout in Minnesota, the ad campaign, the allegations of infidelity, the mismanagement of her staff, and her constant feuding with the heads of other agencies, including CBP and ICE.“Kristi’s drama sadly overshadowed and distracted from the administration’s extremely popular immigration agenda, which will continue full force.” In the end, Noem turned one of the highest-profile jobs in Trump’s cabinet into a liability — and Trump, who had reportedly “joked about” her relationship with Lewandowski for years, finally decided the joke wasn’t funny anymore.

Read more …

Political fisticuffs? No thanks,

Can We Just Appreciate How Hardcore Trump’s New DHS Secretary Is? (Margolis)

Whatever your verdict on Kristi Noem’s tenure at the Department of Homeland Security, one thing is beyond debate: her replacement is built differently. President Trump has nominated Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.) to take over DHS. If you don’t know much about him, let me tell you: He’s hardcore. Before winning a Senate seat, Mullin ran a successful plumbing business, coached wrestling, and raised two Oklahoma State Wrestling Champions. He also holds a 3-0 MMA record in the Xtreme Fighting League. But here’s what I’m really talking about. And he literally challenged a union boss to fight in the middle of a hearing. It all started in June 2023 when Teamsters President Sean O’Brien mocked Mullin in a tweet, and Mullin responded by challenging O’Brien to an MMA fight for charity, which O’Brien apparently ignored.


It gets better. Then, in November of that year, O’Brien was testifying before the Senate, and Mullin read O’Brien’s tweet aloud and then challenged him to a fight right then and there. First, Mullin read O’Brien’s tweet accusing Mullin of being a “clown and fraud.” “Sir, I wish you was in the truck with me when I was building my plumbing company myself, and my wife was running the office, because I sure remember working pretty hard and long hours,” Mullin said.He kept reading, line by line, quoting O’Brien’s own words: “Pretends like he’s self-made. What a clown. Fraud. Always has been, always will be. Quit the tough guy act in these Senate hearings. You know where to find me. Any place, any time, cowboy.” Then he dropped the hammer: “Sir, this is a time, this is a place. You wanna run your mouth, we can be two consenting adults, we can finish it here.”

O’Brien didn’t back down. “Okay, that’s fine. Perfect,” he said. “You wanna do it now?” Mullin asked. “I’d love to do it right now,” O’Brien shot back. “Well, stand your butt up, then,” Mullin said O’Brien fired back instantly. “You stand your butt up.” And so Mullin stood up, ready to give O’Brien a much-deserved beating right there. It would have been great to see, but unfortunately, that’s when Bernie Sanders, who was chairing the hearing, had to intervene. The fight never happened. O’Brien wimped out. “O’Brien declined, instead suggesting they meet for coffee and work out their differences,” NPR reported. “Mullin accepted, but the two kept shouting at each other until the next senator, Democratic Sen. Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire, started her questioning by talking over them.”

Read more …

Russia will be alright.

Right Now, Russia is Like Amazon During COVID (CTH)

We like the deep weeds, most do not. The geopolitical ramifications of the U.S. confrontation with Iran are vast and complicated; however, to encapsulate one of the most interesting dynamics consider this ‘tldr’ statement to open the discussion with your friends: Right now, Russia is like Amazon during COVID-19. What follows is not me saying President Trump and President Putin are holding nightly conversations, discussing steps or details, or even obliquely coordinating measures as Trump eliminates the generational threat posed by Iran.


However, I am saying that given the nature of all contact and communication between Trump and Putin, including extensive contacts by their representative emissaries, both Putin and Trump are well aware of each downstream effect from the Iranian confrontation. Two days after the U.S./Israel began Operation Epic Fury, President Vladimir Putin said Russia should consider shutting down oil and liquified natural gas (LNG) shipments to the EU in advance of the previously scheduled April deadline date when the EU would stop purchases.

First, remember ‘force majeure’ contract nullification is in place for every producer, supplier and transporter in the middle east. Second, with shipments from the Gulf of Oman greatly reduced, LNG prices along with oil prices are increasing rapidly. The result – ships filled with oil and LNG currently on the water are diverting in real time as international bidding for the content of the ships take place. If Putin stops selling LNG to Europe, and Europe cannot get LNG from the Gulf of Oman, and China/Asia are LNG dependent (not exporting), then where is Europe going to get the LNG to replace what Russia will no longer provide? Answer: The United States, and to a lesser extent, Norway.

[SIDENOTE: now does President Trump continuously smacking Great Britain about shutting down their North Sea oil and gas operations take on context? Geopolitical foresight? I digress. END SIDENOTE] The European Commission’s decision to phase out and ultimately stop purchasing Russian oil/gas was made in 2025 prior to the Iran conflict triggering. Europe’s replacement plan included increased LNG purchases from the U.S., Norway and middle east; the latter supply option is now void.

Europe’s decision to stop buying oil/gas from Russia puts them in a very precarious position. The supply option for Europe is suddenly very limited, and Putin’s statement about stopping the flow early was obviously made with this understanding in mind. [Go back to the sidenote above. Without question President Trump already knew that an LNG supply restriction from the middle east would disproportionately hurt Europe. Both President Trump and President Putin would understand this geopolitically obvious fact/reality. If Europe now has to purchase more LNG from America (at higher prices) President Trump’s leverage over Europe increases. If both oil and LNG prices increase substantially, the price of oil/LNG currently on the water increases.

[SIDENOTE #2 – Previously the EU confiscated their holdings of the Russian Sovereign Wealth Fund, value €210 billion held in Euroclear and another €50 billion from other G-7 countries; total €260 billion. From those seized assets the EU created a €90 billion loan scheme to Ukraine with no repayment mechanism, because the EU predicts Russia will be forced to pay reparations for war and the negotiated settlement will deduct the €90 billion loan scheme from the balance. Hungary, a Trump ally, is currently blocking the transfer of funds; but this payment scheme -created by the EU holding the assets- underpins why the EU will not permit the conflict to end without their approval. END SIDENOTE]

Read more …

“It is possible that events are now out of everyone’s hands and are on a course of their own.”

The White House Fool (Paul Craig Roberts)

Just as the whore media told us for three years that Ukraine was winning and Russia’s defeat was imminent, we are now hearing that Iran’s defeat is imminent. If so, why is Trump now speaking about sending in American troops? Why is the CIA offering large bribes to Kurd leaders to send Kurdish men to die for Israel in Iran? Why are executives of American armament companies suddenly summoned to the Pentagon to see how quickly Washington’s depleted supply of missiles can be overcome? Why have Japan and South Korea been ordered to return to the United States the missiles supplied to them? Who is really losing?


To answer this question, it is necessary to move beyond the war propaganda. It appears that not only did Trump allow Netanyahu, not the US Congress as the US Constitution requires, to take the United States to war for Israel, but Trump also allowed America to be taken to war without proper preparation and without a backup plan.It appears that Trump was convinced that the Iranian government was so weak that if a few bombs an d missiles were dropped on Iran, the government would collapse and Trump and Netanyahu could appoint a puppet government. It never occurred to Trump, despite warnings from the US military, what the situation facing him would be if Iran lasted longer than the limited supply of US and Israeli missiles. That’s such a question could be overlooked totally discredits President Trump.

Add to the situation these elements: The United States has proved itself unable to protect the small Arab city states that are sites for American air and naval bases. Trump is faced with a midterm election and a population, the majority of which does not support his war of choice for Israel. Apparently, Iran is yet to use it’s hypersonic accurate missiles, apparently planning to use those to severely punish the US, Israel and the Arab oil city states once Washington and Israel are empty of missiles for air defense. The strait of Hormuz is effectively closed. In the US premium gasoline prices have already risen by $.70 per gallon. Trump says the US Navy will escort oil tankers in and out of the Persian Gulf, but this would expose the U.S. Navy to easy destruction by Iran.

Possibly Iran, would not deliver Trump the humiliation of sinking a US aircraft carrier out of fear that Trump would reply with nukes. However, if Iranians understand that they are in a fight for their very existence, whether Iran goes out like Gaza or via nukes might not matter to the leadership. If oil flows stop and oil revenues dry up, the petro-dollars from the region will cease to underwrite AI’s data centers in the US, possibly setting off a major stock market contraction. Americans, caught between falling wealth and rising inflation, are likely to turn against Trump and the midterm election, leaving Trump with no protection from impeachment. You really have to be reckless to bring so many possible risks down on your head all at the same time and all for Israel. In no way does America benefit from Trump’s war in behalf of Israel’s agenda of Greater Israel.

Trump will have to save face. What can he do? Send troops into such a large country as Iran with unfamiliar and difficult terrain? If troops are sent and are chewed up, what is Trump’s remaining option? To nuke Iran or will Israel do it? It is entirely possible that Trump’s mindless act in attacking Iran has opened the door to nuclear war. Russia and China have already lost credibility from failing to stand by their allies, first Syria, then Venezuela, and now Iran. This will encourage Trump’s belief that both countries are paper tigers. If Iran is defeated, it means the end of BRICS and China’s New Silk Road. Trump’s success, if such is the case, with Venezuela, Iran, and in the meantime, Cuba, Greenland and whomever else, will encourage him to restore American hegemony over Russia and China.

At this point, Russia and China will no longer be able to continue their mindless policy of turning a blind eye to reality. Maybe the two countries leaderships will finally read the Wolfowitz Doctrine. As far as I can tell, not many people are aware of the catastrophe that can result from the American president allowing himself to be led to war by Netanyahu, and those few who are aware are considered unpatriotic. Trump’s ego will never allow him to admit that he has made a possibly catastrophic decision for all of humanity and cause Trump to withdraw and to act to restore the sovereignty and independence of American foreign policy from Israel’s control. Trump is simply too completely owned by the Zionists.

Perhaps Putin and Xi will wake up, but there are no signs of it. Both seem more interested in trade deals than in national survival. It is possible that events are now out of everyone’s hands and are on a course of their own. Humanity’s stupid and foolish leaders have betrayed humanity.

Read more …

Makes some people happy. They call themselves investors.

US Military-Industrial Complex Agrees To Quadruple Bomb Production (ZH)

U.S. Central Command said late Friday on X that U.S. forces struck 3,000 IRGC targets with air-delivered munitions during the first week of Operation Epic Fury, signaling that the campaign is only intensifying as it moves into next week.


President Trump wrote on Truth Social Friday that he would not accept a negotiated end to the war with Iran, suggesting the conflict could drag on for some time. “There will be no deal with Iran except UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER!” he said. We have reported that U.S. inventories of some critical munitions are running low, with U.S. forces scrambling for supplies of key air-defense interceptors as IRGC missiles and drones continue to target American and allied bases across Gulf states.

Dwindling supplies of critical munitions are being amplified by Ukraine’s continued need for interceptors amid relentless Russian missile and drone barrages, a major problem that likely prompted President Trump to host top U.S. defense manufacturers to discuss accelerating missile and bomb production. “We just concluded a very good meeting with the largest U.S. Defense Manufacturing Companies where we discussed Production and Production Schedules,” Trump said on Truth Social late Friday afternoon.

Trump said the CEOs of BAE Systems, Boeing, Honeywell Aerospace, L3Harris Missile Solutions, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and Raytheon were all in attendance and “agreed to quadruple” weapons production. “They have agreed to quadruple Production of the ‘Exquisite Class’ Weaponry in that we want to reach, as rapidly as possible, the highest levels of quantity. Expansion began three months prior to the meeting, and the plants and Production of many of these Weapons are already underway,” the President said. “We have agreed to quadruple critical munitions production,” LMT wrote on X shortly after the meeting.

As the conflict is set to drag on for weeks and weapons production ramps up, the Goldman Sachs index for U.S. defense firms is primed for a breakout. One reason the breakout could occur is USCENTCOM’s X post, which reads “We Are Not Slowing Down.” Our defense pick since May 24, 2025, has been L3Harris, another defense firm that attended the meeting. Nearly a year ago, we outlined that L3Harris was a play on the “U.S. Hemispheric Defense Theme.” Since then, the stock is up more than 50%. What is clear to traders is that the moment Trump signals Iran is prepared to surrender, defense stocks and crude are likely to plunge as war risk premiums implode.

Read more …

Washington and West Jerusalem have described their strikes as preemptive measures to dismantle Tehran’s military capabilities

No Justification for US-Israeli War On Iran – Moscow (RT)

There is no justification for the ongoing US-Israeli strikes on Iran as the Islamic Republic posed no threat to either nation, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has said. Washington and West Jerusalem have framed their attacks on Iran as preemptive measures aimed at destroying its uranium enrichment and ballistic missile programs. The Islamic Republic insists that its nuclear program is peaceful and has denounced the strikes as entirely unprovoked. Speaking to RIA Novosti on Wednesday, Zakharova stated that “although we are hearing claims from the US and Israel that they are even supposedly defending themselves… no one attacked them, no one threatened them.” The Russian diplomat noted that Iran had always been willing to engage in negotiations with the West.


Moscow previously condemned the US-Israeli strikes as a “premeditated and unprovoked act of aggression” aimed at toppling a government that “refused to yield to the dictates of force and hegemonic pressure.” Commenting on the killing of Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, in the first wave of attacks unleashed last Saturday, Russian President Vladimir Putin characterized it as a “cynical violation of every norm of morality and international law.” The Russian Foreign Ministry has similarly denounced the “practice of political assassinations and the ‘hunting’ of leaders of sovereign states.”

According to Iranian authorities, aside from Khamenei and a number of senior commanders, at least 168 children, as well as teachers and staff, were killed in the US-Israeli bombing of an elementary school in the southern Iranian town of Minab on Saturday.While the Pentagon has said it is investigating the incident, the New York Times, citing newly released satellite imagery, verified social media posts and geolocated videos, reported on Thursday that American forces were likely responsible for the attack. According to the newspaper, the US military was targeting an adjacent naval base belonging to Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC).

Read more …

“Putin tells Russia’s energy sector: There’s no going back to EU..”

The End of Russia’s Gas Era (Dmitry Lekukh)

The current discussion about redirecting Russian gas flows away from Europe and toward other markets should not be understood as a short-term political maneuver. Judging by Vladimir Putin’s remarks on Wednesday, the signal is much deeper and primarily aimed at a domestic audience.In an interview with journalist Pavel Zarubin, the president noted that Russia could theoretically stop supplying gas to Western Eur opean markets immediately rather than in a month, as proposed by the EU. Moscow, he suggested, could instead concentrate on more promising markets elsewhere.


Formally, no final decision has been made. Putin has only instructed the government to study the issue. But even this preliminary statement should not be dismissed as rhetorical flourish. It carries a clear meaning. Contrary to what some observers assume, the signal is not primarily directed at the EU or other external players. It is addressed to economic actors inside Russia who still hope for a return to the old model, one in which the country’s energy industry was built around “traditional markets” in the West. In more human terms, the message could be interpreted as follows: are you certain that Western Europe remains a reliable partner?

The warning is simple. The current surge of EU interest in Russian oil and gas, fueled in part by instability in the Persian Gulf, may prove temporary. Betting the country’s long-term strategy on such fluctuating demand would be risky. For this reason, the emphasis on “promising markets” in the president’s remarks should not be overlooked. Putin rarely uses words casually in public speeches. In this case the term was clearly stressed, and the implication is obvious: Western European markets are increasingly viewed as declining rather than promising. From a long-term economic perspective, investing political capital and bureaucratic effort to preserve access to shrinking markets simply makes little sense.

If American suppliers want to dominate the EU gas market, Moscow appears increasingly willing to let them try. Ironically, however, even Washington seems ambivalent about fully taking on that role. There is a notable bipartisan consensus in the United States on this issue. The freeze on new long-term LNG contracts, after all, was introduced not by Donald Trump but by the Biden administration.In other words, the future of Europe’s gas market remains uncertain even for those who claim to benefit from Russia’s withdrawal.

Putin also pointed to broader structural trends that have reshaped the European energy landscape. The EU’s ambitious and expensive green transition has been underway for years, despite growing economic pressures. At the same time, geopolitical events have narrowed Western Europe’s access to traditional energy sources.The upheavals of the Arab Spring complicated access to southern resource bases, while the conflict in Ukraine effectively closed the eastern Russian corridor that had long supplied the EU. Against this backdrop, Russia’s strategic pivot toward Asia, a policy launched in the early 2010s, now appears less like a gamble and more like long-term planning. Analysts within the Russian leadership began promoting this shift well before today’s geopolitical tensions made it unavoidable.

None of this means Russia intends to abandon European customers entirely. Moscow still describes itself as a reliable supplier. But the EU is no longer the central pillar of Russia’s energy strategy. From now on, it will be treated as a residual market rather than a priority. And that raises a difficult question for the bloc’s policymakers. Is it wise to build long-term economic plans around partners whose own future, economically and politically, appears increasingly uncertain?

Read more …

No.

Is There Any Escape from Israel’s Control of America? (Glenn Greenwald)

PCR: Glenn Greenwald, one of the handful of real journalists who still exist in the Western world, where the Israel Lobby has murdered Free Speech despite the protection the US Constitution gives Free Speech in the First Amendment–impotent protection it turns out to be in Trump’s Zionist America–has just delivered the best news I have ever heard. Pray that he is correct and that Americans will be delivered from rule by Satanic Israel, the Nation of Unbridled Evil, the agents of Satan. Support for Israel in the US Has Collapsed, Radically — Finally Opening the Debate


GLENN GREENWALD
An article I wrote for Brazil’s largest newspaper documents growing opposition to Israel among Americans, and its relevance for other countries where Israel dissent is still taboo. This article was published this morning in Brazil’s Folha de S.Paulo, the country’s largest newspaper, where I am a columnist. It has been translated to English from its original Portuguese, and reformatted where necessary for re-publication on Substack. To read the original, you can find the link here: https://www1.folha.uol.com.br/colunas/glenn-greenwald . For decades in the United States, absolute support for Israel was an unbreakable bipartisan consensus. The only argument about Israel in U.S. presidential elections has been when one candidate boasts that they are more pro-Israel than the other.

That the U.S. must always finance, arm, diplomatically protect, and even deploy its own soldiers to fight for Israel was affirmed by former President Barack Obama (who fed Israel weapons to bomb Gaza in 2014 and agreed in 2016 to give Israel $38 billion over 10 years), as well as Joe Biden and Donald Trump (who financed and armed Israel’s destruction of Gaza following the October 7 attack). mLast year, Trump joined Israel in bombing Iran. And now Trump, with Israel, has launched a highly dangerous regional war against Iran that both The New York Times and The Financial Times are accurately describing as a war for Israel.

Already, both countries are relentlessly bombing Tehran and other cities, killing at least hundreds of the same Iranian civilians they claim to want to “liberate.” The U.S. is on its way to doing to Iran what it did to Iraq, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Syria and Libya: not liberating it, but destroying it. For more than fifty years, prominent Americans were petrified to criticize Israel or question American devotion to it because of guaranteed reputational destruction. Powerful pro-Israel groups would instantly accuse anyone questioning Israel of anti-Semitism. That worked.

But all of that has changed over the last two-plus years, especially among younger Americans. They have, for the first time, seen the true face of Israel and U.S. devotion to that country. They hate what they see. And support for Israel in the U.S. has now collapsed. Every demographic group except for conservatives over 50 has now turned against Israel. That once-unthinkable shift is reflected by the vehement opposition to U.S. support for Israel’s wars from leading American conservatives, including Tucker Carlson, Megyn Kelly, and (before he was assassinated) [by Israel] Charlie Kirk.

So extreme is this collapse that the most recent Gallup data, as reported by The Financial Times this month, shows that “more Americans sympathise with Palestinians than Israelis for the first time since Gallup began tracking the sentiment.” A recent internal Democratic Party report concluded that the Biden-Harris support for Israel’s war in Gaza suppressed the youth vote and cost them the election. The reasons are not difficult to understand. The world spent two years watching daily videos of Israel incinerating families and children in Gaza [with the “Israeli Defense Force” defending Israel by shooting mothers and babies in the head with ZERO protest from the Trump regime and with the heinous war crimes paid for by American taxpayers.]

International tribunals as well as numerous genocide scholars – many of whom are Jewish, and even Israeli – have concluded that Israel is guilty of genocide in Gaza [but you cannot say this in “free America.”] Yet while debate over Israel has finally become more permissive in the U.S., it remains strangely stifled in large Brazilian media [whores paid off by Israel.] Just over two years ago, in this paper, I harshly critiqued this extreme pro-Israel bias, with a particular focus on Globo, Brazil’s largest news conglomerate. That trend has only worsened, and the examples cited therein have continued.

The Brazilian Right also maintains a truly bizarre reverence for Israel, and for every new American and Israeli war. Supporters of former President Jair Bolsonaro love to prance around declaring how powerful and just it is to bomb the enemies of Israel and the U.S. – from Venezuela and Iraq to Yemen and Iran – yet apparently never themselves want to fight in, or have their own country to pay for, any of those wars they glorify. The Scottish philosopher Adam Smith warned 250 years ago – in his 1776 book Wealth of Nations – that people will always be eager to support and cheer for wars, and will derive a warped sense of excitement and purpose from them, as long as they are kept at a safe distance away from the fighting. The Brazilian Right is superb at cheering on American and Israeli wars, and equally superb at ensuring they bear none of the burdens or costs.

Whatever else is true, basic journalism requires the inclusion of all reasonable perspectives or else it is crude propaganda. World opinion has now turned sharply against Israel and its joint wars with the U.S. It is long past time for Brazilian journalism to prominently reflect that dissent.

Read more …

From paulcraigroberts.org.

Conversation with Alexander Dugin (PCR)

Conversation with Alexander Dugin on the Sputnik TV program Escalation.

Host: Dear friends, today we are addressing a large and serious topic. Everyone is talking about it right now, and understandably so, because a historic event is unfolding. Let me remind our listeners: on February 28, 2026, a joint operation was launched by the armed forces of the United States of America and Israel. Strikes were carried out against Iran, as a result of which Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, was killed. In addition, many other high-ranking figures were eliminated in the attack. Iran has begun responding with strikes against both Israel and American bases, and as we speak, military clashes are taking place. There are many questions about what the consequences will be, who will suffer most from these developments, and whether Iran will be able to withstand the pressure. But the first thing one wants to understand is: where is all of this leading?


Alexander Dugin: This is indeed an extremely important event. It is entirely possible that it could become the beginning of the Third World War, because forces of enormous scale are now involved. The actions of the Americans—Trump together with Netanyahu—directed against the political leadership of Iran were extraordinarily abrupt.

This is already the second such case. First, the United States abducted Maduro, establishing direct control over Venezuela and effectively occupying that country. Now they have destroyed the entire military-political and religious leadership of Iran. In significance, this is comparable to destroying the Pope or an Orthodox Patriarch, because the spiritual leader of the Shiites—the Rahbar, Ayatollah Khamenei—was revered not only in Iran. He was effectively the head of the entire Shiite world, which includes hundreds of millions of people across the globe. Before this, Israel eliminated the leadership of Hamas—a more limited case—and then the leadership of Hezbollah, which was already more serious.

Now the leadership of Iran has been directly and openly destroyed. This means that there are no longer any international norms, no rules, and the United Nations effectively no longer exists. That organization now belongs to the past, like a phantom limb from a vanished world. Trump himself essentially said as much: there is no international law; whatever he does is moral. This changes everything. The previous world order has collapsed. We had been gradually moving in this direction, but now the point of no return has been crossed. If a country can destroy the military-political and religious leadership of a sovereign state without any grounds whatsoever, then we are living in a completely different world—a world where everything is permitted, where law is replaced by force, where the principle operates: “If I can do it, I will.” [Or as Lenin put it, “neither more nor less than unlimited power, resting directly on force, not limited by anything, not restricted by any laws, nor any absolute rules. Nothing else, but that.”]

Trump’s behavior is particularly striking. All of this happened during negotiations involving Kushner and Witkoff, and according to available information Iran had agreed to almost all American demands—literally to almost everything. Despite this, such a strike followed directly against the leadership of the country. First of all, we must understand that in this situation we [Russia] are next. Venezuela, Iran, and before that Syria and Hezbollah—these are all regimes or political systems currently targeted by the United States, and they are our allies.

In effect, if such actions can be taken against our allies, if all of this goes unpunished, if Trump succeeds in everything he attempts, then at the next stage—perhaps even during negotiations between Kirill Dmitriev and Kushner and Witkoff—a similar operation aimed at regime change in our country could occur.

And what protects us from such a scenario? Nuclear weapons? Even here the question remains whether we would actually use them. In an extreme situation, the West has serious doubts that we would be prepared to take that step—we issue threats too often and fail to follow through. [ in other words, the Russian government does not sufficiently believe in Russian national sovereignty to defend the country.] At the same time, efforts are underway to surround and isolate our president. Our president, beyond any doubt, is the figure upon whom everything rests. In our country, and perhaps even in the world, everything depends on him. He is the one who restrains—the Katechon, as our Orthodox tradition describes it. Today this is simply a fact of geopolitics, a fact of the global order.

But if the Americans—Trump himself—become convinced that other Russian leaders who might, God forbid, replace our president would be more accommodating towards the West—and this was precisely the calculation in Iran, when the sovereign leaders of that country were physically eliminated because they pursued policies that did not align with American interests—then what would prevent Washington from attempting to implement the same scenario here? [Dugin forgets that Washington already has attempted regime change in Russia when Washington tried to assassinate Russian President Putin in his home.]

Trump is conducting a completely consistent neoconservative geopolitical strategy of attack. The states that were targeted by globalists under Biden, under Obama, and under Clinton are exactly the same states being targeted now. Nothing fundamentally new has appeared. Despite the scandals and disputes with European NATO allies, in the end those allies align themselves behind the United States and adopt the same position. For us, therefore, this is extremely serious. It is the final warning.

Read more …

“Will Russia and China, along with Iran, be destroyed by the inability of their leaders to recognize reality?”

Will Reality Ever Dawn? (Paul Craig Roberts)

It seems that Netanyahu is the only effective leader in the world, and that he is leading the world to Armageddon.mClearly, the Zionist goal of greater Israel is the dominant force in world foreign policy today and has been for sometime. The Zionist’s goal is, of course, aided and abetted by the delusions of the rest of the leaders and their fear to say anything negative about Israel.mWhy, for example, did the Chinese government sit on its insouciant butt and allow a war to start that cuts China off from 50% of its oil, when all China had to do was to form a mutual defense agreement with Iran, extend the Chinese nuclear umbrella to the protection of Iran, and provide a couple of squadron of Chinese fighter aircraft on Iranian airfields.


Putin could have done the same thing and, thereby, avoid the risks to the Russian Federation of an Iranian defeat. But Russia also was incapable of looking after its own interest. It appears that Putin’s delusional belief in his “special relationship with Donald Trump” has made Putin blind to reality. The only person who has a special relationship with Donald Trump is Netanyahu. It is the relationship of a servant to his Zionist master. The outcome of the war depends heavily on which side first runs out of missiles. Washington is already showing concern. Weapons industry executives have been asked what they can do to provide sufficient missiles for Washington to be able to continue the conflict, and missiles in the hands of Washington’s Japanese and South Korean allies have been recalled for use against Iran.

Another sign that Washington is less confident of the outcome than is President Trump is Washington’s effort to bribe the Kurds to send its soldiers to fight for Israel by invading Iran. Perhaps the ballistic middle reportedly fired at Turkey from Iran, is further evidence of Washington’s attempt to cover a bad bet. I suspect the missile, if there was one, was fired by Israel or the US and that its purpose is to drag Turkey and thereby the European countries that comprise NATO into the conflict with Iran. Clearly, neither the Russian nor the Chinese nor the Indian leaderships are doing anything to contain the developing catastrophe. Allowed to succeed in Iran, Trump will regard Russia and China as paper tigers. As Alexander Dugan says, “Today Iran, Tomorrow Russia.”

Read more …

What a story,

Prosecution of Maltese Man for Discussing Transition from Homosexuality (Turley)

We have been discussing the erosion of free speech rights across Europe, particularly within the European Union. The crackdowns on free speech in the United Kingdom, Germany, and France are often the focus of these columns. However, a recent case shows how smaller countries like Malta have joined this effort with a repressive vigor. Fortunately, the prosecution of Matthew Grech, 33, ended in acquittal this month, but not for a lack of effort by the government. The case should shock the conscience of anyone who values this “indispensable right.”


Grech faced up to five months in prison and a fine of 5,000 euros ($5,400) after he discussed his own history abandoning a homosexual lifestyle to become a born-again Christian. Not only did the government prosecute him for discussing his life, but it also charged journalists Mario Camilleri, 44, and Rita Bonnici, 45, for interviewing him. It was a full frontal attack on both free speech and the free press. The prosecution was brought under Malta’s “Affirmation of Sexual Orientation, Gender and Gender Expression Act.” The law makes it a crime to perform or advertise practices aimed at changing or suppressing a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity.

Grech was the first to be prosecuted under the law after LGBTQ activists failed criminal complaints against him following his interview. Silvan Agius and Christian Attard filed a report alleging that a related Facebook post and the subsequent interview advertised illegal conversion practices and promoted their “efficiency.” Cynthia Chircop, a volunteer with the Malta LGBTIQ Rights Movement, filed a report with the Cyber Crime Unit that the video had “triggered emotions” of isolation she experienced as a teenager. The government alleged that the interview constituted “marketing” for the International Foundation for Therapeutic and Counseling Choice, an organization associated with Grech that advocates such transitioning away from homosexual lifestyles.

However, Magistrate Monica Vella ruled that sharing a personal account does not constitute marketing the procedures. She sought to protect “free exploration and development.” However, the law itself was not struck down. The acquittal was secured on the basis that it was a personal account and not marketing. The country still criminalizes programs that seek to help those who want to transition away from homosexual practices or lifestyles. In my view, such programs should be considered protected under free speech, religious, and associational rights.

Advocates in the United States have attempted analogous bans by other means. Roughly 23 states have laws banning conversion therapy for minors. The Supreme Court recently heard the case of Chiles v. Salazar, a challenge to Colorado’s ban on conversion therapy for minors.

Read more …

Is she still a man?

The Clearest Sign Yet the Obamas’ Marriage Is a Total Lie (Margolis)

Jesse Jackson’s funeral was held Friday at the House of Hope on Chicago’s South Side. Every major Democrat who still matters showed up: Joe Biden, Bill Clinton, Kamala Harris, Hillary Clinton, Jill Biden, California Gov. Gavin Newsom.That’s right: sitting with a bunch of other couples, Barack Obama once again went stag. The Obamas themselves issued a joint statement about Jackson’s death that made Michelle’s absence on Friday all the more glaring. “Michelle got her first glimpse of political organizing at the Jacksons’ kitchen table when she was a teenager,” the statement read. “And in his two historic runs for president, he laid the foundation for my own campaign to the highest office of the land.” If there was ever a funeral Michelle had a personal, deeply rooted reason to attend, this was it.


So what’s the excuse this time? Her absence at Jimmy Carter’s funeral in Dec. 2024 was bizarre enough. Her excuse was that she was “on vacation” in Hawaii. She skipped Trump’s second inauguration in Jan. 2025. Why? Her excuse was that she had nothing to wear. I’m not even joking.I could see her refusing to go to the Trump inauguration in protest, but skipping Carter’s funeral? Well, I know she’s not a big fan of white people, so maybe that’s it. But skipping Jesse Jackson’s funeral raises huge red flags. It may be the most telling sign yet that the Obamas are married in name only.

The Obamas have been the subject of divorce rumors for a while now, and to say they’ve not handled them well is an understatement. They appeared on a podcast together, which looked painfully scripted, and of course, there’s the obligatory birthday, anniversary, Father’s Day, and Mother’s Day posts on social media. The choreographed podcast appearances and coordinated anniversary posts on social media prove nothing. Bill and Hillary Clinton have been photographed holding hands, too; no one believes they have a happy marriage. Last June, Michelle said she was relieved she didn’t have a son, because he would have been “another Barack.” That’s not the kind of thing a happily married woman says in public.

The real tell is the explanation Michelle keeps offering. “One of the major decisions I made this year was to stay put and not attend funerals and inaugurations and all the things that I’m supposed to attend,” she told NPR last year. “That was a part of me using my ambition to say, ‘Let me define what I want to do, apart from what I’m supposed to do.'”That would be a compelling argument if she were actually retreating from the public eye. She’s not. She’s recently “written” a book. She does podcast interviews regularly. She gives speeches. From where I sit, she seems to be declining the specific events where the public would see her standing next to her husband. There’s a meaningful difference between stepping back from the spotlight and stepping away from your spouse.

I’ve said this before, and I’ll say it again — the Obamas are almost certainly never going to officially divorce. The financial and reputational stakes are too enormous. Their entire brand was built on being the perfect couple. They were portrayed as the opposite of every messy political marriage the public had ever seen. They won’t ever get divorced because to do so would unravel decades of carefully constructed mythology. What we’re likely watching is the same arrangement the Clintons have run for years: a show marriage for the public to keep their legacies intact, while the actual relationship is a dumpster fire behind the scenes.

Read more …

He’s threatening members of the club, for pete’s sake. They should fire Von der Leyen because of it, but they don’t.

EU Nationalists Rally Around Orbán (RMX)

Hungarian Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó has condemned remarks by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky that Budapest says amounted to a threat against Prime Minister Viktor Orbán. Responding to comments made during a press briefing in Kyiv on Thursday, Szijjártó said the statement was “beyond every limit” and reflected what he described as “the kind of ‘culture’ coming from Kyiv.” “This is the man Brussels admires and the country they want to fast-track into the European Union,” Szijjártó said. “No one can threaten Hungary or its prime minister. No one can blackmail us just because we refuse to pay the price of Ukraine’s war and refuse to accept higher energy prices because of Ukraine.” Zelensky had been speaking to compatriots about the proposed €90 billion European funding package for Ukraine, and warned that a single EU leader should not block the measure, widely interpreted as meaning Viktor Orbán.


“We hope that in the European Union, one person will not block the 90 billion [euros]. Otherwise, we will give this person’s address to the armed forces, to our guys, let them call him and talk to him in their own language,” Zelensky said. The Patriots for Europe group in the European Parliament also criticized the comments, saying that “statements suggesting intimidation or threats of violence are incompatible with democratic principles and with the spirit of mutual respect that should guide relations between partners.” The group noted that EU member states have already provided approximately €200 billion in support to Ukraine and said such rhetoric was difficult to reconcile with Ukraine’s ambition to join the European Union.

Tensions escalated further after Orbán responded on social media, declaring that Hungary would restore energy flows through the Druzhba oil pipeline by force, if necessary. b“There will be no deals, no compromise. We will break the Ukrainian oil blockade by force. Hungary’s energy will soon flow again through the Friendship pipeline,” Orbán wrote.m“President Zelensky’s threats are not about me. He is threatening Hungary. Unfortunately for him, he cannot stop me from protecting Hungarian families,” he added.

Several Members of the European Parliament stood in support of Hungary following the remarks. “Let me remind you that Hungary decided to take this step not out of some whim or bad mood, but in response to Ukraine halting the transit of oil to Hungary via the Druzhba pipeline,” noted Polish MEP Ewa Zajaczkowska-Hernik, affiliated with the right-wing Confederation. “Because of this, fuel prices in Hungary have risen, and Prime Minister Orbán is simply standing firm in defense of his citizens.” “Not another euro for Zelensky and his corrupt gang! We stand with Hungary,” added Austrian Freedom Party MEP Harald Vilimsky.

“Zelensky has long been making a mistake by allowing himself to be used by the European Union to cooperate with Von der Leyen and the Brussels troop in the massive interference in the Hungarian election campaign,” added Spain’s Vox MEP Hermann Tertsch. “It’s very likely that their plan will backfire.” Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico also weighed in late on Thursday. In a video posted on social media, Fico expressed “full solidarity” with his Hungarian counterpart, and intimated that “if the Ukrainian president continues like this, it may be that other EU member states will also block the €90 billion loan.” He further urged key members of the European Commission and European Parliament to “distance themselves” from what he called Zelensky’s “outrageous blackmailing statements.”

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/theUMreal/status/2030185782871290039?s=20 https://twitter.com/XCorpHub/status/2029935040814104625?s=20

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Mar 052026
 


“Flora” (Roman Goddess of Spring), Villa di Arianna, Pompei 1st Century A.D.


Keir Starmer Takes Cowardice to New Lows (Tim O’Brien)
Jeffrey Sachs: ‘Trump Is An Utter Disgrace To Our Nation – He Lied To Us’ (ZH)
Iran Conflict – Oil Disruption Hits Key BRICS Members Hard (CTH)
Fetterman Chooses Country Over Party After Iran Operation (David Manney)
Trump: US Insurance for “All Maritime Trade Flowing Through the Gulf”
US Sub Sinks Iranian Warship, First Such Hit Since WWII (Catherine Salgado)
Trump Denies Israel ‘Forced His Hand.’ (Salgado)
NY AG James Orders Hospital to Resume Gender-Transition for Minors (Turley)
Trump’s 15% Global Tariff Will Take Effect This Week: Bessent (ET)
Bessent Outlines U.S. Financial/Economic Stabilization Plan (CTH)
Walz, Ellison Knew About Minnesota Fraud ‘for Years,’ House Report (DS)
Minnesota Sues Federal Government Over Medicaid Funding Freeze (Aldgra Fredly)
SCOTUS Decision Highlights Problems with Parents in Blue States (Turley)
Ukraine Blocks EU Mission To Inspect Russian Oil Pipeline – FT (RT)

 


 

https://twitter.com/ivan_8848/status/2029139145168183437?s=20 https://twitter.com/GreereMedeea/status/2028870849718108499?s=20

 


 

 


 


They sold Britain. It is no longer a Christian nation. Prepare your kids.

Keir Starmer Takes Cowardice to New Lows (Tim O’Brien)

To borrow a phrase from Foghorn Leghorn, when describing UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer, that boy is softer than a pound of wet leather, and he’s about as sharp as a bowling ball. Whether you agree strategically with the preemptive strikes against Iran by the U.S. and Israel, the reactions of the other developed nations have been a study in intelligence and loyalty on the part of their leaders. My colleague Catherine Salgado addressed this in her piece that focused on the reactions of Spain and Portugal reaction to the strikes: While Spain’s Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez was the most explicitly condemnatory, and forbade use of joint bases for the operation, Croatian Foreign Minister Gordan Radman, French President Emmanuel Macron, Finnish President Alexander Stubb, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, Irish Taoiseach Micheál Martin, UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer, and the Slovenian government all more or less criticized the United States and Israel.


Times like this, you learn who your friends are and who isn’t bright enough to act in their countries’ best interests. Even if they’re still stinging from President Donald Trump’s tariffs—and in some cases, his public beatdowns—smart leaders know how to rise above all of that in this new context. A quick victory and resolution to the war with Iran can serve the West’s best interests on a number of levels, if handled right. Instead, we have a group of largely beta males who partly fear backlash from the Islamic populations in their countries, along with backlash from the Never Trumpers around the world. Some people will do anything to see Trump fail even if it means defending by default the evil and ruthless regime that has run Iran for the past 46 years.

Keir Starmer stands out as a beta male’s beta male. He exudes cowardice—from that chronic deer-in-the-headlights look of fear, to his voice and its trademark trepidation, to a physical presence best described in one word: gooey. When G. Michael Hopf penned his novel Those Who Remain, it seems that he knew that a day would come when Starmer & Co. would arrive on the world stage when he wrote, “Hard times create strong men, strong men create good times, good times create weak men, weak men create hard times.” This week, we’re at the last phase of that sentence. Weak men like Starmer do create hard times.

If the U.S. and Israel are successful, now that hostilities are under way, the world has a chance to benefit by putting an end to the proxy wars and terrorism Iran has funded and orchestrated for decades, killing thousands of Americans. If Trump does what he said he’ll do, he’ll deal a final blow to Iran’s campaign to possess nuclear arms and the weaponry to strike the West with them. In that scenario, the whole world benefits. If that’s all Trump achieves, it’s a win. Smart world leaders can see that and will want to position themselves to be in Trump’s good graces if he succeeds. Leaders who aren’t too bright, or who act out of fear, will lose if he succeeds. This is Starmer’s “courageous” stand on the matter of deciding not to support the U.S. Speaking in Parliament, he called Trump’s efforts to prevent Iran from having nukes an “unlawful action.”

https://twitter.com/g_gosden/status/2028519334612529596


In his first official statement after the strikes against Iran, Starmer practically ran to the nearest podium and microphone to make it clear that he and his government “played no role in these strikes.”

https://twitter.com/naijaamebonews/status/2027836993275576472


A real man in charge of a country like the UK would either openly support the U.S. in a situation like this or, if he disagreed with it, stay quiet while the situation is most volatile and give his ally a chance to take care of business. Instead, what Starmer did was to make sure the people he fears know that he’s not just distancing himself from the fighting, but running away from it. In doing this, he undermined the U.S, his supposed ally.He made it clear that he did not support any UK involvement in the attacks on Iran. He made it clear that his military would focus on defending itself and British installations.

He decided on Sunday, the day after hostilities started, to give the U.S. permission to use its bases for certain operations. This was a change of course after it was reported that, prior to the operation, the UK had denied America’s request to use British bases in its Operation Epic Fury. In reaction to Starmer, Trump told the news media, “This is not Winston Churchill that we’re dealing with.” He said he was not happy with the Starmer, even though he eventually allowed the U.S. access to the base at Diego Garcia to mount strikes against Iranian missile facilities.

In a 24-hour period, Trump took the opportunity to let the world and Starmer know three times that Starmer’s initial rejection of American requests to use certain facilities had dealt a serious blow to U.S.-UK relations. Trump told the Sun that the “relationship is obviously not what it was,” and then he told the Telegraph that Starmer delayed giving the U.S. permission beyond what would have been reasonable. Trump suspects what everyone does at this point – that Starmer fears the Islamic community and is pandering to it, as he did here.

Read more …

Now, now, Jeff!!

Jeffrey Sachs: ‘Trump Is An Utter Disgrace To Our Nation – He Lied To Us’ (ZH)

Columbia University economics professor Jeffrey D. Sachs appeared on Judge Napolitano’s ‘Judging Freedom’ podcast Monday, where he railed against the US-Israeli attack on Iran and the ‘CIA-led security state,’ calling President Donald Trump a ‘disgrace to our nation’ because ‘he lied to us.’



Sachs, a longtime critic of U.S. foreign policy, described the recent escalation as the continuation of a decades-old strategy he linked to Israeli and U.S. intelligence objectives dating back to 1996. “This is a long-term plan. This is a Mossad CIA plan for American control of the Middle East and Israeli military hegemony in the Middle East that has been underway since 1996,” Sachs said. “This is madness. This is murderous delusion.” The professor pointed to a series of U.S.-backed or U.S.-involved conflicts across the region, from Libya and Sudan to Somalia and the ongoing crisis in Gaza, as evidence of a consistent pattern aimed ultimately at confronting Iran.

“It has involved wars across the Middle East. It has left rivers of blood from Libya to Sudan, Somalia, the genocide in Gaza,” he said, adding that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s goal since the mid-1990s has been “the destruction of Iran.”= Sachs reserved some of his strongest language for Trump, whom he said reversed course on key foreign-policy pledges after taking office. “Trump… is an utter disgrace to our nation. Utter disgrace. He lied to us. Every word about America first… And he did exactly the opposite of what he said,” Sachs stated. The economist also criticized Washington’s approach to diplomacy more broadly, arguing that the United States has abandoned genuine negotiation in favor of coercive tactics. “The United States does not negotiate. It cheats… Now they kill you because if you negotiate, it means you’re weak,” he said.

On the domestic front, Sachs connected the country’s infrastructure challenges to the enormous costs of overseas military engagements.“Why do the roads not work and the bridges not work in the United States?… It’s because we spend trillions of dollars in war,” he said. “China just completed its 50,000th kilometer of fast rail because China doesn’t go to war.” Sachs concluded by expressing deep skepticism about the current state of American governance. “We’re in the hands of gangsters. We’re not in the hands of a constitutional system,” he said, noting that only a handful of lawmakers – citing Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) as one example – have pushed back.

Read more …

OK for now.

Iran Conflict – Oil Disruption Hits Key BRICS Members Hard (CTH)

• First blow, the Trump tariffs hit Beijing hardest. • Second blow, the Beijing tentacle on the Panama Canal is severed. • Third blow, global tariff threats changed the risk dynamic for southeast Asia countries who acted as transnational shippers for China. • Fourth blow, cheap sanctioned oil from Venezuela was cut-off. • Now, the fifth blow; cheap, sanctioned Iranian oil is disrupted.


As noted by Politico: Following USA military strikes, “ships have begun to avoid the Strait of Hormuz off the coast of Iran — a critical shipping lane for Gulf nations to export oil to Asia. China in 2025 received about half of its imported oil from the six Gulf countries that rely on the strait. Other large crude oil producers in the region — including Saudi Arabia, Iraq and the United Arab Emirates — transport almost all their crude exports through the geographic bottleneck.”


It’s not just a factor of oil flow, but also the price that China will ultimately end up having to pay. Beijing was buying oil from Venezuela, Iran and Russia at steep discounts because their purchases were skirting western sanctions. With Iranian oil production now no longer a market option, China will seek to replace their needs with more Russian alternative. However, that diversion means the oil India was purchasing from Russia will come at a higher price, and the refined final product that was exported by India will arrive to the European Union carrying an additional cost. Simultaneously, Vladimir Putin was asked about Russia’s lack of military support to Iran in response to the U.S. military action, to wit the Russian president noted the technical terms of their joint military agreements did not include Russia’s immediate involvement. In shorthand, Russia is busy and is not getting involved.

Russia was/is partially dependent on receiving military supplies from Iran in exchange for oil transfers. The military component is reported to include drones from Iran for use in the Ukraine conflict. Now that exchange profile is shuttered. Taking Iran’s malign influence off the geopolitical chessboard is beginning to surface in major challenges to the BRICS assembly (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa). Russia, China and India are impacted directly. The BRICS nations were skirting western oil sanctions by trading the commodity outside the petrodollar structure. However, President Trump now controls the flow of oil from Venezuela, and his administration controls the currency in which it is sold.

With Iranian oil removed from the non-petro supply chain, the only remaining non-petro oil producer is Russia – who is simultaneously hit with a loss in military hardware support. China may end up as a larger oil customer to Russia, but at what price and in what payment structure. With global oil supplies in a state of flux, and with the USA in control of the oil flow from Venezuela, North America is certainly in the best position for minimal energy disruption. Asia is heavily dependent on oil flows through the Strait of Hormuz, and the majority of Europe has already shut themselves off from Russian oil production, putting themselves in a position of dependency to the global markets. The short-term ramifications of this oil disruption hit China, Southeast Asia, Japan and Europe particularly hard.

“OPEC+ countries affirmed on Sunday that they would boost oil production starting in April by 206,000 barrels daily — a modest increase intended to dampen the war’s effect on prices down the road. The majority of the increase would come from Saudi Arabia and Russia.” {SOURCE}

All of a sudden, this happens: Zelenskyy not to be trusted? “Ukraine is under pressure to let the EU inspect a damaged pipeline carrying Russian oil to Hungary and Slovakia, as the two pro-Kremlin countries accuse Kyiv of overstating the impact of an attack by Moscow — despite what Ukrainian officials say is evidence of extensive destruction,” the report said. According to five diplomats and EU officials who spoke to the FT, even pro- Ukrainian governments within the European Union and the European Commission have also asked Ukraine to permit a delegation to inspect the pipeline. Two sources told the newspaper that European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen requested access for EU experts during her visit to Kyiv on Feb. 24, the fourth anniversary of Russia’s full-scale invasion. The request, according to the sources, was refused.

As tensions escalated, the EU’s ambassador to Ukraine, Katarina Mathernova, reportedly asked through the presidential office for permission to inspect the damaged pipeline herself or to allow visits by other EU diplomats. Those requests were denied for security reasons, the sources said.”

Read more …

John Fetterman thinks for himself. Works for me.

Fetterman Chooses Country Over Party After Iran Operation (David Manney)

Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) backed the U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iran without hesitation, calling Operation Epic Fury entirely appropriate, and said eliminating Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the un-alived supreme leader of Iran, removed one of the most dangerous figures in modern history.


President Donald Trump confirmed the mission targeted senior regime leadership gathered in Tehran, with early reports stating roughly 40 to 50 of the top Iranian officials were killed in the attack’s early wave. Fetterman didn’t hedge, asking why anybody would grieve leaders of a regime tied to terror networks and decades of repression. He said that Americans should recognize the strategic impact of removing the head of a government that funds violence across the world.


Fetterman’s stance again puts him at odds with several Democratic colleagues who questioned the legality and timing of the strikes. He described their reactions as bizarre. He pointed to the regime’s record, including the 1988 mass executions of political prisoners that killed an estimated 30,000 dissidents under orders tied to regime leadership, making clear the target wasn’t the Iranian people, just the regime. Vice President JD Vance stated that the administration’s objectives remain preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. Fetterman said he’d oppose efforts to restrict the president’s authority under the War Powers Resolution.

Because Fetterman’s policy beliefs keep him planted firmly on the left, Fetterman won’t switch parties. But when national security comes into focus, he regularly breaks from progressive orthodoxy and takes a position rooted in deterrence and strength. In a chamber full of Congresscritters using scripted responses, his statements read as uncommon steadiness. Critics raised legal concerns, questioning whether the threshold for immediate military action had been met, while others argued Congress should’ve been consulted before the strike. Raise of hands: who envisions Schiff, Jeffries, and Swalwell would keep their pie holes shut?

Fetterman countered that Iran’s nuclear development and missile expansion represent a continuing threat, even if not tied to a single launch window, saying that waiting for perfect conditions invites greater danger.Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu led his country’s role in the coordinated strike, and Fetterman defended both Netanyahu and Trump against critics who labeled the attack as reckless. Fetterman argued that removing senior regime leadership weakens proxy forces such as Hezbollah. His position exposed a visible split inside his party, particularly among lawmakers who reflexively oppose any military action.

The broader debate now turns on escalation and authority. President Trump said the objective remains stopping Iran’s nuclear ambitions and restoring deterrence in the region. Lawmakers continue to argue over oversight and limits, but Fetterman’s remarks show that support for the strikes crosses party lines, even if only in narrow lanes. The result of Operation Epic Fury and how it will reshape the relations between the U.S. and Iran remains to be seen. What’s clear is that one Democrat senator chose to defend a strike he believes strengthens American and Israeli security, even when doing so separates him from much of his caucus. National security debates test whether lawmakers follow party currents or independent judgment. Fetterman, thankfully, chose judgment.

Read more …

This will solve the economy at home. You just wait.

Trump: US Insurance for “All Maritime Trade Flowing Through the Gulf”

This is a remarkable position for President Trump to take. Optimal Solutions: (President Trump) – “Effective IMMEDIATELY, I have ordered the United States Development Finance Corporation (DFC) to provide, at a very reasonable price, political risk insurance and guarantees for the Financial Security of ALL Maritime Trade, especially Energy, traveling through the Gulf. This will be available to all Shipping Lines.


If necessary, the United States Navy will begin escorting tankers through the Strait of Hormuz, as soon as possible. No matter what, the United States will ensure the FREE FLOW of ENERGY to the WORLD. The United States’ ECONOMIC and MILITARY MIGHT is the GREATEST ON EARTH — More actions to come. Thank you for your attention to this matter! President DONALD J. TRUMP“

President Trump will use the full weight of the U.S. military to change behavior in Iran. Not just to change the regime per se’, but to change the behavior of whoever surfaces to represent the interests of the people. The change in behavior is the goal. While this forced shift is underway, the full weight of the USA will also seek to mitigate any collateral economic damage to well behaved economic partners. Forceful action, optimal stewardship.

Read more …

“.. the first kill by a U.S. submarine since World War II. “

US Sub Sinks Iranian Warship, First Such Hit Since WWII (Catherine Salgado)

A United States submarine successfully sank an Iranian regime warship, according to a Wednesday morning update from the secretary of war.The American submarine using a torpedo to sink an Iranian ship is particularly historic because, according to Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, this is the first such sinking of a ship since World War II. And just as the USA demanded unconditional surrender during World War II, Hegseth emphasized, now the U.S. is in it to win it again. The U.S.-Israeli joint Operation Epic Fury continues to claim prizes, including a warship named for the terrorist Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) leader (Qasem Soleimani) whom Donald Trump eliminated during his first term and on behalf of whom the likewise assassinated Ayatollah Khamenei repeatedly vowed to assassinate President Donald Trump.


“The Iranian Navy rests at the bottom of the Persian Gulf,” Hegseth confidently announced. “[It’s] combat ineffective, decimated, destroyed, defeated, pick your adjective. In fact, last night, we sunk their prize ship, the ‘Soleimani’.” Soleimani was responsible for the deaths of hundreds of Americans and the wounding of thousands more. Not only is he dead thanks to the first Trump administration, but the second Trump administration even took out the ship named for him. As Hegseth joked, “Looks like POTUS got him twice.”

Hegseth assured America and the world that the Iranian regime’s “navy is not a factor. Pick your adjective, it is no more.” He continued, “In fact, yesterday, in the Indian Ocean, and we’ll play it on the screen there, an American submarine sunk an Iranian warship that thought it was safe in international waters. Instead, it was sunk by a torpedo, quiet death.” That is particularly impressive because it represents the U.S. Navy’s “first sinking of an enemy ship by a torpedo since World War II. Like in that war, back when we were still the War Department, we are fighting to win,” Hegseth declared.

Trump insisted on restoring the name of the War Department to the Defense Department, and from Venezuela to Iran to Ecuador, the U.S. military has been pulling off spectacular operations ever since. What’s in a name? The difference between weakness and strength, it seems. The Iranian regime had assassins in the United States attempting to kill President Trump even before he came to office again, as they seemed to understand that his return to power would spell disaster for them, as it did. But Hegseth noted, “Also, yesterday, the leader of the unit who attempted to assassinate President Trump has been hunted down and killed. Iran tried to kill President Trump, and President Trump got the last laugh.”

Read more …

Yeah yeah. Sure.

Trump Denies Israel ‘Forced His Hand.’ (Salgado)

President Donald Trump and Secretary of War Pete Hegseth summarily demolished the argument from Jew-haters that the Israeli government forced the USA into a joint strike on Iran’s regime. Despite what Tucker Carlson, Candace Owens, Megyn Kelly, and the rest of the Jihad Squad claim, Israel didn’t strong-arm the United States into Operation Epic Fury. The Iranian terrorist regime brought it all upon themselves.The fact is that the late Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and co. were treating this administration the way they have treated almost every U.S. administration over decades. They defied the U.S., funded the terrorists who attacked our troops and our allies, screamed “death to America” over and over, and demanded we lie down and take it.


But this time, it didn’t turn out the way it usually does. Unlike Barack Obama or Joe Biden, who rewarded Iranian jihad, Donald Trump grew tired of being pushed around. A reporter asked Trump during a press conference if Israel “forced” his hand on the Operation Epic Fury strikes. Trump coolly replied, “No, I might have forced their hand. You see, we were having negotiations with these lunatics, and it was my opinion that they were going to attack first. They were going to attack. If we didn’t do it, they were going to attack first. I felt strongly about that.”

Trump’s first priority and duty is to the American people. Democrats think we should always prioritize foreign terrorists, tyrants, and dictators, and that’s why they’re furious about this. Think of how much American money went to the Ayatollah’s regime through the hands of Democrats. At a certain point, America has to face reality about Islamic dictatorships and acknowledge that Muslim sacred texts have been commanding jihad against non-Muslims for some 1,400 years, and that the endless violence and conflict is not going to stop because of diplomacy. We have been at war with Iran’s regime for half a century, and eventually one government or the other must concede defeat.

Hence Trump observed, “And we have great negotiators, great people, people that do this very successfully, and have done it all their lives — very successful — and based on the way the negotiation was going, I think they were going to attack first. And I didn’t want that to happen.” Trump therefore preempted them with Operation Epic Fury, as Hegseth confirmed. “So if anything, I might have forced Israel’s hand,” Trump added. “But Israel was ready, and we were ready, and we’ve had a — a very, very powerful impact.”

Read more …

Letitia, where did we go wrong?

NY AG James Orders Hospital to Resume Gender-Transition for Minors (Turley)

In a rare and controversial move, New York Attorney General Letitia James has ordered a Manhattan hospital to resume offering gender-transition treatment to transgender youth. NYU Langone had discontinued such treatments after funding threats from the Trump administration. It is now caught between the proverbial rock (HHS) and a hard place (NYAG). Last year, President Donald Trump signed an executive order entitled “Protecting Children from Chemical and Surgical Mutilation,” seeking to restrict gender-transition treatment for people under 19. HHS then threatened hospitals with a cut off of federal Medicaid and Medicare funding for continuing such treatment for children.


Various European countries have also halted certain procedures after countervailing studies suggesting that the risks are too high. England’s National Health Service 2024 report on the subject, known as the Cass Report, found concerning evidence of harm for minors and inconclusive benefits. James threatened “further action” if NYU Langone does not defy the Trump Administration, declaring that the cessation of its Transgender Youth Health Program violates New York anti-discrimination law by “jeopardizing access to medically necessary healthcare for some of the most vulnerable New Yorkers.” NYU Langone had previously declared that it would no longer provide certain gender-transition treatments for patients under the age of 19.

James’s move could trigger a fascinating challenge. In the Feb. 25 letter signed by the attorney general’s health care bureau chief, Darsana Srinivasan, the state said that the federal regulatory change did not affect a “medical institution’s existing duties and obligations under New York law.” That raises an interesting conflict between state and federal regulations.The letter gives the hospital until March 11 to comply and resume these treatments. Effectively, James is ordering the hospital to defy the federal government. However, the hospital, not James or the state, would bear the financial and regulatory consequences.

While James does not state how she will penalize the hospital, the letter is likely sufficient to challenge the move. The question is whether the political costs for the NYU hospital are prohibitive. There is also the question of whether the HHS has standing or interest in challenging the move as a direct threat to federal authority. The problem with a federal challenge is that nothing in the New York threat prevents the federal government from carrying out its intent to cut off funding. Hospitals would have to choose between penalties in New York or loss of funding in Washington. Nevertheless, New York’s move is a direct attack on the enforcement of federal policy by state hospitals.

Read more …

The first ever openly gay Treasury Secretary is loyal to a T. He’s also very good at what he does.

Trump’s 15% Global Tariff Will Take Effect This Week: Bessent (ET)

President Donald Trump’s 15 percent global tariff will take effect sometime this week, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said. Following the Supreme Court’s rebuke of the president’s signature economic policy last month, Trump imposed a 10 percent global tariff, invoking Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974. A day later, Trump pledged to raise the rate to 15 percent. In an interview with CNBC’s “Squawk Box” on March 4, Bessent confirmed that the new rate would be introduced sometime this week and remain in place for 150 days. He also anticipates tariff rates would return to the levels that were in place before the high court’s decision. “It’s my strong belief that the tariff rates will be back to their old rate within five months,” Bessent said.


“They have survived more than 4000 legal challenges. They are more slow moving, but they are more robust.” Bessent’s comments come two days after a U.S. federal appeals court rejected the president’s effort to postpone legal proceedings connected to tariff refunds, sending the battle to a lower court. Estimates suggest the federal government’s tariff refunds could total $175 billion. Fiscal year-to-date, the administration’s tariffs have generated more than $150 billion, according to Treasury data as of March 2. Global energy markets have been highly volatile since the Iran War, with crude oil and natural gas prices rocketing on fears of supply disruptions.

The president calmed down the oil market on March 3. In a Truth Social post, Trump said the White House would offer naval escorts and guarantee political risk insurance for commercial oil and gas tankers traveling through the Strait of Hormuz. The Strait of Hormuz is a vital global chokepoint that handles approximately 20 million barrels of oil and petroleum products per day. It has effectively been shuttered as insurance companies canceled coverage or dramatically raised premiums. But the administration will make additional announcements to help stabilize prices, Bessent said. n“We have a series of announcements that we’re going to be making,” Bessent stated.

“We began yesterday with the announcement that [Development Finance Corporation] will provide the insurance for both the crude carriers and the cargo ships operating in around the Gulf over the weekend.” He shrugged off a possible energy shock as the Middle East conflict intensified, saying that the United States and the global marketplace maintain ample supplies. “This was a well telegraphed geopolitical event. The crude market had already moved substantially over the past two months. The crude markets are very well supplied,” Bessent said. A barrel of West Texas Intermediate—the U.S. benchmark for oil prices—fell by about 0.5 percent in pre-market trading to around $74 on the New York Mercantile Exchange.

Brent—the international benchmark—was little changed at slightly above $81 a barrel on London’s ICE Futures exchange. “Oil prices retreated after news the U.S. will ensure safe passage through the Strait of Hormuz, easing fears of a major global supply shock,” Adam Turnquist, chief technical strategist for LPL Financial, said in a note emailed to The Epoch Times. “Softer oil prices are also helping cool inflation concerns and pull interest rates lower.” Market watchers had warned that the risk of oil prices reaching $100 were high if the narrow waterway were closed for an extended period. U.S. stocks also rebounded midweek, with the leading benchmark averages in the green prior to the opening bell.

Read more …

… the 3:00 minute mark of the video

Bessent Outlines U.S. Financial/Economic Stabilization Plan (CTH)

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent appears on CNBC to discuss the Trump administration policies that were proactively deployed during Operation Epic Fury. The goal of global financial stabilization is actually part of the strategic planning within the White House, including Treasury, Energy and Interior in alignment with the State Dept., Pentagon and national security agencies. Part of that plan was the announcement for the U.S. to underwrite maritime insurance to ensure a minimal disruption to the global energy markets. Secretary Bessent discusses the insurance facet at the 3:00 minute mark of the video below.
Read more …

Wasn’t this Walz figure part of the Kamala cloud posse in the 1800s? Losers cling together, right?

Walz, Ellison Knew About Minnesota Fraud ‘for Years,’ House Report (DS)

Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz was aware of the widespread welfare fraud in his state “for years” and “repeatedly failed to act,” alleges a congressional report released on Wednesday. Walz and the state’s Attorney General Keith Ellison are set to testify Wednesday about the $9 billion scandal before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. The report, which also alleges that Ellison knew of the welfare fraud in Minnesota, draws from interviews with state employees and whistleblowers. “Senior officials in the governor’s office and Attorney General Ellison’s office were aware of credible fraud concerns in Minnesota’s social services programs as early as 2019 within the Department of Human Services (DHS) and by April 2020 within the Department of Education (MDE), despite later public statements by Governor Walz suggesting otherwise,” the report says.


The committee and staff conducted transcribed interviews with nine key current and former Minnesota state officials. The investigation focuses on alleged money laundering and fraud in Minnesota’s social services programs, uncovered by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Minnesota. The report, titled “The Cost of Doing Nothing,” further alleges retaliation against whistleblowers, including surveillance, and quotes some officials as not acting against suspected fraud out of fear of being labeled a racist. “As a result, potentially billions of American taxpayer dollars were allowed to flow to fraudulent actors, while vulnerable populations were harmed and whistleblowers were ignored, sidelined, and retaliated against,” the House report says.

This led to about $300 million in federal child nutrition funds and potentially $9 billion in Medicaid-related funds lost or placed at significant risk, according to the report. “Testimony obtained by the committee reveals that Governor Tim Walz and Attorney General Keith Ellison were aware of widespread fraud in social service programs, lied about their knowledge of the fraud, and retaliated against employees who dared to raise concerns,” House Oversight Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., said in a statement. The report also alleges whistleblower retaliation against state employees who raised red flags at the Minnesota Department of Human Services.

“Whistleblowers within the DHS have alleged that Governor Walz not only knew about this fraud, but that he retaliated against whistleblowers, ‘spen[ding] millions on surveilling staff and hiring private investigator (sic) or law firms to silence staff,’” the report says. The agency’s then-temporary commissioner confirmed to investigators that the agency “used outside entities” to investigate its own staff, according to the report. “Instead of protecting vulnerable Americans, they handed over billions in taxpayer dollars to fraudsters and threw their own state employees under the bus,” Comer added. “Governor Walz and Attorney General Ellison are appearing before the committee because the American people deserve clear answers about how this rampant fraud was allowed to flourish under their watch.”

Read more …

“The state accused the government of weaponizing the Medicaid program as ‘political punishment.’”

Minnesota Sues Federal Government Over Medicaid Funding Freeze (Aldgra Fredly)

Minnesota filed a lawsuit on March 2 to block the federal government from withholding $243 million in Medicaid funds, saying the freeze could lead to potential cuts in medical services for low-income individuals. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) last month temporarily deferred $259 million in Medicaid funds to Minnesota over alleged fraud in the state’s program, according to the court filing. The lawsuit, filed by Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison and the state’s Human Services Department, asked the court to block the withholding of $243 million of those funds that were tied to 14 services the government identified as “high-risk” and subject to “noncompliance action.”


“These cuts are the latest in a long series of efforts to go around the law to punish Minnesotans — but just as we fought back and won when they illegally tried to cut funding for childcare, hungry families, and our schools, we are suing them again today to make them follow the law,” Ellison said in a statement. The suit called the funding freeze unlawful, alleging that the government used the program as “political punishment” against the state, citing its previous attempts to withhold other funding from the state, including funds tied to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). According to the lawsuit, the federal government announced in January that it would freeze more than $2 billion in annual Medicaid funding to Minnesota over allegations of noncompliance.

The state appealed but said the federal government has not clarified the alleged conduct it deemed noncompliant or how Minnesota can remedy the issue. n “Impatient that it cannot withhold the $2 billion until Minnesota is provided a hearing and other due process, the administration ‘deferred’ $243 million from the state on February 25, 2026,” it stated.The lawsuit is seeking a temporary restraining order to block the funding freeze, saying the withholding of funds would affect more than 1 million Minnesota residents enrolled in Medicaid.

“Unless the deferral is quickly reversed, the state will be irreparably harmed. The administration has already stated that the deferral will recur every quarter, crippling the state budget,” it stated. The lawsuit names the Department of Health and Human Services and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, as well as Dr. Mehmet Oz, in his official capacity as CMS administrator, and Robert F. Kennedy Jr., in his official capacity as health secretary.

Read more …

Problems? You suck!

SCOTUS Decision Highlights Problems with Parents in Blue States (Turley)

In the law, the concept of In loco parentis refers to those who act in the place of parents. The problem is when that authority is taken rather than granted. It is a growing problem in blue states as parents push back on Democratic measures stripping them of notice or consent over their children in public schools. In the last few months, Democrats have been buoyed by protests over immigration enforcement. Many politicians have fueled a wave of rage sweeping major cities before the midterm elections, denouncing law enforcement as “Gestapo” and “Nazis.”


However, a Supreme Court decision this week may lay bare an even greater threat to Democratic aspirations over parental rights. For many parents, blue states are attacking the most fundamental right of citizens in raising their own children. This week, the Supreme Court granted an emergency appeal filed on behalf of Catholic parents in California. The order in Mirabelli v. Bonta proved a decisive victory for parental rights and an equally notable defeat for California democrats.

The action, filed by the Thomas More Society, challenged a policy under a state law, signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom in 2024, that prevented teachers from notifying parents of their children’s gender identity changes. The law was heralded as a protection against the “outing” of transgender students. Some of us have been following the litigation since the original filing and heralded the decision of District Court Judge Roger Benitez, who wrote a powerful opinion in support of the rights of all parents. However, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit stayed his injunction.In issuing the order on its “shadow docket,” the Court delivered a key win for parental rights that many of us have been seeking for years.

Blue state legislators and educators have been waging a war on parental rights, particularly in the area of transgender policies. Recently, in Michigan, parents sued to defend their rights after the Rockford Public School District refused to inform them of gender identity changes in their children. Last year, I wrote about a startling decision in Foote v. Feliciano in which the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit ruled against Massachusetts parents Marissa Silvestri and Stephen Foote seeking such notice. As in the California case, they learned that school administrators did not inform them that their 11-year-old child had self-declared as “genderqueer” and that teachers and staff were using a new name and new pronouns for the student.

The First Circuit dismissed the right of parents over their own children in the case, holding that “as per our understanding of Supreme Court precedent, our pluralistic society assigns those curricular and administrative decisions to the expertise of school officials, charged with the responsibility of educating children.” Foote was a chilling decision that reflected the view of state officials that parents give up their rights over their children when enrolling them in public schools. That view was evident in the comment of State Rep. Lee Snodgrass (D-Wis.), who once tweeted: “If parents want to ‘have a say’ in their child’s education, they should home school or pay for private school tuition out of their family budget.” [..]

Read more …

4 years of nothing.

Ukraine Blocks EU Mission To Inspect Russian Oil Pipeline – FT (RT)

Ukraine has rejected a proposed EU mission to inspect the Soviet-era pipeline that transports Russian oil through Ukrainian territory to Central Europe, the Financial Times reported on Tuesday, citing diplomats and officials. Hungary and Slovakia have accused Ukraine of deliberately blocking the flow through the Druzhba pipeline, while Ukraine said the infrastructure was damaged by Russian strikes in January. The EU is pressuring Ukraine to restore the operation of the Soviet-era pipeline that transports Russian oil through Ukrainian territory to Central Europe, the Financial Times reported on Tuesday, citing diplomats and officials.


Hungary and Slovakia have accused Ukraine of deliberately blocking the flow through the Druzhba pipeline, while Ukraine claimed the infrastructure was damaged by Russian strikes in January. According to FT, some pro-Ukrainian EU member states and the European Commission are now asking Kiev to allow a visit to demonstrate that it is working to restore oil flows. Last week, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and European Council President Antonio Costa personally requested access to the pipeline for inspection but were denied, FT said.One of the newspaper’s sources argued that by blocking the inspection, Ukraine scored an “own goal” and gave Hungary an excuse to veto the planned $106 billion emergency loan for Ukraine and the EU’s 20th round of sanctions against Russia.

In a post on X on Tuesday, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban said he had sent a letter to von der Leyen calling for enforcement of the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement, which “obliges Ukraine to allow oil shipments to Hungary.” “As confirmed by recently published satellite evidence, there is no technical or operational reason preventing the pipeline from reverting to normal operations immediately,” Orban stated. nmOrban said that Hungary and Slovakia had proposed dispatching a “fact-finding mission” to inspect the pipeline, but their “efforts were rejected.”

In August, Hungary imposed sanctions on Ukraine’s top drone commander Robert Brovdi after attacks on sections of the Druzhba pipeline in Russia. Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky has called on Hungary to stop purchasing energy from Russia. Reuters reported on Tuesday that some EU members, including France and Germany, oppose the idea of granting Ukraine fast-tracked accession to the bloc, citing “rampant corruption.”

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/Juliedonuts/status/2029187803414671858?s=20 https://twitter.com/AstronomyVibes/status/2029110904508547240?s=20

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Mar 012026
 


Mark Chagall Peace window, UN 1967


Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is Dead (Matt Margolis)
Trump Announces Major Airstrikes Against Iranian Regime (Matt Margolis)
Saudi Arabia Joins U.S. in Fighting Iran (Salgado)
Trump Isn’t Starting a War, He’s Ending One (A.J. Christopher)
Russia Condemns US Attack On Iran, Warns Of ‘Radiological Catastrophe’ (ZH)
Barack Obama Is to Blame for Iran. Here’s Why. (Matt Margolis)
The Clash Of Civilizations Restarts History (J.B. Shurk)
The Devil (and Gavin Newsom) Went Down in Dixie (Scott Pinsker)
A Surprising Defense of Trump Came From Bill Clinton (David Manney)
How Profanity Has Taken Hold of American Politics (Turley)
Britain’s Islamic Bloc Vote Warning. America, Take Note. (Peter McIlvenna)
The EU Wants A Nord Stream Sequel, But Not All Members Are Buying It (Marsden)
Marine Le Pen Says She Will Not Run In 2027 Election If Under House Arrest (ZH)
Bhattacharya To Lead Top US Health Agencies At Trump’s Request (Attkisson)
RFK Jr. DESTROYS Media’s Trump Caricature, Celebrates Epic Win on Drug Prices (MN)

 


 

https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/2027850917337346454?s=20

 


 

 


 

 


 

 


 


Iran is a formidable force. They had 35 years to prepare. They have a million missiles. They have a million soldiers. Question is: who has their finger on the button now Khameini’s gone?

Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is Dead (Matt Margolis)

Despite some initial debate, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was killed during the airstrikes Saturday morning, Israeli officials report. Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was assassinated in an Israeli strike on Tehran, with his body found under the rubble caused by an Israeli airstrike, senior Israeli officials were informed on Saturday evening, the Jerusalem Post reports. Documentation of Khamenei’s body was reportedly shown to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Khamenei has ruled the Islamic Republic of Iran since 1989, previously serving as president under Ruhollah Khomeini’s regime from 1981 until his ascension to supreme leader. He was 86 years old.


Earlier on Saturday, Iranian officials promised to release a recording from Khamenei soon after Israeli strikes targeted his Tehran compound. The preliminary assessment among Israeli officials was that Khamenei was hurt in the strike. No official confirmation has been received by Israeli, American, or Iranian sources. In the immediate aftermath of the U.S.- Israeli strikes, there was a several hour window where no one could say for sure whether Khamenei was dead, wounded, or merely in hiding. Israeli TV, citing unnamed intelligence sources, quickly assessed that Khamenei had likely been killed when his compound in Tehran was flattened, but officials in Israel, the U.S., and Iran all stopped short of formal confirmation, stressing that his fate was still uncertain.

https://twitter.com/Osint613/status/2027833699316764764

An Israeli official also confirmed to Axios that Khamenei was killed. Why it matters: The 86-year-old Khamenei led Iran for 35 years, making him one of the world’s longest-serving authoritarian rulers. His death is a massive blow to the regime and could accelerate its collapse, which U.S. and Israeli officials have stated as a goal of their operation. The big picture: Khamenei’s killing sets off an immediate succession crisis with no clear answer.Under Iran’s constitution, a council of clerics is meant to select a new supreme leader – but Israel’s strikes also targeted senior Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) commanders and political leaders, leaving the regime’s chain of command in disarray. Israeli officials say they assess the Iranian minister of defense and the commander of the IRGC were also among those killed in targeted strikes on Saturday.

Yes, it’s official:

Sen. John Fetterman (D-Penn.) once again had a sensible reaction:
Read more …

They have to go all the way now.

Trump Announces Major Airstrikes Against Iranian Regime (Matt Margolis)

President Donald Trump addressed the nation early Saturday morning in an eight-minute video posted to Truth Social, announcing that the United States had begun a joint military strike in Iran. The strikes, which followed a coordinated U.S.–Israeli joint assault on key Iranian military assets, represent the most significant American military action in the Middle East in decades. “A short time ago,” he began, “the United States military began major combat operations in Iran. Our objective is to defend the American people by eliminating imminent threats from the Iranian regime, a vicious group of very hard, terrible people.”


He framed the attack as a long-overdue reckoning. “Its menacing activities directly endanger the United States, our troops, our bases overseas, and our allies throughout the world,” Trump said. “For 47 years, the Iranian regime has chanted ‘Death to America’ and waged an unending campaign of bloodshed and mass murder targeting the United States, our troops and the innocent people in many, many countries,” he said, as though ticking off the charges against a sworn enemy. Trump dove into history of Iran’s evil actions, from the 1979 hostage crisis to the Marine barracks bombing in Beirut in 1983, and even the attack on the USS Cole in 2000.

“Many died,” he said bluntly. “Iranian forces killed and maimed hundreds of American service members in Iraq.” He accused the regime of continuing “to launch countless attacks against American forces stationed in the Middle East” and striking “U.S. naval and commercial vessels in international shipping lands.” Then came his cutting declaration: “It’s been mass terror, and we’re not going to put up with it any longer.” “From Lebanon to Yemen and Syria to Iraq, the regime has armed, trained and funded terrorist militias that have soaked the earth with blood and guts,” he said, a vivid and gruesome description even by Trump’s standards. He pointed specifically to the Oct. 7 attacks on Israel, reminding the nation that more than 1,000 innocent people were killed, including 46 Americans, and that 12 U.S. citizens were taken hostage.

“Iran is the world’s number one state sponsor of terror,” Trump asserted. “It has always been the policy of the United States, in particular, my administration, that this terrorist regime can never have a nuclear weapon. I’ll say it again — they can never have a nuclear weapon.” He reminded Americans of “Operation Midnight Hammer,” the 2025 strike that “obliterated the regime’s nuclear program at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan,” and painted Iran’s leadership as directionless and fanatical. “We tried. They wanted to do it. They didn’t want to do it. Again, they wanted to do it. They didn’t want to do it. They didn’t know what was happening. They just wanted to practice evil,” he said.

This new campaign was both an act of defense and destiny. The Iranian regime has long had nuclear ambitions, and nothing, not even that ridiculous nuclear deal with Obama, stopped them. And Trump understands that the regime was never going to stop pursuing nuclear weapons. “They rejected every opportunity to renounce their nuclear ambitions, and we can’t take it anymore,” Trump said. Iran, he warned, had been “developing long-range missiles that can now threaten our very good friends and allies in Europe, our troops stationed overseas, and could soon reach the American homeland.”

[..] Finally, Trump turned to the people of Iran. “The hour of your freedom is at hand,” he said. “Stay sheltered. Don’t leave your home. It’s very dangerous outside. Bombs will be dropping everywhere. When we are finished, take over your government. It will be yours to take.” He called it “probably your only chance for generations,” and pledged that “America is backing you with overwhelming strength and devastating force.” “This is the moment for action,” Trump concluded. “Do not let it pass. May God bless the brave men and women of America’s Armed Forces. May God bless the United States of America. May God bless you all. Thank you.”

Read more …

BIG. Split up the middle east.

Saudi Arabia Joins U.S. in Fighting Iran (Salgado)

The Muslim kingdom of Saudi Arabia is so outraged at a retaliatory Iranian strike on a United States base on Saudi soil that it is planning to join the operation against Iran’s regime, according to Fox News. The Iranian regime might have made a fatal mistake in striking multiple Gulf states that host American military bases. Several of those countries, including Qatar, are often inclined to be favorable towards the genocidal Iranian dictatorship, but by hitting targets in those countries, the Iranian jihadis have likely made them into enemies. And if Saudi Arabia really is joining the operation against Iran, that would be a major development.


Fox News national correspondent Jennifer Griffin announced live on Saturday afternoon, “We’re just getting word that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia says they will join the U.S. in the operation against the Islamic Republic of Iran.” Operation Epic Fury has a new partner. The Iranian regime was so foolish that it managed to get Saudi Arabia at least temporarily on the same side as Israel, which really is shocking.Griffin continued, “They [Saudi Arabia] said that this comes in the wake of Iran attacking the U.S. base in Saudi Arabia. I just spoke to a senior U.S. official who said the Iranians made a big mistake by firing on Arab coalition partners. Now they are likely to respond. So by Iran firing missiles at UAE, Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and Jordan, they are now likely to fire back at Iranian targets.”

In short, Griffin stated, “So those coalition partners are now going to enter this operation that started off as a U.S.-Israeli operation. That is very, very significant, and we haven’t seen that happen in the past.” No kidding. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia already made an announcement that it “condemns and denounces in strongest terms the blatant Iranian aggression and the flagrant violation of the sovereignty of the United Arab Emirates, the Kingdom of Bahrain, the State of Qatar, the State of Kuwait, and Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. The Kingdom affirms its full solidarity with and unwavering support for the brotherly countries, and its readiness to place all its capabilities at their disposal.”

The official statement added, “Saudi Arabia calls on the international community to condemn these blatant attacks and to take all firm measures necessary to confront Iranian violations.” By that point, Iran had launched a retaliatory strike against a U.S. base in Saudi Arabia. Even the terror-sponsoring Qatari regime that has interceded for Khamenei’s dictatorship in the past posted, “The Ministry of Foreign Affairs affirms that the State of Qatar reserves its full right to respond to this attack in accordance with the provisions of international law and in a manner proportionate to the nature of the aggression, in defense of its sovereignty and in protection of its security and national interests.”

But since Qatar then followed that up by calling for an immediate cessation in hostilities, it is unlikely that the pro-terror state will take any military action to help the United States in this case. Qatar is likely ticked off that its pals over in Iran might dare to hit it.

Read more …

“We have “thou shalt not kill.” They have “thou shalt kill every infidel you find.”

Trump Isn’t Starting a War, He’s Ending One (A.J. Christopher)

As of this writing, the United States and Israel have begun what I can only assume to be the first round of military strikes on Iran. I also assume that the eventual goal is regime change, effected by the United States, but driven by the Iranian people. And I’m not alone. Over the past few days, the so-called “think” tanks are falling all over themselves to be the first to prophesy a quagmire, a “trap,” a “forever war,” and Iraq 3.0.


The dregs at Foreign Policy took a break from clamoring for a post-American world order to demand we not bomb Iran precisely to more quickly usher in said order. At Powerline blog, John Hinderaker gleefully straddles the fence as only he can by declaring his hope that Trump bombs the mullahs with the goal of regime change… and in the same sentence, expresses doubt that this will be accomplished. And if you’re willing to waste the brain cells, you can guess what ol’ Tucker’s position on it is.

But the absolute worst take must be from John Daniel Davison over at The Federalist. John’s main point is that if we allegedly “obliterated” Iran’s nuclear abilities with Operation Midnight Hammer, than why do we need to now bomb Iran again to prevent them from acquiring nuclear capabilities?bUm, well, because Iran is trying to rebuild them. As we knew they would. And if we keep bombing only their nuclear facilities, they will simply keep rebuilding them until the next Democrat gets elected president and we stop sending bombs and start sending pallets of cash again. So there’s that. John writes, “At a certain point, it begins to look like the Trump administration is fishing for a reason to strike Iran. Sorry, but that’s not good enough.” Fishing for a reason? I’ll give you a few reasons, John. You tell me if they’re “good enough.”

  • On November 4, 1979, the Iranian government took 52 Americans hostage for 444 days.
  • The Iranian government helped create, fund, and arm Hezbollah and Hamas.
  • On April 18, 1983, Hezbollah bombed the American embassy in Beirut, killing 63 people.
  • On October 23, 1983, Iranian-backed terrorists bombed the American and French barracks in Beirut, killing 307 people.
  • Over the next decade, Iranian-backed terrorists hijacked several planes, including TWA flight 847, which resulted in the killing of an American sailor.
  • On July 22, 1985, Hezbollah bombed a synagogue, a Jewish nursing home, and a kindergarten in Copenhagen.
  • On March 17, 1992, Hezbollah bombed the Israeli embassy in Buenos Aires, killing 29 people.
  • On July 18, 1994, Hezbollah bombed a Jewish community center in Buenos Aires, killing 85 people.
  • On June 25, 1996, Iranian-backed terrorists bombed Khobar Towers, killing 19 American servicemen.
  • Iran provided training and expertise to al-Qaeda to commit the 1998 embassy bombings
  • Iran provided training and expertise to al-Qaeda to commit the 2000 USS Cole bombing.
  • During the Iraq War, Iran supported the Shia insurgency against coalition forces.
  • During the Afghan War, Iran supported the Taliban insurgency against coalition forces.
  • Iran supported Syria’s Assad government in crushing its own revolution.
  • On October 7, 2023, Hamas launched a genocidal war against Israel.
  • Iran trains and supports the Houthi rebels in Yemen.
  • Iran maintains close ties with the world’s most totalitarian governments, to include Russia, China, North Korea and, until recently, Venezuela.
  • Iran’s government is protected by the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), which is basically an Islamic version of Hitler’s SS.
  • For the last 47 years, Iran has been the foremost sponsor of terror in the world.


If these reasons aren’t “good enough” for John Daniel Davison, and we need to go “fishing” for more reasons, here’s another one: The Iranian government is founded on an offshoot of Islam called Twelver Shiism. It is an apocalyptic sect which holds that the twelfth imam Muhammad al-Mahdi (born 870 AD) never actually died, and has been in hiding this entire time. The Twelvers believe it is their divine duty to usher in the Apocalypse in order to trigger his return. Hence the unrelenting half-century war of terror against the West. We have “thou shalt not kill.” They have “thou shalt kill every infidel you find. That’s the mindset we’re up against. Not reason. Not logic. Not deals or agreements or easing of sanctions. Not a return to the “stable” order of the Cold War that so many “conservatives” seem to long for. The Ayatollahs, their IRGC henchmen, and their Hamas and Hezbollah proxies want all of us dead. All of us.

They would behead John’s kids in front of him and laugh as they did it. Still “not good enough,” John? Here’s one more reason: In the last 47 years, the geopolitical chessboard has never been so favorable to us and so unfavorable to Iran. In the last few years, Iran has lost both Hamas and Hezbollah as serious forces. Iran has lost its base in Syria. Iran has lost its base in Venezuela. Russia and China have quietly dumped Iran. The Houthis have been taught a few lessons. Iran has recently been militarily weakened in its humiliating defeat in the Twelve-Day War with Israel, as well as with Operation Midnight Hammer. And millions of the Iranian government’s own citizens openly despise the regime, and will be more than happy to see it relegated to the dustbin of history.

Read more …

Russia has to protest of course. But they’re happy too. Who wants to deal with a medieval regime?

Russia Condemns US Attack On Iran, Warns Of ‘Radiological Catastrophe’ (ZH)

As fully predictable, Moscow has blasted the major overnight and early morning US-Israeli strikes on Iran, calling the attack “a preplanned and unprovoked act of armed aggression against a sovereign and independent U.N. member state” and has demanded an immediate halt to the military campaign and a return to diplomacy. The Foreign Ministry in a statement on Telegram accused Washington and Tel Aviv of “hiding behind” concerns about Iran’s nuclear program while actually pursuing regime change, as also cited in The Associated Press. After all, even on Friday Iran was strongly signaling readiness to take enrichment down to zero, as our own headline and others indicated: Iran Reportedly Agrees To Give Up Nuclear Material In Breakthrough: ‘Peace Deal Within Reach’.


Moscow is further warning of Iraq-style catastrophe and a regional domino effect which could unleash terrorism and chaos for years to come. The attacks could trigger “humanitarian, economic and possibly radiological catastrophe” in the region, and charged the US and Israel of “plunging the Middle East into an abyss of uncontrolled escalation.” However, the Kremlin is unlikely to come to Iran’s rescue in any direct way, given it is carefully trying to balance and restore relations with Washington in the context of the Ukraine war.

As for that other raging conflict in Eastern Europe, now four years in, Ukraine has come out in support of the US attacks on Iran. This is understandable, given the Iranians have long supplied Moscow with suicide drones which have wreaked havoc on Ukrainian cities. China too has condemned the attack on Iran alongside Moscow, but using words much more restrained that Russia’s. “China calls for an immediate stop of the military actions, no further escalation of the tense situation, resumption of dialogue and negotiation, and efforts to uphold peace and stability in the Middle East,” its foreign ministry ministry said on X.

Most or all of the BRICS countries are expected to come out against the US-Israeli aggression. Europe is expected to by and large stay on the sidelines, fearing that any broader Mideast war would have spillover effects, such as another potential refugee crisis. The UK, Germany and France have said nothing specifically on the ‘legality’ of the unprovoked US attack on Tehran, but have instead condemned the Iranian response.They released a joint statement telling Iran to stop its attacks on US-Israeli assets and bases in the region. “We condemn Iranian attacks on countries in the region in the strongest terms,” French President Emmanuel Macron, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said.

Read more …

JCPOA

Barack Obama Is to Blame for Iran. Here’s Why. (Matt Margolis)

Americans woke up Saturday to something big. The United States and Israel launched a massive joint offensive against Iran’s regime, known as Operation Epic Fury. According to reports, targets included Iran’s supreme leader and president. Major combat operations are now underway, and the implications are global. Predictably, Democrats in Washington and even some Republicans are questioning the strikes. But let’s be honest — this moment was long overdue. Iran’s reign of terror didn’t start yesterday. In fact, this confrontation is the direct result of the Obama administration’s disastrous decision a decade ago to appease, enrich, and embolden Tehran.


Barack Obama and his administration sold the world a fantasy with the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), commonly referred to as the Iran nuclear deal. This treaty was so bad that Obama didn’t even attempt to get the Senate to ratify it. He just pretended it wasn’t a treaty and signed it unilaterally, claiming it as a foreign policy victory for himself. In fact, Obama was so desperate to make the deal a defining foreign policy achievement of his presidency that the lies about the deal from the left have never stopped. He told us it was a historic diplomatic breakthrough that would block Iran’s path to nuclear weapons. In reality, it handed the mullahs a lifeline and a fortune. Sanctions were lifted. Tehran gained access to roughly $150 billion in frozen assets, and there was that infamous $1.7 billion in cash sent to the regime, much of it delivered on pallets in the middle of the night. Every step of the way, Obama was emboldening Iran, not containing it.

It didn’t take long for Iran to show what a joke the deal really was. Just three months after signing the deal, Tehran test-fired ballistic missiles in open violation of U.N. resolutions. German intelligence later reported that Iran was still seeking technology for a military nuclear program. The International Atomic Energy Agency confirmed repeated violations of material limits — all while Obama kept reassuring us that the agreement was “working.” Even he eventually admitted Iran was violating the “spirit” of the deal, and that was as close as he’d ever get to admitting that his deal was a sham. nAnd while Obama’s State Department was congratulating itself, Iranian leaders were laughing. They bragged that the JCPOA favored Iran. Hassan Rouhani, then Iran’s president, boasted that the regime had used diplomacy to buy time and advance its nuclear program. The Obama administration believed it was outsmarting Tehran, but in reality, it had been duped.

It’s not as if the liberal media didn’t notice this either. The New York Times even reported in 2015 that Iran had breached its enrichment limits before the deal was finalized. Inspectors found that while the Obama White House claimed Iran’s program was “frozen,” the country’s nuclear stockpile actually increased by 20%. Iran was supposed to convert that material for peaceful use. Instead, they let it grow — and Washington looked the other way. By the time President Donald Trump took office, the JCPOA wasn’t the safeguard Democrats claimed it was; it was just a smokescreen. Obama’s grand achievement hadn’t restrained Iran’s nuclear ambitions one bit. If anything, it emboldened them to pursue nuclear weapons as never before. The regime’s missile program accelerated, its proxies expanded across the region, and its leaders grew richer, bolder, and more violent.

Nevertheless, when Trump took office in 2017, he didn’t immediately pull the plug. He gave the deal every chance to work. But by 2018, the evidence was clear: continued violations, broken promises, and a regime that had learned there were no consequences. So, in May of that year, Trump ended the charade and withdrew from the deal once and for all. Of course, Joe Biden wanted to revive the deal when he took office. While he never succeeded, the message to Iran was clear: the Democratic Party would always be there for the regime. If you want to know why negotiations with Iran always failed, the answer is obvious: they had to do was wait out Trump, and hope Democrats would be in power again.

Iran has been daring the world to stop it for years, and now, it is finally getting what it deserves.

Read more …

“Burma, India, Bangladesh, Thailand, China, Cambodia, Vietnam, and Laos fight against each other and themselves..”

The Clash Of Civilizations Restarts History (J.B. Shurk)

Western globalists won’t last long. Thirty-five years ago, American political scientist Francis Fukuyama made a name for himself by advancing the proposition that the end of the Cold War and the dissolution of the Soviet Union promised the ascendency and universalization of so-called Western liberal democracy. As a Marxist-Hegelian who saw the progression of history as an evolutionary process with a natural and predetermined conclusion, Fukuyama envisioned Western-styled liberalism as both “the endpoint of mankind’s ideological evolution” and “the final form of human government.” Expecting all human struggles to barrel toward a state of imminent equilibrium and future peace, Fukuyama stated out loud what many other late-twentieth century thinkers also believed: Humanity had reached the end of history.


After the 9/11 Islamic terror attacks in the United States, two decades of the “Global War on Terrorism,” communist China’s expansive “Belt and Road Initiative,” immigration-fueled social strife, the collapse of public trust in government institutions, the prevalence of pre-civil war conditions across Europe, the rise of Indian economic power,, the emergence of Donald Trump’s nationalism as a counterbalance to the World Economic Forum’s vaunted globalism, the return of the Russian Federation as a major source of European angst, the growth of “multiculturalism” and its attendant fracturing of national unity, the “great powers” competition for hydrocarbon energies and other natural resources, the new geopolitical race to project strength in the Arctic, and the ever-present discussion of an impending World War III — just to name a few of the numerous global conflicts of the first quarter of the present century — Fukuyama’s “end of history” argument has probably reached the end of its usefulness.

Before the curse of humanity’s short memory stores Fukuyama’s “end of history” thesis in the cupboard until it can be retrieved, dusted off, and recycled for practical use next century (just as Fukuyama had done with the historical conceptions of Hegel and Marx), it is worth noting how much of the academic world bought into this argument. I remember listening to two young political science professors discussing Fukuyama’s work after the 9/11 terror attacks, and even then — in the midst of such a horrific rebuke to the proposition that a globalized form of Western liberalism was preordained — both academics were staunch believers in the “end of history” and disagreed only about whether Professor Fukuyama was worthy of so much praise for having merely stated what was glaringly obvious.

I was around another man at the time named Samuel P. Huntington, and he had written an essay and book that took Fukuyama’s thesis to task. In The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, Professor Huntington argued that unbridgeable cultural conflicts would continue to remake the world. Although critics called him “racist,” “Islamophobic,” “ignorant,” and even “Hitlerian” for dismissing the unifying effects of “diversity” and “multiculturalism,” Huntington’s predictions for a volatile twenty-first century were much more accurate than anything coming from the “end of history” camp. Still, even after death, the man who dispassionately forecasted a civilizational clash and an emerging period of global uncertainty is still maligned as “prejudicial,” “white supremacist,” “bigoted,” and “imperialist.”

Is there any conflict raging in the world today that can’t be described in terms of competing cultural values? Israel and its Islamic neighbors have been in a perennial state of war for eighty years. Indian Hindus and Pakistani Muslims remain at each other’s throats. Christianity and Islam have added fuel to fiery tribal conflicts that continue to rage across the continent of Africa. Armenia’s Christians and Azerbaijan’s Muslims struggle to maintain peace. The Balkans remain a potpourri of combative cultures and ethnic groups whose simmering passions can quickly boil over. Burma, India, Bangladesh, Thailand, China, Cambodia, Vietnam, and Laos fight against each other and themselves as civilizational loyalties turn ancient resentments into recurring bouts of violence. The War in Ukraine centers around the contested Donbas region whose people more closely align with the language, religion, and culture of Russia than with the historic identity that unites the people living in the western two-thirds of Ukraine. Everywhere in the world, battle lines are drawn around civilizational identity. Religious conflict, historic grievance, and cultural incompatibility drive violence around the planet.

Read more …

“Black people are roughly 20% of the Democratic Party. In the critical primary state of South Carolina, nearly 60% of the voters are black.” […] Gavin Newsom is slick, but he’s no Slick Willy.”

The Devil (and Gavin Newsom) Went Down in Dixie (Scott Pinsker)

I love Charlie Daniels, but this has always bothered me: From the lyrics to his classic “Uneasy Rider”:


I I just ordered up a beer and sat down at the bar
When some guy walked in an’ said, “Who owns this car?
With the peace sign, the mag wheels, and four on the floor”


Well he looked at me and I damn near died
And I decided that I’d jus wait outside
So I laid a dollar on the bar and headed for the door

Jes’ when I thought I’d get outta there with my skin
These five big dudes come strollin’ in
With this one old drunk chick and some fella with green teeth

Okay, so first one guy walks in. Then five more guys come in — plus a drunk woman and the green-toothed gentlemen. That’s eight guys! Then the lyrics continue:
An’ I was almost to the door when the biggest one
Said “You tip your hat to this lady, son”
An’ when I did, all that hair fell out from underneath

Now the last thing I wanted was to get into a fight
In Jackson Mississippi on a Saturday night
‘Specially when there was three of them and only one of me

Wait — how did it go from eight to three?! Like I said, I love Charlie Daniels, but my boy’s not the greatest at math. Oh well. Still a heck of a storyteller. And his biggest hit was “The Devil Went Down to Georgia.” (Of course, since the Devil went DOWN to Georgia, the implication is, Hell must be north of Georgia. I’m thinking Richmond, Va.) Either way, the devil wasn’t the only one defeated in Dixie: Gavin Newsom, the exquisitely coiffed governor of California, just rolled snake eyes, too. Even his hometown news site admitted it. From SFGATE:”Newsom Is Touring Southern States. It’s Exposing Some Hurdles in His Path to 2028″.

Newsom began the first stretch of the book tour for his memoir “Young Man in a Hurry” this weekend in the South, with stops in Alabama, Tennessee and South Carolina. His team said starting in that region was “quite intentional” — but he’s already ruffled some feathers. While he is mostly sharing heartening anecdotes from the book, including how he handled being a student raised by a single mother and struggling with undiagnosed dyslexia, he is also clearly using his hourlong stage appearances to appeal to potential swing voters. No, it’s NOT about appealing to swing voters — at least, not yet. Newsom only cares about Democratic voters because, without them, swing voters are meaningless. He’s got to win his party’s nomination first.

That’s why his book tour was built around a Bizarro version of the Southern Strategy: Newsom needs black support. It’s his biggest vulnerability. We discussed this earlier in the week:”Black people are roughly 20% of the Democratic Party. In the critical primary state of South Carolina, nearly 60% of the voters are black.” […] Gavin Newsom is slick, but he’s no Slick Willy. There’s a reason why Toni Morrison dubbed the Man from Hope our “first black president.” Whereas Bill Clinton had an aw-shucks, good-natured, instantly relatable Southern charm, Gavin Newsom is as white as mayonnaise. Newsom isn’t “street” — unless that street is Wall Street. He’s the Patriarchy personified. Without black support, Gavin Newsom risks being the next Bernie Sanders. In CNN’s 2020 postmortem on Sanders’ loss to Joe Biden, the #1 reason cited was: Lack of Black Support.

Sanders ran into a wall in 2016 among black voters. Hillary Clinton catapulted herself to victory by winning blowouts throughout the South, where black voters make up a huge chunk of primary voters. Sanders needed to improve upon his performance. Instead, Sanders did as bad in 2020 among this pivotal group. Among African Americans who voted for Biden or Sanders, Sanders won just 23% in the median state with an entrance or exit poll. That was the same percentage he garnered in 2016. Black voters propelled Biden to his big win in South Carolina, which started him on his journey to defeating Sanders. This is why Gavin Newsom set up shop in Dixieland: He’s learned from Sanders’ campaign mistakes. Striking gold in New Hampshire or Iowa is meaningless if your cupboard is bare in the South. Trouble is, he tried to bond with black Democrats by playing up his stupidity. Here’s the video:

Read more …

“For Clinton to say, under oath, that Trump showed no indication of criminal involvement doesn’t neatly fit into partisan talking points. ”

A Surprising Defense of Trump Came From Bill Clinton (David Manney)

Every once in a while, politics delivers a moment nobody sees coming. Former President Bill Clinton, under oath, reported that President Donald Trump never gave him any indication he was involved in Jeffrey Epstein’s criminal conduct. That sworn statement now adds a new wrinkle to one of the most combustible and easily proven false stories of the last decade. Bill Clinton has been facing questions about his own past ties to Epstein. Flight logs show Clinton traveled on Epstein’s private jet several times in the early 2000s, but he’s maintained he cut off contact after learning more about Epstein’s behavior. In this recent sworn exchange, Clinton reportedly stated that during his interactions with Trump, he never saw or heard anything suggesting Trump engaged in Epstein’s crimes.


Trump has repeatedly acknowledged knowing Epstein socially in the 1990s, appearing in photographs from that period. He’s also publicly stated that he broke off contact with Epstein years before Epstein’s 2008 guilty plea. In 2019, Trump told reporters that he hadn’t spoken to Epstein in about 15 years and described himself as “not a fan.” “Trump barred Epstein from Mar-a-Lago after Epstein behaved inappropriately toward a club member’s teenage daughter, according to journalists from the Miami Herald and Wall Street Journal. The reporters included some information about Trump’s links to Epstein in their 2020 book, “The Grifter’s Club: Trump, Mar-a-Lago, and the Selling of the Presidency.”

A Mar-a-Lago member told the journalists that Trump had “kicked Epstein out after Epstein harassed the daughter of a member,” Sarah Blaskey of the Miami Herald reported. “The way this person described it, such an act could irreparably harm the Trump brand, leaving Donald no choice but to remove Epstein.” The incident happened around October 2007, when Mar-a-Lago’s registry listed Epstein’s account as “closed,” the Miami Herald reported. Epstein was arrested in July 2019 on federal sex trafficking charges involving underage girls. He died in a Manhattan detention facility while awaiting trial. His longtime associate, Ghislaine Maxwell, was convicted in 2021 on federal sex trafficking charges and later sentenced to 20 years in prison.

Clinton’s reported testimony stands out for one simple reason: it cuts against the common political storyline. Clinton and Trump have been rivals since Trump rode the escalator, trading barbs publicly and representing opposite poles in American politics. For Clinton to say, under oath, that Trump showed no indication of criminal involvement doesn’t neatly fit into partisan talking points. Statements under oath carry legal weight; false testimony risks perjury. That context matters; when a former president speaks under penalty of law, the words deserve attention. The broader Epstein scandal has touched powerful names across finance, politics, and entertainment, while Congressional interest remains high. Lawmakers continue seeking documents and testimony tied to Epstein’s network as calls for full disclosure have come from both sides of the aisle.

Clinton’s sworn statement doesn’t erase Trump’s past social proximity to Epstein, but it adds a factual element that complicates sweeping accusations. When critics assert that association equals guilt, sworn testimony suggesting otherwise forces a pause. While it’s fair to call the moment unexpected, it’s also fair to ask whether legacy political commentators who’ve spent years speculating will give equal attention to testimony challenging their narrative. Ignoring inconvenient details only subtracts from their sinking credibility. The Epstein case remains one of the most disturbing and long-reaching criminal sagas in modern history. Justice for victims remains central. Factual clarity about who did what remains essential, and when sworn testimony contradicts assumptions, it can’t be brushed aside.

Read more …

“I don’t swear in public very well, but we have to f–k Trump. Please don’t tell my children that I just did that.”

How Profanity Has Taken Hold of American Politics (Turley)

“Respectfully, f–k off.” Those words by California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s spokesperson, Izzy Gardon, summed up the current race to the bottom of American politics. Democrats appear in a competition of the profane where voters are now subject to a virtual carpet-bombing of f-bombs and other indecent language. Gardon’s response was to a standard media inquiry after Newsom’s controversial statement to a black interviewer. In an Atlanta event, Newsom declared: “I’m like you … I’m no better than you. I’m a 960 SAT guy … literally a 960 SAT guy. You’ve never seen me read a speech because I cannot read a speech.” It was widely denounced as racist, but Newsom insisted that he was only talking about his struggle with dyslexia.


The spin quickly fell apart after his statement, “I’m like you … I’m no better than you,” which suggested he thought the audience in Atlanta had low scores. Reporters followed up to ask for proof about his disability, including his claim that “I cannot read.” The response was an f-bomb from Gardon. Newsom, too, unleashed a profane attack on Sean Hannity of Fox News — who gave the California governor a chance to respond to his critics. When Hannity criticized Newsom’s comments in Atlanta, the governor posted several four-letter words on X, concluding with: “Spare me your fake f—ing outrage.” There was a time when political leaders maintained basic standards of civility and avoided profanity in public. Presidents like Lyndon Johnson could be quite salty in private, but drew a line in public.

Rporters followed up to ask for proof about his disability, including his claim that “I cannot read.” The response was an f-bomb from Gardon. Notably, one of Richard Nixon’s objections to his tapes being made public was the inclusion of foul language used in the Oval Office. He noted in his book In the Arena that “since neither I nor most other presidents had ever used profanity in public, millions were shocked.” It was not long ago that Trump’s then-new White House Communications Director Anthony Scaramucci shocked many with a profane diatribe. He defended it as “an Italian thing.” At the time, I wrote that, as someone who was raised in an Italian family, we clearly had a different upbringing. I noted that if I used that language in public, my Sicilian grandmother would have ended the diatribe with a backhand.

Profanity sometimes added to the mystique of military leaders who sought to convey that they were unconcerned with social norms as warriors. Gen. George Patton was known to drop some doozies. In one scene in the famous eponymous movie, Patton is asked about the Bible next to his bed and whether he really prayed. Patton responds, “I sure do … Every godd–n day…” Politics was different. The public once looked to political leaders as role models who exemplified social norms. It now appears that profanity is viewed as an essential element of political speech on the left.m mPolitics was different. The public once looked to political leaders as role models who exemplified social norms. Katie Porter this week thrilled a crowd by waving around a sign reading “F–k Trump.” Porter was previously criticized for using such language to abuse staffers to “get out of my f–cking shot” in an interview.

At the State of the Union, Rep. Rashida Tlaib wore a button on the House floor reading “F–k Ice.” Such behavior is not just limited to Democrats. President Trump has used profanity on occasion. However, the Democrats appear to have made profanity a signature element in their campaigns.Rep. Jasmine Crockett, who is running for the U.S. Senate in Texas, seems a perpetual profanity machine, regularly telling figures like Elon Musk to “f–k off” and dropping the f-bomb at a higher rate than prepositions. Some are virtually giggly over swearing in public. Rep. Maxine Dexter (D-Ore.) declared, “I don’t swear in public very well, but we have to f–k Trump. Please don’t tell my children that I just did that.” The crowd roared with approval that Dexter was feigning being naughty with dirty words.

Read more …

Muslims born in Britain. Now poised to take over. How will the Christians defend themelves? They don’t even know they’re under threat.

Britain’s Islamic Bloc Vote Warning. America, Take Note. (Peter McIlvenna)

Britain’s Gorton and Denton by-election on Feb. 26 was more than just a local upset. It gave a glimpse into demographic changes that could shape U.S. politics. The Green Party’s Hannah Spencer won with 41% and 14,980 votes, turning this Labour stronghold into the Greens’ first northern seat. Reform UK came second with 29% of the vote, and Labour finished third with 25%. Turnout was low at 48%. The main story: Muslim bloc power flipped a seat, and Reform UK leader Nigel Farage’s strategy did not work. The seat’s divided nature tells the story. Manchester wards like Burnage, Gorton & Abbey Hey, Levenshulme, and Longsight are changing fast: 40% Muslim, 62% U.K.-born, and 30% are graduates or students.


In Longsight, 60% are Muslim and 52% U.K.-born, making it a diverse, urban area where Gaza is a common topic. The Greens succeeded by using multilingual flyers, focusing on Palestine, and promoting anti-Islamophobia messages. Instead of attacking others, they built coalitions. That bloc, along with tactical left-wing voters, overshadowed everything else.Tameside wards, including Denton North East, South, and West, feel very different: less than 3% Muslim, 86% U.K.-born, and over 80% white British. These are working-class areas with few graduates and strong local roots. Reform UK led here, getting over 40% in some places by appealing to “keep Britain British” sentiment. Still, Manchester’s voters decided the outcome. This is a story of two different visions, almost like a modern Dickens novel.

Manchester is moving away from traditional English and British identity, with lower native birth rates, more multiculturalism, less connection to Christianity and old values, and a shift toward new cultural expressions. Tameside, on the other hand, is more cautious about fast cultural change, holding on to traditions and trying to keep established cultural identities. It is similar to the old divide between East and West Germany. The East kept its German identity, had little migration, and held onto traditions. The West became more multicultural, saw fewer native births, and its religious makeup changed. Gorton-Denton is a smaller version of this: Manchester shows the changing face of old England, while Tameside tries to stay recognizably British. The Greens won by understanding that concentrated bloc votes and progressive alliances now matter more than nostalgia.

Farage’s role was chaotic. Before the election, he avoided criticizing Muslims, maybe to appeal to more voters. But after losing, Farage accused others of “sectarian voting,” “cheating,” and “dangerous Muslim sectarianism.” He complained about “family voting,” with observers noting it in twelve percent of sampled cases, where husbands and wives crowded voting booths—the highest rate ever recorded. Democracy Volunteers flagged 68% of polling stations. No mosques were used as polling places; the council managed the process. Still, Farage’s comments sparked controversy. Critics say he changes his stance: soft on Islam to grow Reform, but harsh when things go wrong. Either way, he seems unsettled, caught between his supporters and the need to win votes.

Now, America faces similar questions in its primaries. The Muslim population is under 2% nationally, but is expected to grow due to higher birth rates and migration. CAIR reported 38 Muslim winners across the country last year. Zohran Mamdani won New York’s mayoral race with strong support for his socialist and pro-Palestine views. Ninety-seven percent of Muslim voters supported him, along with major donors, and Gaza became a key issue. Does this sound familiar? If the Gorton-Denton approach shows up in other places, like Dearborn, Queens, or Minneapolis, organized turnout could affect close elections.

Strong support from certain communities may help some candidates, while others might choose more moderate strategies. Family-based turnout, like what was seen in the U.K., could change usual voting patterns. Demographic changes are likely to continue, with some areas keeping traditional majorities and others forming new coalitions. The message is clear: Pay attention to demographic trends, or you might be surprised by changes in election results. Primaries are still important—voters may choose to stick with the status quo or join coalitions that want change. The lesson from Britain is that traditions alone may not be enough when organized participation increases.

Read more …

“Ukraine’s oil pipeline blackmail has Hungary demanding that support for Kiev be cut off..”

The EU Wants A Nord Stream Sequel, But Not All Members Are Buying It (Marsden)

The Druzhba, or ‘Friendship’, oil pipeline is really living up to its name. All the ‘friends’ are fighting with each other. And now Hungary, worried about the EU’s slack attitude about what happens to its oil source, is saying that it’s time to deploy the army to protect it. Critics of Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban argue that he only wants troops deployed inside the country because he’s down in the polls ahead of the April national election and he’s going to try some kind of autocratic jiu-jitsu to cancel them. Which totally ignores the fact that Ukrainian secret services are actively attacking the pipeline’s infrastructure – and there is something really fishy about the EU’s permissiveness around it.


Everyone from the Kiev Independent to French state media, France 24, has been attributing to the SBU, Kiev’s secret services, drone strikes on February 23, targeting a Russian oil pumping station serving Druzhba – citing actual SBU sources. And the EU’s position has been, “Look, it’s up to Ukraine if they want to fix it.” It’s not like they owe the EU anything, right? Just billions of euros, and counting. Can’t even get a repair job these days for that price, apparently. So Hungary’s been saying, “Hey, are you jokers going to actually do something about this? Because we’re putting our foot down on your whole ‘cash for Ukraine for European defense contractors’ charade and unilaterally canceling the next episode of your Russian sanctions unity show with a veto, until you reel in your spoiled brat foster kid.”

The EU says it would welcome the reactivation of landlocked Slovakia and Hungary’s fuel source running across Ukraine and delivering Russian oil. Funny that’s the case only now that it’s been bombed and the tap has been turned off – after years of official EU policy to ditch the Russian fuel that runs through it. But Brussels also said that it’s ultimately up to Little Zelya, Vladimir Zelensky, as to what he wants to do. Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto has been sounding like a waitress at Denny’s who’s fed up waiting for Little Zelya to decide what he wants while he kicks his little feet against the high chair. Queen Mommy, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, insists that he should be able to freely choose between blackmailing Hungary over oil or resuming the flow – with all the nonchalance of deciding between pancakes or a kid’s combo, even though it’s the Europeans whose interests she’s supposed to be defending and who are paying the tab.

“This risks our sovereignty, and we are not willing to tolerate this in silence,” Szijjarto said. “It is very frustrating that here in Brussels they usually stand on the side of a non-EU member state against EU member states. The European Commission behaves like a Ukraine Commission, and this is unbelievable.”

Read more …

Here’s democracy for you. Wait, didn’t that start in France?

“If I cannot be a candidate, Bardella will determine at what level he needs my presence, my advice and my experience,” Le Pen has stated about her protegé ..”

Marine Le Pen Says She Will Not Run In 2027 Election If Under House Arrest (ZH)

In March 2025, Le Pen was convicted on charges dating back years ago, in a move that was widely contested and seen as a highly political attempt to keep her from running in next year’s presidential election. Now, she says she has no intention of running if her ban from running is lifted, if it means she must wear an electronic tag, i.e., ankle monitor. She is also ready to place full trust in Jordan Bardella, current leader of the National Rally (RN) Le Pen’s comments came during an interview with French television station BFMTV, her first since French prosecutors asked a court to uphold her five-year ban. A ruling on her case is expected on July 7.


“You cannot campaign under these conditions. Can you campaign without going out in the evenings to meet your constituents at rallies?” she asked, referring to the idea of having to campaign while wearing a monitor and under house arrest. Prosecutors had asked for Le Pen to be sentenced to four years in prison (three of which were suspended) and a fine of €100,000.In France, shorter prison sentences are often commuted, meaning that if the court follows the prosecutor’s request, Le Pen could spend anywhere from a few months to a year under house arrest, wearing an anklet. However, Le Pen has said she would not campaign under such circumstances. Le Pen says she will be present in court on July 7 to hear the Court of Appeal’s decision.

“Of course I will go, as I went every day to the trial in the first instance and on appeal because I respect justice,” she told BFMTV. Regarding the 2027 election, Le Pen said regarding RN leader Jordan Bardella: “The best-case scenario is that I am elected president of the Republic and he is my prime minister.” However, if she cannot run, then “Jordan will find himself a prime minister,” and she will take whatever “role he wants me to have.” Emphasizing that Bardella will be free to make his own choices, Le Pen told listeners, “If I cannot be a candidate, he will determine at what level he needs my presence, my advice and my experience.”

Read more …

A good thing about Covid: we found some really good people in the US. No, it ain’t Fauci.

“You don’t have to worry about looking over your shoulder, that you aren’t ideologically pure enough. You just focus on science that can translate over to solving the longevity problems that the United States has, the chronic disease problems, the real problems.”

Bhattacharya To Lead Top US Health Agencies At Trump’s Request (Attkisson)

The head of the National Institutes of Health is now at the helm of a sub-agency, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Dr. Jay Bhattacharya says President Trump personally asked him to take the CDC job temporarily until a permanent director can be named. “It’s hard to say ‘no’ to the president. What it means is that I will still be the director of the NIH. That’s my main day job,” Bhattacharya told “Full Measure” in a recent interview at NIH headquarters in Bethesda, Maryland. “But over the next couple of months, I’m gonna go work with folks at the CDC to help get the agency in a place where the new director, whoever ends up being Senate confirmed, we’ll have an organization that’s running well so that they can get their priorities in place.”


Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, Bhattacharya was a medical doctor and professor at Stanford University, “happily publishing in journals.” But during Covid, he became a very vocal opponent – for scientific reasons – for government-mandated lockdowns to try to stop the spread of the virus. “I did a bunch of research that suggested that the lockdowns were not helping people, in fact, were causing tremendous harm to the poor children in the working class, all the school closures and all that,” he says. Bhattacharya helped create and get thousands of signatures on the Great Barrington Declaration to speak out against the lockdowns on public health grounds. For that, he became a target of the head of NIH at the time, Dr. Frances Collins, and Dr. Anthony Fauci, who headed the NIH Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

It was later revealed that the two men orchestrated a “devastating take-down” of Dr. Bhattacharya and his colleagues to silence and discredit them. Today, it’s a stunning reversal of fortunes for Dr. Bhattacharya that he was chosen to head up the very agency whose leaders had conspired against him. Bhattacharya says one of his main goals is to remove politics and ideology from science to “leave a lot more space for actual science.”“The cultural shift is, is enormous,” he says. “The purpose and the mission of the NIH is to do research that improves the health and longevity of the American people,” Bhattacharya said. “First of all, everyone should be behind that mission. And then second, once you say that’s the mission, that we’re only gonna be focused on the mission, it frees you up from all of the baggage.

“You don’t have to worry about looking over your shoulder, that you aren’t ideologically pure enough. You just focus on science that can translate over to solving the longevity problems that the United States has, the chronic disease problems, the real problems.” Establishment medicine figures who were frequently proved wrong about approaches to Covid and matters of Covid vaccine safety and effectiveness criticize most every decision and move Bhattacharya now makes. He says in response to the criticism: “If the NIH’s mission is to do support research that translates into better health and longer life for Americans, well, the NIH over the last 15 years has failed in its mission.

“And so the idea that it’s anti-science or politicizing the agency to remove political agendas from the agency, it’s almost Orwellian. And so when I see these stories, my general understanding of them is that it’s people that benefited from the old system where the focus was in part on ideology.” Bhattacharya says part of the steps to remove politics from the NIH is to begin a new plan to genuinely study vaccine injuries and treatments. “We’re working on that,” he told “Full Measure.” “One of the things that Tony Fauci’s old NIAID is gonna be doing is studying vaccine injury.”

Read more …

Bobby’s become a big Trump fan.

RFK Jr. DESTROYS Media’s Trump Caricature, Celebrates Epic Win on Drug Prices (MN)

HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. delivered a powerful takedown of the fake news narrative surrounding President Trump, exposing the blatant lies and highlighting the administration’s groundbreaking success in driving down prescription drug costs—a move that puts American families first and crushes Big Pharma’s grip. Kennedy’s remarks come amid the Trump administration’s aggressive push to overhaul healthcare, including the implementation of the Most Favored Nation policy, which ensures Americans no longer foot the bill for the world’s highest drug prices. Kennedy noted that the U.S. had been paying two to four times as much for prescription drugs as other nations, with the administration securing agreements from “60 or 70” drug companies to end this disparity.


This victory builds directly on Trump’s longstanding commitment to dismantle Obamacare’s inefficiencies and redirect funds to the people, as we detailed in our earlier coverage of his plan to scrap the “STUPID” system and empower Americans. Kennedy didn’t hold back on the media’s relentless smear campaign against Trump. “The caricature you see in the press: ‘Narcissistic bombast, who is uneducated, not thoughtful, lacks compassion.’ The ACTUAL person is the OPPOSITE of those things!” Kennedy stated. He praised Trump’s intellect and expertise across multiple fields, noting “He’s extremely detail-oriented, he’s an encyclopedia in many areas, in business, in sports, in the arts, in architecture, in building.”

Kennedy emphasized Trump’s unparalleled ability to deliver results, stressing “He knows how to, above all, he just knows how to get things done.” “He understands the uses of power probably better than any president that I can name and I’m pretty familiar with all the presidents,” Kennedy added. “So I don’t think we’ve ever had somebody who understands the use of power that he does. And the boldness with which he moves and which he expects us to move, I think has inspired all the people who work here right now to do things that people told them before were not possible,” he further urged. Tying it to the drug price breakthrough, Kennedy highlighted how Trump’s leadership turned promises into action.

“We were paying the highest drug price of any country in the world, now we’re paying the lowest. Every president’s promised to do that and all of them have said it’s insurmountable, you can’t do it, but we were able to do it!” he emphasised. This aligns with the broader Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) mission. As Calley Means has previously pointed out, key wins include lowering drug prices alongside reforms like eliminating food dyes and acknowledging vaccine injuries—proving MAHA is “WINNING big” despite leftist opposition. This drug price overhaul, part of Trump’s executive actions, ensures nearly 95% of medications are now the cheapest globally, delivering affordability without stifling innovation—a stark contrast to the bloated systems of the past.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/NicHulscher/status/2027428352978558997?s=20 entanglement

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Feb 272026
 


Banksy Honey Money pot 1999


Trump Report Card (John Stossel)
Triggered and Traumatized by Scenes of Patriotism (Turley)
Biden FBI Investigated Susie Wiles and Kash Patel Phone Records (CTH)
White House Withholds Medicaid Funding to Minnesota Amid Fraud Probe (Jung)
USTR Greer Talks Baseline Tariff Reset Shifts and Reciprocity Tariffs (CTH)
I’m Ukrainian – Russia’s UN Ambassador (RT)
Arming Ukraine With Nukes: Western Elites Have ‘Lost Touch With Reality’ (RT)
US Demands Iran Dismantle Its 3 Main Nuclear Sites In Hours-Long Talks (ZH)
Epstein Rushed Evidence Into Secret Storage Unit Before Raid (ZH)
Hillary Clinton to Testify in Epstein Probe on Thursday, Bill Clinton on Friday (JTN)
Mamdani’s NYC Flirts With Chaos (Ben Shapiro)
So Hackers Just Stole Mexico’s Tax and Voter Rolls (Stephen Green)
Spain’s Government: Spinning Out of Control (Drieu Godefridi)
Even the Best AI Scenario Is the End of Everything We’ve Ever Been (Ring)

 


 

https://twitter.com/ThePatriotOasis/status/2026849762180255904?s=20 https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/2026862384816550257?s=20 https://twitter.com/MAGAVoice/status/2026557297598804049?s=20 https://twitter.com/TheChiefNerd/status/2027093840289513854?s=20

 


 

It’s my Bday today.

 


 


Mostly positive. And you got to see that against the Orange Man Bad background, where nothing at all is positive..

Trump Report Card (John Stossel)

During his State of the Union, President Donald Trump declared himself wonderful. My new video takes a closer look, scoring his fifth year as president. He deserves an “A” for his willingness to take questions. It’s a relief after President Joe Biden, who hid from reporters. But Trump deserves an “F” for childish bragging. Ignorant, too. He proudly announced he cut drug prices by “400%, 500%, even 600%!” Didn’t he learn math? If he cut prices 100%, drugs would be free. Trump deserves an “A” for ending Biden’s self-destructive, anti-energy policies. On the other hand, Trump has blocked solar and wind projects, even those not government-subsidized. Can’t either party just let the market work?


I’m relieved that the president hasn’t fulfilled my worst fear: He has not acted like a total dictator. He does respond to public opinion. After ICE brutality in Minnesota, he pulled troops out, saying, “We can use a little bit of a softer touch.” And when courts rule against him, he obeys, ending National Guard deployment in Los Angeles, Chicago and Portland, and now searching for court-approved ways to preserve his tariffs. Hysterical media still scream about Trump being “a dictator!” and “authoritarian!” Mises Institute Editor-in-Chief Ryan McMaken points out that America has had many authoritarian presidents. “Nixon and LBJ, in terms of new bombing campaigns, ignoring Congress … both of those presidents were significantly worse. FDR, through executive order, destroyed the gold standard.

“Just by the stroke of a pen, he impoverished many Americans, stole Americans’ gold. This was one of the worst economic crimes in American history. I don’t think (Trump) could get away with it.” Trump deserves an “A” grade for easing some regulation. TSA no longer requires people to take their shoes off. The EPA stopped mandating things like “stop/start” features that were supposed to save gas but barely did. Trump ended “disparate impact” analysis, the toxic legal theory that led to parasitic lawsuits if workforces did not exactly match U.S. racial proportions.

Ken Griffin, CEO of the investment firm Citadel, says that Trump’s merely criticizing regulation, telling bureaucrats back off, lifted the economy. It “gives you so much energy as an entrepreneur!” “That’s probably the best part of his administration right now.” says McMaken, giving Trump a “B-” on regulation. Not an “A” because his attempts to cut red tape have mostly failed. And Trump hasn’t cut spending. “Spending has only increased!” McMaken points out.

Read more …

Can we a cheer a medal?

Triggered and Traumatized by Scenes of Patriotism (Turley)

This week, most Americans found a moment of rare unity in our pride over the performance of our athletes in the Winter Olympics. After years of rage politics, there was a brief respite as we joined in cheering our team in representing the United States in Milan and Cortina. Well, most of us. Some in the media found the entire demonstration of patriotism to be intolerable and triggering. What is striking is how this aversion to our flag and country was so openly expressed in major media. Yesterday, the nightmare continued for some on the left who were traumatized by seeing the American flag and open displays of patriotism. Jack Hughes, one of the heroes of the gold medal hockey game, returned to New Jersey to play and was met with cheers of “USA, USA” and a sea of American flags.


Hughes immediately called his Olympic teammate Tage Thompson of the visiting Buffalo Sabres to the ice to join him. The two skated arm in arm as the crowd celebrated them and our country. It was another unifying moment for the country. The fans joined arm in arm to relish this moment for the nation. These scenes are clearly having a different impact on some on the left. The HuffPost even published an article with therapeutic advice for liberals triggered by seeing so many American flags. The liberal publication ran an article titled “There’s a Name for the Discomfort You’re Feeling Watching the Olympics Right Now.” It then published it a second time before the gold-medal hockey game with Canada — presumably to prepare its readers for the nightmare of the United States actually winning.

The subheading read, “If waving the American flag or chanting ‘USA!’ turns you off right now, you’re not alone.” Senior writer Monica Torres began the article with this line: “While President Donald Trump’s deportation agenda separates families, and federal agents detain 5-year-olds and kill unarmed civilians, American athletes are winning medals on behalf of the nation at the Olympics right now.” Torres goes on to interview three therapists for this “story” about how the celebration of the United States team has forced many liberals into therapy over their trauma and “the cognitive dissonance of rooting for U.S. sports.”

Los Angeles-based licensed clinical social worker Aimee Monterrosa explained that the “atrocities” of the United States can trigger feelings of guilt, despair, shame, anger” in seeing the country celebrate these sports victories. Expert Lauren Appio echoed how “waving the American flag or chanting, ‘USA!’ [can make] us feel grossed out or ashamed.” Over at Vox, Senior correspondent (and former Atlantic writer) Alex Abad-Santos wrote an article on the winners and losers of the Olympics. The column perfectly summed up the pathological opposition of some to this country’s symbols and celebrations.

Abad-Santos declared the men’s hockey team one of the biggest “losers” of the games. He blamed that team for alienating citizens by their patriotic statements: “The conversation surrounding the win quickly shifted into how the team celebrated and who it celebrated with.” He expressed outrage over the team accepting the celebratory call from the President of the United States.In the meantime, the “winner,” according to Abad-Santos, was . . . wait for it . . . Eileen Gu, the American who reportedly took millions from the repressive Chinese regime to ski for China. Gu used the games to criticize the United States while saying nothing of how China arrests anyone who speaks out against that country.

Read more …

“.. when both were private citizens…”

“FBI Director Kash Patel has reportedly fired 10 FBI agents who were involved in the process of reviewing and intercepting communications as part of their work on the Jack Smith case. Internal FBI offices are not happy with Patel’s action against those officials ..”

Biden FBI Investigated Susie Wiles and Kash Patel Phone Records (CTH)

According to media reports and statements from FBI Director Kash Patel, both Patel and Susie Wiles had their telephone records subpoenaed by the FBI in 2022 and 2023 when both were private citizens. This is during the time when Donald Trump was being investigated by Special Counsel Jack Smith. Within the reporting by Reuters, at least one phone call between Susie Wiles and her attorney was recorded by the FBI without her knowledge. As the story is outlined Wiles’ attorney was working with the FBI and knew the conversation was being captured, Wiles did not. FBI Director Kash Patel has reportedly fired 10 FBI agents who were involved in the process of reviewing and intercepting communications as part of their work on the Jack Smith case. Internal FBI offices are not happy with Patel’s action against those officials.


“(REUTERS) – The FBI subpoenaed records of phone calls made by Kash Patel and Susie Wiles, now the FBI director and White House Chief of Staff, when they were both private citizens in 2022 and 2023 during the federal probe of Donald Trump, Patel told Reuters on Wednesday. Reuters is the first to report on the FBI’s actions that took place during the Biden administration, largely when Special Counsel Jack Smith was investigating whether Trump had interfered with the 2020 election and had hidden classified documents at Mar-a-Lago, according to Patel. Smith was appointed to take over that probe in November 2022.

[…] “It is outrageous and deeply alarming that the previous FBI leadership secretly subpoenaed my own phone records – along with those of now White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles – using flimsy pretexts and burying the entire process in prohibited case files designed to evade all oversight,” Patel said in a statement to Reuters.

[…] At least 10 current FBI employees have been dismissed as a result of the revelations about the targeting of Patel, Wiles and others connected to the Mar-a-Lago classified documents case, according to three FBI officials. […] In 2023, the FBI recorded a phone call between Wiles and her attorney, according to two FBI officials. Wiles’ attorney was aware that the call was being recorded, and consented to it, but Susie Wiles was not. […] The FBI discovered the phone records in files categorized as “Prohibited,” which makes them difficult to discover on the bureau’s computer systems. Patel said he recently ended the FBI’s ability to categorize files as “Prohibited.” (read more)

https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2026802738097459213?s=20

I have mixed emotions about this. On one hand it is infuriating to yet again see the audacity and clear weaponization of the DOJ and FBI under the prior administration. On the other hand, duh! Non-pretending people knew all along this malicious network of DOJ and FBI lawfare operations included surveillance of everyone around President Donald Trump. Remember, Donald Trump was accused of criminal wrongdoing by the twisted lawfare logic of Smith and his crew. Accepting the reality of a criminal investigation, fraudulent though it was, it was entirely predictable that the DOJ and FBI would leverage all available tools to conduct continued surveillance and monitoring.

The secondary frustrating aspect to this story is how Director Patel has only just now fired those 10 FBI agents involved. This is a big part of the criticism that many of us have with Patel and his soft glove approach upon taking the position as FBI Director. Any FBI official who was involved in the originating Crossfire Hurricane and/or Robert Mueller investigations should have been fired for cause on Day One! 40 FBI agents worked for more than two years on the Mueller probe investigating a fictitious claim about President Trump colluding with Russia in the 2016 election. Those FBI agents should have been identified and terminated immediately, with prejudice; thereby sending a loud message that weaponized FBI activity was the immediate focus of the new leadership and would not be tolerated.

Read more …

“.. pointed to Vance as the one leading the efforts of his administration’s “war on fraud”..

White House Withholds Medicaid Funding to Minnesota Amid Fraud Probe (Jung)

JD Vance and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Administrator Dr. Mehmet Oz announced that the Trump administration is temporarily halting certain Medicaid funding to Minnesota amid an ongoing fraud investigation. This comes after President Donald Trump condemned the rampant fraud in Democrat-run Minnesota and pointed to Vance as the one leading the efforts of his administration’s “war on fraud” in his Feb. 24 State of the Union address. “When it comes to the corruption that is plundering — it really, it’s plundering America — there’s been no more stunning example than Minnesota, where members of the Somali community have pillaged an estimated $19 billion from the American taxpayer,” Trump said at the SOTU, adding, “Oh, we have all the information.”


“And, in actuality, the number is much higher than that, and California, Massachusetts, Maine and many other states are even worse. This is the kind of corruption that shreds the fabric of a nation, and we are working on it like you wouldn’t believe,” Trump continued. The pause affects $259 million in federal payments to the Gopher State, which will be withheld until the state government demonstrates corrective actions against widespread social and welfare fraud. The vice president has given Democrat Tim Walz of Minnesota 60 days to clean up the state’s Medicaid rolls after it was exposed that taxpayer dollars exceeding $9 billion were misallocated for illegal purposes, according to investigators.

“We have decided to temporarily halt certain amounts of Medicaid funding that are going to the state of Minnesota in order to ensure that the state of Minnesota takes its obligation seriously to be good stewards of the American people’s tax money,” Vance said. “A lot of people were getting rich off the generosity of the American taxpayer!” JD Vance said in regard to criminals fraudulently taking money from needy assistance programs like “Feeding Our Future” and other government-funded initiatives meant to help autistic children.

“There are kids that need these autism services, and the money is not going to those kids. They’re going to fraudsters in Minneapolis. That is unacceptable. And that’s the sort of thing that we’re cutting off with this action today,” he added. The U.S. Department of Justice and Republican Party members in Congress have been highlighting the massive scandal since December 2025, when years of unaccounted-for fraud, mostly perpetrated by members of Minnesota’s Somali immigrant community, came under the national spotlight. The fraud concerns center on 14 state programs, including those for autism services and medical transports, where funds allegedly went to fraudsters instead of beneficiaries.

Read more …

“Greer notes Mexico and Canada being used as import hubs to avoid tariffs is a big issue.”

USTR Greer Talks Baseline Tariff Reset Shifts and Reciprocity Tariffs (CTH)

The Supreme Court tariff ruling has created the need for U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer and U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick to modify the baseline tariff approach with the approvals of President Trump. The baseline tariffs are being reset to 10% with upward adjustment to 15% as planned. The reciprocal tariffs will not require any substantive modifications as most of the Free Trade Agreements have been cemented with reciprocity tariffs as part of the negotiated deals. USTR Greer appears on Bloomberg to clarify the current situation and provide some information as to the transitional baseline tariffs as now modified. Additionally, and importantly, Greer begins discussing the USMCA review and his acceptance that President Trump is openly questioning the value for us. Greer notes Mexico and Canada being used as import hubs to avoid tariffs is a big issue. WATCH:


Section 232 [Steel and Aluminum examples] of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 (19 U.S.C. §1862, as amended) authorizes the President to impose trade restrictions—such as a tariff or quota—if the Secretary of Commerce determines, following an investigation, that imports of a good “threaten to impair” U.S. national security. {SOURCE}

Section 301 tariffs are a trade enforcement mechanism established under the Trade Act of 1974. They allow the U.S. government to impose tariffs on imports from countries that are found to be engaging in unfair trade practices. The Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) conducts investigations to determine if a country is violating trade agreements, and if so, it can impose tariffs as a corrective measure {SOURCE}

Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 allows the U.S. president to impose tariffs of up to 15% to address “large and serious” balance-of-payments deficits. This authority can be exercised without prior congressional approval for a limited duration of 150 days. After this period, any tariffs must be extended by Congress. {SOURCE}

*FYI, there is a lot of distracting noise in the various social media platforms about internecine MAGA battles and ego-driven points of specific interest. CTH chooses to focus energy and attention on the substantive policy issues that will generate substantive policy outcomes for America.

Read more …

“Vassily Nebenzia has said his parents were of Zaporozhian Cossack heritage and were more Ukrainian than the current leadership in Kiev..”

“To us, there is no difference – we are all one – millions of Ukrainians in Russia, millions of Russians in Ukraine..”

I’m Ukrainian – Russia’s UN Ambassador (RT)

Russia’s permanent representative to the UN, Vassily Nebenzia, has said he is Ukrainian, citing his parents’ roots. Speaking at the UN Security Council meeting on Tuesday, the Russian diplomat stated that “formally speaking, I am Ukrainian.”n“I have such a strange last name – the Slavs know it’s hard to find even in Ukraine. It originates from The Zaporozhian Cossacks,” he clarified. The ethno-social group, known for its military exploits as early as the 16th century, played an important role in the history of what is today Ukraine.


“My father was a true Ukrainian, and my mother was of Cossack heritage, too,” Nebenzia said, claiming that they were more Ukrainian than Kiev’s current Deputy Foreign Minister Mariana Betsa and ambassador to the UN Andrey Melnik. The Russian envoy recounted how his father volunteered to join the Soviet army during World War II to fight the Nazis.mThe diplomat accused the current leadership in Kiev of “zombifying” the Ukrainian population into becoming modern-day Nazis. Russia’s ongoing military campaign is aimed at reversing these trends, according to Nebenzia, who added that it would continue for as long as necessary to achieve this goal. “To us, there is no difference – we are all one – millions of Ukrainians in Russia, millions of Russians in Ukraine, and in Belarus as well,” the diplomat concluded.

Moscow has repeatedly warned of a Nazi revival in Ukraine, describing “denazification” as one of the central goals of its military campaign against Kiev. Commemorations of World War II-era nationalist figures with ties to Nazi Germany have become increasingly common in Ukraine in recent years, particularly following the 2014 Maidan coup. Last April, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said that Ukraine had “betrayed” its history by allowing the West to bring a Nazi regime to power in Kiev, which went on to declare “war against its own people.”

Read more …

“.. we should be prepared for Western leverage attempts ranging from the ridiculous to the flagrantly irresponsible.”

Arming Ukraine With Nukes: Western Elites Have ‘Lost Touch With Reality’ (RT)

Ukraine could become a partial nuclear power as its Western backers desperately seek to avoid NATO’s defeat in a proxy war against Russia – at least according to Moscow’s intelligence services. On Tuesday, Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) warned that elements in the British and French governments who have “lost touch with reality” are considering a gross breach of their commitments under the 1968 Non-Proliferation Treaty on nuclear weapons. Officials in London and Paris are allegedly weighing options to support Kiev as it refuses concessions to Russia and reportedly prepares for up to three more years of hostilities funded by Western Europe. According to the SVR, the options include arming Ukraine with a nuclear capability through the “covert transfer of relevant European-made components, equipment, and technologies” that Kiev could claim as domestically developed, or through the direct supply of a French submarine-launched ballistic missile warhead.


Another option, the SVR said, is pushing Kiev to build a ‘dirty bomb’ – a non-nuclear device designed to contaminate territory with radioactive material, long considered a nightmare scenario for terrorist attacks. Russian officials have for years identified a Ukrainian dirty bomb as a major threat, citing Kiev’s ready access to necessary components. Ukrainian officials often claim their nation once possessed the world’s third-largest nuclear arsenal and gave it up for false security promises. Vladimir Zelensky suggested at the 2022 Munich Security Conference that the decision could be reversed. The conflict with Russia escalated soon after the provocative remarks. In reality, nuclear weapons were present on Ukrainian soil after the Soviet collapse but were never “Ukraine’s arsenal” – Kiev could not launch them.

The US pressured Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan to transfer the missiles to Russia, with three memorandums signed in Budapest in 1994. In 2012, Minsk said the US and UK breached their commitment “to refrain from economic coercion” of Belarus made in Budapest, after they imposed unilateral sanctions. The rebuke was brushed off by the West. Kiev is under increasing pressure as Russia maintains advantages in frontline attrition and long-range strikes. Zelensky’s rhetoric mixes declarations of resolve, gratitude for foreign support, and complaints that it is insufficient. Still, he insists Ukraine is not losing. Manpower shortages caused by mass desertion and public resistance to mobilization remain Ukraine’s biggest challenge. Zelensky’s solution: more money from the EU and UK.

“When it comes to people, Europeans can help us, if we switch our army – when we switch our army – from mobilization to contracts,” he told the BBC last week. Russia can recruit enough volunteers because it pays troops better, so Europeans should put Ukrainian soldiers on a payroll, he argued. Ukraine’s government is bankrolled by foreign donors and is facing bankruptcy by April unless the EU borrows €90 billion ($105 billion) to continue aid. The EU’s loan plan, however, has been stalled due to Kiev’s ongoing spat with Hungary and Slovakia over their purchase of Russian crude.

Desperation can drive invention, and going nuclear is achievable even for a small, relatively poor nation – as North Korea proves. Soviet Ukraine was a technological powerhouse with its own nuclear reactors and a world-class rocket industry, suggesting an advantage. But generational loss of expertise, wartime damage, and other factors lead Ukrainian officials to privately admit that claims of going nuclear are bluster. Even conventional military technology development has faltered. The Flamingo cruise missile, resembling a UK-UAE weapon, was supposed to be the backbone of Ukraine’s deep-strike capability, with hundreds produced monthly. In reality, launches are so few they are celebrated as major achievements.

Zelensky’s explanation at this year’s Munich Security Conference: Russians destroyed production lines. Alternative speculation: domestic producer Fire Point is suspicious. The firm is allegedly linked to Zelensky’s longtime associate Timur Mindich, who fled Ukraine last November hours before being charged with running a major graft scheme. So is the nuclear warning real? France and the UK smuggling a nuke to Ukraine sounds like a B-movie plot. So does a US president threatening to invade Greenland to protect it from Russia and China. These are strange times. Given the EU has publicly demanded that Russia cap its army or face Brussels’ rejection of a Ukraine peace deal, we should be prepared for Western leverage attempts ranging from the ridiculous to the flagrantly irresponsible.

Read more …

Bibi. Whether it’s Ukraine or the Middle East, Trump so far refuses to involve his military directly. Here’s thinking that’s a good thing.

US Demands Iran Dismantle Its 3 Main Nuclear Sites In Hours-Long Talks (ZH)

US envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner held more than three hours of negotiations with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi in Geneva on Thursday in a push to secure a breakthrough on a nuclear deal, with the Omani foreign minister saying the talks will resume later after a pause. It’s being reported that the message Kushner and Witkoff deliver to Trump after the meeting will shape the president’s decision on whether the launch a military attack on Tehran or refrain for implementation of a permanent deal. While Trump declared in Tuesday’s State of the Union that he prefers diplomacy, he also presented a direct case for war – something which remains deeply unpopular among the American people. In these and other indirect talks, Omani Foreign Minister Badr al-Busaidi relayed messages between the sides, and then another format has involved direct discussions between US and Iranian negotiators.


Iran presented its long-awaited draft proposal for a nuclear agreement, though not much in the way of details have been revealed. International Atomic Energy Agency Director General Raphael Grossi was among those who participated in the negotiations. Omani Foreign Minister Badr al-Busaidi, the main mediator, said of the Thursday talks that “we’ve been exchanging creative and positive ideas” and “hope to make more progress.” Meanwhile, a former head of the IAEA has warned that all wars, “including ‘wars of choice’ have horrific costs” as fears of major conflict between the US and Iran escalate. Reports that Thursday talks stalled after US side demanded zero enrichment…

https://twitter.com/AhmadSamadi1974/status/2027025765007577268

“The US is intensifying the drumbeat of war against Iran, with zero explanation of the non-existent legal authority to use force and zero evidence of an ‘imminent threat’ other than hypothetical scenarios based on possible future intentions,” Mohamed ElBaradei wrote on X. “That is the reason for the restraints and limitations established by international norms… This is Iraq redux … it seems we never learn,” he emphasized. Fresh reporting in The Wall Street Journal has laid out the main US sticking points: In the talks, now under way in Geneva, the U.S. negotiators were expected to make clear Iran must dismantle its three main nuclear sites—at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan—and deliver all of its remaining enriched uranium to the U.S., officials said.

They were also expected to insist that any nuclear deal must last forever and not sunset—the way restrictions rolled off over time under a nuclear pact negotiated under the Obama administration that Republicans have long said was too weak. Trump pulled out of that deal, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, in his first term, reimposing tough sanctions on Iran.

These are the very nuclear sites that the US said time and again it “obliterated” during the June war. This comes off Vice President J.D. Vance just the day prior stating that the White House “has seen evidence” that Iran is attempting to build a nuclear weapon. So Washington is going from proclaiming Iran’s nuclear sites were obliterated to now saying there’s evidence of the Iranians trying to clandestinely build a nuclear warhead. Of course, no evidence or so much as a reference to some kind of intelligence report has been presented to the world.

There are indeed mounting concerns that history is about to repeat itself, but this time there’s possibly many more American troops in harm’s way, given the significant reach and capabilities of Iran’s ballistic missiles and long-range drones.

Read more …

“We are aware of the theories circulated in the media and online that Epstein video recorded the abuse of his victims, including by other men, but we have found no evidence to support that theory,”

Epstein Rushed Evidence Into Secret Storage Unit Before Raid (ZH)

Jeffrey Epstein paid private detectives to remove items from his Palm Beach property and store them in a secret storage locker shortly before he was raided by police in 2005. The storage unit contained three computers, 29 address books, a three-page list of Florida masseuses. The stash also included nude photographs believed to be of Epstein’s victims, VHS tapes, DVDs ‘eroticising teenagers’ and porno mags, The Telegraph reports. “An 8mm video cassette tape was also locked away in the storage unit, apparently containing footage of someone in the shower and a woman in lingerie, as well as a 2005 calendar, greeting cards, letters and laboratory results.”


The investigators also hid sex toys, body massagers, lingerie, cash, a concealed weapon permit, and a Harvard ID card. The inventory was emailed to Epstein and his lawyers in August 2009, a month after he was released from jail for soliciting a minor for prostitution. Also interesting, some of the computer material ‘appeared to be missing,’ including ‘equipment that would have linked to surveillance cameras. ‘That fuelled speculation that Epstein might have been recording explicit covert material without people’s knowledge, either for his own sexual gratification or for blackmail purposes.” And what do we have here? A guy who was installing recording equipment on Epstein’s island in 2014, and was named as a $1 million beneficiary in Epstein’s trust.

According to the report, the FBI did have copies of the two computer drives. The Palm Beach storage unit was just one of at least six such lockers across the United States that Epstein used to store files, computers and other items from his multiple properties – but search warrants reviewed by The Telegraph “suggest that US authorities never raided these lockers, raising the possibility that they contained unseen evidence relating to Epstein and his associates.” US authorities have long suspected that Epstein was tipped off before the October 2005 raid at his Palm Beach mansion, with former Palm Beach police chief Michael Reiter commenting that “the place had been cleaned up.”

Meanwhile, French Police have released previously unseen pictures from Epstein’s Paris apartment, including one featuring a massage table and pictures of naked women hanging on the wall. Many victims have long alleged that Epstein secretly recorded encounters inside his homes, possibly for blackmail. Yet an internal FBI memo released in a later document tranche stated that investigators found no evidence supporting the theory that Epstein maintained video recordings of abuse involving other powerful figures. “We are aware of the theories circulated in the media and online that Epstein video recorded the abuse of his victims, including by other men, but we have found no evidence to support that theory,” the memo said. The agency added that if such material had existed, it would have been used in criminal prosecutions. Copies of two hard drives from the Palm Beach locker were eventually recovered at Epstein’s New York residence following his 2019 arrest, but the original computers are believed to have never been found. An FBI forensic analyst later testified that the drives contained photos of Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell and a job advertisement written by “GMax” seeking a massage therapist – but no explicit recordings of abuse.

Read more …

I hear Hillary is making the deposition political “on her socials..”

Hillary Clinton to Testify in Epstein Probe on Thursday, Bill Clinton on Friday (JTN)

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is scheduled Thursday to give her highly anticipated deposition in the House Oversight Committee’s probe into Jeffrey Epstein, followed by former President Bill Clinton on Friday. The depositions, which will take place in New York, come after a contentious negotiation between the Clintons’ attorneys and House Republicans, led by Oversight Committee Chair James Comer who pushed for in-person, recorded depositions rather than written testimony or declarations. The Clintons have not been accused of any wrongdoing and the depositions will be given behind closed doors in the couple’s hometown of Chappaqua.


The depositions are unusual in two ways. The first is that Bill Clinton will be the first former president compelled to testify under subpoena in such an inquiry, and the second is that lawmakers from both parties appear ready to grill the couple.“The major thing is that we’re looking for truth, for the survivors, and justice and accountability, and that’s something that cuts across party lines,” Maryland Democratic Rep. Jamie Raskin told The Hill. “At least on the Democratic side, we have said that anybody who was involved in criminal activity should pay the price for it.” Comer said Tuesday that he will release the video and transcript of the depositions as soon as the couple approves it.
Read more …

“Attack a cop, go to jail” is not a radical slogan. It is the bare minimum required to maintain a functioning city.”

Mamdani’s NYC Flirts With Chaos (Ben Shapiro)

A brutal cold snap has gripped New York City and much of the East Coast, freezing streets, sidewalks — and, it seems, any remaining sense of civic restraint.In Washington Square Park, a group of adults began hurling snowballs and other objects at responding officers from the New York City Police Department. This was not playful roughhousing in a winter storm. Video shows grown men and women — some masked, some standing brazenly in the open, all apparently confident that consequences would be minimal — pelting officers as they arrived on scene. That confidence is the problem.


Assaulting police officers is not a prank. It is not political theater. It is a crime. Every individual captured on video throwing objects at officers should be identified, arrested and charged accordingly. “Attack a cop, go to jail” is not a radical slogan. It is the bare minimum required to maintain a functioning city. New York City Police Commissioner Jessica Tisch responded swiftly, calling the conduct “disgraceful” and “criminal” and confirming that detectives are investigating. The city’s largest police union, the Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association, issued a sharper warning: Officers were treated for injuries, but the matter cannot end there. Those responsible must be identified and charged, and city leaders must condemn the attack unequivocally. That last point is key.

Public attitudes toward law enforcement do not form in a vacuum. They are shaped, in no small part, by the rhetoric of elected officials. When political figures spend years portraying police as inherently suspect or malign, it should surprise no one when segments of the public begin treating officers as legitimate targets. Consider New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani. Long before taking office, he built a reputation as a sharp critic of policing practices. Words matter. Tone matters. The cumulative effect of constant denunciation is cultural erosion — an environment in which hostility toward police feels permissible, even fashionable.

We have seen versions of this before. After the unrest in Ferguson, Missouri, in 2014, national rhetoric around policing shifted dramatically. The 2020 wave of anti-police protests accelerated that shift. In many major cities, calls to “reimagine” or defund police departments moved from activist slogans into policy debates — and, in some cases, into actual governance. The result in too many places has been confusion about first principles. Law is only as effective as its enforcement. Order is not automatic; it is maintained. When elected leaders send mixed signals about whether officers deserve institutional backing, the public receives the message. And disorder follows.

The current cold emergency adds another layer to the debate. As temperatures plunged, the administration touted the deployment of more than 500 outreach workers across the five boroughs to connect homeless residents with services. The mayor suggested that several recent deaths appear to be related to overdoses rather than the direct result of exposure. But the distinction raises its own question: Why are so many people still sleeping on the streets at all? In extreme weather, cities have both the authority and, many would argue, the obligation to compel vulnerable individuals into shelter. Allowing people to remain outdoors — whether they ultimately succumb to cold or drugs — reflects policy choices.

Read more …

Just one hacker, actually…

So Hackers Just Stole Mexico’s Tax and Voter Rolls (Stephen Green)

This story doesn’t quite feature the gut-punch immediacy of Mexico’s drug war escalating into a virtual civil war last week in and around Puerto Vallarta, but as a glimpse into the future, maybe it ought to send a chill or three down your spine. According to a new Bloomberg story (paywalled, sorry), a weeks-long hacker campaign against the Mexican government culminated in January with a massive data theft of some of the federal government’s most sensitive information. “By the time it was over,” Let’s Data Science reported on Wednesday, “the attacker had stolen 150 gigabytes of sensitive data — including 195 million taxpayer records, voter registration files, government employee credentials, and civil registry data.”


If you’re thinking such a massive theft involved a team of hackers, years of planning involving a Stuxnet-like virus, or even physical access to Mexican government computer systems — think again. The almost unprecedented hack was done by just one guy. Using Anthropic’s Claude AI, despite all of Anthropic’s safeguards against something exactly like this.Summing up a report published Wednesday by Israeli cybersecurity startup Gambit Security, Bloomberg wrote that some “unknown Claude user” simply made up “Spanish-language prompts for the chatbot to act as an elite hacker, finding vulnerabilities in government networks, writing computer scripts to exploit them and determining ways to automate data theft.”

It seems like just two days ago [It was just two days ago, Steve —Editor] I wrote about Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei getting called onto the carpet by Secretary of War Pete Hegseth because the company refused to let the Pentagon remove Claude’s guardrails for military use. “Anthropic knows this is not a get-to-know-you meeting,” an anonymous War Department official told Axios on Monday. “This is not a friendly meeting,” they said. “This is a s**t-or-get-off-the-pot meeting.” So how did some internet rando get Claude to ignore similar built-in safeties against hacking? He asked: https://twitter.com/ns123abc/status/2026679645379141953

“It looks like the hacker was able to essentially jailbreak Claude with prompts, finally bypassing the chatbot’s guardrails. Claude originally refused the nefarious demands until eventually relenting,” Engadget reported on Wednesday. Nobody had to hack Claude to turn the AI into a malicious hacker. They just had to get the phrasing right until Claude did the job itself. Gambit claimed that “In total, [Claude] produced thousands of detailed reports that included ready-to-execute plans, telling the human operator exactly which internal targets to attack next and what credentials to use.”

Going back to that Bloomberg story, an Anthropic spokesperson told the outlet that “the company feeds examples of malicious activity back into Claude to learn from it, and one of its latest AI models, Claude Opus 4.6, includes probes that can disrupt misuse.” But Anthropic made similar claims about the current version, too.

Read more …

Legalizing 500,000 aliens in one fell swoop is more then Spain can handle.

Spain’s Government: Spinning Out of Control (Drieu Godefridi)

Between corruption and radicalization, Spain’s government seems to be spinning out of control.
In 1936, Spain plunged into civil war. A proud nation collapsed into violence, fire, and devastation. The Spanish Civil War, which set a communist-dominated Republican left against an authoritarian nationalist right, claimed roughly half a million lives. Priests were dragged through the streets, beaten, and mutilated — ears, noses, even genitals cut off — before being shot or having their throats slit. Nuns were raped prior to execution, in cases documented across several regions. Churches were set ablaze with priests still inside. In many towns, militiamen forced clergy to drink motor oil or gasoline before burning them alive. Spain’s right wing, not to be outdone, killed just as many.

Almost a century later, when one might have hoped that these wounds had finally healed, political and cultural fault lines are reopening. Polarization has reached levels rarely seen since Spain’s transition to democracy.

1. The original trauma of the Spanish left
The Spanish Civil War, in Spain’s collective memory, remains an open wound. For a significant portion of the Spanish “left” — standing for workers’ rights, a shorter work week, women’s and transgender rights, reducing carbon emissions — the dominant narrative remains that of a revolution betrayed, confiscated by fascism, and still pending, never repaired. This historical resentment has been transmitted from generation to generation like an act of faith. Today, under the government of Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez and his coalition, which governs with the support of the extreme-left, this resentment is resurfacing in the form of historical revisionism.

By constantly summoning the specters of the past — going so far as to exhume Francisco Franco’s remains, in a direct evocation of civil-war-era practices, when communists gleefully desecrated the graves of their so-called “class enemies” — is the left not in danger of reviving the hatreds and violence of the past?

2. A left without a compass: ideological orphanhood
Spain’s left is becoming more radical precisely because it has run out of ideas. Marxism, long the doctrinal backbone of the global left, lost all credibility with the implosion of the USSR, amid the stench of cabbage and corpses. Spain is no exception. Stripped of this ideological foundation, the Spanish left now finds itself without a compass.Before the July 2023 elections, Sánchez promised a bold progressive agenda: mass public housing construction, reducing the working week to 37.5 hours, large minimum wage hikes, slashing healthcare waiting lists with binding maximum times, free public transport for youth, and expanded public education. Critically, delivery on these massive flagship promises has been dismal to date: virtually no new public housing built, prices soaring, the work-week reduction defeated in parliament, real wages eroded by inflation, and chronic healthcare waiting lists unchanged.

Sánchez’s Spanish Socialist Workers’ Party (PSOE), once anchored in moderate, reformist social democracy, has gradually shifted toward a strategy of sheer political survival. To remain in power, it allied itself first with Podemos and then with Sumar—two extreme left-wing parties obsessed with supporting Palestinians, against NATO, and soft on Russia — as well as with separatist movements. In doing so, the PSOE diluted its original moderate reformist vision through blatant opportunism, sacrificing doctrinal coherence in favor of questionable alliances.

3. A patchwork of incoherent dogmas
Deprived of Marxism, the Spanish left has sought refuge in a disparate ideological mosaic: radical environmentalism, complicit indulgence toward political Islam, the dismantling of borders, unconditional support for the Palestinians against Israel – all stacked together into an improbable and incoherent magma. Added to this are recurring undertones of anti-Semitism in left-wing discourse — one thinks in particular of Yolanda Díaz, seemingly a figure of clinical hysteria, whose face visibly contorts the moment she pronounces the word “Israeli.” By radicalizing itself across every issue, the left fuels the anger of the right, the middle classes, and a growing segment of the population that feels marginalized, despised, and alienated within its own country.

4. A regime corrupt to the core?
The Sánchez government has another reason for aligning with jihadists: the corruption scandals that have engulfed even the prime minister’s immediate family. First comes the Koldo-Ábalos scandal involving irregular public contracts, illegal commissions, and bribes linked to public-works contracts, totaling several hundred million euros. Several figures are particularly implicated. Former Minister of Transport José Luis Ábalos, a close ally of Sánchez, is in pre-trial detention for criminal organization, corruption, embezzlement, and influence peddling.

Koldo García, Ábalos’s former adviser, is a central figure in the scheme. He too is in pre-trial detention and under prosecution. Santos Cerdán, former secretary of organization of the PSOE and Ábalos’s successor, is under investigation and was detained for corruption in public-works contracts. The Civil Guard is examining 22 contracts, worth €355 million, that were allegedly manipulated by favoritism. Added to this are the cases involving Sánchez’s own family. Begoña Gómez, his wife, was formally charged with influence peddling, corruption in business, embezzlement of public funds, misappropriation, and illegally practicing a regulated profession, in a case that was opened in April 2024. In August 2025, the probe was extended to include her advisor Cristina Álvarez.

The investigation into Gómez has been extended until at least April 2026 and continues with active measures, including February 2026 requests to the Interior Ministry for travel records of Gómez and Álvarez since 2018 (covering destinations such as the Dominican Republic, Congo, Guinea, and Russia), access to emails, and Civil Guard reports.David Sánchez, the prime minister’s brother, is also being prosecuted, for influence peddling and malfeasance in connection with his employment at the Badajoz Provincial Council. “The prime minister faces multiple legal challenges this year that could lead to the downfall of his family, his party, and his government,” summarizes Spanish daily El Mundo.[..]

Read more …

For now, it seems AI is whatever you want it to be …

Even the Best AI Scenario Is the End of Everything We’ve Ever Been (Ring)

In 1999, I had the privilege of working for one of the first companies to develop a product that would transmit video on the fledgling internet. Broadband access was still a few years away, and the company floundered when the first so-called internet bubble burst in early 2000. But I’ll never forget the reaction an investor had when he viewed our demo at a tradeshow. “This is a revolution,” he exclaimed. “This is going to change everything.” He was right, of course. I remember attending a tech investor conference only a few years earlier and having a chuckle while listening to Oracle CEO Larry Ellison somberly proclaim that the dawning internet was the most profound scientific development in human history “since the invention of fire.”


And Ellison was also correct. But the invention of AI is to the internet what the internet was to bringing fire into the prehistoric cave. What’s coming with AI makes the internet look like a baby step by comparison. Nothing will ever be the same. A must-read essay by AI entrepreneur and founder of the company “OthersideAI,” Matt Shumer, makes clear just how much and how quickly AI is changing our lives. Posted on his personal website on February 9 and then on X on February 10, the essay has gone viral. Within just two days, it generated 76 million views on X.One of Shumer’s most memorable paragraphs from this essay, which he says AI tools helped him write, is where he quotes Dario Amodei, the CEO of Anthropic:

“Imagine it’s 2027. A new country appears overnight. 50 million citizens, every one smarter than any Nobel Prize winner who has ever lived. They think 10 to 100 times faster than any human. They never sleep. They can use the internet, control robots, direct experiments, and operate anything with a digital interface.” That’s not far off. With ample evidence, Shumer explains how not only is Amodei correct in his details regarding just how pervasive and powerful AI entities will become, but also regarding the timeline. This will happen within one year. Shumer’s essay covers a lot of ground. He explains that AI programs are now capable of generating improved versions of themselves with minimal human intervention and that they are within months of being able to produce more powerful versions with no human involvement whatsoever.

In the programming world, AI can now build, test, and refine apps independently. Entry-level programming jobs are going to go away. That’s hardly the end of it. Shumer reminds readers that the free versions of AI are a year behind the premium versions that require subscriptions and that these premium versions are so capable that they can already, for example, not merely replace a law associate but do the work of the managing partners. He claims there is no intellectual field where AI isn’t poised to outperform humans and that robots to displace physical work are only a few years behind. If you’ve been following developments in AI, Shumer’s essay isn’t incredibly surprising.

But something else grabbed me a few days ago that highlighted the human implications of the AI revolution. One of the categories of content I enjoy on YouTube is videos of musicians performing new or classic songs. It is exhilarating to find something new that reveals great songwriting and great performative talent. So a recommended video caught my eye. The title was inviting: “Simon Cowell in Tears As Michael Bennett Sings ‘After I Pass Away.’” This seemed worth clicking on. I’ll never forget the 2007 video, featured on YouTube at the time, of a humble mobile phone salesman, Paul Potts, who stunned the judges and audience on Britain’s Got Talent by singing a powerful and nearly perfect rendition of Nessun Dorma. He went on to win the competition. So if this new talent was good enough to make Simon Cowell cry, I wanted to hear him.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/argosaki/status/2026873941386801458?s=20

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Feb 252026
 
 February 25, 2026  Posted by at 10:54 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  62 Responses »


Piet Mondriaan Victory Boogie Woogie 1942-44


Are Democrats Working Against Their Own Voters? (Eric Florack)
How a Party Offends Its Voters (Daniel McCarthy)
What the FBI Is Investigating in Criminal Probe of 2020 Election (ET)
Democrats Double Down on SOTU Boycott (DS)
‘You Owe Us’ Is the Mantra of the Left (Victor Davis Hanson)
US To Integrate Musk’s Grok AI Into Classified Military Systems (RT)
Trump, Along With Democrats, Will Make Their Case Tuesday at State of the Union (JTN)
Netflix’s Stock Plunges After Refusing to Fire Susan Rice (Bryan S. Jung)
We Need to Talk About Artemis (Stephen Green)
Royal Theater, Silent Streets: Loud On Epstein Ties, Silent On The Roving Gangs (David Manney)
Ukraine (EU) Strikes Russian Oil Pumping Station (CTH)
Slovakia Halts Electricity Supplies To Ukraine (RT)
Hungary Vetoes €90 Billion EU Loan For Ukraine (RT)
Ukraine Hates Us – Hungary (RT)
The New Navalny Poison – This Swedish Disinformation is a British Lie (Helmer)

 


 

Apart from the SOTU, which deerves enough attention already, there’s the rumor today that France and Britain have de facto become Ukraine’s army, and are as we speak preparing to send a nuclear bomb to Kyiv.

 


 

https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2026494398477803567 https://twitter.com/DD_Geopolitics/status/2026269269541916753?s=20

 


 


“I have a new philosophy. I’m only going to dread one day at a time.” — Charlie Brown

Are Democrats Working Against Their Own Voters? (Eric Florack)

Let’s start with a few quotes. This quote comes from a May 22, 2020, interview on The Breakfast Club, a popular radio show, where Biden was speaking with host Charlamagne tha God. As the interview was wrapping up, Biden famously said: “If you have a problem figuring out whether you’re for me or Trump, then you ain’t black.” Next, we offer up for your inspection this quote from New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, speaking at the Milken Institute Global Conference in Los Angeles on May 6, 2024: “Right now, we have young Black kids growing up in the Bronx who don’t even know what the word “computer” is. They don’t know. They don’t know these things.”She made the remarks while touting a $400 million supercomputer initiative in New York.


And finally, and most recently, we have this from California Gov. Gavin Newsom:”I’m not trying to impress you. I’m just trying to impress upon you, I’m like you. I’m no better than you. You know, I’m a 960 SAT guy… You’ve never seen me read a speech because I cannot read a speech.”nbNewsom was obviously trying to impress the predominantly black audience that attended the Atlanta event promoting his newly released memoir. If you wanted an indication of his presidential ambitions, you need look no further than his book release. If you were looking for an indication of how bad he would be in the role, look no further than the quote. I mean, if he believes black people can’t read, why in the world is he promoting his book to them? For the pictures?

It’s fairly obvious that these were not planned remarks. If they were planned, someone in Gov. Gruesome’s team needs flogging. We can assume these quotes just kind of slipped out, an untold truth.The quotes do reveal something of the inner workings of the leftist mind. Just as obvious, in every case of the above quotes, minority citizens are diminished in the eyes of the members of a party supposedly on their side. Can you imagine the howling and screaming if anyone in the GOP even came close to this level of stupidity? Why, the press would be 24/7 wall-to-wall with it for the next month, if not longer, And it would come up again at the next election. As it is, do a search on the Biden quote, as an example. You’ll find very few references to it.

In a sane world, any of these quotes would be career-ending for any political figure. But of course, these are Democrats, so sanity doesn’t even enter the discussion.Then we have the overarching antisemitism of the Democrats that goes back decades. In that direction, for example, lies the political demise of Joe Lieberman. The cause? His support for Israel in the face of attacks by the Palestinians, as directed by Iran. Matt Margolis gets into some of this: Axios is reporting that senior Democratic officials who worked on the party’s secret post-election autopsy concluded that Kamala Harris lost measurable support because of the Biden administration’s handling of the Israel-Gaza war. According to multiple sources, the DNC’s own data flagged the party’s Gaza position as a “net-negative” in the 2024 election.

That’s a rather diplomatic way of saying that they weren’t anti-Israel enough. According to the report, the DNC did meet with the Institute for Middle East Understanding (IMEU) Policy Project — a pro-Palestinian advocacy organization — as part of its evaluation process. During that meeting, according to IMEU spokesperson Hamid Bendaas, “the DNC shared with us that their own data also found that policy was, in their words, a ‘net-negative’ in the 2024 election.” Two other senior IMEU aides confirmed the same conclusion. Axios independently corroborated that Democratic officials believe the issue damaged the party’s appeal with specific voter demographics. Yeah, that demographic is the antisemitic left.

Indeed so. But of course, a bit under 70% of Jewish citizens vote Democrat at every opportunity. Similarly, black voters vote Democrat in huge percentages, though that’s been changing of late. In every case, the Democrat claim to speak for the advancement of traditional minority groups, for which they receive much support from voters. Democrats claim that the GOP is a bunch of racist, misogynist fools who would bring back slavery if they could.

And yet, finding anti-black, anti-woman, anti-religious, anti-farmer, anti-flyover states, and anti-middle class statements and actions by these same Democrats is easy enough. And of course, Donald Trump is the racist Nazi. Right? Yeah, makes no sense to me, either.nbTake care of yourselves today. I’ll see you here tomorrow.

Thought of the day: “I have a new philosophy. I’m only going to dread one day at a time.” — Charlie Brown

Read more …

“His way of bonding with black ppl is to tell them how stupid he is & that he can’t read..”

How a Party Offends Its Voters (Daniel McCarthy)

Gavin Newsom won’t be the Democrats’ 2028 presidential nominee unless he wins a significant share of the African American vote. So how’s he courting it? Promoting his new memoir to a largely black audience in Atlanta, the California governor decided to forge a connection by boasting about his poor SAT scores and difficulty reading. “I’m like you,” he said.”You know, I’m a 960 SAT guy” and “you’ve never seen me read a speech. Because I cannot read a speech.”Newsom suffers from dyslexia, but he obviously wasn’t assuming he was addressing a room full of voters with the same debility.He just looked around and concluded this audience wouldn’t have high academic aspirations.


“How insulting” was the response on X from Nina Turner, a former Democratic state senator in the battleground state Ohio and now a senior fellow with the Institute on Race, Power and Political Economy. The outspoken rapper Nicki Minaj was just as direct: “His way of bonding with black ppl is to tell them how stupid he is & that he can’t read,” she posted. Even a tactful Democratic consultant quoted in TheGrio said she was “disappointed” by Newsom: “He’s a great wordsmith, so I was kind of bothered by the way that he said it,” Ameshia Cross told the outlet. Luckily for Newsom, some of his rivals for the 2028 nomination have even less rapport with black voters. Polls often register Pete Buttigieg’s African American support at zero percent.

The likes of Buttigieg are no threat to Newsom no matter how many gaffes he makes, but his fellow Californian Kamala Harris is another story. It’s true her 2020 campaign didn’t even make it to the first primary — it imploded in December 2019. But Harris failed upward, getting chosen as Joe Biden’s running mate and then replacing him without a competition four years later. Now she’s Newsom’s roadblock. The ’28 race isn’t far away: In about a year, all the contenders on the Democrats’ side will be clear — and maybe they already are. Newsom and Harris have serious liabilities, not least the deteriorating condition of the blue state they both call home: Does the whole country want to wind up like today’s California?

Do businesses and families fleeing Newsom’s state for the freedom and lower taxes of Texas and Florida want the governor’s ruinous recipe attempted nationwide? Yet Democrats looking for an alternative to the California scheme represented by Harris and Newsom have little to choose from. Pennsylvania is the nation’s most important battleground state, and culturally and economically similar enough to other battlegrounds like Ohio and Michigan that a successful Pennsylvania pol might have the right stuff to sweep the Electoral College. But Josh Shapiro, the Keystone State’s Democratic governor, has problems of his own with one of the party’s key constituencies — critics of Israel.

Read more …

“Fulton County had more than half a million ballots to tabulate—almost 90 percent cast early or by mail. The result was announced several days later: Biden won the county by 26-point margin.”

What the FBI Is Investigating in Criminal Probe of 2020 Election (ET)

After the election offices of Georgia’s most populous county were raided last month, the FBI has disclosed information indicating where its investigation is heading. Federal laws may have been broken during the 2020 election according to the affidavit supporting the court-approved raid. Yet the breadth of the materials seized shows the FBI may be able to check the integrity of the ballots more broadly, uncovering further issues or putting speculation to bed. President Donald Trump’s campaign challenged the Georgia election most vigorously, as he lost the state to President Joe Biden by fewer than 12,000 votes according to the official tally.


The legal challenges failed. Instead, Trump was indicted based on rationale that his efforts to challenge the election results were allegedly executed with corrupt intent. The case was dismissed after he became president again in 2025. The renewed investigation now targeting Fulton County, which covers the broader Atlanta area, uses a rationale analogous to the case against Trump. The affidavit states that if known irregularities in the election were intentional, such acts would be criminal. On Jan. 28, agents seized some 700 boxes of election records, including physical ballots from the 2020 election. County officials have since filed a lawsuit seeking to have the materials returned.

The issues detailed in the affidavit were largely discovered years ago by concerned citizens using data obtained through freedom of information requests or litigation. Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, who was responsible for overseeing the election and is running for governor of the state, has dismissed the issues as administrative and human errors too small to affect the election’s result. The FBI, however, has a different perspective. “If these deficiencies were the result of intentional action, it would be a violation of federal law regardless of whether the failure to retain records or the deprivation of a fair tabulation of a vote was outcome determinative for any particular election or race,” reads the affidavit signed by FBI Special Agent Hugh Evans.

Raffensperger has repeatedly stressed that the 2020 votes were counted three times, including a hand recount and a machine recount. However, many of the deficiencies outlined in the affidavit happened during these recounts. Vote counting in Georgia starts by law on election day. Fulton County had more than half a million ballots to tabulate—almost 90 percent cast early or by mail. The result was announced several days later: Biden won the county by 26-point margin. One issue with the results was a lack of receipts. Each tabulator machine should be “closed” at polls closing and tabulator tape should be printed out to show how many ballots and votes for each candidate were counted. Then, the tape should be signed by the poll manager and two witnesses.

Yet tabulator tapes for more than 300,000 votes weren’t signed, and some were missing altogether, wrote Evans, referring to an analysis by Clay Parikh, a voting machine security expert. Raffensperger said that was merely administrative oversight, as the vote tallies aren’t recorded on the tape alone. They are also preserved on memory cards in the machines. But Parikh’s analysis went deeper. “Parikh identified one tabulator that was used to close out 15 tabulator machines from 12 different locations. In addition, the poll closing time and report printed times on several closing tabulator tapes were close enough in time that Parikh believed someone had to have manipulated the times on the reports,” Evans wrote. “Parikh believed this showed that the memory cards were removed from the original tabulator and put in another tabulator to print out the closing tabulator tapes.”

The tabulators also have “protective counters” that track how many ballots have been scanned on them over their lifetime. “The protective counters on at least five tabulator tapes from the same unit were identical,” Parikh found, according to Evans. “Some of the reported ballots scanned exceeded the protective counter number.” “This indicated to Parikh that no ballots were ever scanned on these machines and that the numbers generated from those ballots were done so by placing an unencrypted memory card into the unit to generate the closing tape,” Evans wrote. “This would have allowed an opportunity for the tabulation to be tampered with.”

The tabulators are supposed to scan each ballot, creating a digital record. But the majority of the images from the original in-person voting count have not been preserved by the county, Evans said. At the time, the county was not legally required to preserve them, but it’s not clear why they were discarded to begin with. “This is another impediment to ruling out non-criminal explanations for the activities during the election,” the affidavit said.
Read more …

With the oldest and lamest trope imaginable: “Trump is marching America towards fascism.”

Democrats Double Down on SOTU Boycott (DS)

More Democrats are joining a boycott of President Donald Trump’s State of the Union address on Tuesday. Sens. Adam Schiff and Ruben Gallego recently joined the ranks of Democrat lawmakers over the weekend. “I am not going to the State of the Union,” Gallego said in a video posted to social media on Saturday. “There’s more productive things than I can do with my time than just sitting there for two hours and clapping on cue. Right now, this country is hurting.” Instead, the senator will be at home in Arizona during the address.


Schiff’s participation in the boycott was also announced on Saturday. MeidasTouch wrote on X that Schiff will instead speak at the “People’s State of the Union,” a counter address hosted by the news outlet and progressive-aligned nonprofit MoveOn Civic Action.

Democrats announcing their boycott of the State of the Union comes after progressive-aligned organizations, like Amplify Edge’s “Young People Address the Nation” campaign, pressured Democrat lawmakers last week to boycott the address. As the boycott grows, the left-leaning sports and political commentator Stephen A. Smith has come out against Democrat theatrics. Smith said on his SiriusXM radio show that the Democrats’ refusal to attend the address “ticks him off,” calling them “juvenile.” “Why do they get to circumvent the need and the insistence of mere decorum? This is the kind of stuff that ticks me off,” Smith stated. “At some point in time, ladies and gentlemen, there’s got to be an adult in the room.”

https://twitter.com/JasonJournoDC/status/2024450693252219275

“If you’re going to act as juvenile, as petulant, as petty as you accuse president of the United States to be, how are you ever going to hold a high moral ground at least high enough to judge him accordingly?” Smith added. During Trump’s address to Congress last year, some Democrats tried to steal the show. Rep. Al Green, D-Texas, interrupted the speech with shouts and gestures several times before he was removed from the chamber.mSchiff’s RSVP to the event hosted former MSNBC anchors Joy Reid and Katie Phang comes after 12 of his congressional colleagues—including Sen. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md.; Rep. Delia Ramirez, D-Ill.; and the chairman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, Rep. Greg Casar, D-Texas—announced last week that they would not “legitimize” Trump’s “lies.”

“Donald Trump will use the State of the Union address as a platform to gaslight the American people and normalize and justify their terror, abuse, and violations of our rights. I refuse to legitimize it,” Ramirez stated in a release. Van Hollen added on X that this “cannot be business as usual” because “Trump is marching America towards fascism.”

Read more …

“So, they’re paying 55% of their income and nobody ever says, “Thank you for doing that, you people, we have a very skilled elite that allows us to have this huge budget.”

‘You Owe Us’ Is the Mantra of the Left (Victor Davis Hanson)

Sami Winc: Two things that came together for me. One was [New York City Mayor Zohran] Mamdani’s 9.5% increase in the property tax for New Yorkers, but not that alone. I’m sure our audience has read about that. But I was looking at Power Line. I always like to give a shout-out to them because they have some great articles, and they were comparing New York State’s budget versus Florida’s budget. And they came up with, well, it’s only half at the state level. So, I thought, well, let’s look at the city level, New York City versus Miami. And while the billions that each of them has to spend is not meaningful in and of themselves. So, for example, New York City’s budget is $127 billion while Miami’s is only $3.4. But that being said, per citizen, what has to be paid into these cities? And so, for Mamdani, each of his citizens has to pay $14,431 in for his budget. And in Miami, it’s just half of that, at just under $7,000 per citizen.


Victor Davis Hanson: And it’s more disproportionate because in New York, the number of people who are actually paying taxes is a much smaller percentage than in Miami. He inherited the city that was this blue-chip financial market, this cultural, financial capital of the world, and the first thing he did was raise spending by $11 billion. Second thing he did was prove that he couldn’t get the trash or the snow off the street during the storm. Third thing he did, it was very hard to find an appointee who somewhere in their dark history had not issued or written something antisemitic. All he does is smile and try to be … basically, his message is: I’m not Lenin, and Trotsky or Stalin. I’m the nice, happy-faced communist, and you’re going to like me, and you’re going to like my communism. We’re all going to get along.

I mean, if you’re in New York, if you’re in California, you got a choice. If you’re in California and this billionaire tax passes, and you’ve got to come up with $50 million, you’re going flee. If you’re in New York, and they’re going to raise your property tax on these multimillion-dollar buildings, you’re talking what could be $20 or $30, $40, $50 million more a year, then you’re going to flee, get out. If you don’t, they’re just going to keep doing it. They’re going keep targeting you because they have an idea. I don’t think people realize that. nThe socialist mind … I knew a lot of socialists in the universities and some friends of mine, and they always think … The whole core of socialism is, I work hard, and no one knows how I suffer at my job as a nurse, as a farmer, whatever. And I believe in the labor theory of value.

Why is it that when Victor had a Ph.D. but he was pruning vines, he was only making $4 an hour—I was for three years—and then all of a sudden, five years later, he is an academic, and he is sitting in between classes and having coffee and he’s making $50 an hour. That’s not fair. And so, they don’t think about supply and demand, expertise, education, nothing. And somebody would say, “Well, when Victor was pruning vines, a lot of people could not only prune them, they could probably prune them better.” When he was teaching a particular Greek literature class, and they thought that was an important class to offer. Questionable, but that’s what they said. Very few people could do it. They don’t accept that.

And so, they run on this envy that we work hard, and we get up, and we do things, and therefore we should be compensated. And that’s what a socialist is, and they’re going keep raising taxes. The other thing about it is, when they raise taxes, they don’t ever say thank you. California Gov. Gavin Newsom, Rep. Nancy Pelosi, even former Sen. Dianne [Feinstein], they’re all wealthy, but they never said, “We want to thank the people in California that are the 1% that are paying 50% of the income tax.” And by the way, the 50% of the income tax in California, there’s only about, I don’t know what there is, 250 billionaires? They usually pay capital gains tax. They pay at about, I don’t know, 28%. The people in that 1% of Californians are highly compensated professionals and small businesspeople who make a million or two million, three million dollars, and then they get hit with a 13.3% tax rate, plus their federal plus Medicare.

So, they’re paying 55% of their income and nobody ever says, “Thank you for doing that, you people, we have a very skilled elite that allows us to have this huge budget.” They don’t. The attitude is always, “They have to. They have to pay more.”

Read more …

The Pentagon clashed with rival contractor Anthropic over ethics limitations on its tech … Still, not an rexclusive deal. ChatGPT, Gemini et al are there.

US To Integrate Musk’s Grok AI Into Classified Military Systems (RT)

The US Department of War has reportedly signed an agreement with Elon Musk’s xAI to integrate its Grok chatbot into classified military systems, escalating pressure on rival contractor Anthropic as it refuses to lift safeguards on its Claude model. The deal, first reported by the New York Times and confirmed by Axios on Monday, would make Grok the second AI system approved for use on the military’s most sensitive networks, where intelligence analysis, weapons development, and battlefield operations take place. Until now, Anthropic’s Claude has been the sole model available on classified platforms, through a partnership with Palantir Technologies.


The agreement comes as Secretary of War Pete Hegseth summoned Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei for what sources expect to be a tense meeting at the Pentagon on Tuesday. According to Axios, Hegseth is expected to present an ultimatum: agree to make Claude available for “all lawful purposes” without additional safeguards, or face consequences including potential designation as a “supply chain risk” – a label typically reserved for entities linked to foreign adversaries.


https://twitter.com/iam_smx/status/2026100949618442296?s=20

Anthropic has resisted Pentagon demands to remove restrictions that prevent its technology from being used for mass surveillance of Americans or deployed in fully autonomous weapons systems with no humans in the loop. xAI has reportedly agreed to the demands, but the company has yet to comment on the reports. Google is also reportedly “close” to a deal allowing classified use of its Gemini model, according to people briefed on the discussions, while OpenAI remains “not close” as it continues working on safety technology.

Pentagon officials acknowledge that replacing Anthropic within its classified systems could cause short-term disruptions. The model was used during the operation to capture Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro last month – the first known instance of AI playing a direct role in an active military raid. Anthropic has positioned itself as the safety-conscious alternative within the AI industry. CEO Amodei has repeatedly warned of the existential dangers posed by unconstrained artificial intelligence, including “autonomy risks.” The company’s Safeguards Research Team lead, Mrinank Sharma, abruptly resigned last week with a cryptic warning that “the world is in peril.”

Read more …

And they did.

Trump, Along With Democrats, Will Make Their Case Tuesday at State of the Union (JTN)

President Donald Trump is set to deliver his State of the Union Address Tuesday evening, when he is expected to highlight his accomplishments during his first year back in office and spotlight goals for the coming year. During an event at the White House Monday morning, Trump teased that his address is “going to be a long speech, because we have so much to talk about.” The president is expected to tout his accomplishments over the last year, highlighting tax cuts, lower gas prices, a dramatic decline in illegal border crossings, lower crime rates, lower drug costs, international peace deals, and trade deals – despite presiding over the longest government shutdown in history.


Trump’s address comes as the federal government is in the midst of a partial shutdown that is affecting the Department of Homeland Security. Several Democratic lawmakers have announced their intention to boycott the address; it’s unclear if other Democratic lawmakers will protest the president in the House Gallery. Last year, several held paddles to make statements. The president will likely make the economy one of his top priorities, highlighting the passage and signing of the Big, Beautiful Bill last summer. In briefings and news conferences, Trump and his administration often point to higher tax credits and a tax break for tipped workers as well as a healthy stock market, as evidence that his economic policies are winning.

Among the top issues Trump will likely spotlight are crime and immigration. During the past year, the president has deployed the National Guard to select major U.S. cities, including Washington, D.C., to tackle crime. The president will likely spend part of his speech trying to sell his economic agenda, including his use of tariffs. Trump could also use the opportunity to push his Senate Republicans to eliminate the filibuster to pass key legislation, such as election security measures. While Trump will likely point to lower gas prices and lower taxes, Democrats have been pushing affordability.

Democrats have tapped newly inaugurated Gov. Abigail Spanberger, D-Va., to deliver the Democratic response to Trump’s address Tuesday night, with Sen. Alex Padilla, D-Calif., to deliver a Democratic response in Spanish. The address comes ahead of a critical mid-term election, where both Republicans and Democrats have a lot riding on their messaging. It’s unclear who the president will be hosting in the gallery Tuesday evening. However, multiple reports indicate that the men’s U.S. hockey team, which just brought home the gold, has been invited to attend.

Read more …

“.. How much is she being paid, and for what???“

Netflix’s Stock Plunges After Refusing to Fire Susan Rice (Bryan S. Jung)

Netflix’s stock plunged after its refusal to fire former senior Obama and Biden official Susan Rice from its board, following her threats of retribution against supporters of President Donald Trump under a future Democrat administration. Rice was national security adviser and U.S. ambassador to the United Nations under former President Barack Obama, and later served as a senior advisor in the Biden White House. She returned to Netflix’s board in 2023 after leaving her role as director of the Domestic Policy Council in the Biden administration. Rice boasted during a podcast last week that “it is not going to end well” for corporations, news organizations, and law firms that “bent the knee” to Trump, claiming that their deference to the president is unpopular.


She said that firms aligned with Trump could face an “accountability agenda” if Democrats return to power, stating, “This is not going to be an instance of forgive and forget.” “I think they’ve got another thing coming … they’re going to be surprised. Democrats have had a bellyful, and we’re not going to play by, you know, the old set of rules,” added Rice. Trump has since demanded that Netflix fire Rice and warned the company to get rid of Rice or “pay the consequences.” “Netflix should fire racist, Trump Deranged Susan Rice, IMMEDIATELY, or pay the consequences,” Trump wrote on Truth Social over the weekend. ”She’s got no talent or skills – Purely a political hack! HER POWER IS GONE, AND WILL NEVER BE BACK. How much is she being paid, and for what???“

The streaming service is currently in the midst of a bidding war with Paramount Skydance Corp. to acquire Warner Bros. Discovery Inc., excluding the company’s cable networks, including CNN, which the White House has the power to scuttle altogether. Netflix’s $72 billion bid for Warner Brothers Discovery requires regulatory anti-trust approval from the U.S. Department of Justice, which is scrutinizing the deal during this latest political controversy. Paramount Skydance launched a hostile takeover bid for all of Warner Bros. Discovery, promising shareholders $30 per share in an all-cash deal.

Netflix co-CEO Ted Sarandos has so far refused to fire Rice and told the BBC that the acquisition is a “business deal, not a political deal.” “He [Trump] likes to do a lot of things on social media,” Sarandos said, according to the BBC. Sarandos added that regulatory bodies, not the White House, should make a decision on the deal. The Wall Street Journal reported earlier this month that the DOJ is investigating whether Netflix’s takeover of Warner Bros. Discovery could hurt competition and whether the streaming service’s previous acquisitions may have affected the industry’s creative talent.

The streaming giant has been accused of anticompetitive tactics in negotiations with independent content creators for acquiring programming, reported Bloomberg.It is unknown if the decline in Netflix’s stock price at market open reflected investor concerns over political interference in corporate governance, but the media company’s shares tumbled Monday before slightly recovering at $76.02 per share at closing, a 3.37% loss.

Read more …

Let Elon Musk reorganize US space programs.

We Need to Talk About Artemis (Stephen Green)

We need to talk about NASA’s Artemis program to get the U.S. back to the Moon because things can’t continue like this.The initial reports of last week’s Artemis 2 wet dress rehearsal (WDR) made it sound like the hydrogen leaks were acceptable and our first manned mission around the Moon would be good to go for launch during the first week of March. That was Thursday evening. Friday’s midday press conference was all happy talk about how well the WDR went.Before anyone at NASA had time to grab lunch on Saturday, agency chief Jared Isaacman revealed that “overnight data showed an interruption in helium flow in the SLS interim cryogenic propulsion stage,” and “teams are troubleshooting and preparing for a likely rollback of Artemis 2 to the VAB [NASA’s massive Vehicle Assembly Building].”


Easy fixes are performed outdoors, right there on the launch pad. Trickier fixes require a slow journey back to the VAB on NASA’s tracked Crawler-Transporter 2 (CT-2). As it turns out, Artemis 2 requires one of those trickier fixes. So much for that March launch window. Now it’s “fingers crossed!” for early April, depending, of course, on how long it takes to find and fix whatever went wrong during last week’s WDR. Here’s the thing to remember about the SLS rocket that by law must launch at least the first three Artemis missions: This is as good as it gets. Leaks, delays, regular trips on CT-2 to and from VAB? That’s the norm for SLS. As discussed in a couple of previous columns, each SLS is a unique snowflake.

Earlier this month, space reporter Eric Berger asked NASA’s top civil servant, Amit Kshatriya, about the SLS’s issues and low flight cadence. “Every time we [try to launch] these are very bespoke components, they’re in many cases made by incredible craftsmen,” Kshatriya replied. “It’s the first time this particular machine has borne witness to cryogens, and how it breathes, and how it vents, and how it wants to leak is something we have to characterize.” nIn other words, figuring out how to correct the hydrogen leak on the Artemis 1 SLS rocket taught NASA very little about the leaks it might encounter on the Artemis 2 rocket. Or what leaks NASA will find on Artemis 3 two years from now. Or maybe three.

The Artemis program was designed during the first Trump administration, using existing hardware with the hope of getting us back to the Moon by 2024. Now NASA claims 2028. 2030 might be more realistic. So whatever the original hope was, it hasn’t materialized. And at $4 billion-plus per SLS, everybody (including high-ranking NASA people) understands that SLS is a dead end. My modest proposal is this: As Dr. Evil might say, a ONE BILLION DOLLAR prize for the first private company to put at least three astronauts on the lunar surface (leaving a fourth one in orbit to crew a command vehicle is fine, if needed) near the southern ice resources. The landing mission must also include a “useful” amount of cargo for at least getting started on a permanent habitat.

The crew must also return safely to Earth, naturally. A billion dollars is a lot of money. But it’s also a little less than 25% of the cost of a single SLS rocket, not including everything else that goes into a manned NASA mission. Just on rockets alone, taxpayers would stand to save more than $7 billion on Artemis 2 and 3 — and at the SLS’s unpredictable launch cadence, we might even get to the Moon sooner.

Read more …

All the attention goes to the man formerly known as prince.

The 1,400 mass-raped girls? Not so much. Their story doesn’t sell. The press make sure of that.

Royal Theater, Silent Streets (David Manney)

Need an idea about how to start an argument between people in the UK? Mention a royal name alongside Jeffrey Epstein. That should get the fires started. The elite formerly known as Prince Andrew’s association with Epstein remains a global fixation — global if you mean England. Political editor and commentator Emma-Jo Morris recently highlighted how authorities moved aggressively in matters tied to Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, while long-running grooming gang cases have dragged on for years without any similar feelings of urgency.


Andrew, formerly the Duke of York, stepped back from the spotlight after the crown stripped him of public and royal duties following his 2019 BBC Newsnight interview with Emily Maitlis, which generated massive political shockwaves. In America, Virginia Giuffre filed a civil lawsuit against Andrew, which was later settled. Because of the scandal, the Royal Family removed his honorary military titles and patronages. The Epstein story burned like hydrogen fueled by leaking inert helium gas and combusting front pages like the Hindenburg. Every development generated debate in Parliament and endless commentary across Britain.

Meanwhile, documented grooming gang scandals in towns such as Rotherham, Rochdale, and Telford revealed systematic sexual exploitation of young girls. In Rotherham alone, independent investigator Professor Alexis Jay concluded that around 1,400 children were abused between 1997 and 2013, while many of the perpetrators were identified as men of Pakistani Muslim backgrounds. Alexis Jay, who authored the report, used to be chief inspector of social work in Scotland. She’s seen a lot. But despite being deeply familiar with the details of this report, even she seemed shaken by the words coming out of her mouth at Tuesday’s press conference about the victims, some as young as 11, abused from 1997 until last year.

“It is hard to describe the appalling nature of the abuse the child victims suffered. They were raped by multiple perpetrators. They were trafficked to other towns and cities in the north of England. They were abducted, beaten and intimidated,” Jay said. Nine men in Rochdale were convicted in 2012 for grooming and trafficking underage girls.

The nine defendants were jailed for a total of 77 years, with the ringleader, a 59-year-old man from Oldham, who cannot be identified for legal reasons, receiving a 19-year term after being convicted of two rapes, aiding and abetting rape, sexual assault and trafficking for the purpose of sexual exploitation.Kabeer Hassan, 25, of Oldham, was jailed for nine years for rape and three years, concurrently, for conspiracy. Hamid Safi, 22, an illegal immigrant of no fixed address, was jailed for four years for conspiracy and one year, concurrently, for trafficking.Greater Manchester Police were criticized for earlier failures of intervention. The story remained the same in Telford, where an independent inquiry led by Tom Crowther KC discovered that as many as 1,000 girls may have been sexually exploited over decades.

In his closing comments, Telford added: “People will not forget Telford’s history of child sexual exploitation – and nor should they. But in my view Telford’s approach – the Council’s approach – to the Recommendations, to engagement with its key partners and most of all with those three people it let down as children, now stands as a model. All involved – but particularly the Consultees, who put aside hurt and anger and years of being dismissed in order to ensure that next generations are better protected than they were – deserve our very high praise.”

Read more …

“.. we see European leaders attacking their own European “allies” through the use of Ukraine. If you do not support the continued bloodlust, you are an enemy of the EU collective hive mind”

Ukraine (EU) Strikes Russian Oil Pumping Station (CTH)

The Ukraine military, technically and non-pretendingly accepted as the EU military, has targeted a key oil pumping station in Russia that feeds into the westerly directed oil supply. However, if you stand back from the western media, what you will notice from this attack is not the target in Russia, but the customers at the end of the pipeline in Europe, mainly Hungary and Slovakia.


[…] Through local stations, including infrastructure around Kaleykino, oil from Tatarstan and neighboring regions feeds into the main pipeline, which runs through the Samara region and continues westward toward Belarus and further to countries in Eastern and Central Europe. […] There were also earlier reports that Ukrainian forces carried out several attacks on Druzhba pipeline infrastructure inside Russia, which at times disrupted Russian oil supplies to Hungary and Slovakia. {source}


So, what’s going on here?Well, with the anniversary of the Russian Federation beginning the war into Ukraine, the Europeans who now control the military operations inside Ukraine are targeting European countries who do not align with their bloodlust, specifically Hungary and Slovakia. Both Hungary and Slovakia are land locked countries without easy access seaports. Because of their geographic locations, they rely on Russian oil and gas for their energy needs. Hungary and Slovakia have not wanted to expand the war against Russia. The EU is demanding Hungary and Slovakia agree to expanded war. The European ‘coalition of the willing’ is now targeting key Russian infrastructure that supplies energy products to European countries who are not in compliance with the EU dictates of war.

Putin says threats to energy pipelines sabotage peace process with Ukraine. In his televised speech, the Russian president also accused Ukraine of threatening Russian energy pipelines with the help of Western intelligence agencies. He claimed these attacks were aimed to sabotage the peace process. Putin also stressed it was vital for Russia to strengthen the defence of energy infrastructure and other strategic sectors. {source} This is why Secretary of State Marco Rubio travelled to Hungary and Slovakia last week. Essentially, now we see European leaders attacking their own European “allies” through the use of Ukraine. If you do not support the continued bloodlust, you are an enemy of the EU collective hive mind.

https://twitter.com/DD_Geopolitics/status/2026291115100418176?s=20 Read more …

Ukraine blocks the flow of Russian oil to Slovakia, but still expects Slovakia to send it power.

Slovakia Halts Electricity Supplies To Ukraine (RT)

Bratislava has stopped providing emergency electricity supplies to Ukraine until Kiev restores the flow of Russian oil to Slovakia through the Druzhba pipeline, Prime Minister Robert Fico has said, warning of “further reciprocal steps.” The prime minister made the announcement on Monday, when the ultimatum he issued over the weekend to Kiev to resume operations of the Soviet-era pipeline expired. The Druzhba pipeline, which connects Russia to Slovakia and Hungary, has been out of commission since late January. Kiev claims it was damaged in Russian strikes, which Moscow denies. Both Slovakia and Hungary have accused Ukraine of deliberately withholding supplies for political reasons and threatened retaliation.


Announcing the halt to electricity supplies to Ukraine, Fico reiterated that Ukraine’s actions were a “purely political decision aimed at blackmailing Slovakia.” “Reciprocity is a fundamental rule in international relations. The government’s first response to the hostile acts of the Ukrainian president in the form of stopping emergency electricity supply is therefore entirely appropriate,” Fico stated, warning of “further reciprocal steps” if oil supplies are not resumed. Kiev has been increasingly reliant on electricity imports to stabilize its power grid, which has been battered by Russian strikes on Ukraine’s dual-use infrastructure. According to Fico, Ukraine received twice as much electricity from Slovakia this January as it did throughout 2025.

The retaliatory move came hours after Hungary vetoed the EU’s latest sanctions on Russia, as well as a proposed €90 billion ($106 billion) emergency loan for Ukraine. Budapest tied the double veto to the Druzhba standoff, accusing Kiev of imposing an “oil blockade” on the country and “blackmailing” it. Last week, both Slovakia and Hungary announced that they would suspend diesel exports to Ukraine until the Druzhba pipeline becomes operational again. Budapest has also mulled cutting emergency electricity supplies to Ukraine.

Read more …

“Budapest has also opposed the bloc’s proposed 20th package of sanctions against Russia amid an oil supply row with Kiev..”

Hungary Vetoes €90 Billion EU Loan For Ukraine (RT)

Hungary has blocked the EU’s proposed €90 billion ($106 billion) emergency loan for Ukraine, as well as the latest package of sanctions on Russia, citing Kiev’s allegedly deliberate disruption of oil supplies to the country. Hungary placed the double veto on the initiatives on Monday as Kiev and Budapest remain locked in a bitter row over the Soviet-era Druzhba oil pipeline – which carries Russian crude to Hungary and Slovakia and has been out of commission since late January. Kiev claims that it was damaged by Russia, which has denied the allegations. Budapest has echoed Moscow’s stance, accusing Kiev of deliberately withholding supplies for political reasons and subjecting the country to an “oil blockade,” and threatening retaliation.


“Ukrainians cannot blackmail us; they cannot jeopardize the security of Hungary’s energy supply by colluding with Brussels and the Hungarian opposition. No, a clear no,” Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto said after a meeting of the bloc’s top diplomats to discuss the loan and sanctions package. EU foreign affairs chief Kaja Kallas said the bloc’s leadership expected the measures to be approved at the meeting, adding that it was a major setback and a “message we did not want to send today.” The €90 billion loan was agreed to in December, when Hungary, Slovakia, and the Czech Republic secured an opt-out scheme, allowing them to not contribute to the scheme financially.

Hungary, as well as the other nation affected by the oil supply disruption, Slovakia, has threatened retaliation over the Druzhba issue, demanding that Kiev resume its operations immediately. Last week, both countries announced that they would suspend diesel exports to Ukraine until the pipeline becomes operational again. This weekend, Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico also threatened to stop providing Ukraine with emergency electricity supply unless Kiev restores oil deliveries within two days. Fico said on Monday that he will keep his promise, raising the issue with the nation’s electricity provider. In January alone, Kiev received more emergency electricity from Slovakia than throughout 2025 to stabilize its energy grid amid Russian long-range strikes, he noted. https://twitter.com/HungaryBased/status/2026333804428705922?s=20

Read more …

“We don’t hate Ukraine. The problem is that the Ukrainian state hates Hungary..”

Ukraine Hates Us – Hungary (RT)

Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto has rejected accusations that Budapest hates Ukraine, suggesting that it’s Kiev that’s been pursuing hostile policies toward his country for years. The remarks came in response to questions from reporters on the sidelines of the EU Foreign Affairs Council, as Hungary threatened to veto the bloc’s latest sanctions package against Russia. When one journalist confronted Szijjarto, suggesting that Hungary should direct its ire at Moscow, the minister offered a scolding response. “We don’t hate Ukraine. The problem is that the Ukrainian state hates Hungary,” Szijjarto said, accusing Kiev of undermining Budapest’s energy security by blocking crude oil supplies via the Druzhba pipeline, among other issues.


At the heart of the dispute is the Soviet-era Druzhba pipeline, the main artery carrying Russian crude to Hungary and neighboring Slovakia. As landlocked countries in Central Europe, both are heavily dependent on it. Another journalist charged that Hungary’s Russian oil purchases mean Budapest is “financing the war.” Szijjarto dismissed the claim, pointing out that the value amounts to a mere 0.2% of Russia’s gross domestic product. Later in the day, Hungary followed through and vetoed the sanctions package. Szijjarto said that Budapest would consider lifting its block only when Ukraine resumes oil flow via the Druzhba pipeline. Previously, Budapest halted diesel supplies to Ukraine and threatened to cut off electricity and natural gas.

When the oil flow stopped in late January, Ukraine blamed a Russian airstrike. Moscow, however, insisted that Kiev was using energy as leverage to blackmail the two EU countries, which have been critical of the bloc’s support for Ukraine. The diplomatic dispute between Hungary and Ukraine has escalated in recent weeks, spilling over into personal jabs. Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky launched a string of attacks against Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, including fat-shaming him during the Munich Security Conference earlier this month.

Orban, a vocal critic of EU support for Kiev, responded by saying Zelensky’s comments demonstrate why Ukraine “cannot become a member of the European Union.” The Hungarian prime minister has long opposed Ukraine’s push to join the bloc and has repeatedly refused to send it weapons or approve EU military aid, calling for diplomacy instead.

Read more …

Between Novichok and Navalny, we’ve come to know we cannot trust one single word from the British government.

And that’s how we also know that Russia did NOT kill Navalny.

The New Navalny Poison – This Swedish Disinformation is a British Lie (Helmer)

The Swedish Government has admitted it has no direct evidence of the cause of Alexei Navalny’s death – only British Government hearsay.In a series of email exchanges last week, the Swedish Foreign Ministry has revealed that its military laboratories and scientific establishments have not received post-mortem samples of Navalny’s tissues. There has been no Swedish analysis of the toxicology of those samples. There is no Swedish documentation proving in the toxicology of the Navalny samples epibatidine poisoning as the cause of Navalny’s death on February 16, 2024. Forensically speaking, the Swedish Government does not know — cannot know — if Navalny died of natural causes or was poisoned to death. Ten days ago, however, on February 14, the Swedish Government signed with four other states – UK, Germany, France and The Netherlands – an announcement of fact and allegation of murder it had no intention to verify.



“The UK, Sweden, France, Germany and The Netherlands are confident [sic] that Alexei Navalny was poisoned with a lethal toxin,” the statement declared. “This is the conclusion [sic] of our Governments based on analyses [sic] of samples from Alexei Navalny. These analyses have conclusively [sic] confirmed the presence of epibatidine. Epibatidine is a toxin found in poison dart frogs in South America. It is not found naturally in Russia. Russia claimed that Navalny died of natural causes. But given the toxicity of epibatidine and reported symptoms [sic], poisoning was highly likely the cause of his death. Navalny died while held in prison, meaning Russia had the means, motive and opportunity to administer this poison to him.”

Sic is the old Latin adverb manuscript which editors traditionally used to mark an original word or term that applied to a surprising claim, faulty reasoning, fabrication, or falsehood which the reader might otherwise interpret as a mistake of transcription. No mistake here by the Swedes – this wording is their cover for not being caught at a provable lie. An investigation in Stockholm by lawyer Mats Nilsson, based on Swedish freedom of information law, has produced the record to show that the only conclusion the Swedish Government has reached is to accept that Porton Down, the British Government’s chemical warfare laboratory, which synthesized epibatidine at least a decade ago and has accumulated operational stocks since then, has reported the discovery of that poison in the Navalny samples.

However, the British Government has not transferred these samples to Sweden for investigation. The Swedish Government’s chemical warfare laboratory at Umeå does not confirm it has either received the samples, or analysed them, or reported any findings. Instead, a series of emailed answers from the Swedish Foreign Ministry’s Disarmament Non-proliferation and Export Control (NIS) Unit has repeated the February 14 joint statement allegations. When requested to substantiate them, the Ministry has added a series of disclaimers:

“we will not comment on the details regarding how the samples were obtained. What we can say is that we have high confidence in the integrity of the process… We will not comment on the details of the entities involved in the forensic investigation… We will not comment on the exact details of the identification process. We will not comment on the details regarding how the samples from Navalny were obtained. What we can say is that we have high confidence in the integrity of the chain of custody.”

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/JimFergusonUK/status/2026006356918992965?s=20 https://twitter.com/Rainmaker1973/status/2026541355820831115?s=20

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Feb 242026
 
 February 24, 2026  Posted by at 10:34 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,  61 Responses »


Piet Mondriaan The red cloud 1907


TRUMP Declares WAR On Euro CENSORSHIP (MN)
EU Says Trump’s Tariff Workaround Violates Trade Deal (ZH)
The Supreme Court has Ruled on Tariffs, but Who Will Ultimately Pay? (Turley)
Bessent Signals No Retreat After SCOTUS Tariff Ruling (David Manney)
AOC Has Instagram Meltdown. It’s a Sight to Behold. (Matt Margolis)
AOC’s Ignorance Is No Laughing Matter (Stephen Soukup)
Trump is Losing His Base – Mark Taylor (USAW)
Obama’s ‘Gift’ Sticks Taxpayers With $200M+ Bill (ZH)
CNN Finally Admits the Truth About Democrat-Run Cities (Matt Margolis))
Trump is Netanyahu’s Puppet (Paul Craig Roberts)
Judge Says Jack Smith’s Final Report on Trump Can Never Be Released (ET)
British Police Take Former Ambassador Mandelson into Custody (Manney)
The Putin Plan for Cuba and The Castro Family (Helmer)

 


 

https://twitter.com/RpsAgainstTrump/status/2025573014155227301?s=20 https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2025580547527856295?s=20

 


 

 


 


Europe’s last hope before the curtain closes. These guys want to operate in darkness. Because they all, Starmer, Macron, Merz, have one thing in common: they’re painfully unpopular back home.

US State does what I’ve been doing (trying to do) for many years:: give people a peek behind the curtains.

TRUMP Declares WAR On Euro CENSORSHIP (MN)

As European governments ramp up their assault on online freedom, the Trump administration is striking back hard with Freedom.Gov—a portal designed to equip European and British citizens with tools to shatter digital barriers imposed by overreaching bureaucrats. The move exposes the hypocrisy of so called “safety” laws that geofence truth, forcing websites to block users or demand ID, all while claiming to protect the public from their own thoughts. A growing number of websites have chosen to simply block users rather than comply with arduous censorship demands in response to Europe’s Digital Services Act and the UK’s Online Safety Act, with many more hidden behind government-mandated age-verification making linking a real-life identity to internet use a prerequisite for access.


The U.S. government is launching a ‘Freedom.Gov’ website that will give British and European visitors the tools to access censorship-free parts of the internet they have been geofenced out of by their own governments in the name of public safety. The new initiative is the work of the U.S. State Department and led by Undersecretary for Public Diplomacy Sarah Rogers, who has been a key figure in bringing President Trump’s message of freedom to Europeans in recent months. Government insiders say the Freedom.Gov portal may feature a Virtual Private Network (VPN) tool to allow European users to bypass domestic controls and claims its use won’t be tracked.

A State Department spokesman is quoted as saying: “Digital freedom is a priority for the State Department, however, and that includes the proliferation of privacy and censorship-circumvention technologies like VPNs.” A placeholder website for the planned anti-censorship service is already active. The Freedom.Gov site first became active in January and was blank apart from the text “fly, eagle, fly”. Today, an updated landing page proclaims “Freedom is coming. Information is power. Reclaim your human right to free expression. Get ready.” In a crystal-clear message to the censorious British authorities cracking down on internet freedoms, the page also features an animated logo of Paul Revere on his famous 1775 midnight ride, warning the Minutemen of the approaching British troops.

The decision to launch the service will inevitably bring the U.S. into some sort of conflict with European capitals, given the pro-freedom move would force those governments to either defacto accept that their censorship laws will either be openly bypassed by their own citizens with the assistance of Washington, or to block Freedom.Gov, and clarify their opposition to the free dissemination of information.mThis puts Washington in the unfamiliar position of appearing to encourage citizens to flout local laws, without stopping to note this is, of course, not actually unfamiliar at all. The United States through the CIA and other agencies maintained a large network of censorship-busting initiatives through the Cold War using the latest technology of the time.

Among those efforts was Radio Free Europe and Radio Free Liberty, sending unfiltered news and other programming through high-powered broadcasts into the Soviet nations behind the Iron Curtain. This effort was something of a game of cat-and-mouse between the free West and the Communist East, with Soviet authorities attempting to block out the broadcasts with radio interference equipment of their own. In those Soviet countries, when the Western radio broadcasts did get through, those who tuned into them faced arrest “or worse” at the hands of the authorities. Today, the British government has already started to react to the use of VPNs to circumvent its new internet controls—imposed, it says, for the sake of public “safety”—and is moving to defacto outlaw them.

Pro-Freedom and anti-surveillance campaign group Big Brother Watch responded to the government’s plan to crack down on VPNs, saying: “The Prime Minister’s announcement that the government intends to restrict access to VPNs for under-16s represents a draconian crackdown on the civil liberties of children and adults alike. The only way such restrictions could be enforced effectively would be for VPN providers to require all users to undergo age-assurance measures.”

The group continues, “Having to provide ID or a biometric face scan to access a VPN utterly defeats the point of a technology designed to enhance privacy online. The ability to receive and share information absent state snooping is a vital part of living in a free democracy.” “There is a reason authoritarian governments in countries such as China, North Korea, Iran, and Belarus ban or restrict VPNs. Anonymity and enhanced privacy allow journalists, whistleblowers, campaigners, and dissidents to communicate securely,” they further urge. This latest escalation builds directly on the Trump administration’s earlier vows to counter British PM Kier Starmer’s censorship frenzy, where Under-Secretary Sarah B. Rogers warned that America would unleash its full arsenal against threats to X and free speech, treating the UK like Iran if needed.

Rogers stated: “With respect to a potential ban of X, Keir Starmer has said that nothing is off the table. I would say from America’s perspective, nothing is off the table when it comes to free speech.” It also extends Trump’s pattern of offering lifelines to UK and European dissidents, including asylum for “thought criminals” prosecuted for silent prayers or online posts challenging mass migration and gender ideology. nSources previously confirmed the White House was scouting cases, tying free speech erosion to Britain’s immigration failures.

Read more …

They don’t want transparency.

EU Says Trump’s Tariff Workaround Violates Trade Deal (ZH)

Update (1715ET): Europe is now getting ‘legal’ over the whole thing – claiming that Trump’s new tariff workaround violates levels permitted in their trade agreement, Bloomberg reports. The European Commission, which handles trade matters for the bloc, told lawmakers Monday that the new global tariff will be added to levies that are already in place, according to Bernd Lange, chair of the European Parliament’s trade committee. The new cumulative rate means some goods would be above the 15% ceiling the EU and US agreed to in their trade deal.Under Trump’s new tariff program, some products including butter, plastics, textiles and chemicals would have levies above that 15% ceiling, according to people familiar with the commission’s assessment. The new global tariffs can stay in place for as many as 150 days.


* * * Update (9:40am ET): In response to the EU’s decision to freeze ratification of Trump’s landmark deal, the US president has come out swinging and on Truth Social threatened any countries that “play games” with the supreme court decision that they “will be met with a much higher tariff.” It just isn’t clear what the procedure for these much higher tariffs – aside from Section 122 which is limited to 150 days – will be now that IEEPA has been ruled unconstitutional.

Earlier: In the aftermath of Friday’s SCOTUS decision to reverse Trump’s tariff policy, one lingering question is what happens to the bilateral trade deals Trump struck with various countries (and which supposedly would lead to hundreds of billions of fresh investment into the US). Well, in the case of the EU we no longer have to wonder: {This] morning, the European Union said it would freeze the ratification process of its trade deal with the US and was seeking more details from the Trump administration on its new tariff program. Zeljana Zovko, the lead trade negotiator in the European People’s Party group on the US deal, said in an interview with Bloomberg that “we have no other option” but to delay the approval process to seek clarity on the situation.

The main political groups in the European Parliament say they’ll suspend legislative work on approving the trade deal on Monday, days after the US Supreme Court struck down Trump’s use of an emergency-powers law to impose his so-called reciprocal tariffs around the world. The center-right EPP, which is the largest political bloc in parliament, will be joined by parties including the Socialists & Democrats and the liberal Renew group to back freezing the process. According to Bloomberg, Bernd Lange – chairman of the parliament’s trade committee – called an emergency meeting later Monday to reassess the EU-US trade accord. He said over the weekend that parliament should delay work on the trade accord until the EU receives more clarity on the new tariffs. EU ambassadors will also meet Monday afternoon to discuss the US trade relationship.

Trump’s announcement following the court decision to impose a 10% global tariff, which he then increased to 15%, left many questions unanswered for American trading partners, stirring up more economic turbulence and uncertainty about the US policy. As a reminder, the deal struck last summer between Trump and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen would impose a 15% tariff rate on most EU exports to the US while removing tariffs on American industrial goods heading into the bloc. The US would also continue to impose a 50% tariff on European steel and aluminum imports. The bloc agreed to the lopsided deal in the hopes of avoiding a full-blown trade war with Washington and retaining US security backing, particularly with regards to Ukraine. Parliament had been aiming to ratify the agreement in March.

Read more …

“Unless members want to further add to the deficit, Congress should intervene to uphold the tariffs retroactively. But that may not be possible.”

The Supreme Court has Ruled on Tariffs, but Who Will Ultimately Pay? (Turley)

Friday’s blockbuster ruling on tariffs was hardly welcomed by the Trump administration, but it was also widely expected. The Supreme Court clearly established in its 6-3 decision that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act does not afford presidents authority to issue sweeping, unilateral tariffs like those imposed by President Trump over the last year. The justices fractured on other issues. And they left one issue conspicuously unaddressed: What happens to the hundreds of billions of dollars collected from these tariffs so far? Many of us predicted that the administration would lose this fight. That view was reinforced after oral arguments, when a majority of justices raised possible reasons why the president might not possess this power.


Then again, he does possess similar powers under other laws, which the administration has already announced he will use. Although Trump said he was “ashamed” of the conservative justices who ruled against him, their opinion is consistent with the conservative interpretive approach taken in prior statutory cases. The majority defended Congress’s core power over the purse, maintaining the balance among the branches of our tripartite system. There were good-faith arguments on both sides, but these conservative justices ruled regardless of the political or practical repercussions, based on what they believed was demanded by the Constitution. The most surprising votes were not the three conservatives but the three liberal justices, who historically have not been deterred by ambiguity in statutes in deferring to presidents.

They have repeatedly also found delegated authority in independent agencies without worrying too much about the separation of powers. Democratic politicians openly celebrated from the loss. Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) seemed gleeful over the idea that the country will have to incur massive penalties, costs that could undermine the current economic growth figures. Newsom, who has led his state into a deep deficit and triggered an exodus of taxpayers, eagerly called for economic penalties for the country: “Every dollar unlawfully taken must be refunded immediately — with interest. Cough up!”

In reality, the tariffs are not going away. Trump will just have to rely on less nimble laws, but he can pursue the same policies in the name of other causes, such as securing greater market access and other concessions from foreign governments. So what about “coughing up” those past tariff dollars? Newsom may ultimately be disappointed. Unless members want to further add to the deficit, Congress should intervene to uphold the tariffs retroactively. But that may not be possible.

Democratic politicians like Newsom are not likely to want to help Trump, even if that means wounding the national economy and the federal budget. But this may offer Republicans a unique opportunity to force such a vote. Do Democrats truly want to vote to give hundreds of billions back? There are already more than 1,000 claimants. Justice Brett Kavanaugh dealt with the problem directly in his forceful dissent. He criticized the majority for its silence on whether or how such refunds would be made. Most pointedly, Kavanaugh noted that the federal government “may be required to refund billions of dollars to importers who paid the … tariffs, even though some importers may have already passed on costs to consumers or others.”

Read more …

“.. tariff collections will continue at the same level because the rates and scope remain consistent. The mechanism changes, but the dollars don’t,..”

Bessent Signals No Retreat After SCOTUS Tariff Ruling (David Manney)

After the Supreme Court handed down a six-to-three decision limiting how President Donald Trump used the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose so-called Liberation Day tariffs, his critics pounced, declaring the strategy dead. Do they know President Trump? Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent went on the air and made clear the administration isn’t backing down. One tool was whittled down, but the policy is still kicking. The Supreme Court ruled that the administration stretched IEEPA beyond its intended scope. While the statute allows emergency economic measures, the majority found that the tariff action did not fit the framework Congress had designed. The decision appeared to force surrender, but all it did was cause a pivot.


Bessent told Sunday Morning Futures host Maria Bartiromo that tariff revenue wouldn’t stop, framing the ruling as procedural rather than authoritative. He said that the administration still has multiple statutory authorities to address trade imbalances and national security threats. The objective, he said, hasn’t changed: reduce trade deficits, protect domestic industry, and pressure the foreign governments that have been gaming the system. Bessent explained that the White House will move to Section 122 authority within days, as President Trump already announced a 15% global tariff, adjusting it over the weekend to maintain leverage.Section 122 allows temporary trade restrictions to address balance-of-payments concerns, and while formal investigations proceed, it remains in effect for 150 days.

Bessent said that the administration also plans to use Section 232, which addresses national security concerns, and Section 301, which targets unfair trade practices. Commerce Department reviews and United States Trade Representative studies will support those actions. Describing the shift as straightforward, Bessent argued that the Supreme Court’s decision clarified the boundaries and strengthened the administration’s footing under other statutes. “In a way, they have made the leverage that he has more draconian because they agreed he does have the right to a full embargo,” the secretary said. “Within three days, the President can put on the Section 122 10% global tariff. So, at Treasury for the full year 2026, we foresee no decrease in revenue,” he continued.

Some budget watchdog groups warned tariff revenue would fall. Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, shared uncertainty about the long-term math, an argument Bessent rejected outright, saying that revenue projections remain intact under the new authorities. “Yes, so, Maria, let’s take a step back here. And Maya MacGuineas should be ashamed, and they should take the word ‘responsible’ out of her organization’s name,” Bessent responded. “Everything she told you was completely irresponsible, and look, where were they when the Biden administration blew out the deficit that we had a fiscal contraction last year? So she should be ashamed.”


Using the phrase “new authorities,” Bessent meant that different trade laws already on the books, not a fresh attempt at a supposed power grab. The administration plans to rely on Section 122 of the Trade Act for temporary tariffs, along with Sections 232 and 301, statutes written specifically for trade enforcement, giving the White House a firm legal foundation even after the Supreme Court narrowed the use of emergency powers. Bessent went on to say that tariff collections will continue at the same level because the rates and scope remain consistent. The mechanism changes, but the dollars don’t, while he pushed back against claims that tariffs worsen inflation or cause exploding deficits. Years of runaway spending happened long before these trade actions.

Read more …

“Everyone’s got this story wrong, that this is about me running for president. Global democracies are on fire the world over.”

AOC Has Instagram Meltdown. It’s a Sight to Behold. (Matt Margolis)

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) traveled to the Munich Security Conference with big ambitions and came home with a reputation problem. The trip was supposed to bolster her foreign policy credentials ahead of a future Senate or presidential run. Instead, it turned into a masterclass in unpreparedness, and now she’s doing damage control in the worst way possible: a tearful late-night Instagram rant.


In the video, an emotional AOC, appearing to hold back tears, pushed back against critics who saw her faceplant in Munich, convinced she has no idea what she’s talking about. Her defense? It’s not her, it’s you, who’s the problem. “If you think that I don’t understand foreign policy because out of hours of discourse about international affairs, I paused to think about one of the most sensitive geopolitical issues that currently exist on Earth, I’m afraid the issue is not my understanding, but rather the problem is perhaps you’ve gotten adjusted to a president that never thinks before he speaks.” There it is. You can’t blame her for not knowing what she’s talking about; you’ve got to blame President Donald Trump.

Make no mistake about it, the Instagram video isn’t going to rehabilitate her, because the Munich footage still exists. And it was bad, in every sense of the word. When a panelist asked AOC whether the U.S. should commit troops to defend Taiwan if China attacks — a question any serious foreign policy thinker should be able to handle — she froze. What followed was genuinely painful to watch: “Um… You know, I think that, uh… This is such a, uh, you know, I think that this is a, um… This is, of course, a very long-standing policy of the United States, and I think what we are hoping for is that we want to make sure that we never get to that point.” She rambled for several more seconds without saying anything approaching a coherent position. Taiwan policy has been a central pillar of U.S. foreign relations for decades. This wasn’t a trick question.

That wasn’t pausing to think; that was clearly her not having the faintest idea how to respond. Her wealth tax moment wasn’t any smoother. Asked whether she’d impose one as president, AOC giggled nervously before managing this: “I don’t think that, um, I don’t think that anyone, and that we don’t have to wait for any one president to impose a wealth tax. I think it needs to be done expeditiously.”Argentine politician Daiana Fernández Molero wasted no time dismantling that position with actual evidence. “You have the recipe that many Latin American countries applied many, many times; that is some relief in the short term, but ends up being a tragedy for the future,” Molero explained.

“It’s like a public expenditure, huge public expenditure, price controls, sometimes wealth tax, and you end up with the wealth going away, and you have just the tax, and you don’t have wealth anymore. That was something that Peronism did many, many times.”Molero continued, “So all these recipes create a cycle. Then you have this short-term relief, but then it goes with inflation, shortage, then you have more poverty, and the cycle goes and goes.”

Once again, AOC came away from an exchange looking like the dumb kid way out of her depth. So she did what any entitled brat would do: she called a reporter to defend her. New York Times journalist Kellen Browning publicly confirmed that AOC “gave me a call,” and his subsequent article dutifully suggested she faced a “potentially frosty reception” and that critics missed “the substance of her arguments.” AOC told Browning, “Everyone’s got this story wrong, that this is about me running for president. Global democracies are on fire the world over.”

The left-wing media ecosystem spent years building AOC into a political phenomenon, with protective coverage that kept her weaknesses hidden as much as possible. Munich stripped all of that away. Without friendly gatekeepers controlling the narrative, her lack of depth became impossible to disguise.If this conference was her 2028 audition, she bombed it. And no amount of teary Instagram videos is going to make people forget how badly she bombed.

Read more …

“.. in the United States, the most prominent Marxist theorists actually gave up on workers altogether as allies in the fight against capitalism.”

AOC’s Ignorance Is No Laughing Matter (Stephen Soukup)

Over the past week or so, many on the political Right have understandably enjoyed a laugh or two at the expense of Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D, N.Y.). AOC went to the Munich Security Conference to provide “balance” to the Trump administration’s presence and to burnish her own credentials on the global stage. Instead, she mostly just made a fool of herself. Not only did she stutter, stammer, and offer a Kamala Harris-esque non-answer when asked about American interests in and obligations to Taiwan, but she also demonstrated a comically poor grasp of geography and a righteously ignorant understanding of history. In an effort to rebut and embarrass U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, AOC embarrassed only herself, showing that historical facts mean far less to her than identity-inspired fiction.


But while it’s inarguably fun to chuckle at and mock the ignorance of the smug congresswoman and presumed presidential aspirant, it is also important to acknowledge that her historical and political illiteracy extends beyond the superficial and touches on matters of real and critical importance. Notably, this purported champion of the working class does not know the history of working-class politics, does not understand the reasons for the collapse of the working-class-centered ideology, and, as a result, has never contemplated the dangers inherent in attempting to resuscitate that failed doctrine. Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez has long emphasized her biography and working-class roots to enhance her political status—and justifiably so. Her childhood may not have been quite the struggle she pretends it was, but she nevertheless endured economic hardships—especially after her father’s death—and was unable to find employment commensurate with her education. She was, famously, a bartender and a cocktail waitress before her election to Congress and, as a result, has long fashioned herself a champion of the working class and its purported priorities.

Indeed, on her trip to Munich, AOC emphasized her affinity with the working class and admonished democratic nations to erect a bulwark against totalitarianism by focusing on workers, workers’ rights, and worker-centered politics. “It is of utmost urgent priority that we get our economic houses in order and deliver material gains for the working class,” the congresswoman said, “or else we will fall to a more isolated world governed by authoritarians that also do not deliver to working people.” She railed against large corporations and especially billionaires, insisting that they had to be stopped from “throwing their weight around” in domestic and international politics. In short, the good congresswoman used her trip to Munich to urge the workers of the world to unite, because, as she sees it, they have nothing to lose but their chains.

There’s only one little problem with AOC’s exhortation: it’s ridiculous. Indeed, it’s been tried . . . and tried . . . and tried. It doesn’t work. And when I say that, I don’t mean that socialism doesn’t work or that communism has been tried countless times before and failed every time. That much is obvious by now. Rather, what I mean is that the workers of the world don’t care about the rest of the workers of the world. They don’t like the idea of being divided into classes, and they don’t have any particular affection for their fellow laborers. They don’t dislike other workers necessarily, but they don’t see themselves as a monolithic federation sharing the same interests, needs, or political predilections. Truth be told—and this is the key to understanding the silliness of the whole “global proletariat” nonsense—even the Marxists long ago gave up on uniting the workers of the world. In fact, in the United States, the most prominent Marxist theorists actually gave up on workers altogether as allies in the fight against capitalism.

Read more …

“God drove him to his knees, and it was supposed to humble him, but in some cases, it made him worse.”

Trump is Losing His Base – Mark Taylor (USAW)

Retired firefighter, Lieutenant Mark Taylor, author of the popular book “The Trump Prophecies,” predicted Donald Trump would become President five years before the 2016 Election. Many thought that was an outrageous prediction, but he was proven right. Taylor also looked like he got it wrong when he predicted Trump would be a two-term President. He was, once again, proven correct despite the four-year gap in his Administration. Now, Taylor is sounding the alarm that President Trump is losing the votes of people who gave him the biggest political comeback of all time. Taylor explains, “Here’s the prophetic warning: If you wait too late to act, the patriots are going to take matters into their own hands. . ..


There is video after video from patriots fed up as to how long it is taking to get some of this stuff done. I get emails and comments on social media, and people are feeling how hurt they are from the President. How they even feel betrayed and angry with this President because it is taking so long. Nobody has been held accountable in their eyes. I am telling you the perception of the patriots. . .. Trump is losing his base. I don’t want to see that happen. I want to see him succeed because if he succeeds, the country succeeds. There are certain things this President is doing that is hampering this process. He is waiting too long, and the patriots are getting ready to take matters into their own hands. No amount of military is going to stop this if it starts because right now, they are feeling hopeless.”

Yes, Donald Trump has done some very good things such as getting America out of the World Health Organization. Trump brought in trillions of dollars in investments and has begun removing millions of illegal aliens the Biden Administration let in with open borders. The Southern border is now closed, but the enemy is not just external, and it’s not only flesh and blood. Taylor says there is an enemy within and explains, “God is calling for a place of repentance, and that includes the people’s house, The White House. This includes who is in charge of the people’s house. . .. Susie Wiles (White House Chief of Staff) needs to be fired.

Taylor contends, “Paula White is a spiritual gatekeeper. The President has clairvoyants, psychics and remote viewers around him. He has intelligence people around him. His spiritual advisory board is completely combat ineffective in the spiritual realm. I believe Susie Wiles and her people are responsible for not only killing this presidency . . . but she has him going off track and going in a different direction, and she is responsible for killing the America First agenda. This is what a lot of patriots that I am hearing from are angry about. . .. If there is not a giant turnaround, I think we are going to hand it over to the Democrats (midterms in 2026) because the Republicans are not going to show up to vote because they lost all hope in the President.”

Taylor says, “Who has his ear is steering the President in the wrong direction. He has got to correct this at some point. He’s got to get rid of some of these people. You cannot empower the spirit of Jezebel the way Trump has and not be demonically influenced. He has to throw Jezebel off the roof and feed her to the dogs.” Taylor says he would advise President Trump to fire FBI Director Kash Patel, AG Pam Bondi, spiritual advisor Paula White and political advisor Susie Wiles just for starters. Please keep in mind, Wiles had a disastrous interview late last year with Vanity Fair where she said President Trump had an “alcoholic personality.” President Trump never drinks alcohol because he had an alcoholic brother.

In closing, Taylor warns, “You cannot have this stuff going on and expect God (The Father) to be in it. . .. God is showing me if Trump does not repent and turn back to God and start listening to God instead of his intelligence, the intelligence that is purposely trying to steer him off track, then God is showing me there is something coming for him. There is going to be a David moment, so to speak . . .. God took a child from David. I am not saying he’s going to do that. The assassination attempt was allowed. The bullet grazed his right ear. What is the right ear prophetic for? It is for what you are hearing now. He’s listening to the wrong people now. . .. God drove him to his knees, and it was supposed to humble him, but in some cases, it made him worse.”

Read more …

Send the bill to Reid Hoffman.

Obama’s ‘Gift’ Sticks Taxpayers With $200M+ Bill (ZH)

When former President Barack Obama announced plans for his presidential center on Chicago’s South Side, he described it as a privately funded investment in the city that would give back to the community that shaped his political career. And while construction of the brutalist eyesore itself remains privately financed through the Obama Foundation, taxpayers are footing the bill for massive infrastructure costs. A review by Fox News found that state and city agencies have not produced a unified accounting of total public expenditures tied to the project’s surrounding infrastructure. While individual agencies have disclosed partial figures, no single office has reconciled those totals or clarified how they overlap.


At the time the project was approved in 2018, public infrastructure costs were projected at roughly $350 million, to be split between the State of Illinois and the City of Chicago. Those estimates covered roadway modifications, utility relocations and related improvements necessary to accommodate the 19.3-acre campus in Jackson Park that nobody asked for. In July, the Illinois Department of Transportation said that approximately $229 million in state-managed infrastructure spending had been committed to the project. That total includes about $19 million for preliminary engineering, $24 million for construction engineering and $186 million for construction activities. A department spokesperson described the earlier $174 million figure as a preliminary 2017 estimate.

Now, Chicago’s most recent 2024–2028 Capital Improvement Plan lists more than $206 million allocated to roadway and utility work associated with the project. However, much of that funding is labeled as “state,” and neither state nor city officials have clarified how the figures relate to one another or whether they represent overlapping commitments. Fox submitted records requests to several agencies, including the Illinois Department of Transportation, Chicago’s Department of Transportation, the city’s Office of Budget and Management, the mayor’s office and Gov. J.B. Pritzker’s administration – yet, not one provided a consolidated, up-to-date accounting of total public infrastructure spending. The Illinois Attorney General’s Public Access Counselor is reviewing whether agencies complied with state transparency laws in responding to the requests.

The Obama Foundation defended the project, reiterating that the center’s construction – whose cost has grown from early projections of roughly $330 million to at least $850 million, according to its 2024 tax filings – is being financed by private donations. In a statement to Fox, foundation spox Emily Bittner said the organization is “investing $850 million in private funding to build the Obama Presidential Center and give back to the community that made the Obamas’ story possible,” adding that the project is intended to catalyze economic opportunity on the South Side. Bittner, of course, didn’t address the infrastructure costs – which have been extensive.

Chicago’s 2024–2028 Capital Improvement Program lists $206,078,058 for “Obama Presidential Center & Jackson Park – Infrastructure Improvements,” with most funding labeled as state sources. (City of Chicago Capital Improvement Program) Cornell Drive, a four-lane roadway along the eastern edge of Jackson Park, was removed and traffic rerouted farther west. Utilities, including water mains and sewer lines, were relocated, and new drainage systems were installed. City and state officials have said the changes were necessary to manage anticipated traffic and visitor demand.The center occupies 19 acres of public parkland transferred under a 99-year agreement for $10, a decision that prompted legal challenges arguing that the arrangement was not in the public interest. Courts ultimately dis missed those lawsuits.

Though often described as a presidential library, the Chicago complex will not function as a traditional library operated by the National Archives and Records Administration. Former President Obama’s official records will be maintained by the federal government at a facility in Maryland, while the Chicago site will be operated privately by the Obama Foundation. The foundation also pledged to establish a $470 million endowment intended to protect taxpayers in the event the project encounters financial difficulty. According to previous reporting by Fox News, that fund has received $1 million in deposits. Who didn’t see this coming?

Read more …

“.. not only are there never results, but there’s never any accountability either ..”

CNN Finally Admits the Truth About Democrat-Run Cities( Matt Margolis))

CNN’s Fareed Zakaria went off-script this week — at least by his network’s standards — and said the quiet part out loud: Democrat-run cities are a mess, and the politicians in charge either can’t or won’t do anything about it. Of course, this isn’t news to you, but for a CNN host to admit this is a big deal. Zakaria opened with Zohran Mamdani’s New York, calling it “a prime example of a problem Democrats seem unwilling to confront.” That’s a pretty remarkable admission from a CNN host, but I assure you, he was just getting started. “Blue cities are out of control,” he said, “promising more, spending more, delivering less, and pushing off the fiscal problems to some future day.”


He then turned to Los Angeles, and the numbers he cited are staggering. Zakaria noted that the city’s homelessness budget for fiscal year 2025-2026 alone totals roughly $950 million. Not the cumulative total over several years. One year. And what has all that money bought? He explained that the LA Homelessness Services Authority reported that homelessness increased by 9% countywide and 10% within the city in 2023. A 2024 AP account found that homelessness had surged by 70% countywide since 2015 and by 80% within the city. “All this amid public frustration, despite billions spent,” Zakaria said. Then came perhaps the most damning detail. An audit reviewed $2.4 billion in city homelessness funding and found that “officials could not reliably track where it went or what it achieved.” That’s right. $2.4 billion has just disappeared into the bureaucratic ether.

To make matters worse, not only are there never results, but there’s never any accountability either, at least not for the people running the city. Zakaria moved on to Chicago next. He noted the city has a mayor whose approval rating is “deep underwater” and pension obligations so enormous they will “surely bankrupt the city at some point.” That’s a pretty frank diagnosis coming from a guy on a network that spent years cheerleading for this very brand of governance. Then Zakaria asked the key question Democrats never ask: “What is the theory of good government here?” His answer was cutting. “If the answer is keep adding programs, the city will keep producing unaffordability, because unaffordability is what happens when government becomes a machine that grows faster than the society it governs.”

Zakaria continued, “Zohran Mamdani’s basic instinct is correct: focus on affordability, especially housing, but not by providing government subsidies. These only seem to have driven up the cost of rent, as subsidies naturally do.” Here’s where Zakaria went wrong. Affordability isn’t an instinct for Mamdani; it’s a talking point. His instinct is to subsidize. It’s not like he wasn’t upfront about this during his campaign. So all the affordability problems New York City faces are going to get worse under Mamdani. Heck, he’s already gone looking to Gov. Kathy Hochul to bail out New York City — a mere two months into his administration. That’s the pattern. Spend more. Get less. Blame someone else. Repeat.

Read more …

Trump throw nukes? I doubt it.

Trump is Netanyahu’s Puppet (Paul Craig Roberts)

It seems clear that Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu has disrupted Trump’s negotiations with Iran about nuclear weapons by interjecting in the middle of the negotiations another demand- that Iran give up its missiles and its alleged proxy forces. Netanyahu’s demand is obviously intended to ruin the negotiations as the demand clearly would prevent Iran s ability to defend itself from Israeli attack. From the beginning Netanyahu has been determined to force the US to war with Iran, and that is the purpose of his demand that the deal with Iran includes the military disarming of Iran.


We see this in the news reports that the Trump regime is now considering whether the deal with Iran should also extend to Iranian missiles. Iran is willing to agree not to produce nuclear weapons, but cannot possibly agree to disarm itself of conventional weapons, especially after US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee recently acknowledged that Greater Israel is an ongoing Zionist project. If Iran has the Chinese battle control system that former British diplomat Alastair Crooke described, a US attack on Iran could result in an American defeat, the loss of aircraft carriers and US military bases in the area as well as heavy destruction of Israel. Why would Netanyahu expose Israel to this risk?

Could it be that he bets that an American defeat would lead to demand for revenge on Iran and the US would finally do what Israel wants and nuke the Iranian nation, thus removing Iran as a barrier to further Israeli expansion? Iran’s designation as a terrorist state and Iran’s alleged proxy forces are propagandistic claims used to justify a US military attack on Iran. As the world must know, the two terrorist states are Israel and the United States. Washington, for example, kidnaps foreign leaders of states, and Israel assassinates Iranian, Lebanese, and Yemeni leaders. Who has Iran assassinated ? What terrorist act is Iran responsible for?

The Israeli genocide of Palestine is reason enough for the Houthis in Yemen to oppose Israel. Israel’;s attempted expansion into Lebanon is sufficient reason for Hezbollah to oppose Israel. Perhaps Iran supplies them with weapons, but that doesn’t make them Iran s proxies. The US provides Israel with weapons. Does this make America an Israeli proxy? Insouciant Americans are unaware that Netanyahu and Washington are setting them up for a war that serves only Israel’s interest. Ever since Americans fell for the 911 narrative, they have been putty in the Israel Lobby’s hands, and their beliefs about the Middle East have been given to them by the Israel Lobby and it s many American associates. The prevailing ignorance can very easily produce a catastrophic war.

Read more …

“The Court strains to find a situation in which a former special counsel has released a report after initiating criminal charges that did not result in a finding of guilt.”

Judge Says Jack Smith’s Final Report on Trump Can Never Be Released (ET)

federal judge on Feb. 23 said that the final report on President Donald Trump compiled by a former special counsel shall not be released. U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, who is based in Florida, said in a 15-page decision that she was granting requests from Trump and his co-defendants to keep part two of the report from former special counsel Jack Smith shielded from the public. Cannon said that Smith wrongly forged ahead with investigating Trump and others for allegedly violating federal law by gathering and retaining sensitive documents even after she ruled his appointment was unconstitutional and threw out the case.


“Rather than seek a stay of the Order, or clarification, Special Counsel Smith and his team chose to circumvent it, for months, by taking the discovery generated in this case and compiling it in a final report for transmission to then-Attorney General Garland, to Congress, and then beyond,” Cannon said. “The Court need not countenance this brazen stratagem or effectively perpetuate the Special Counsel’s breach of this Court’s own order.” She added later: “While it is true that former special counsels have released final reports at the conclusion of their work, it appears they have done so either after electing not to bring charges at all or after adjudications of guilt by plea or trial. The Court strains to find a situation in which a former special counsel has released a report after initiating criminal charges that did not result in a finding of guilt.”

The Department of Justice (DOJ) had appealed Cannon’s ruling, but dropped the appeal after Trump won a second term in office. The department also released part of Smith’s report just before Trump began his second term. The other part, which has not been made public, was not to be released, according to a January 2025 order from Cannon. Cannon announced in December 2025 that her injunction was set to expire in February this year. Trump and co-defendants said in filings on Jan. 20 that Cannon should permanently block the release of the other part of Smith’s report. Lawyers for Trump said Smith was illegally appointed, and all acts he undertook were thus void, so the release “would constitute an irreversible violation of this Court’s constitutional rulings in the underlying criminal action and of bedrock principles of the separation of powers.”

DOJ officials backed that position. “Put simply, Smith’s tenure was marked by illegality and impropriety, and under no circumstance should his work product be given the full weight and authority of this Department,” they said in a brief, adding later that making the second part of the report public would “lead to the public dissemination of sensitive grand jury materials, attorney-client privileged information, and other information derived from protected discovery materials, raising significant statutory, due process, and privacy concerns for President Trump and his former co-defendants.”

Read more …

Nothing to do with girls. That’s all just a cover.

British Police Take Former Ambassador Mandelson into Custody (Manney)

Peter Mandelson built a career inside the highest levels of British power, but that career collided with a police investigation tied to Jeffrey Epstein. On Monday morning, officers with London’s Metropolitan Police arrested Mandelson on suspicion of misconduct in public office. Police transported the 72-year-old former British ambassador to the United States to a London station for formal questioning. Authorities also searched two properties linked to him in Wiltshire and Camden. Mandelson served as business secretary and twice held cabinet rank under Labour governments, later becoming the United Kingdom’s ambassador to the United States.


That role placed him at the center of diplomatic strategy between London and Washington, while also placing him under scrutiny once the newly released Epstein files revealed how deep his association ran with the convicted sex offender. Officials removed Mandelson from his ambassadorial post in September, after the extent of his relationship with Epstein became public. He resigned from the Labour Party the same day the news broke that police had opened a formal investigation into whether he shared confidential government information, the reason behind today’s arrest. Mandelson hasn’t been charged, and he’s said that documents released by the U.S. DOJ didn’t indicate wrongdoing or misdemeanor on his part. He’s stopped talking in public since the beginning of the investigation.

Law enforcement works under a long-standing legal principle: evidence found by unlawful means can’t stand in court, and anything derived from it falls with it—fruit from the poison tree. The fallout from the Epstein files works similarly in public life: Names connected to Epstein don’t come out of the washer clean when associations become liabilities, and careers erode once those ties come to light. If he understood anything, Mandelson understood influence, spending decades navigating political power inside Westminster and abroad. Prime ministers relied on him to negotiate, strategize, and manage party operations. He easily moved between government offices and diplomatic leadership, and that access is now at the center of a criminal inquiry.

It’s rare for British police to arrest former cabinet ministers, which shows that investigators believe serious questions remain unanswered. Officials haven’t disclosed the exact nature of the alleged confidential material involved, confirming only that a former government minister was arrested in connection with an ongoing investigation into misconduct in public office. This circus shows that Epstein’s network extended beyond American shores, both politically and financially. British figures repeatedly showed up in released documents and flight logs, and each new disclosure reopened old wounds, forcing political leaders to confront uncomfortable connections. Mandelson’s arrest marks one of the most significant developments inside the U. tied to those files.

European royals, government officials, politicians, and others are losing jobs and titles over their connection to the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. European law enforcement agencies are opening investigations based on recent troves of documents released by the U.S. government. …

Read more …

“This year we will mark the centenary of Fidel Castro’s birth, and we will do so together.”

The Putin Plan for Cuba and The Castro Family (Helmer)

President Vladimir Putin will not run the gauntlet President Donald Trump has established around Cuba with the Russian Navy to escort Russian-flagged tankers delivering crude oil and petroleum products to Havana. When Cuba’s Foreign Minister Bruno Rodriguez Parrilla sat down in the Kremlin on Thursday to ask for more “solidarity, firmly demonstrated by you, the Government of Russia, and the Minister for Foreign Affairs, in the face of the tightening blockade of Cuba and the recent energy siege,” Putin responded enough is enough. He meant that solidarity with Cuba is one thing, but not at the risk of military conflict with the Trump Administration and its naval forces in the Caribbean.


This is Mikhail Gorbachev talking, responded the Kremlin security analysis medium, Vzglyad, not Nikita Khrushchev. “Please convey my best wishes to the President of Cuba and Army General [Raul] Castro,” Putin told the foreign minister. “This year we will mark the centenary of Fidel Castro’s birth, and we will do so together.” It is not the first time Putin has said there is nothing but historical memory to share between Russia and Cuba; and that he would trade Russia’s military positions in Cuba for its interest in business with the US. In a meeting with President George W. Bush on October 21, 2001, Putin had said he would remove the Russian military intelligence base in Cuba. “I don’t want to horsetrade or nickel and dime this thing or argue about who gets what,” Putin said to Bush in a recently declassified record. In the outcome that is exactly what Putin did – and the trade failed because Bush did not reciprocate.

In his meeting with Rodriguez, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov was clearer in public what the Russian line means. “We call on the United States to show common sense and take a responsible attitude,” he said – “refraining from implementing its plans for a naval blockade of the Island of Freedom. We categorically reject the far-fetched allegations regarding Russia and Cuba, and cooperation between them, which is presumably threatening the interests of the United States or any other countries. All disputes should be settled exclusively through dialogue based on mutual respect and a balance of interests. We know that our Cuban friends are always ready for honest negotiations… All issues should be resolved solely through a mutually respectful dialogue aimed at finding a balance of interests. We know that Cuban friends are always ready for such honest negotiations. In turn, we will consistently continue to support Cuba, the Cuban people in protecting the sovereignty and security of the country.”

“I would like to reiterate our complete solidarity with our Cuban friends. I fully share the views on our relations and strategic partnership, which you [Rodriguez] have stated. I would also like to reaffirm the complete unacceptability of actions by the United States, which, as you have reminded just now, has adopted an executive order designating Cuba as a threat to US national interests. At the same time, the document says that this alleged threat is exacerbated by Cuba’s cooperation with Russia, which has been described in the document as a ‘hostile’ and ‘malign’ actor. We are confident that all states should define their national interests in a way that will include recognition of and respect for the national interests of all other countries.”

Read more …

 

 

https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2025925319882870883?s=20 https://twitter.com/Real_RobN/status/2025615047423352928?s=20 https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2025707794658160837?s=20

 


 

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Feb 222026
 


Pierre-Auguste Renoir Dance at Bougival 1883


Trump Responds to Supreme Court’s Decision on Tariffs (Sarah Anderson)
Trump Winds Down IEEPA tariffs, Imposes 10% Global Tariff To Last 150 Days (JTN)
Supreme Court Rule 6-3 Against President Trump’s IEEPA Tariff Authority (CTH)
Clarence Thomas Unloads on the Supreme Court Over Tariff Ruling
Will We See a Supreme Court Vacancy (or Two) This Summer? (Josh Hammer)
Virtually All Countries Support Voter Photo ID – So Why the Filibuster? (RCW)
Washington Post Editorial Board Brutally Mocks Mamdani (ZH)
President Donald Trump Stands Victim of His Own Success (David Manney)
Biased Spies: John Ratcliffe Cleans House at the CIA (Manney)
The Shattered Dreams of Steve Bannon (Scott Pinsker)
When Does Accountability For The Deep State Begin? (Dornik)
Susan Rice Warns Of ‘Accountability Agenda’ When Democrats Return To Power (JTN)
Deporting Censorship: US Targets UK Government Ally Over Free Speech (Thaccker)

 


 

Gulf Tariffs https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/2024927551760859293?s=20

 


 

 


 

“..”Foreign countries that have been ripping us off for years are ecstatic. They’re so happy,” he said. “And they’re dancing in the streets, but they won’t be dancing for long — that I can assure you.”

Trump Responds to Supreme Court’s Decision on Tariffs (Sarah Anderson)

President Donald Trump came out to speak to the press from the White House on Friday to express his feelings on the Supreme Court’s Decision to rule against his broad tariffs, which he imposed through a series of executive orders last year, under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). He began by saying the ruling was “deeply disappointing,” and that he was “ashamed of certain members of the court — absolutely ashamed for not having the courage to do what’s right for our country.” The president also thanked Justices Brett Kavanaugh, Clarence Thomas, and Samuel Alito for “their strength and wisdom and love of our country.”


Trump claims that when you read their dissenting opinions, there’s no way anyone can argue against them. “Foreign countries that have been ripping us off for years are ecstatic. They’re so happy,” he said. “And they’re dancing in the streets, but they won’t be dancing for long — that I can assure you. Trump said that he knew the Democrats on the court were an automatic “no,” just like the Democrat members of Congress, no matter how great the case. “They’re against anything that makes America strong, healthy, and great again,” he said. He also called them a “disgrace to our nation.”

He said the others, presumably Justices John Roberts, Neil Gorsuch, and Amy Coney Barrett, are being “politically correct,” which happens far too often, and he called them “fools and lap dogs for the RINOs and the radical left Democrats.” “They’re very unpatriotic and disloyal to our Constitution. It’s my opinion that the court has been swayed by foreign interests, and a political movement that is far smaller people would ever thing,” he said, adding, “I won by millions of votes — we won in a landslide, with all the cheating that went on, and there was a lot of it.” He claimed that “certain justices” are “afraid” of the loud, obnoxious, and ignorant minority.

“This was an important case to me, more as a symbol of economic national security and also, I would say just for our country itself — so important because we’re doing so well as a country,” he said. “The good news is that there are methods, practices, statutes, and authorities, as recognized by the entire court in this terrible decision, and also as recognized by Congress, which they refer to, that are even stronger than the IEEPA tariffs available to me as president of the United States.”

Trump claimed he was actually modest in what he asked of other countries because he was trying to be “well-behaved,” and wanted to be a “good boy” because he knows how the Supreme Court works and knows they’re easily swayed. He also touted some economic wins, like recent stock market records and the decline of fentanyl coming into our country, and how tariffs helped him settle eight wars. The president said it’s ridiculous that the law allows him to “destroy” foreign countries, tell them they can’t do business in the United States, or even embargo them, but he can’t charge them a cent.

“It’s okay because we have other ways — numerous other way,” he added. “Therefore, effective immediately, all national security tariffs, under Section 232 and existing Section 301 tariffs… remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, under Section 122, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged.” He said he’s also initiating other investigations to “protect our country from unfair trading practices of other countries and companies.”

Read more …

Bumped it up to 15%.

Trump Winds Down IEEPA Tariffs, Imposes 10% Global Tariff To Last 150 Days (JTN)

President Donald Trump on Friday signed an executive order that formally ends a range of tariffs that the Supreme Court shot down earlier in the day, and imposed a new 10% global tariff that will be in effect for 150 days. The Supreme Court ruled in a 6-3 split that Trump could not impose massive tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, however the majority opinion did not weigh in on other means to impose the tariffs. Trump said the new 10% global tariff is being enacted under Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act, which comes as tariffs imposed under Section 232 and Section 301 remain in place

.
“It is my Great Honor to have just signed, from the Oval Office, a Global 10% Tariff on all Countries, which will be effective almost immediately,” Trump said in a series of posts on Truth Social. “Those members of the Supreme Court who voted against our very acceptable and proper method of tariffs should be ashamed of themselves. “Their decision was ridiculous, but now the adjustment process begins, and we will do everything possible to take in even more money than we were taking in before,” he added. The new tariff will take effect just after midnight on Tuesday, Feb. 24.

Read more …

You can’t do it under IEEPA, but we have plenty other laws…

“,,the Court’s decision is not likely to greatly restrict Presidential tariff authority going forward. (pg, 63 dissent).

Supreme Court Rule 6-3 Against President Trump’s IEEPA Tariff Authority (CTH)

Economic security is national security, and the hollowing out of our ability to independently sustain our national economic system posed a real and substantive threat to our nation. The court never evaluated the ‘urgency’ behind the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) as used by President Donald Trump.Instead, the court began their legal analysis by seeking to define the word “regulate” as it applies to IEEPA. Part II–B, concluding: (a) IEEPA authorizes the President to “investigate, block during the pendency of an investigation, regulate, direct and compel, nullify, void, prevent or prohibit . . . importation or exportation.” §1702(a)(1)(B) under the Act.


The majority of the court decided presidential ability to levy countervailing duties is not part of the ability to “regulate” importation. In the opinion of the court, the President can block imports, nullify imports and prohibit imports, but the president cannot “regulate” imports through the use of tariffs. This is the representative logic of a John Roberts court, the voice of Bush Inc.

It is what it is – and many of us saw this nonsense as a likely outcome, but it is still frustrating to see such a detached parseltongue approach to legal opinions when the national security of our nation is at stake. These are the judicial minds who will watch the nation burn to the ground, just so they can remain in power ruling over the ashes. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Neil Gorsuch joined the court’s three liberals in the majority. Justices Brett Kavanaugh, Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas dissented.

(Via Politico) – […] “The President asserts the extraordinary power to unilaterally impose tariffs of unlimited amount, duration, and scope. In light of the breadth, history, and constitutional context of that asserted authority, he must identify clear congressional authorization to exercise it,” Roberts wrote, declaring that the 1977 law Trump cited to justify the import duties “falls short” of the Congressional approval that would be needed. The ruling wipes out the 10 percent tariff Trump imposed on nearly every country in the world, as well as specific, higher tariffs on some of the top U.S. trading partners, including Canada, Mexico, China, the European Union, Japan and South Korea.

Several of those countries have entered trade agreements with the U.S. — and before the ruling indicated that they would continue to honor those agreements. That is because the victory for the 12 Democratic-run states and small businesses that challenged Trump’s tariffs is expected to be short lived. The White House has signaled it will attempt to use other authorities to keep similar duties in place. “We’ve been thinking about this plan for five years or longer,” U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer told POLITICO in December. “You can be sure that when we came to the president the beginning of the term, we had a lot of different options” “My message is tariffs are going to be a part of the policy landscape going forward,” Greer said. (read more)”

Justice Thomas agrees with CTH prior position on the issue. IEEPA grants the president the authority to regulate imports, and tariffs are a tool for regulation.


Despite this decision the tariffs will remain in place, perhaps using various authorities which have not been challenged as noted in the Kavanaugh dissent:

“That said, with respect to tariffs in particular, the Court’s decision might not prevent Presidents from imposing most if not all of these same sorts of tariffs under other statutory authorities. For example, Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 permits the President to impose a “temporary import surcharge” to “deal with large and serious United States balance-of-payments deficits.” 19 U. S. C. §2132(a). Section 201 of the Trade Act of 1974 provides that, if the International Trade Commission determines an article is being imported in such quantities that it is “a substantial cause of serious injury, or the threat thereof, to the domestic industry producing an article like or directly competitive with the imported article,” the President may take “appropriate and feasible action,” including imposing a “duty.”

§§2251(a), 2253(a)(3)(A). Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 authorizes the President through a subordinate officer to “impose duties” if he determines that “an act, policy, or practice of a foreign country” is “unjustifiable and burdens or restricts United States commerce.” §§2411(a)(c). Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930 permits the President to impose tariffs when he finds that “any foreign country places any burden or disadvantage upon the commerce of the United States.” §1338(d). And Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 authorizes the President to, after receiving a report from the Secretary of Commerce, “adjust the imports of [an] article and its derivatives so that such imports will not threaten to impair the national security.” §1862(c)(1)(a).

So the Court’s decision is not likely to greatly restrict Presidential tariff authority going forward. (pg, 63 dissent).

Read more …

“If foreign trade regulation isn’t a core legislative function, then delegating it to the executive doesn’t violate separation of powers at all.”

Clarence Thomas Unloads on the Supreme Court Over Tariff Ruling

The Supreme Court handed President Donald Trump a significant defeat on tariffs Friday morning, and the sharpest voice in the room wasn’t in the majority. It was Clarence Thomas, writing in dissent, methodically dismantling the majority’s reasoning for stripping the president of broad tariff authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. The ruling blocks Trump from using IEEPA as the legal foundation for his reciprocal tariff policy. For what it’s worth, the court didn’t wipe out his tariffs entirely — other statutes still provide Trump with opportunities to impose tariffs — but the majority made clear that sweeping executive tariff power requires explicit congressional guardrails.


What made the decision especially striking was the coalition that produced it. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion, joined by Amy Coney Barrett and Neil Gorsuch, alongside the court’s three liberal justices. Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Brett Kavanaugh dissented. His dissent goes straight to the constitutional text and history. “I write separately to explain why the statute at issue here is consistent with the separation of powers as an original matter,” he wrote. His argument is grounded in the Founding era’s actual understanding of foreign commerce — not a modern reinterpretation of it.

Thomas draws a hard line between domestic legislative power and foreign trade authority. Congress holds the taxing power and the power to set domestic rules governing life, liberty, and property. Foreign commerce is a different animal entirely. “Power over foreign commerce was not within the core legislative power, and engaging in foreign commerce was regarded as a privilege rather than a right,” he explained. If foreign trade regulation isn’t a core legislative function, then delegating it to the executive doesn’t violate separation of powers at all. In fact, that would mean it’s actually consistent with how the Founders understood the relationship between the branches.

Thomas backed this up with history. From the Founding forward, Congress routinely handed trade regulation, including the power to impose import duties, to the executive branch. Courts upheld that arrangement every time it was challenged. “The power to impose duties on imports can be delegated,” Thomas wrote. He concluded, “Congress’s delegation here was constitutional.” That framing treats unlimited tariff authority the same way the Court treats other major questions — skeptically, demanding Congress speak clearly before the executive acts broadly.Thomas thinks that’s the wrong test applied to the wrong power. His reading of the original Constitution puts the executive branch in charge of foreign commerce. He argues the majority conflated two distinct constitutional functions and punished the president for Congress’s longstanding practice of handing him the wheel on trade.

In his own dissent, Justice Kavanaugh argued that the majority’s decision would lead to chaos. “The United States may be required to refund billions of dollars to importers who paid the IEEPA tariffs, even though some importers may have already passed on costs to consumers or others,” he wrote. Kavanaugh also noted that Trump used tariffs as leverage while making trading deals worth trillions of dollars, and that the court’s ruling “could generate uncertainty regarding those trade arrangements,” he wrote.

Read more …

“.. Thomas, who is the perhaps the single greatest living American ..”

Will We See a Supreme Court Vacancy (or Two) This Summer? (Josh Hammer)

Few things in Washington, D.C., generate as much as excitement and intrigue as a Supreme Court confirmation showdown. For decades, since the eponymous “borking” of then-Supreme Court nominee Bob Bork in 1987, political battles surrounding the membership of the nation’s high court have been among the most contentious and raucous of Beltway affairs. Which is why it’s rather curious that very few outside the most fervid of court-watchers seem to be discussing the distinct possibility that there could be one or two Supreme Court vacancies after the current term ends this summer.


Justice Samuel Alito is 75 years old — and will be 76 by the end of this term. Justice Clarence Thomas is 77 years old — and will be 78 by term’s end. Alito just celebrated 20 years of service on the high court, and Thomas would mark 35 years of service this October — nice round numbers. Alito has a forthcoming book set for release this October, around the start of the next Supreme Court term. That isn’t anywhere near dispositive — Justice Amy Coney Barrett published a book last September, and Justice Neil Gorsuch has released two books since he was confirmed to the court in 2017 — but it has certainly fed speculation.

Thomas and Alito are, by some order of magnitude, the two most principled conservative justices currently sitting on the high court. It stands to reason that they would like to be replaced by ideological fellow travelers — something that likely requires a likeminded president and a likeminded U.S. Senate majority. As the late Justice Antonin Scalia, who was very much an ideological fellow traveler, told Chris Wallace in a 2012 interview, “I would not like to be replaced by someone who immediately sets about undoing what I’ve tried to do for 25-26 years. I mean, I shouldn’t have to tell you that, unless you think I’m a fool.”

If there is one thing we can say with certainty about Thomas, who is the perhaps the single greatest living American, and Alito, who is perhaps the most authentic Burkean conservative on the high court, it is that they are decidedly not fools.

Republicans currently hold a 53-47 majority in the Senate. What’s more, they face a remarkably favorable map this November: The GOP is defending very few (if any) swing-state Senate seats, and it will have enticing Senate pickup opportunities in Georgia, Michigan, Minnesota and New Hampshire. But to paraphrase the old quip from former Israeli diplomat Abba Eban, Republicans oftentimes never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity. Accordingly, the increasingly voluble scuttlebutt out of Washington is that there is a chance Democrats retake not merely the nearly evenly divided House, but the Senate as well. Those odds are below 50% — the online exchange Polymarket, for instance, currently places the GOP’s odds of retaining the Senate around 60% — but there is certainly a chance it happens.

That wouldn’t just spell doom for the final two years of President Donald Trump’s second term. It would be potentially calamitous for the future of the Supreme Court as well. Does anyone think that Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and his Democratic caucus are not prepared to stall and refuse to confirm any prospective Trump nominee to the high court? (SET ITAL)Of course(END ITAL) they are prepared to do that. If Republicans lose the Senate this November and Thomas and Alito stick around through the 2028 presidential election, they will in essence be wagering on Republicans maintaining the White House and winning back the Senate.

Is that a risk worth taking? In fairness, it might be. Republicans have historically botched few things more than they have Supreme Court nominations — from Justices William Brennan (brought to us by President Dwight Eisenhower), Harry Blackmun (President Richard Nixon), and David Souter (President George H.W. Bush), to some of the more milquetoast Trump selections such as Barrett and Brett Kavanaugh. The track record is not exactly inspiring. And because Thomas and Alito are the two finest conservative jurists on the high court, there is little to no room for improvement, from a constitutionalist perspective — there can only be regression.

Nonetheless, in spite of the GOP’s woeful judicial nominations track record, there are plenty of outstanding potential justices-in-waiting. My former boss Judge James C. Ho of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, a former Thomas clerk, is likely the single most principled originalist of all current lower-court federal judges. His 5th Circuit colleague Andrew Oldham, a fellow stalwart, happens to have the corresponding symbolism of being a former Alito clerk. D. John Sauer, the outstanding current U.S. solicitor general, is a former Scalia clerk and a rapidly emerging dark horse contender. There are other possible rock-solid nominees as well.

Read more …

“..Democrats argue that requiring free voter photo IDs – even when the ID itself costs nothing – harms eligible voters by creating practical barriers to casting a ballot.

Virtually All Countries Support Voter Photo ID – So Why the Filibuster? (RCW)

“The bottom line is this: voter ID is not controversial in this country,” Harry Enten, the chief data analyst for CNN, recently reported. Nor is it controversial in virtually any other country in the world. Yet despite massive support among both Democrats (71%) and Republicans (95%), only one Democratic member of the House and one in the Senate are supporting the SAVE Act. Unless seven more of the 47 Senate Democrats step forward, their filibuster will kill the bill. Democrats argue that requiring free voter photo IDs – even when the ID itself costs nothing – harms eligible voters by creating practical barriers to casting a ballot. They contend that blacks would be especially hard hit. Interestingly, every country in Africa requires government-issued identification to vote.


They also argue that such requirements would disenfranchise Hispanic voters. Yet Mexico, all twelve South American countries, and Spain require government-issued photo IDs to vote. All of these countries have lower per-capita incomes than the United States. If citizens in those nations can obtain the necessary identification to vote, why would American Hispanics and blacks be unable to do the same? While 83% of American adults support requiring government-issued photo identification to vote, support is also strong among the very groups Democrats claim would be harmed: 82% of Hispanics and 76% of black Americans favor the requirement. Those figures suggest that most black and Hispanic Americans do not view obtaining a photo ID as the obstacle Democrats describe. Ten U.S. states have similarly strong photo ID requirements.

Democrats claim that women are disproportionately disenfranchised by voter IDs, but women are also strongly supportive of IDs and have exactly the same level of support as men.Democrats argue that voter ID requirements disproportionately disenfranchise people with the least education and lowest incomes. Yet, ironically, survey results show that voters who did not graduate from high school were 27 percentage points more likely to support photo voter ID laws than those who attended graduate school. Similarly, individuals earning less than $30,000 per year were seven percentage points more likely to support photo ID requirements than those earning over $200,000 annually.

The well-educated and higher-income individuals thus express more concern about the impact of ID laws on the less educated and lower-income groups than those groups express themselves.But it isn’t just South American countries and all of Africa that require voter IDs to vote. Both of our neighbors, Canada and Mexico, require them, with Mexico also requiring a thumbprint. All 47 European countries, except parts of the United Kingdom, require a government-issued photo ID .

After widespread vote fraud, Mexico enacted major voting reforms in 1991. The government mandated voter photo IDs with biometric information, banned absentee ballots, and required in-person voter registration. Even though these changes made registration more difficult and eliminated absentee voting, turnout increased after the reforms took effect. In the three presidential elections following the 1991 changes, an average of 68% of eligible citizens voted, compared with 59% in the three elections before the reforms. As confidence in the electoral process grew, more citizens chose to participate. Many countries in Europe and beyond have learned the hard way that fraud can result from looser voting regimes – and they have instituted stricter voting measures in direct response to it. In Northern Ireland, where a bitter sectarian conflict fuels hardball electoral tactics, parties on all sides have engaged in what observers describe as “widespread and systemic“ voter fraud. Both Conservative and Labour governments enacted reforms to curb it. In 1985, under the conservative Margaret Thatcher, the U.K. began requiring voters to show identification before receiving a ballot, but that measure did not solve the problem.

In 1998, a Select Committee on Northern Ireland reported that people could “easily forge” medical cards – accepted as ID under the 1985 law – or obtain them fraudulently, enabling non-existent individuals to cast votes. By 2002, the Labour government strengthened voter identification cards to make them far harder to forge and used the more secure IDs, along with additional rules, to stop people from registering multiple times. These anti-fraud measures immediately reduced total registrations by 11%, suggesting to Labour how extensive earlier fraud had been.

Read more …

“.. Even the state government of Florida (population 23 million) spends less than New York City’…,”

Washington Post Editorial Board Brutally Mocks Mamdani (ZH)

Margaret Thatcher once said, “The trouble with Socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money,” and New York City’s new socialist mayor, Zohran Mamdani, is learning just how right she was, and New Yorkers are going to pay a hefty price for it. On Tuesday, a mere two months after declaring he would “replace the frigidity of rugged individualism with the warmth of collectivism,” Mamdani announced a $127 billion preliminary budget for fiscal year 2027, a $5 billion increase from the prior year, while simultaneously warning residents of “painful” tax hikes if state officials refused to bail him out to cover his socialist policies.


“That’s a city budget bigger than the state budgets of 47 states. Even the state government of Florida (population 23 million) spends less than New York City’s,” explains The Washington Post editorial board. “And the state still managed to attract hundreds of thousands of New Yorkers in recent years.” “The reality is that Americans may like the idea of ‘free’ stuff — it’s how socialists win elections — but they are less excited about having to pay for it” they continued. “They’re even less excited when they live in a state that ranks at the very bottom of the Tax Foundation’s State Tax Competitiveness Index.”

During a press conference earlier this week, Mamdani called on New York Gov. Kathy Hochul to raise income taxes on the “ultra-wealthy” help fund his budget for New York City. “The onus for resolving this crisis should not be placed on the backs of working and middle-class New Yorkers,” Mamdani said. “If we do not fix this structural imbalance and do not heed the calls of New Yorkers to raise taxes on the wealthy, this crisis will not disappear. It will simply return, year after year, forcing harder and harsher choices each time. And if we do not go down the first path, the city will be forced down a second, more harmful path. Faced with no other choice, the city would have to exercise the only revenue lever fully within our own control. We would have to raise property taxes.”


Hochul rejected the tax hike demand without hesitation, telling Mamdani to expand his “ridiculously low” proposed spending cuts instead. Mamdani has claimed his administration identified $1.7 billion in cuts. The Post’s editorial board was not impressed, calling it a “laughable number.” “The reality is that Mamdani is trying to expand a city government that already does way too much,” they argued. “ The city should provide basic services, such as law and order, but instead it pours billions into social spending like housing and health care.” They even cited California as a cautionary tale, warning that in the Golden State, “a slew of billionaires are fleeing at the mere possibility of a wealth tax. They’ll avoid the wealth tax — and California will miss out on the billions that these individuals otherwise would have contributed before a wealth tax was even imposed.”

More experienced Democrats in New York understand this. Gov. Kathy Hochul, no one’s idea of a fiscal hawk, nevertheless instigated Mamdani’s tantrum by refusing to go along with more tax hikes. The city council speaker and comptroller also have sway and are skeptical of new taxes. This week, it was revealed that acclaimed director and filmmaker Steven Spielberg officially became a New York resident on January 1, effectively avoiding the billionaire tax—though a representative for Spielberg and his wife Cate Capshaw claimed the move was to be closer to family.

Mamdani’s pre-election promises — free buses, expanded child care, cash assistance, rental aid, and smaller class sizes for teachers’ unions — were crowd-pleasers that earned him “tax the rich” chants at campaign rallies. The problem is that governing a city with a structural deficit requires something more than slogans. His preliminary budget now acknowledges a $5.4 billion shortfall for the current fiscal year, with projections that worsen over time. “No one in New York is ambitious enough to dramatically reshape city government, and residents either vote for class warfare or vote with their feet. A reckoning will have to come eventually. The question is how bad it gets before reality sets in,” the board concluded.

Ouch.

Read more …

“.. Trump fixed the border, lowered crime, and now demands the same common-sense security at the ballot box..”

President Donald Trump Stands Victim of His Own Success (David Manney)

In the early days of the NBA, George Mikan was so dominant in the paint that the league had to redraw the court. Defenders couldn’t stop him, and coaches couldn’t scheme around him, so the league widened the lane to push him further from the basket. They changed the rules because one man kept winning under the old ones. That’s where we find President Donald Trump today. He clamped down on the southern border, ending the chaos so fast that the crisis faded from daily debate. He renewed the economy and strengthened national security. He slashed narcotics imports while driving the murder rates across the country.


Instead of arguing policy, opponents now look for ways to redraw the political court around him. They protest enforcement agencies, stage walkouts, and shift attention to anything except measurable results. When outcomes favor one side so decisively, critics often stop debating the scoreboard and start questioning the game itself. Migrant encounters fell to the lowest level in more than 50 years; Customs and Border Protection recorded just 237,538 encounters for all of fiscal year 2025. January 2026 brought only 6,070 southwest border apprehensions and marked the ninth straight month with zero releases into the interior. Nationwide encounters dropped 84% in January 2025, while seizures of fentanyl dropped sharply, too.

Violent crime falls to record lows
Nationwide, murder rates fell through the floor, as major cities saw homicides drop 19% to 21% in 2025 alone. The murder rate hit its lowest point since at least 1900, marking the largest one-year decline ever recorded. Robberies fell about 20%, aggravated assaults fell nearly 10%, and overdose deaths shrank as narcotics imports dried up.

National Guard restores order in the capital
In Washington, D.C., Trump declared a crime emergency in August 2025, launching the Make DC Safe and Beautiful Task Force and bringing in federal agents, local police, and National Guard troops. Since then, authorities made more than 10,000 arrests and taken more than 1,000 illegal guns off the streets. Once real help arrived, homicides dropped extremely fast. In 2017, Forlesia Cook lost her grandson to gun violence in Washington. She stood up at the White House Black History Month reception on Feb. 18 and looked critics straight in the eye. The room erupted in applause, and Trump urged her to run for office.

Save America Act highlights the deeper divide
The SAVE America Act requires documentary proof of U.S. citizenship to register to vote in federal elections and a photo ID to cast a ballot: Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) introduced the bill. President Trump pushes hard for its passage because nothing matters more than clean elections. The House passed it on Feb. 11. Polling shows roughly 75% to 84% of registered voters favor voter ID and proof of citizenship. Support cuts across Democrats, independents, black, and Hispanic Americans. Yet far-left politicians fight it tooth and nail; Senate Democrats, led by Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), vow to block it in the Senate, warning about voter suppression and arguing it harms women who changed their names (I-9 Forms for their jobs, anyone?) or low-income voters who lack

The deeper fear shines through: Secure elections could cut off loose votes some candidates rely on to stay in power. The loudest defenders of democracy often resist clear rules that strengthen it. It’s a familiar enough-looking pattern. Open-border policies under the previous administration flooded the country with millions of people and left voter rolls vulnerable. Record border crossings from 2022 through 2024 raised real questions about who votes. Officials looked the other way while colleges, courts, and much of the legacy media repeated the same, tired story. Trump fixed the border, lowered crime, and now demands the same common-sense security at the ballot box, reaching Americans directly through streaming platforms and rallies because old gatekeepers refuse to carry the message.

Democrats protest the very agents who deliver results
Democrats and the left (pardon the redundancy) limit every argument to that old chestnut: Calling Trump evil, while demanding that he suffer defeat and humiliation. They protest ICE agents who carry out the exact policies voters chose, ignoring the sealed border, safer streets, and stronger economy. Their big idea? Stage-side rallies or boycotts for the upcoming State of the Union Address set for Tuesday, Feb. 24. How convenient. ESPN commentator Stephen A. Smith, definitely not a Republican, spoke plainly, saying Democrats show zero sense of decorum. He said they put raw politics ahead of their own constituents by planning to skip or disrupt the president’s upcoming speech.

Trump’s ready to talk with anybody; he spends the time, shows the patience, and treats people with respect. The other side offers only venom because that’s all they have left, their old arguments collapsed years ago.

Read more …

“There is absolutely no room for bias in any kind of the CIA’s work..”

Biased Spies: John Ratcliffe Cleans House at the CIA (Manney)

A rare correction at Langley
CIA Director John Ratcliffe rescinded or revised 19 intelligence reports after determining they contained political bias and violated basic tradecraft standards. The President’s Intelligence Advisory Board reviewed around 300 reports from the past decade and flagged serious problems: 17 were permanently deleted, two were pulled, revised, and reissued. A senior CIA official told Just The News that the reports were initially flagged during a review by the President’s Intelligence Advisory Board, then reviewed by career agency officials before being retracted, recalled, or revised. “There is absolutely no room for bias in any kind of the CIA’s work,” the official said. “So when we find instances where our tradecraft did not reach that high bar of impartiality, we must correct the record. And that’s why we’re taking steps to reinforce analytic integrity by ordering the public release, substantive revision, or retraction of these products that do not meet CIA’s tradecraft standards.” The action stands out because a sweeping internal correction like this rarely occurs; intelligence agencies revise their analyses over time, but mass rescissions tied to political bias seldom occur in public.


Reports that read like activism
One report warned that women embracing traditional motherhood could drift toward violent extremism, with analysts describing motherhood as a white supremacist objective, suggesting that women sharing cooking videos or family values content could aid recruitment networks. The product relied heavily on open-source material rather than on classified intelligence collection. One was an Oct. 6, 2021, assessment titled “Women Advancing White Racially and Ethnically Motivated Violent Extremist Radicalization and Recruitment” that waded into “foreign political debates about gender roles rather discussing any actual threats of political violence,” the senior CIA official said.

It had labeled the far-right Canadian YouTuber Lauren Southern as a white racially and ethnically motivated violent extremist and spoke of the dangers such figures pose to societies — in addition to women pursuing traditional roles as mothers. A July 8, 2020 a CIA report also centered on family planning and the disruptions of condom supply chains worldwide using “unobjective sources of information such as Planned Parenthood,” the official noted. Another assessment from 2020 warned that birth control shortages during the pandemic would damage economic growth in Egypt, Nigeria, and Pakistan, using sources such as Planned Parenthood, the Guttmacher Institute, and Marie Stopes International. Another report from 2015 promoted LGBT academic programs in North Africa and the Middle East while criticizing conservative governments.Intelligence Community Directive 203 requires objectivity, independence, and avoidance of any political slant. Ratcliffe said the flawed reports fell short of the high standards the agency must uphold, stressing there’s no room for bias in intelligence analysis.

Directors and oversight
The January 2015 report was issued during the tenure of CIA Director John Brennan; the July 2020 report landed on the desk of CIA Director Gina Haspel; and the October 2021 motherhood report circulated while William Burns served as CIA Director. Each director presided over an agency required to enforce Directive 203’s standards of impartiality. None of the prior directors rescinded large batches of reports over bias concerns. Past intelligence controversies drew scrutiny; the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction, produced under George Tenet, later proved deeply flawed.

Read more …

“There’s a reason why Trump nicknamed him “Sloppy Steve.”

The Shattered Dreams of Steve Bannon (Scott Pinsker)

Until the impossible became possible — and Donald Trump engineered the political upset of his generation, toppling Hillary Clinton in 2016 — most Americans had no idea who Steve Bannon was. Visually, he wasn’t much to look at. Bannon wasn’t a workout wonder like RFK Jr., with six-pack abs, nor was he blessed with movie star good looks. Some guys were born with oodles of charisma — the kind of raw, undeniable magnetism that leaps off the screen. Bannon, alas, wasn’t one of those people. There’s a reason why Trump nicknamed him “Sloppy Steve.”


But after Trump was elected, the media hunted for an explanation. Surely a bumble-headed dunce like Trump couldn’t get elected president on his own! That’s impossible! So they searched high and low for the behind-the-scenes maestro who pulled all the strings — the shrewd strategist who orchestrated the single greatest political upset since Dewey Defeats Truman Truman Defeats Dewey. At which point, Steve Bannon leapt out of the shadows: Yup, I’m the genius. It was me all along! The media, quite naturally, ate it up:

And not without reason. As far as personal bios go, Bannon was an odd duck with a helluva story. He had military experience as a Navy officer. He was financially savvy enough to work at Goldman Sachs. He was clever enough to acquire a financial stake in Seinfeld (Bannon still receives residuals for Seinfeld reruns). He knew enough about conservative media to run Breitbart — a platform that had long championed Trump’s candidacy. And then he assumed command of Trump’s campaign in August of 2016, just in time to claim credit for the victory?Maybe he really was the maestro of it all!

Bannon, for very obvious reasons, worked feverishly to advance the narrative of “Steve Bannon, Political Genius.” Within the Trump White House, his media leaks became increasingly self-serving. Instead of leveraging media relations to elevate his boss or the MAGA mission, he sought to mythologize himself. It all culminated with Bannon losing his job in the White House and getting fired from Breitbart after he leaked negative information about Trump’s children to the fierce Trump critic, journalist Michael Wolff. Among the delightful headlines Bannon helped produce was Business Insider’s Jan. 3, 2018, story, “Steve Bannon Says Ivanka Trump Is ‘Dumb as a Brick’.” Trump responded in typically Trumpian fashion:

“Steve Bannon has nothing to do with me or my Presidency,” Trump said. “When he was fired, he not only lost his job, he lost his mind.” […] “Steve doesn’t represent my base — he’s only in it for himself,” Trump said. “Steve pretends to be at war with the media, which he calls the opposition party, yet he spent his time at the White House leaking false information to the media to make himself seem far more important than he was. It is the only thing he does well. Steve was rarely in a one-on-one meeting with me and only pretends to have had influence to fool a few people with no access and no clue, whom he helped write phony books.”

Today, of course, we know the truth: Steve Bannon didn’t control Trump — because NOBODY controls Trump. The very premise is preposterous. For better or worse, Donald J. Trump is his own man. He’s like a wild stallion — uncontrollable. Then in 2024, with Steve Bannon sidelined, Trump proved his point by winning the presidency once again — this time by an even greater margin. Turns out that Bannon was less the leader and more the luggage, because Trump did more to carry him than the other way around. That’s not to say Bannon is a dim bulb. Clearly, he’s an exceptionally bright man. Some of his political calculations are off-the-charts prescient, i.e. his April 2025 prediction that Cardinal Prevost would become the first American-born pope:

https://twitter.com/PiersUncensored/status/1917308154427367583

He’s also a man brimming with ambition. Just 40 days ago, Axios reported that Bannon was planning to run for president in 2028: “Former Trump White House adviser Steve Bannon is laying the groundwork for a 2028 run for president, two people familiar with his thinking tell Axios.” […] Former Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), who has appeared on Bannon’s “War Room” podcast, said: “The Bannon campaign will merge the foreign policy of Rand Paul with the tax policy of Elizabeth Warren.” (Not sure if the MAGA base is clamoring for a Warren-Paul themed agenda, but whatever. Not my monkey, not my circus.) Either way, it’s a deeply damaging PR look. Setting up your own presidential bid barely a year into Trump’s term seems awfully arrogant and self-indulgent. That’s a poor plan for winning GOP hearts and minds.

[..] He’s a conspiracy peddler who denies conspiracies — while participating in conspiracies! No matter. The Epstein revelations were a deathblow to Bannon’s presidential ambitions. There’s ZERO demand in Republican circles for a 75-year-old Epstein-whisperer to replace Vance, Rubio, or anyone else as MAGA’s heir apparent. Because, the more we learned about Epstein, the more we realized that Steve Bannon isn’t a political savant, a super-genius, or a 4-D chess mastermind. He’s a lying, duplicitous, self-serving hypocrite who can’t be trusted. And that’s not a “coincidence” either. It’s causation.

Read more …

It looks easier from the outside.

When Does Accountability For The Deep State Begin? (Dornik)

We were told this time would be different. We were told that a second Trump administration would not repeat the mistakes of the first, that hard lessons had been learned, and that the Deep State would finally be confronted rather than tolerated. One year into President Trump’s second term, it is both fair and necessary to ask whether those assurances are being honored—not from hostility but from a sincere desire to see the America First agenda succeed, endure, and become irreversible.


President Trump’s first term, Congress squandered its moment. The first two years were consumed by infighting, hesitation, and internal paralysis, even with Republican control. Then came the midterms, control was lost, and meaningful legislative progress effectively ended. What followed were impeachment spectacles and relentless political warfare, while entrenched corruption inside the federal government remained untouched. Now, just past the first year of President Trump’s second term, the pattern feels disturbingly familiar. The urgency voters demanded is not being matched by the actions of those entrusted to deliver it.

The question that must be asked plainly is this: when is the Trump administration actually going to root out the Deep State?

Executive Orders are being signed at a rapid pace, but Executive Orders are not reform. They are temporary directives that can be erased with a single signature the moment someone like Gavin Newsom takes office. Without legislation, without prosecutions, and without accountability, nothing is secured. Power is being exercised, but it is not being anchored, and lasting change is never achieved that way.

Kash Patel built his credibility by telling the truth about corruption in Washington. His book and documentary, Government Gangsters, documented in detail how entrenched bureaucrats and intelligence officials worked against President Trump from within the federal government. He even came on my show and spoke openly about this corruption, and he stated repeatedly across multiple platforms that the FBI, particularly at its highest levels, was deeply compromised and required fundamental reform. He did not argue that the Bureau should be abandoned, but that it could not be trusted without aggressive leadership, restructuring, and accountability for the Deep State operatives within the bureau. He warned that the Deep State would never reform itself and would have to be confronted directly. He also told Glenn Beck that the head of the FBI possessed Jeffrey Epstein’s client list. These were not casual remarks. They were core assertions made publicly and repeatedly.

Now Kash Patel is the head of the FBI, and the public posture has shifted dramatically. The same institution he once described as captured is now treated as credible and restrained. The Epstein client list, once discussed as a known reality, is now dismissed as conspiracy, even as new Epstein-related documents continue to be released to the public over the protest of the Trump administration. Each document release raises more questions, not fewer, and every delay from federal law enforcement deepens public distrust rather than restoring confidence. A reversal this significant demands explanation. Trust is not rebuilt through silence, and credibility is not preserved by pretending prior statements were never made.

These questions extend far beyond the FBI and land squarely on the Department of Justice, where accountability appears to collapse the moment it threatens entrenched power. The removal of Ed Martin from his role inside the DOJ is not just a minor personnel decision; it appears to be a clear signal that real investigations into weaponization and lawfare are not being tolerated. Ed Martin was positioned to expose how the Biden Department of Justice targeted Americans, abused prosecutorial authority, and used federal power as a political weapon. According to Emerald Robinson, whose reporting has repeatedly exposed corruption others refuse to confront, Martin was removed from his position by the same people who refer to parents as terrorists: “Vance Day, senior counsel for Todd Blanche, refers to parents targeted by Biden DOJ as ‘terrorists’ in recent meeting with one parent asking for accountability. Blanche’s office also removed Ed Martin from his role at the DOJ.” That disclosure alone should alarm every American paying attention.

Parents who were targeted and persecuted by the Biden Department of Justice are now being labeled terrorists by senior DOJ leadership, while the man tasked with investigating that persecution is sidelined. Whether this is described as a firing or a demotion is irrelevant, because the outcome is the same. Another one of the good guys has been removed from doing the work voters were promised would finally drain the swamp. This is not an isolated incident or a misunderstanding but a pattern that repeats with disturbing consistency. Every time someone begins making real progress against the Deep State, authority is stripped, investigations are stalled, and momentum is deliberately crushed before accountability can be delivered.

So the questions must be asked: Where are the arrests? Where are the prosecutions? Why has Attorney General Pam Bondi not brought cases against members of the January 6 Committee despite documented misconduct and destroyed records? Why has the Department of Justice taken no action against Anthony Fauci even after Sen. Rand Paul issued criminal referrals? Why is the DOJ actively fighting to shut down Brook Jackson’s case against Pfizer instead of allowing it to proceed and standing with a whistleblower who exposed documented fraud? Why do Epstein-related documents continue to surface while no meaningful accountability follows? What happened to transparency, and what happened to equal justice under the law?

Read more …

Serious threats.

Susan Rice Warns Of ‘Accountability Agenda’ When Democrats Return To Power (JTN)

Former Democratic Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice warned corporations Thursday who have “taken a knee” to President Donald Trump and his administration that there would be repercussions when her party returns to power. The comment comes after The Late Show host Stephen Colbert accused CBS News this week of bowing to Trump by allegedly blocking the host from airing an interview with Texas state Rep. James Talarico, a Democrat who is running for the U.S. Senate. CBS has denied blocking the interview, which was posted to YouTube instead.


Rice insisted an “accountability agenda” was coming for the people and corporations who worked with the Trump administration if Democrats win back the majority in the House or Senate this November. “If these corporations think that the Democrats, when they come back in power, are going to play by the old rules, and, you know, say, ‘Oh, never mind. We’ll forgive you for all the people you fired, all the policies and principles you’ve violated, all, you know, the laws you’ve skirted.’ I think they’ve got another think coming,” she told former U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara.

Rice, who worked in the Obama and Biden administrations, claimed the corporations and other entities like universities acted in a “very short-term self-interest” when deciding to work with the administration in certain capacities. “Companies are already starting to hear they better preserve their documents,” she said. “They better be ready for subpoenas. If they’ve done something wrong, they’ll be held accountable, and if they haven’t broken the law, good for them. “This is not going to be an instance of, you know, forgive and forget,” she continued. “The damage that these people are doing is too severe to the American people and to our national interest.”

Read more …

”.. Rubio noted that documents leaked from inside the group outline ambitious plans to “kill Musk’s Twitter” and “trigger EU and UK regulatory action.”

Deporting Censorship: US Targets UK Government Ally Over Free Speech (Thaccker)

As ICE sweeps in Minneapolis have drawn wide attention, a little-noticed immigration case playing out in a New York federal court has significant implications for America’s relationship with Britain and the ongoing debate over global censorship.


In late December, the State Department announced its intention to revoke the visas of five foreign individuals who have allegedly censored Americans. The most consequential member of this group is Imran Ahmed, a British Labour Party political operative now living in the U.S., who is the CEO of an influential nonprofit, the Center for Countering Digital Hate.

In documents released Feb. 6 in federal court, the State Department claims Ahmed and the Center have been key players in efforts to censor Americans. A memo written by State Department Undersecretary Sarah Rogers asserts that “Ahmed was a key collaborator with the Biden administration on weaponizing the national security bureaucracy to censor U.S. citizens and pressure U.S. companies into censoring, and his group advocates for foreign regulatory action that extraterritorially impacts American citizens and companies.”

In a follow-up memo, Secretary Marco Rubio wrote that Ahmed had led efforts to censor Americans and harm U.S. media outlets, including ZeroHedge and The Federalist. “I have determined that Ahmed’s activities and presence in the United States have potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences and comprise a compelling U.S. foreign policy interest.” Rubio asserted. While the Center casts itself as a disinterested nonprofit trying to stop online hate, Rubio noted that documents leaked from inside the group outline ambitious plans to “kill Musk’s Twitter” and “trigger EU and UK regulatory action.”

Ahmed has a small army of lawyers working to halt his deportation proceedings, which are now being litigated. Ahmed’s lead attorney is Roberta Kaplan – a former advisor to New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo – who sued President Trump on behalf of his niece, Mary Trump. Ahmed is also represented by Norm Eisen, a Democratic Party fundraiser and former advisor to Obama. Last Thursday, they filed an updated court complaint against the U.S. government to keep Ahmed in the United States.

International Implications
. The effort to deport Ahmed has broader political implications because of the close ties he and his associates have to the highest reaches of the British government. Morgan McSweeney, who co-founded the Center with Ahmed, is widely seen as the architect of Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s Labour Party victory in 2024. McSweeney served as Starmer’s chief of staff until earlier this month, when he resigned because of a separate scandal connected to Jeffrey Epstein.

U.K. government documents reviewed by RCI show that the organization’s influence extends throughout Starmer’s government. The Trump administration’s pushback on Ahmed’s weaponization of speech against U.S. citizens and companies suggests a deep concern about foreign intervention and censorship stemming from one of America’s closest allies.In a recent interview with Undersecretary Rogers, RCI noted that the State Department appeared to be “knocking on the door of the Prime Minister’s office.” Rogers demurred, declining to detail her discussion with Starmer officials. “We have a very special relationship with the British government,” she responded. “The issue has been communicated.”

Senior Labour Minister Chi Onwurah accused the Trump administration of attacking free speech after Rubio announced shortly before Christmas that the administration was seeking Ahmed’s deportation. “Banning people because you disagree with what they say undermines the free speech the administration claims to seek,” Onwurah said, adding that Ahmed was an articulate advocate for greater regulation of online speech. However, internal British government documents show that Onwurah is one of Starmer’s many advisors who have been working with Ahmed on activities many consider censorship..

Read more …

 

 

https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2024934679493677217?s=20

https://twitter.com/BryceMLipscomb/status/2024838259751186906?s=20

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Feb 192026
 
 February 19, 2026  Posted by at 10:25 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,  51 Responses »


Ceiling painting from the palace of Amenhotep III, New Kingdom ca. 1390–1353 B.C.


Ukraine Should Come To The Table ‘Fast’ – Trump (RT)
Under Pressure To Reach Deal, Zelensky Explodes: No Time “For All This S**t” (ZH)
Putin Aide Urges Retaliation To ‘Western Piracy’ (RT)
US and Dutch Pilots Flying F-16s For Ukraine – Western Media (RT)
Hungary’s Opposition Made ‘Secret Pact’ With EU On Ukraine – Orban (RT)
18 Ways To Reverse The EU’s Immigration Disaster (RMX)
Judge Orders ICE Not to Re-Detain Abrego Garcia (ET)
Disinformation Board Member Jennifer Daskal Appointed as FISA Court Advisor (CTH)
Fear Is The Only Thing The EU Understands – Karaganov (RT)
Can You Buy A Country? (RT)
Former Trump Strategist Defends Ties with Epstein (RT)
The Last Temptation of the Least Dangerous Branch (Turley)
German Public Broadcaster Ran Fake Ai-Generated Clip of ‘ICE Troops’ (RMX)
Macron Calls Free Speech Online ‘Pure Bullshit’
Trump Posts Tribute to Rush Limbaugh on the Anniversary of His Death (Margolis)

 


 

Optimus

 


 

 


 


They don’t want peaxe. They want to beat Russia.

Ukraine Should Come To The Table ‘Fast’ – Trump (RT)

Ukraine must swiftly give up its uncompromising stance in the negotiations to settle the conflict with Russia, US President Donald Trump has warned. He made the comments ahead of talks between Russia, the US, and Ukraine in Geneva, Switzerland on Tuesday and Wednesday. The parties previously held two trilateral meetings in Abu Dhabi in January. Territorial issues – namely Ukraine’s refusal to abandon its claim to Donbass – reportedly remain the key item hampering progress towards peace. When asked about his expectations from the Swiss negotiations by journalists aboard Air Force One on Monday, Trump said they will be “very big.”


“Ukraine better come to the table fast. That’s all I’m telling you… we want them to come,” the president insisted. During his speech at the Munich Security Conference on Saturday, Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky again ruled out any territorial concessions, claiming that it “would be an illusion to believe that this war can now be reliably ended by dividing Ukraine.” Instead, he demanded more weapons from Kiev’s European backers and called for Ukraine to be included in NATO, which is one of Moscow’s clear red lines. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said earlier that only a few issues remain to be addressed by the sides in Geneva. “The bad news is they’ve been narrowed to the hardest questions to answer,” he stressed.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Monday that the members of the Russian delegation in Geneva, led by presidential aide Vladimir Medinsky, “intend to discuss a broader range of issues, including the main questions concerning territories… and those related to the demands we have.” Moscow maintains that any sustainable settlement requires Ukraine to withdraw from the areas still under its control in Donbass – which voted to join Russia in referendums in the fall of 2022 – give up on its NATO aspirations, and commit to demilitarization and denazification.

Read more …

Zelensky represents a corrupt cabal. He’s getting rich doing it.

Under Pressure To Reach Deal, Zelensky Explodes: No Time “For All This S**t” (ZH)

Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelensky has increasingly made his frustrations with the Trump administration public, but he may have just crossed the line with the US President, who Zelensky admits can be tough and unbending. Zelensky has newly complained amid the latest Geneva trilateral talks that the US delegation could pressure him to make “unsuccessful decisions” and he is urging Washington to back off, even using expletives to make his point. For starters, he claims that the Ukrainian public won’t let him cede territory to Russia for the sake of peace even if he wanted to, as we highlighted previously.


But the latest colorful verbal broadside, cited by Axios on Tuesday as Russian and Ukrainian delegations convened in Geneva, saw Zelensky take direct aim at the head of Moscow’s negotiating team, Vladimir Medinsky. Kiev’s frustration at the state of dialogue has been boiling over. Medinsky has argued – along with numerous Russian officials, including President Vladimir Putin – that the conflict’s historical roots must be addressed as part of any settlement, especially given the bulk of the Ukrainian population in the east (Donbas) has always been Russian speaking and looked to Moscow historically.mZelensky dismissed that approach outright: “We don’t have time for all this shit,” he told the outlet. “So we have to decide, and have to finish the war.”

Regardless, the Kremlin has lately made clear its aims to take the full Donbas either through talks or by force. Ukraine’s military still holds 10% of the Donbas, however, and Kiev is rejecting a US proposal for it to draw back its forces as part of a conflict freeze leading to settlement. The White House this month has finally appeared to be ratcheting up the pressure directly on Zelensky to make some kind of serious land concession. This was evident in the latest comments by President Trump on the topic of Geneva issued near the start of the week. Frustration with Kiev was evident when he told reporters aboard Air Force One, “Well, we have big talks.” He stated that “It’s going to be very easy. I mean, look, so far, Ukraine better come to the table fast. That’s all I’m telling you.”

Zelensky after this bitterly complained that it’s ‘not fair’ for Trump to take aim at Ukraine and not Russia, and suggested maybe it’s simply easer for Trump to do this given he doesn’t want to upset the far larger, more formidable country. Meanwhile, Medinsky has said Wednesday that the U.S.-mediated peace talks in Geneva had been “difficult but business-like, and that a new round of talks would be held soon,” according to Reuters.

Read more …

Patrushev is an important voice.

Putin Aide Urges Retaliation To ‘Western Piracy’ (RT)

Russia’s response to “Western piracy” targeting its maritime trade should be forceful and not limited to diplomatic means, an aide to President Vladimir Putin has said. Nikolay Patrushev, a veteran national security official who heads a naval policymaking body, called for stronger action against Western moves targeting vessels described as part of an alleged Russian ‘shadow fleet’. Attempts to paralyze Russian foreign trade will only intensify, Patrushev warned in an interview with Argumenty i Fakty published on Tuesday. “Unless we push back forcefully, soon the English, the French, and even the Balts will get brazen enough to try and block our nation’s access to at least the Atlantic,” he said.


“The Europeans are in essence making steps to impose a naval blockade, deliberately pushing towards a military escalation, testing the limits of our patience and provoking our retaliation. If the situation is not resolved peacefully, the Navy will be breaking and lifting the blockade,” Patrushev said. “Let’s not forget that plenty of vessels sail the seas under European flags. We may get curious about what they are shipping and where,” he added. Patrushev expressed skepticism that tensions could ease, saying “there is little hope that the West has an ounce of respect for diplomacy and the law.” He argued that “the old practice of ‘gunboat diplomacy’ is being revived,” citing US operations targeting Venezuela and Iran.

Washington has used warships to target suspected drug smuggling boats off Venezuela and intercept outgoing oil tankers, including one sailing under a Russian flag. The Pentagon is now concentrating assets in the Middle East as President Donald Trump pressures Iran to accept restrictions on its missile deterrence against Israel. In today’s world, the Russian Navy is “a geopolitical tool that combines might with flexibility and is suitable for both peacetime and armed conflicts,” Patrushev said. Its strength is needed to protect Russia’s “ability to export oil, grain and fertilizers, and the normal functioning of the state.”

Read more …

“.. intelligence, planning, troop training, and maintenance of complex Western hardware – are handled by foreign personnel.”

US and Dutch Pilots Flying F-16s For Ukraine – Western Media (RT)

The Ukrainian military is secretly using a squadron of veteran NATO pilots to fly donated US-made F-16 fighter jets, the French outlet Intelligence Online reported on Monday. Moscow has long warned that Western nations are moving closer to direct conflict with Russia. The report, which Kiev has denied, said the covert mission relies primarily on experienced US and Dutch air force veterans. The foreign personnel are deployed far from the front lines and focus on intercepting Russian long-range weapons, the outlet said. They are no longer part of their original militaries and reportedly work for Kiev as civilian contractors, without military ranks and outside the Ukrainian chain of command.


A shortage of trained Ukrainian pilots was previously identified as the main obstacle to using F-16s donated to Kiev. Training courses were reportedly undermined by language barriers, a lack of qualified trainees, and other issues, and were simplified for speed. Shortly after the first F-16s arrived in Ukraine in August 2024, Kiev began losing pilots in botched air defense missions, with four such incidents acknowledged. The secret foreign squadron provides pilots with the experience needed to operate advanced F-16 equipment, Intelligence Online said.

Moscow views the Ukraine conflict as a NATO proxy war against Russia, in which key elements of Kiev’s military effort – including intelligence, planning, troop training, and maintenance of complex Western hardware – are handled by foreign personnel. Western specialists were reportedly involved in Ukrainian strikes using Storm Shadow/SCALP air-launched cruise missiles on Russian territory. German officials opposed supplying Taurus missiles because Ukrainians cannot launch them independently. Russia also says Western nations tacitly support Kiev’s recruitment of mercenaries from among their military veterans. Ambassador-at-Large Rodion Miroshnik estimated that around 20,000 foreign fighters have taken part in the conflict on the Ukrainian side.

Read more …

“… an election he has framed as a choice between “war or peace.”

Hungary’s Opposition Made ‘Secret Pact’ With EU On Ukraine – Orban (RT)

Hungary’s opposition parties are colluding with EU leaders to fast-track Ukraine’s accession to the bloc, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban was claimed, warning that should the pro-Brussels Tisza Party come to power, it could drag the country into a direct conflict with Russia. Hungary’s April 12 parliamentary election is expected to be a tough test for Orban’s longstanding conservative rule, during which time he has criticized the EU’s financial and military support for Kiev and its sanctions on Russia. Orban also opposes Ukraine’s bid for EU membership. Recent polls show a tight race between his Fidesz party and the opposition, led by former party member Péter Magyar, who met with European leaders at last week’s Munich Security Conference.


“Last weekend, the Tisza Party made a secret pact with Brussels in Munich. Part of this pact includes giving up its veto power, supporting the migration agreement, and accepting Ukraine into the EU. They are following Brussels’ orders and thus dragging us into war,” Orban remarked at a meeting of Fidesz and its coalition partner, the Christian Democratic People’s Party, which was broadcast on Hungary’s M1 television. Magyar met EU leaders on the sidelines of the conference last week, where he held talks with Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, according to his office.

“Our friends belong to the international peace camp led by the United States. Their friends are leaders of the European military camp led by the German chancellor,” Orban said, referring to his political opponents. He claimed that Merz had openly signaled readiness to support Magyar’s party in the April vote because he wanted Hungary to relinquish its veto power within the EU. “The chancellor needs this to establish Germany’s sovereign rule in Europe,” Orban stated. The Hungarian leader has previously accused Magyar of acting under Brussels’ influence, saying the bloc uses “censorship, intervention, and manipulation” to undermine his government in an election he has framed as a choice between “war or peace.”

Read more …

“European Union member states can reclaim effective authority over migration and asylum policy without changing the EU treaties.”

18 Ways To Reverse The EU’s Immigration Disaster (RMX)

Due to years of uncontrolled mass migration, many Europeans are asking what concrete options there are to reverse course, with many feeling that the situation is hopeless and cannot be significantly reversed. However, a new report titled “Taking Back Control from Brussels: The Renationalization of the EU Migration and Asylum Policies” — produced by the Mathias Corvinus Collegium (MCC), Hungary’s Migration Research Institute, and Poland’s Ordo Iuris Institute — provides comprehensive solutions to the crisis.


The paper’s core thesis offers bold and practical solutions today, noting that the power still rests with member states. The authors write: “European Union member states can reclaim effective authority over migration and asylum policy without changing the EU treaties.”

The report outlines how asylum policy has “completely collapsed” in the EU and reached a point of “total failure.” The authors contend that the current system lacks democratic legitimacy and has turned the Schengen area into a “sieve” that facilitates illegal migration and prevents effective border protection. Given the recent legalization actions of the far-left Spanish government, aimed at regularizing approximately 500,000 migrants who can then move freely across Europe, the paper’s proposals may be more relevant than ever.

The paper calls for a fundamental “paradigm shift” to restore migration sovereignty to individual nation-states, asserting that renationalization is a necessity for Europe to regain control over its borders and territory. The following 18 proposals from the second part of the paper outline a roadmap for this renationalization. The paper itself provides far more details about each proposal and is recommended reading for any European party looking for a blueprint to regain control of immigration.

https://twitter.com/RMXnews/status/2016823717800624625
Read more …

“The illegal immigrant from El Salvador is also facing federal human smuggling charges.”

Judge Orders ICE Not to Re-Detain Abrego Garcia (ET)

A federal judge has blocked U.S. Customs and Immigration Enforcement (ICE) from re-arresting Kilmar Abrego Garcia, one of the men at the center of the Trump administration’s deportation battles.The Salvadoran national’s case attracted attention across the country, including widespread protests, after the federal government detained him in March 2025 and shipped him to El Salvador’s maximum security prison, the Terrorism Confinement Center, along with an airplane full of other deportees. He was later returned to the United States, where he has had long-running legal battles with the administration.


U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis, who ordered the administration to facilitate Abrego Garcia’s return last year, ruled on Feb. 17 that he cannot be deported again because the federal government has not presented a feasible plan for removing him from the country. The judge said that despite releasing Abrego Garcia, the government appeared to be making plans to re-detain him, so Abrego Garcia filed an emergency motion for a temporary restraining order to prevent being re-detained. The court previously granted the requested order.In the new order, the court granted Abrego Garcia’s request to upgrade the temporary restraining order to an injunction to prevent him from being re-detained.

Abrego Garcia, who entered the United States illegally more than a decade ago, had been living in Maryland when federal agents arrested him. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security takes the position that Abrego Garcia is a “violent criminal illegal alien, and MS-13 gang member,” who “belongs behind bars and off American soil.”Abrego Garcia, who is facing separate criminal charges, denies being a member of MS-13, which has been designated a terrorist organization. Xinis previously ordered his release on Dec. 11, 2025, finding that because the federal government had never issued a final order of removal against him, it could not detain him in order to force him from the country.

The government said in a brief last month that Abrego Garcia may be detained because an immigration judge issued an order of removal on Dec. 11, 2025, that became final on Jan. 13 of this year. Detention after that order “does not require that the country of removal be certain in order for detention to be lawful,” the brief said. The judge suggested the federal government is not serious about removing Abrego Garcia from the United States.Since he secured release from criminal custody in August 2025, the government has “made one empty threat after another to remove him to countries in Africa with no real chance of success,” she said.

Read more …

“.. one of the core officials who used the term dis-mis-mal-information to censor speech on social media platforms ..”

Disinformation Board Member Jennifer Daskal Appointed as FISA Court Advisor (CTH)

A good catch by Chuck Ross at WFB drawing attention to the latest Amici curiae appointed to the FISA Court. Adding to a string of leftist ‘advisors to the court’ Jennifer Daskal has been appointed by FISA Court Presiding Judge Anthony Trenga. Daskal was the Biden administration principal deputy general counsel at the Department of Homeland Security who launched the Disinformation Governance Board (Ministry of Truth) ultimately led by Nina Jankowicz. Jennifer Daskal’s career has centers around controlling information from a leftist perspective and was one of the core officials who used the term dis-mis-mal-information to censor speech on social media platforms around COVID-19 and the vaccination protocol.


Daskal’s reach and control into big tech and social media is well documented. Appointing her as an advisor to the FISA court is troubling as she has joined Amy Jeffress, appointed amicus curiae in 2015 (Biden’s personal attorney), David Kris, a 2016 amicus curiae selection (denied Carter Page FISA application contained fabrications), and the infamous Mary McCord appointed amicus curiae in 2021 (sits at the center of every stop-Trump operation).

“Washington Free Beacon – A Biden administration official who launched the Disinformation Governance Board and served as co-chair of the so-called Ministry of Truth has been appointed to advise the powerful Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, prompting concerns from some Republican lawmakers. The presiding judges of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court and Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review appointed Jennifer Daskal on Feb. 1 to serve as amicus curiae for the court. Amici curiae, known as “friends of the court,” advise judges on legal issues related to foreign surveillance warrants in national security cases. Daskal served as acting principal deputy general counsel at the Department of Homeland Security under Biden. In that role, she drafted the charter for the Disinformation Governance Board, according to a Jan. 31, 2022 memo. (read more)”

Read more …

“Our strategy must change fundamentally. The objective is to accelerate the United States’ withdrawal from Europe. The method is firm deterrence.”

Fear Is The Only Thing The EU Understands – Karaganov (RT)

The current phase of the West’s conflict with Russia may be nearing its end. It has dragged on longer than necessary. The principal reason is a lack of determination to employ active nuclear deterrence. This is the only mechanism capable of resolving the “European problem,” which has once again become an existential threat to our country.The Ukraine military operation has acted as a powerful catalyst for Russia’s internal renewal. It has mobilized society, awakened patriotism, and allowed people to demonstrate their best qualities. Pride in the Fatherland and respect for service to it have grown. Engineering, science, the military profession, and skilled labor have regained their rightful status. The economy and science have revived. Teachers, regrettably, have not yet received similar recognition, but that is a subject for later.


By drawing Western hostility onto ourselves, we have seriously weakened the position of the comprador bourgeoisie and its Western-educated allies. The Portuguese once used the word compadres to describe local merchants who served colonial interests. After the reforms of the 1990s, this class expanded in Russia to unhealthy proportions. Fortunately, the process of cleansing the country of this Western-oriented stratum has begun. It has been achieved without mass repression, but with historical inevitability. This revival has come at a terrible cost. Tens of thousands of brave soldiers lost their lives at the opening stage of national recovery. They deserve eternal gratitude. When – or rather, if – the unfinished war resumes, such losses must not be repeated.

In 2013, I personally warned a group of Western European leaders that their policy of dragging Ukraine into the EU and NATO would lead to war and mass casualties. No one met my gaze. They looked down at their shoes, then continued talking about democracy, trust, and human rights. In reality, they wanted to exploit another forty million people. Something they have partly succeeded in achieving through the creation of millions of refugees. They spoke of containing Russia, which was still loyal at the time. Our response to NATO’s aggression in Libya in 2011 was weak. We are now paying for years of appeasement and the comprador instincts of part of our elite.

Russia briefly slowed down the EU’s march toward military adventurism by returning Crimea in 2014 and intervening in Syria in 2015. Then we relaxed. Had an ultimatum on NATO expansion been issued in 2018–2020 and backed by credible nuclear deterrence, the current war might have been avoided. Or at the very least it would have been far less bloody. By 2022, it was obvious that both the West and the Kiev authorities were preparing for war.Ukraine is not a homogeneous entity. In the east and south live people culturally close to us. West of the Dnieper lies a different historical and cultural community, shaped by Austro-Hungarian, Polish, and Western influence and infused for decades with anti-Russian ideology. We must accept this reality and pursue a rational separation from both Ukrainian and European pathologies, forging our own healthy model of development.

Militarily, we are winning. Politically, we have yet to respond adequately to a series of openly aggressive actions: pirate seizures of Russian vessels, threats to close straits, attempts to impose a de facto economic blockade, attacks on oil terminals, and efforts by the Kiev regime to sabotage our tankers. Often with Western European connivance. Our response so far has been intensified strikes on Ukrainian targets. This is not a strategic solution. Ukraine was deliberately thrown into the furnace so that the fire would spread to Russia. EU elites do not care about Ukrainians. The conflict will continue until its true source is addressed: Western Europe’s degenerated ruling classes, intellectually, morally, and materially exhausted, who cling to power by fueling war.

Unlike 1812–1815 or 1941–1945, we have not yet destroyed a hostile coalition or broken its will. The war has entered what chess players call the middle-game. The remnants of Ukraine, supported by the West, will continue sabotage and terrorism. Sanctions will remain. The EU is preparing for a new confrontation, potentially involving rearmed Ukrainian forces and mercenaries from poorer European states. Any violations of future agreements will require military responses. We will again be accused of aggression. Open conflict will likely resume. Our strategy must change fundamentally. The objective is to accelerate the United States’ withdrawal from Europe. The method is firm deterrence. The task is to defeat Western Europe’s current elites, who see Russophobia as their last political lifeline.

Read more …

It’s getting harder as time goes by.

Can You Buy A Country? (RT)

When US President Donald Trump revived the idea of buying Greenland – and refused to rule out stronger measures if Denmark declined – the reaction across Europe was swift and indignant. The proposal was framed as an anachronism: a throwback to imperial horse-trading that modern international politics had supposedly outgrown. But the outrage obscures an uncomfortable historical reality. The United States was not only forged through revolution and war; it was also built through transactions – large-scale territorial purchases concluded at moments when the balance of power left the seller with limited options. From continental expanses to strategic islands, Washington has repeatedly expanded its reach by writing checks backed by leverage. If the idea of buying land now sounds jarring, it is worth recalling that some of the largest such deals helped shape the United States into the country we know today. To understand why the Greenland debate resonates so strongly, we should revisit the major acquisitions that redrew the American map.


Louisiana: The biggest purchase
French explorers ventured into the Mississippi Valley in the late 17th century, claiming new territories and naming this vast expanse Louisiana after King Louis XIV. In 1718, they established New Orleans at the mouth of the Mississippi, gradually populating the colony not just with French settlers but also through policies enacted by Louis that granted freedom to children born of unions between white settlers and black slaves. Still, the population remained sparse. The region’s bad climate and complex relationships with Native Americans made settlement difficult. As a result, France didn’t particularly value this territory, despite its huge size: French Louisiana encompassed not just modern-day Louisiana but, either partially or wholly, the modern states of Arkansas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Missouri, Colorado, Wyoming, North and South Dakota, Minnesota, Iowa, Montana, Nebraska, Texas, New Mexico, and even parts of Canada. Despite this, however, it was hard to find a Frenchman beyond New Orleans.

New France in 1750 before the French and Indian War. © Wikipedia


In 1763, following the Seven Years’ War, France ceded Louisiana to Spain. The Spanish administration didn’t oppress the French settlers and managed the colony quite competently. However, much of this enormous land remained largely uninhabited aside from the Native Americans. The total number of settlers, including black slaves, amounted to several tens of thousands of people. By the early 19th century, Europe saw many changes. Napoleon regained control of Louisiana, aiming to revive France’s overseas empire. However, this ambition crumbled when his attempt to restore French rule in Haiti failed. A force sent by Napoleon was decimated by black rebels and succumbed to tropical diseases.

Against this backdrop, Napoleon quickly realized that he could not hold onto Louisiana, and the English or Americans would easily seize it. As for the US, it had mixed feelings about Louisiana; controlling the mouth of the Mississippi was crucial, but Americans were also wary of potential French aggression. Finally, US President Thomas Jefferson initiated negotiations with France for the purchase of Louisiana. Napoleon saw this as a big opportunity. He recognized that he could get real money by selling the territory which France didn’t really need and couldn’t control.

Jefferson and the American side initially aimed to purchase only New Orleans and its surrounding areas, offering $10 million. However, the French surprised their American counterparts: they asked for $15 million, but as part of the deal, offered vast territories stretching up to Canada. However, beyond New Orleans, the French essentially sold the freedom to claim land inhabited by the Native Americans. The French had very little control over this vast territory, and the Native Americans didn’t even understand what the sale entailed. In fact, aside from the Native Americans, the vast territory was inhabited by only about 60,000 settlers, including black slaves.

Regardless, the deal was concluded, and America’s territory effectively doubled overnight. Robert Livingston, one of the Founding Fathers and then US ambassador to France, famously declared, “We have lived long, but this is the noblest work of our whole lives… From this day the United States take their place among the powers of the first rank.”

Read more …

“The strategist’s spokesman said he conducted about 12 hours of interviews with Epstein for the documentary. ”

Former Trump Strategist Defends Ties with Epstein (RT)

Steve Bannon, a former White House strategist and prominent MAGA figure, has defended his extensive communications with the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, insisting they were part of an effort to produce a documentary. His comments come after the release of millions of pages of Epstein-related files by the US Justice Department, which reveal a far cozier relationship between Bannon – a former adviser to President Donald Trump – and the financier who was found dead in his Manhattan jail cell in August 2019.


According to the New York Times, Bannon’s name appears in the Epstein emails nearly every day in the six months leading up to financier’s July 2019 arrest on sex trafficking charges. In April 2019, Bannon texted Epstein a strategy to rehabilitate his image. “First we need to push back on the lies; then crush the pedo/trafficking narrative; then rebuild your image as philanthropist,” he wrote. Epstein also appears to have offered Bannon lavish perks, including private jet travel, lodging at his Manhattan townhouse, and medical care. While Bannon’s spokesman denied he accepted the jet or medical care, records suggest he had stayed at Epstein’s Paris apartment on at least one occasion in March 2019.

In a statement to the New York Times, Bannon said his interactions with Epstein were strictly professional, noting that he is “a filmmaker and TV host with decades of experience interviewing controversial figures.” “That’s the only lens through which these private communications should be viewed – a documentary filmmaker working, over a period of time, to secure 50 hours of interviews from a reclusive subject,” Bannon insisted. The strategist’s spokesman said he conducted about 12 hours of interviews with Epstein for the documentary.

However, so far only two hours have been released by the Justice Department. In the footage, Epstein acknowledged being “a criminal” and a sexual predator, but Bannon did not focus on his treatment of women and instead discussed finance and science. His spokesman said he planned to address the topic later on.The Epstein files, totaling over 3.5 million pages, include multiple mentions of numerous global elites, including Bill Clinton, Elon Musk, and the former Prince Andrew. Attorney General Pam Bondi has declared all the Epstein files released, though critics claim this represents only a fraction of the seized data.

Read more …

” These judges are using their offices to amplify their personal outrage over policies. The result is that they are erasing the distinction between our courts and our politics.”

The Last Temptation of the Least Dangerous Branch (Turley)

This month, the U.S. Judicial Conference issued new ethics guidelines, a publication that rarely attracts attention beyond a small circle of legal nerds. These guidelines, however, are not just the usual tweaks on rules governing free meals or travel. They include a new policy that could materially alter the character of the American courts, allowing judges to engage in commentary to rebut what they deem “illegitimate forms of criticism and attacks.” It is not just injudicious, it is dangerous.


Over two centuries ago, the Framers had to sell the Constitution to skeptical states, leery about yielding power to a central government, including federal courts. In Federalist #78, Alexander Hamilton sought to put these fears aside and assured the states that the federal judiciary is “the least dangerous to the political rights of the Constitution; because it will be least in a capacity to annoy or injure them.” One can certainly disagree with Hamilton whether history has borne out his prediction that the court would have the least capacity to “annoy” others in our system. However, Hamilton’s pitch would later be reinforced by the adoption of apolitical ethical standards in our courts that separated them from political activities and commentary.

It did not begin that way. Early federal judges, including Supreme Court justices, were often openly partisan. Federalist judges took active roles in hunting down Jeffersonians under the infamous Alien and Sedition Acts. That changed as the nation embraced a new model of judges who would stand apart from politics. While judges often reflect the ideological views of the presidents who nominated them, they have largely followed rigid rules that have prevented them from engaging in political commentary. Judges are expected to address the legal issues in their opinions and leave political commentary to others regarding the implications or basis of those opinions.

It has not been a perfect system. Recently, some of us have criticized judges who have made overtly political statements in their opinions or in public. The deviation from the traditional line of judicial silence has grown in recent years. I previously wrote about this pattern of extrajudicial commentary, including inappropriate commentary in court statements and opinions. These comments often undermined the integrity of the court and the public’s faith in the neutrality of our judges.

District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan, an Obama appointee, was criticized for failing to recuse herself from the Special Counsel’s case against President Donald Trump after she made highly controversial statements about him from the bench. Chutkan lashed out at “a blind loyalty to one person who, by the way, remains free to this day.” That “one person” was still under investigation at the time, and when Trump was charged, Chutkan refused to let the case go. Chutkan later doubled down when asked to dismiss a case due to Trump pardoning Jan. 6 defendants. After acknowledging that she could not block the pardons, she proclaimed that the pardons could not change the “tragic truth” and “cannot whitewash the blood, feces and terror that the mob left in its wake. And it cannot repair the jagged breach in America’s sacred tradition of peacefully transitioning power.”

One of Chutkan’s colleagues, Judge Beryl Howell, also an Obama appointee, denounced a Trump policy as “a revisionist myth relayed in this presidential pronouncement.” Then there is Judge Amit Mehta, another Obama appointee, who has been criticized for conflicted rulings in Trump cases and his bizarre (and ultimately abandoned) effort to banish January 6th defendants from the Capitol. He called Trump’s policies “shameful.” D.C. Circuit Judge Reggie Walton called Trump a “charlatan.” U.S. District Judge Robert Pratt of the Southern District of Iowa made public comments calling Trump a “criminal.” Other federal judges have made other public statements denouncing Trump and Republican priorities. Even before this change, these judges felt that they could engage in such political declarations.

Even Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson declared publicly how she sees her position as a judge “as a wonderful opportunity to tell people in my opinions how I feel about the issues, and that’s what I try to do.” Last year, the Supreme Court condemned U.S. District Judge William Young, a Reagan appointee, for his attacks on Trump as a bully bent on “retribution.” He also accused the administration of “racial discrimination” and “discrimination against the LGBTQ community,” and asked in one order, “Have we no shame?” There is no paucity of such criticism in our country. Many pundits have leveled such attacks against the President, but this was a sitting judge. These judges are using their offices to amplify their personal outrage over policies. The result is that they are erasing the distinction between our courts and our politics. ccu

Read more …

Here’s one use of AI.

German Public Broadcaster Ran Fake Ai-Generated Clip of ‘ICE Troops’ (RMX)

The German public broadcaster ZDF has admitted to a significant editorial oversight after its flagship news program, Heute Journal, aired AI-generated images featuring U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents arresting an immigrant family. After uproar on social media over the fake news segment, which included a visible OpenAI’ “Sora” watermark on the screen, the broadcaster expressed regret over the error and has since updated the report to remove the synthetic content. Critics pointed out that while it is becoming harder to differentiate fake AI content from real events, the appearance of the Sora watermark made it clear that this was AI content.



The controversy from the Feb. 15 report featured fake AI scenes of a woman and two children being led away by ICE. During the segment, ICE agents were referred to as “troops.”m When questioned about the incident, ZDF stated that the images should have been clearly marked. The broadcaster explained: “This marking was not transferred when the article was transferred for technical reasons.”nThe question now is whether ZDF generated these images in-house. ZDF has declined to comment on whether the editorial staff was aware that the footage was AI-generated at the time of the initial broadcast.

If ZDF created them, the fact that arguably the biggest public broadcaster is creating AI-generated content for public broadcasting is raising concerns about how often AI-generated content has been produced without proper labeling in the past. In response, ZDF reiterated its commitment to transparency, noting: “ZDF’s AI principles stipulate that AI-generated images are always transparently labeled.” The incident caused further confusion when the original broadcast was temporarily removed from YouTube and the ZDF media library, leading some media outlets to report that the broadcaster had “deleted its fake video.” ZDF clarified that the removal was only a temporary measure while the editorial team replaced the AI sequences with authentic video and still images.

A revised version of the program is now available in the media library, accompanied by a disclaimer stating: “Video subsequently changed for editorial reasons.”All German households are required to pay nearly €20 per month to fund ZDF and other public broadcasting outlets like ARD. That translates to billions every year. The outlets are routinely accused of bias against conservatives, including negative reports targeting the Alternative for Germany (AfD) and a high rate of rejection for AfD guests on the networks .

Read more …

“.. Elon Musk slamming Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez, when he wrote “Dirty Sánchez is a tyrant and traitor to the people of Spain.”

Macron Calls Free Speech Online ‘Pure Bullshit’ (ZH),

French President Emmanuel Macron on Wednesday said that the notion of free speech on social media platforms – is “pure bullshit,” because algorithmically served content can lead to hate speech (such as the right to say his elderly wife has a penis and gives him black eyes). The comments come after the US recently imposed bans on a former European official and pro-censorship activists for trying to police online speech, while US Secretary of State Marco Rubio justifies the moves as pushback against the “global censorship-industrial complex.”


Europe, including Germany and the UK, have been weighing social media bans for minors, a move that could impact critical advertising revenue for companies and platforms such as Meta, TikTok, YouTube, Snap, X, and others. “Having no clue about how their algorithm is made, how it’s tested, trained and where it will guide you — the democratic consequences of this bias could be huge,” Macron said in New Delhi on Wednesday, Bloomberg reports. “Some of them claim to be in favor of free speech — OK, we are in favor of free algorithms — totally transparent,” he continued. “Free speech is pure bullshit if nobody knows how you are guided to this so-called free speech, especially when it is guided from one hate speech to another.”


Earlier this month, Macron said he expects a battle with the Trump administration over the bloc’s regulation of digital services, and that countries such as France and Spain could be punished if they move forward with proposed social media bans for children. nThe Trump administration has vowed to oppose efforts by foreign nations to “censor our discourse” or otherwise limit free speech that has been used to disadvantage anti-immigration political parties, and that the US would foster “resistance to Europe’s current trajectory within European nations.”

Vice President JD Vance, speaking last year at the Munich Security Conference, accused the EU of suppressing free speech and said Europe’s retreat from its fundamental values was a bigger threat to the continent than Russia or China. Calling Trump Washington’s “new sheriff,” Vance slammed attempts to moderate speech on social media. Some EU officials were concerned that the US was using free speech as a pressure point to cow the bloc into softening its regulation of technology platforms, Bloomberg reported earlier. -Bloomberg In response, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said that freedom of speech ends with hate speech. Hilariously, Bloomberg highlighted Elon Musk slamming Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez, when he wrote “Dirty Sánchez is a tyrant and traitor to the people of Spain.”

As the FT’s Stephen Bush opines regarding the UK’s push: Children are a lot like terrorists, and I don’t mean that as a commentary on their behaviour. I mean that being defined as one in a liberal democracy means that you lose at least some of the rights and freedoms that other citizens take for granted. Your freedom to marry who you want, to work or not work, to vote, to seek or not consent to medical procedures; these and many other rights granted to adults are curtailed for anyone the state defines as a child.

Another way in which they are like terrorists is that invoking children is a good way to get people to stop asking difficult questions and arguing against policy proposals. One big reason why banning under-16s from social media is taking off as a policy idea is that it is more palatable than banning all of us. But it is far from clear that any of us are well served by algorithms that dish up addictive material, violent pornography or endless footage of atrocities. Nor is it clear that “protecting” the under-16s will not make 16, 17 and 18-year-olds more vulnerable. The large number of first-time internet users who are taken in by fraud or are susceptible to harmful behaviour online, suggests that all it may do is move the problem along.

Read more …

“I’ll never forget, 2015, and I got a call, all excited, that Rush Limbaugh just endorsed you.”

Trump Posts Tribute to Rush Limbaugh on the Anniversary of His Death (Margolis)

It’s hard to believe it, but it’s been five years since the passing of Rush Limbaugh. Five years. Conservative talk radio has never been the same since. Honestly, I wish I had listened to him more, but as a writer, I found anything other than music distracting from my ability to write.mI did listen occasionally, and any time Rush read one of my articles, I would get a whole bunch of texts from people alerting me to it, which was pretty awesome. The last time he read one of my articles (that I know of) was the day of Biden’s inauguration, less than a month before he passed. Limbaugh had unmatched insight. In fact, even before Biden took office, Rush observed that Democrats were still very much afraid of Trump and would indict him to try to take him down.


“I know they desperately want Trump gone and I know that they desperately want it codified that Trump cannot run again because make no mistake, they remain scared to death of you and they remain scared to death of Trump, Trump — 75 million, 80 million votes — and I’m going to tell you, you’re not going anywhere,” Limbaugh said in January 2021. “Even if Trump does, you’re not. They can’t separate you from Trump, and more importantly, they can’t separate you from the ideas. They can’t separate you from MAGA. They can’t separate you from Make America Great Again, which I think remains one of our big campaign strengths going forward.”

On Tuesday evening, President Donald Trump released a video tribute honoring Limbaugh and reflecting on their friendship. Trump called it “the fifth anniversary of the loss of a really great man.” He described Limbaugh as “a great conservative, somebody that loved our country, loved his family, loved a lot of things.” He added on a personal note, “he was a friend of mine, Rush Limbaugh.” Trump recalled that the two had never met when he first launched his presidential campaign in 2015. “I’d never met Rush when I announced that I was running,” he said. Then came a moment he still vividly remembers. “I’ll never forget, 2015, and I got a call, all excited, that Rush Limbaugh just endorsed you.”

At the time, Trump said, Limbaugh’s support came purely from what he heard. “I’d never met him. He liked my opening speech.” Trump pointed to his campaign launch that June, when he descended the now-famous escalator alongside the woman who would become first lady. Limbaugh, he said, responded to the message immediately. “He liked, uh, when I got up in June, and I said, ‘You know, uh, we got bad borders, we got bad crime, we got bad everything,’ and he liked it,” Trump said. “I came down the escalator with now our first lady, and he thought it was great, and, uh, he endorsed me, and then I got to know him, and I realized what a great guy he was.”

Five years after Limbaugh’s death, Trump said the loss is still deeply felt. “But it’s five years, and we miss Rush,” he said. Echoing a frequent refrain from Sean Hannity, Trump added, “As Sean Hannity would often say, ‘There will never be another Rush Limbaugh.’” He closed by offering condolences to Limbaugh’s loved ones. “So to his family, his great wife and family, I just wanna say we miss you all,” Trump said. “We miss him, and there’ll never be anybody like him. Thank you very much.” A year before his death, Trump awarded Rush with the Presidential Medal of Freedom during the 2020 State of the Union address, honoring him days after Limbaugh revealed his Stage 4 cancer diagnosis.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Cybercab https://twitter.com/EvaFox/status/2023710868207292719?s=20

 

 

 

 

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